Five years ago, I blogged about my quandary over whether to research my collateral lines, rather than focusing on my direct-line ancestors. That I even hesitated to explore collateral lines amazes me because the benefits are now obvious. These collateral lines provide valuable clues. They help verify that the person I’m researching is my person. My family tree is very obviously not complete without them.
Two years ago, I blogged that was rededicating myself to the task of adding siblings; that is, I going back to the censuses or other information I’d downloaded previously and filling in the blanks.
Now I have a new quandary on the other side of the spectrum: Should I limit my research when it comes to the collateral lines? In 2017 and so far in 2018 I’ve focused my research on my Adams line, barely even looking at the other three lines. In doing so, I’ve been able to really explore the collateral lines without feeling any pressure to return to my direct-line ancestors. It’s been really rewarding and fun.
This has added a little complexity in terms of organizing, but nothing I can’t handle. A year ago, I simply had a Collateral subfolder in my Surnames folder with all the source documents I’d downloaded for collateral relatives mixed together–I didn’t have enough to merit subfolders. But when the number of documents started to grow, I created subfolders for the surnames and the individuals, like I do with my direct-line ancestors, except that they fall under the Collateral folder. So the path looks like this:
Genealogy/Surnames/Collateral/[Surname]/[Name of Ancestor (YOB-YOD)]/Document name
I just checked. I have 419 documents in the Collateral folder.
I’m going to the library this afternoon, where I can access certain documents on Family Search that I can’t access at home, because the library is affiliated with the Family History Library. As I was creating the list of look ups in Evernote I realized that they’re for ancestors that are a bit far afield:
- A marriage document for my 2nd great grandfather’s stepdaughter
- A marriage document for my great grandfather’s half-brother’s wife’s parents
So I’m wondering whether I should ratchet things back closer to my direct-line ancestors or just continue happily exploring the folks who cross my path.
I thought I’d turn to you and ask. Do you limit who you research, or do you research anyone who is somehow related to you?
Photo by Anders Sandberg via Flickr. Used under Creative Commons License.
Yes, I think you’ve strayed a bit, but, well, it really depends on your goals, doesn’t it? If your goal is to have fun, and you’re having fun, why not? You are really getting to know your Adams ancestors! I do add siblings to direct ancestors at every opportunity. Whether or not I further research those siblings, and their spouses and children, depends on how I’m doing with the direct ancestor. In every line, at every subsequent generation, the direct ancestors multiply, so I never run out of work to do. When I get stuck, I take a closer look at the siblings. Why? Because a record might exist for a sibling that gives me the information I need for the direct ancestor.
Oh my goodness! I wrote this post and left the house for the day and came home to all these wonderful comments. Thank you!
Thanks to many commenters for reminding me that it’s all about goals. I’ve found the collateral relatives to be so very interesting that it’s really been fun to learn about them. And, of course, it fills out my tree and provides a bigger picture of my family. So I’m going to stick with my research and not worry about putting limits on it.
I really appreciate all the comments, all of which helped me gain clarity.
P.S. I realized that today I was looking for the marriage record for my 2nd great grandfather’s granddaughter, not his stepdaughter. Too many relatives, not enough memory!
For quite a long time I have used the goal of researching my ancestors, their children and their grandchildren, so that includes all the siblings and their children. Usually that is as far as I go, but now with DNA and all those 4th and 5th cousin matches, for some of the families I need to go farther. I have found it helpful to refer to my ancestor’s siblings as Uncle George and Aunt Ivy, etc, even when they are many great aunts and uncles because then they become more real to me. In 2017 I wrote on my blog about some of the 1st cousins of my gt-grandparents. As I did about 50 of those stories I learned what a diverse group of relatives I have.
Family trees are so much fun that it can be hard to stay focused on just one certain grouping of ancestors. Plus the benefits of searching for collateral ancestors does open up a lot more information and allows a person to double check that they have the correct ancestor in their tree. I personally like to look at all the direct ancestors siblings, but unless I find something really interesting, I do not normally go into each of their families. It just gets to be too much. I guess that is my line in the sand. I am not writing a book, or trying to become an expert on the entire family.
Hi, Janine. Being more than just a little ADD, I research all of them! I am also using the Cluster research method, and have found it very helpful with my paternal line. My brick walls are my paternal g.g. grandparents. It would appear they were closely associated with another family, so I decided to include them in my research. Eureaka! I hit the Mother Lode!
The families (both German) had migrated down the Valley of Virginia together, intermarried several times, and finally settled together in Botetourt Co. That’s where I found marriage records for my g.g. grandfather’s first marriage to a member of this same family! Not only that, but I also found his correct name! Although his first wife was not my g.g. grandmother, I do have DNA matches with the children from the first marriage. After 10 frustrating years, I have finally made a small hole in the brick wall! I am very hopeful that I’ll be able to find his parents, but without collateral and cluster research, none of this would have been possible!
I research my direct lines but I also include their children with spouses and children if i easily come across them. I only include their birth, death, and marriage, leaving any further research to do down the road IF I am still on this side of the grass.
Hm, these do seem rather fringe but then it depends on your objectives. Part of the issue with family history is that it is rather easy to fall down a rabbit hole and you end up researching people who are very remote from your own.
Gathering information on siblings has been incredibly rewarding for me. Not only does it help with verification, but sometimes the siblings can open doors to additional information about your descendants. I live in England, and am now Facebook friends with a half cousin in Buffalo that I would never had even known about, if I hadn’t included siblings on my tree.
collateral lines — that a mix of emotional. then somebody tells me they have 23,000 relatives in their line I think that is his or she doing that not genealogy: But I.m related to general Patton I’m related to him by the 23 rd cousin 3rd removed on my mothers side now that something to talk to people about. Do I go out of the way for collateral names no but if there id a rumor yes. I also have proof that my great-grandfather was part of the Chicagomob at the turn of the century
In order to broaden my understanding of my direct ancestor’s extended family, I try to identify the all of their siblings, along with their children, grandchildren and spouse(s). I also try to identify the parents and siblings of the spouse. This approach has led me to many important facts and sources which I might otherwise not have discovered. In addition, when posted online, it provides a “trail” for those researching those collateral families which has resulted in the discovery of several distant cousins with whom I could collaborate.
As others have said, it depends on your objectives. Generally, I work on my direct lines and only include BMD for siblings in case I need to branch out to find more information about my direct line. However, I’ve also collected info for my own mini-one name study, like for my Astle family, where I seek out all descendants up to whatever cutoff point I set.
I do a lot of research on collateral family members. For me, it rounds out the portrait of the families that I descend from. One family in the Netherlands included my 3rd great-grandfather, who was a baker. I followed his children and they all either became bakers or married the sons/daughters of other bakers from the same province. Apparently, I had relatives in most of the bakeries in South Holland. I found this really interesting. It was a totally different way of how marriage matches came about in my family; most of the marriage matches in my family came about through marrying siblings or cousins of other family members.
Go for it!
Our ancestors tended to move with their youngest child,s family when they were getting up in years. At least in France, where I research, it used to be quite the norm. Our ancestors used to have many children and the youngest one was usually the only one able to provide food and shelter for the old parents. If you do not research all the siblings, you might never find where your ancestor died. I have found many a death certificate in the most unlikely places by researching all the siblings of my direct ancestor: such as in Paris for an ancestor that had lived ALL her life in Luxembourg. When the youngest child went to Paris in search of work, the old mother was part of the move. I could have looked all over Luxemboug forever and obviously would never have found her death certificate. YES, I think it is a MUST to research collateral family members.
I have documented many generations of my many families (615 families at last count!) Some of the information I have was only found by searching collateral lines. My rule is to place some limitations on what I research.
For instance: If there are other spouses, I do list that spouse and his/her parents for identification purposes, but I do not follow their lines unless there is a blood relationship.
If there are step-children to my ancestor, I will list the children, especially if their parent and my ancestor also had children, as the step-children would be half-siblings but I do not follow lines for the step-children unless there is a blood relationship.
I also do not follow the lines of collateral relatives’ spouses unless they are also related to one or more of my lines. Again, in most instances that spouse is not a blood relative.
So, my basic rule is no blood relationship, no research. Hope this helps.
Do all of them, you never know when families cross each other or where clues hide.
I will collect information on the children of my direct lines. I will collect any documents regarding them and put them in a folder under the parents names. Only my direct lines will get their own folder. I will do more research on the other children if I hit a brick wall. This is what I do for my own family research as well as for my clients. Maybe when I retire.. I will only do my line.. lol. as if a genealogist ever retires!
It depends on whether I’ve hit a brick wall with that particular line. Sometimes researching those collateral lines out an extra generation leads me to resources and family histories I wouldn’t have found otherwise. One of those collateral relatives lived to be well over 100, and there were several news articles on her birthdays in which she recounted her family’s history. She talked about her grandfather (our common ancestor) who told her about being 12 years old when the Revolutionary War broke out. And sometimes you find family Bibles and letters which were passed down through another branch of the family. I loved being able to read letters written in my 3rd great-grandmother’s own hand to her grandson who lived in Texas.
Hi Melissa, I found through DNA, ,my bio Dad is Charles Columbus Littlefield, Jr. I see a direct connection to the Kitchens family in Mary Louise Kichens
I research collateral lines as far as I can. I read somewhere long ago this quotation (wish I knew where and by whom) “ALL I want to know is ALL the descendants of ALL of my grandchildren”. I think that just about covers it!
I generally research siblings and the siblings children. If I find something interesting, I will search a little farther. I also look into additional marriages because you never know. I found one story which helped to explain how the family went from prosperous to on the edge in a generation. Apparently wife #2 had a habit of marrying much older men, having one child, then taking the entire estate. I am still researching her to find her maiden name. My ancestor was husband #3. It definitely adds to the story!
When I started my family tree, I just wanted to know where I had come from. However, you quickly become fascinated by the lives your descendants lived, and adding their siblings is nice, as it creates a fuller picture of their life. My 2* great grandfather was very close to his younger brother, as their mother died when they were young. They joined the British Army on the same date during WW1, and both lived until they were late 70’s. They are now buried next to each other in Southampton, England. I have contact with my great-uncle’s granddaughter, so not adding any siblings feels as though your tree is missing important people
Oh, I am going to weight in again. And I am going to say, it depends on how much time you have! On my personal tree, I am trying to stick with the direct lines and their children. After 43 years of working on this and at the ripe age of 63, I think I want to have as much done when I go on to be part of those being researched. If I was 22 or 40, I would be definitely looking much more broad.
I have never gone out of my way to search collateral lines, but if they present themselves why not make one search do it all. You never know when they might connect. Because I did that a cousin & I just found out our Dad’s are 6th cousins, wish they were alive to know it, as it would give both of them a Big laugh!
I think it is personal choice. I never was interested in collateral lines but then there were letters of cousins to my great grandfather plus the lines intertwined as his parents had died and the orphaned children went to live with aunts and uncles and into an orphanage. The collateral lines became more important to me. Then those lines became more interesting and now I have the privilege of meeting 3rd and 4th cousins which is fun and exciting.
Thanks to everyone for your great comments! I especially love the stories of how studying collateral relatives has connected you with distant cousins. Because genealogy is all about connection, isn’t it?
I have been working n an organizational protocol for my family tree. I have gobs of information and after a few feeble attempts to put this into my software program, I stopped because it was taking too long for each document. One of my roadblocks was what to do with my collateral relatives. Several of my lines were close-knit families and I have quite a bit of information on all of them.
I have decided to make sub-folders for each person I have information on. I am going to color-code them in a like manner. If the direct line is red, the collateral lines will be in pink. I am also going to experiment with a unique way to list my document folders on my hard drive. Because Windows alphabetizes by number first, my father, who is a Rowland will be “2Rowland_James”, and my mother will be 2Buck_Marjorie””. The collateral relatives will be “2aRowland” or “2aBuck”. I won’t put birthdays on these names because that takes too much time. In this way, all the Rowlands will be together, by generation. My dad’s parents will be “3Rowland_Russell” and “3Wiley_Jana”, and so on. If I do any extra research on collateral relatives, it will only be descendancy research. I assume their ancestors will be the same as mine.
Helen, thanks for explaining your process for collaterals! I hope that system works out well for you.
I’ve enjoyed pursuing collateral lines, and the information was invaluable after I inherited a large number of photographs from my grandmother and her mother. Some were labeled, some not, but distant cousins I had met online because of the collateral research helped identify the photos and to put them into the hands of descendants who could really appreciate them.
Janine,
Hi, We are distant cousins! I found your blog while looking for info about my Grandfather, Wayne Adams… Horace’s son. My sons have been interested in the family tree and we have some interesting info that my sister Karen has gathered from other relatives and our Indian Heritage which is so interesting. I have a couple books on the Delaware Indians by Richard Adams, a brother of Horace.
Michael Adams
Michael, I am so excited to hear from you! On my task list has been to reach out to Horace’s descendants. I’m more than happy to share all the information I have on Horace with you, though I have to admit I don’t have any record of Horace having a brother named Richard. I will email you and we can see how we can exchange information.
I tend to get carried away sometimes too. And because of that, I get overwhelmed and start suffering from family tree fomo. I can’t focus because there are so many lines to work on, so many stories to discover. So I do try to limit myself. But it really comes down to the reasons you’re doing that line. As a general rule, I try to limit my research to direct ancestors…of my children, and their descendents. But in researching descendents, that means their spouses too, which may lead to looking into their parents and siblings when I can’t find the information I want on the spouse. But if I can’t easily find info on those individuals, it’s time to let go and move on.
I do have one line which stayed in a very small town for several generations. Eventually everyone was related to everyone else somehow. And even if you weren’t, you were treated like family. So I end up researching a lot of non-relatives simply because their lives, and documents, are so intertwined with my ancestors’.
Additionally, my first husband’s parents divorced when he was young, so my kids have never known a time without his step-mom as grandma. She is part of my children’s family tree so I research her lines as well. Though I generally don’t worry too much about the step-lines unless we have known them personally.
You’ll never be able to research everyone so you have to determine what the priorities for you are. Are you in it to connect specifically with your family? Or are you in it because you love the chase or the mystery it piecing together stories. If it’s one of the latter, then by all means, research whomever you run across whose story excites you. If it’s for your family then following too far out the collateral lines robs you have time with the lines closer to you. So you have to ask yourself if the value you might add by following that rabbit hole is worth the opportunity costs?
I’m late to this conversation…. I reach into collateral lines because my husband’s ancestors had a great tendency to name sons and daughters the name handful of names. So, when I’m working on a surname and there are three Samuel’s or four Oliver’s or 6 Jane’s or Elizabeth’s, I follow ancillary branches to help keep me in check that I am pursuing the correct line. In many ways, following these double sub branches is not where I want to spend my time, but if I don’t, I won’t only confuse myself as to who is who.