TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-L Archives

Archiver > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM > 2009-12 > 1262209925


From: Kathy Rippel <>
Subject: Re: [TGF] Help with a possibly obvious situation
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 15:52:05 -0600
References: <4B3BA107.5000804@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4B3BA107.5000804@gmail.com>


I usually record the spouses information if I find it, but do not
always actively pursue it unless there are brick walls to conquer.

However... in cases, espcially 18th and 19th century era, where
families were migrating to more frontier areas I find it quite
helpful to research everyone that pops up connected with the family.
It is often that a group of people migrate (either together or as a
"chain migration") to a small town and proceed to marry into one
another's families continuely.

I'm currently working on a family in Jefferson County, Iowa, and the
names RAMEY, LONGERBONE, CLINE, SCOTT, MYERS, JONES, and others
continually weave in out thoughtout generations. These links even
seem to go backward into Ohio and Virginia for many.

Kathy

At 12:50 PM 12/30/2009, you wrote:
>This could be something I should know, but I would still like other
>folks opinions. I am working on my own family genealogy over the
>holidays, and I have a situation. A great-granduncle was married three
>times with no children from any of the marriages. Is it standard
>practice to follow the lines of the spouses? In other words, is it
>necessary from a proper genealogical research point of view to know and
>document the families of each of the spouses since they are not related
>to me?
>
>Thanks for the help,
>
>Bill
>
>-------------------------------
>To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> with the word
>'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>Version: 8.5.431 / Virus Database: 270.14.123/2594 - Release Date:
>12/30/09 07:27:00

This thread: