Dennis Which version of FH are you using If version four then the projects window will show the default location for your projects On either version 3 or 4 if you open the file automatically then tools/preferences/startup should show the location of the file Regards John Hanson -----Original Message----- From: family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Dennis Hawkins Sent: 09 November 2011 10:20 To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [FHU] GEDCOM file Mike Thanks for that. However, the path described in File Statistics leads exactly to the FTW GEDCOM, and when I click on it, it opens in FTM, and it's out of date. The only thing I can think is that my hard drive is partitioned into C and D. I use C but the size of the mainly zipped data in D leads me to think that FH is hiding its GEDCOM file in D. I still don't understand why File Statistics is wrong, and why or how FH is hiding stuff in D, if that's what is happening. (I can't actually find it in D, anyway)! Dennis -----Original Message----- From: Beryl & Mike Tate Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 12:03 AM To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [FHU] GEDCOM file Yes, use File > File Statistics Regards, Mike Tate -----Original Message----- From: family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Dennis Hawkins Sent: 08 November 2011 21:02 To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com Subject: [FHU] GEDCOM file FH is a brilliant program, but I occasionally use Family Tree Maker when (and only when!) I want to link two chosen relatives on a diagram with a coloured line, something FH doesn’t do but would be very useful. So I load my FH GEDCOM file (called Hawkins1) into FTM and get my coloured line. Just lately I have noticed that my Hawkins1 GEDCOM file in FamilyHistorianProjects /Hawkins1/Hawkins1.fh_data/ is described as an “FTW GEDCOM File” (FTW is a Family Tree Maker nomenclature). I noticed this but didn’t think it mattered. And it didn’t, at first. The point of this rather lengthy description is this: FH works perfectly, but when I uploaded the FTW GEDCOM FILE to ancestry.co.uk I realised it’s out of date, lacking the latest additions (I haven’t used FTM for a while). FH evidently isn’t using it. So where is my FH GEDCOM file? The FH program finds it every time, but where has it gone? Windows Explorer can’t find it. Is there any way I can get FH to tell me where it’s saving it? Regards Dennis Hawkins ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi, Try top menu bar: File/Gedcom File Tasks/Save a copy of Gedcom. That will show a suggestion of where to save your copy and also show where your working ged file is hiding. I think! Alan -----Original Message----- From: Dennis Hawkins Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 10:20 AM To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [FHU] GEDCOM file Mike Thanks for that. However, the path described in File Statistics leads exactly to the FTW GEDCOM, and when I click on it, it opens in FTM, and it's out of date. The only thing I can think is that my hard drive is partitioned into C and D. I use C but the size of the mainly zipped data in D leads me to think that FH is hiding its GEDCOM file in D. I still don't understand why File Statistics is wrong, and why or how FH is hiding stuff in D, if that's what is happening. (I can't actually find it in D, anyway)! Dennis -----Original Message----- From: Beryl & Mike Tate Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 12:03 AM To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [FHU] GEDCOM file Yes, use File > File Statistics Regards, Mike Tate -----Original Message----- From: family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Dennis Hawkins Sent: 08 November 2011 21:02 To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com Subject: [FHU] GEDCOM file FH is a brilliant program, but I occasionally use Family Tree Maker when (and only when!) I want to link two chosen relatives on a diagram with a coloured line, something FH doesn’t do but would be very useful. So I load my FH GEDCOM file (called Hawkins1) into FTM and get my coloured line. Just lately I have noticed that my Hawkins1 GEDCOM file in FamilyHistorianProjects /Hawkins1/Hawkins1.fh_data/ is described as an “FTW GEDCOM File” (FTW is a Family Tree Maker nomenclature). I noticed this but didn’t think it mattered. And it didn’t, at first. The point of this rather lengthy description is this: FH works perfectly, but when I uploaded the FTW GEDCOM FILE to ancestry.co.uk I realised it’s out of date, lacking the latest additions (I haven’t used FTM for a while). FH evidently isn’t using it. So where is my FH GEDCOM file? The FH program finds it every time, but where has it gone? Windows Explorer can’t find it. Is there any way I can get FH to tell me where it’s saving it? Regards Dennis Hawkins ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Mike Thanks for that. However, the path described in File Statistics leads exactly to the FTW GEDCOM, and when I click on it, it opens in FTM, and it's out of date. The only thing I can think is that my hard drive is partitioned into C and D. I use C but the size of the mainly zipped data in D leads me to think that FH is hiding its GEDCOM file in D. I still don't understand why File Statistics is wrong, and why or how FH is hiding stuff in D, if that's what is happening. (I can't actually find it in D, anyway)! Dennis -----Original Message----- From: Beryl & Mike Tate Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 12:03 AM To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [FHU] GEDCOM file Yes, use File > File Statistics Regards, Mike Tate -----Original Message----- From: family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Dennis Hawkins Sent: 08 November 2011 21:02 To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com Subject: [FHU] GEDCOM file FH is a brilliant program, but I occasionally use Family Tree Maker when (and only when!) I want to link two chosen relatives on a diagram with a coloured line, something FH doesn’t do but would be very useful. So I load my FH GEDCOM file (called Hawkins1) into FTM and get my coloured line. Just lately I have noticed that my Hawkins1 GEDCOM file in FamilyHistorianProjects /Hawkins1/Hawkins1.fh_data/ is described as an “FTW GEDCOM File” (FTW is a Family Tree Maker nomenclature). I noticed this but didn’t think it mattered. And it didn’t, at first. The point of this rather lengthy description is this: FH works perfectly, but when I uploaded the FTW GEDCOM FILE to ancestry.co.uk I realised it’s out of date, lacking the latest additions (I haven’t used FTM for a while). FH evidently isn’t using it. So where is my FH GEDCOM file? The FH program finds it every time, but where has it gone? Windows Explorer can’t find it. Is there any way I can get FH to tell me where it’s saving it? Regards Dennis Hawkins ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Yes, use File > File Statistics Regards, Mike Tate -----Original Message----- From: family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Dennis Hawkins Sent: 08 November 2011 21:02 To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com Subject: [FHU] GEDCOM file FH is a brilliant program, but I occasionally use Family Tree Maker when (and only when!) I want to link two chosen relatives on a diagram with a coloured line, something FH doesn’t do but would be very useful. So I load my FH GEDCOM file (called Hawkins1) into FTM and get my coloured line. Just lately I have noticed that my Hawkins1 GEDCOM file in FamilyHistorianProjects /Hawkins1/Hawkins1.fh_data/ is described as an “FTW GEDCOM File” (FTW is a Family Tree Maker nomenclature). I noticed this but didn’t think it mattered. And it didn’t, at first. The point of this rather lengthy description is this: FH works perfectly, but when I uploaded the FTW GEDCOM FILE to ancestry.co.uk I realised it’s out of date, lacking the latest additions (I haven’t used FTM for a while). FH evidently isn’t using it. So where is my FH GEDCOM file? The FH program finds it every time, but where has it gone? Windows Explorer can’t find it. Is there any way I can get FH to tell me where it’s saving it? Regards Dennis Hawkins

Windows explorer is rather poor at finding things. I use the free program 'Agent Ransack' -qv HTH Martin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dennis Hawkins" <dennis.hawkins138@btinternet.com> To: <family-historian-users@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2011 9:01 PM Subject: [FHU] GEDCOM file > FH is a brilliant program, but I occasionally use Family Tree Maker when > (and only when!) I want to link two chosen relatives on a diagram with a > coloured line, something FH doesn’t do but would be very useful. So I load > my FH GEDCOM file (called Hawkins1) into FTM and get my coloured line. > Just lately I have noticed that my Hawkins1 GEDCOM file in > FamilyHistorianProjects /Hawkins1/Hawkins1.fh_data/ is described as an > “FTW GEDCOM File” (FTW is a Family Tree Maker nomenclature). I noticed > this but didn’t think it mattered. And it didn’t, at first. > The point of this rather lengthy description is this: FH works perfectly, > but when I uploaded the FTW GEDCOM FILE to ancestry.co.uk I realised it’s > out of date, lacking the latest additions (I haven’t used FTM for a > while). FH evidently isn’t using it. So where is my FH GEDCOM file? The > FH program finds it every time, but where has it gone? Windows Explorer > can’t find it. Is there any way I can get FH to tell me where it’s saving > it? > Regards > Dennis Hawkins > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

FH is a brilliant program, but I occasionally use Family Tree Maker when (and only when!) I want to link two chosen relatives on a diagram with a coloured line, something FH doesn’t do but would be very useful. So I load my FH GEDCOM file (called Hawkins1) into FTM and get my coloured line. Just lately I have noticed that my Hawkins1 GEDCOM file in FamilyHistorianProjects /Hawkins1/Hawkins1.fh_data/ is described as an “FTW GEDCOM File” (FTW is a Family Tree Maker nomenclature). I noticed this but didn’t think it mattered. And it didn’t, at first. The point of this rather lengthy description is this: FH works perfectly, but when I uploaded the FTW GEDCOM FILE to ancestry.co.uk I realised it’s out of date, lacking the latest additions (I haven’t used FTM for a while). FH evidently isn’t using it. So where is my FH GEDCOM file? The FH program finds it every time, but where has it gone? Windows Explorer can’t find it. Is there any way I can get FH to tell me where it’s saving it? Regards Dennis Hawkins

Glen - Assuming you have version 4.1, I can only think of 2 reasons why you might not be asked if you want to copy the media file into your project when you add media. You won't be asked to copy media if into your project if you don't have one open - i.e. if you are editing a standalone GEDCOM file, rather than a project. Also, even if you do have a project open, and not a standalone GEDCOM file, you still won't be asked to copy the media file into your project folder if it's already there - i.e. if the media file you have selected is already located in the media area within the project folder. Do either of these apply? If it's a standalone GEDCOM file you're editing, the main title bar of the window will say "Family Historian Gedcom - " followed by the name of the file. If you have a project open it will say "Family Historian Project - " followed by the name of the project. Or at least it will if you have 4.1. Simon Orde List Administrator & Family Historian designer ----- Original Message ----- From: <glen.everard@tesco.net> To: <family-historian-users@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2011 4:13 PM Subject: [FHU] Talking of lost functions.. > My program no longer asks me if I want to copy media to file when I add > media. I'm currently copying it manually but this is a pain. What have I > done and how do I undo it? > -- > Glen > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

My program no longer asks me if I want to copy media to file when I add media. I'm currently copying it manually but this is a pain. What have I done and how do I undo it? -- Glen

I thought that once a second birth certificate was in force the first was never issued, except in cases where an adoptee wishes to learn who her birth parents were, and then only to the adoptee. I have been linking images of Parish Register and Bishops Transcript entries to the same baptism by creating two different source citations, one for each, and linking them to the same baptism fact. If you do have two birth certificates for the same person this would be the same process. The differing information would appear in the "Text from source" box for each citation. Anne Anne Cole, President, Lincolnshire Family History Society Duncalf(e)/Duncuff/Duncuft One-name Study GOONS member 513 http://www.one-name.org/profiles/duncalf.html Lincolnshire Post 1837 Marriage Index http://mi.lincolnshiremarriages.org.uk/ Lincolnshire Family History Society http://www.lincolnshirefhs.org.uk > -----Original Message----- > From: family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:family- > historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Connie Williams > Sent: 08 November 2011 11:57 > To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [FHU] Two Birth Certificates for One Individual. > > > Always something new to spark further interest! > > Perhaps this is the moment then to come back to base with a question..... > > So... does the FHU system find it easy to accept two differing birth > certificates for a single individual? Has anybody entered this > combination > without difficulties? Obviously one must be careful with entering the > actual DOB and clearly some explanation and notes could be included....... > > > > Connie Williams > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Julie Smith [mailto:julie@juliesmith.plus.com] > Sent: 08 November 2011 10:59 > To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com; con.williams@btinternet.com > Subject: RE: [FHU] Illegimacy problem with a difference > > Hi, > > I had a registrar explain re-registering this to me about 20 years ago. > When parents married they are/were advised to have any existing children > re-registered and this would make them legitimate in the eyes of the law. > Without this children born within the marriage used to have greater rights > than their "illegitimate siblings", in terms of being next of kin and > inheritance rules. The law may well have changed now and the anomalies > removed. > > Regards > > Julie > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN- > USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message

Always something new to spark further interest! Perhaps this is the moment then to come back to base with a question..... So... does the FHU system find it easy to accept two differing birth certificates for a single individual? Has anybody entered this combination without difficulties? Obviously one must be careful with entering the actual DOB and clearly some explanation and notes could be included....... Connie Williams -----Original Message----- From: Julie Smith [mailto:julie@juliesmith.plus.com] Sent: 08 November 2011 10:59 To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com; con.williams@btinternet.com Subject: RE: [FHU] Illegimacy problem with a difference Hi, I had a registrar explain re-registering this to me about 20 years ago. When parents married they are/were advised to have any existing children re-registered and this would make them legitimate in the eyes of the law. Without this children born within the marriage used to have greater rights than their "illegitimate siblings", in terms of being next of kin and inheritance rules. The law may well have changed now and the anomalies removed. Regards Julie

Hi, I had a registrar explain re-registering this to me about 20 years ago. When parents married they are/were advised to have any existing children re-registered and this would make them legitimate in the eyes of the law. Without this children born within the marriage used to have greater rights than their "illegitimate siblings", in terms of being next of kin and inheritance rules. The law may well have changed now and the anomalies removed. Regards Julie -----Original Message----- From: family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Anne Cole Sent: 07 November 2011 22:09 To: con.williams@btinternet.com; family-historian-users@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [FHU] Illegimacy problem with a difference Connie, My eldest grandson has two birth certificates, for the same reason! I have copies of both and the only difference is that the mother's maiden name is entered on one and not the other. I have noticed a number of double birth entries amongst the Duncalfs in the GRO - this will have come about through adoptions too after 1920 something when they became formalised. There is only one registration for CAS Duncalf though. Anne Anne Cole, President, Lincolnshire Family History Society Duncalf(e)/Duncuff/Duncuft One-name Study GOONS member 513 http://www.one-name.org/profiles/duncalf.html Lincolnshire Post 1837 Marriage Index http://mi.lincolnshiremarriages.org.uk/ Lincolnshire Family History Society http://www.lincolnshirefhs.org.uk > -----Original Message----- > From: family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:family- > historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Connie Williams > Sent: 07 November 2011 22:00 > To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [FHU] Illegimacy problem with a difference > > Anne, > > In case this is of further help and of any interest....... > > I have a similar situation somewhere in my tree and was surprised to > discover that there are two birth certificates for the child, as the > parents eventually married each other. I had not realised that was > ever a possibility. > > To date I have not begun to enter that branch of my tree into the > programme, so I have yet to find whether that gives me any > difficulties! > > > Connie Williams > > > -----Original Message----- > From: family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Anne > Cole > Sent: 07 November 2011 21:47 > To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [FHU] Illegimacy problem with a difference > > Thanks all. I guess I had better get the birth certificate so that I > can put in a date of birth. > > Anne > > Anne Cole, President, Lincolnshire Family History Society > > Duncalf(e)/Duncuff/Duncuft One-name Study GOONS member 513 > > http://www.one-name.org/profiles/duncalf.html > > Lincolnshire Post 1837 Marriage Index > > http://mi.lincolnshiremarriages.org.uk/ > > Lincolnshire Family History Society > > http://www.lincolnshirefhs.org.uk > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FAMILY-HISTORIAN- USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the > message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Connie, My eldest grandson has two birth certificates, for the same reason! I have copies of both and the only difference is that the mother's maiden name is entered on one and not the other. I have noticed a number of double birth entries amongst the Duncalfs in the GRO - this will have come about through adoptions too after 1920 something when they became formalised. There is only one registration for CAS Duncalf though. Anne Anne Cole, President, Lincolnshire Family History Society Duncalf(e)/Duncuff/Duncuft One-name Study GOONS member 513 http://www.one-name.org/profiles/duncalf.html Lincolnshire Post 1837 Marriage Index http://mi.lincolnshiremarriages.org.uk/ Lincolnshire Family History Society http://www.lincolnshirefhs.org.uk > -----Original Message----- > From: family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:family- > historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Connie Williams > Sent: 07 November 2011 22:00 > To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [FHU] Illegimacy problem with a difference > > Anne, > > In case this is of further help and of any interest....... > > I have a similar situation somewhere in my tree and was surprised to > discover that there are two birth certificates for the child, as the > parents > eventually married each other. I had not realised that was ever a > possibility. > > To date I have not begun to enter that branch of my tree into the > programme, > so I have yet to find whether that gives me any difficulties! > > > Connie Williams > > > -----Original Message----- > From: family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Anne > Cole > Sent: 07 November 2011 21:47 > To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [FHU] Illegimacy problem with a difference > > Thanks all. I guess I had better get the birth certificate so that I can > put > in a date of birth. > > Anne > > Anne Cole, President, Lincolnshire Family History Society > > Duncalf(e)/Duncuff/Duncuft One-name Study GOONS member 513 > > http://www.one-name.org/profiles/duncalf.html > > Lincolnshire Post 1837 Marriage Index > > http://mi.lincolnshiremarriages.org.uk/ > > Lincolnshire Family History Society > > http://www.lincolnshirefhs.org.uk > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN- > USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message

Anne, In case this is of further help and of any interest....... I have a similar situation somewhere in my tree and was surprised to discover that there are two birth certificates for the child, as the parents eventually married each other. I had not realised that was ever a possibility. To date I have not begun to enter that branch of my tree into the programme, so I have yet to find whether that gives me any difficulties! Connie Williams -----Original Message----- From: family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Anne Cole Sent: 07 November 2011 21:47 To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [FHU] Illegimacy problem with a difference Thanks all. I guess I had better get the birth certificate so that I can put in a date of birth. Anne Anne Cole, President, Lincolnshire Family History Society Duncalf(e)/Duncuff/Duncuft One-name Study GOONS member 513 http://www.one-name.org/profiles/duncalf.html Lincolnshire Post 1837 Marriage Index http://mi.lincolnshiremarriages.org.uk/ Lincolnshire Family History Society http://www.lincolnshirefhs.org.uk ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Thanks all. I guess I had better get the birth certificate so that I can put in a date of birth. Anne Anne Cole, President, Lincolnshire Family History Society Duncalf(e)/Duncuff/Duncuft One-name Study GOONS member 513 http://www.one-name.org/profiles/duncalf.html Lincolnshire Post 1837 Marriage Index http://mi.lincolnshiremarriages.org.uk/ Lincolnshire Family History Society http://www.lincolnshirefhs.org.uk > -----Original Message----- > From: family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:family- > historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Adrian Bruce > Sent: 07 November 2011 21:05 > To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [FHU] Illegimacy problem with a difference > > <<snipped>> > KAS Duncalf was the daughter of J Silvester and S Duncalf. The child was > registered in the March quarter of 1844 and baptised in May 1844. The > couple > actually married in January 1844, but as both surnames are given in the > baptism registers and she is registered as KAS Duncalf she must have been > illegitimate. How do I show this? > <<snipped>> > > Personally, I wouldn't (indeed, haven't) bother to do anything other than > add in a note. > > Everything depends on how much you expect anyone to actually read the > words > in the reports, queries and diagrams. After all, the whole file shows what > happens over time, it's not a snap shot of any one time in particular. If > there were a report that says simply "KAS D born abt Dec 1843; parents JS > and SD, married", then you'd need to do some work. But I bet any report > says > (in summary) "KAS D born abt Dec 1843, parents JS and SD, married Jan > 1844". > I think that's pretty clear in itself. I'd just add a note against KAS D's > birth event saying that she was born before her parents were married. > > To make this work you must have dates against her birth and against the > marriage, with the one clearly being before the other (e.g. "abt Dec 1843" > and "Jan 1844" respectively.) You might also try putting a date-phrase in > for the birth, e.g. "before her parents' marriage", with an interpretation > for that of "abt Dec 1843". I've tried it once or twice but never been > quite > happy with the output words. > > Creating two families - with the same parents - would seem painful and > lead > to as many questions being asked by your readers as you're trying to > solve. > > I think you're entitled to make the audience read and think a little bit!! > > Adrian B > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN- > USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message

<<snipped>> KAS Duncalf was the daughter of J Silvester and S Duncalf. The child was registered in the March quarter of 1844 and baptised in May 1844. The couple actually married in January 1844, but as both surnames are given in the baptism registers and she is registered as KAS Duncalf she must have been illegitimate. How do I show this? <<snipped>> Personally, I wouldn't (indeed, haven't) bother to do anything other than add in a note. Everything depends on how much you expect anyone to actually read the words in the reports, queries and diagrams. After all, the whole file shows what happens over time, it's not a snap shot of any one time in particular. If there were a report that says simply "KAS D born abt Dec 1843; parents JS and SD, married", then you'd need to do some work. But I bet any report says (in summary) "KAS D born abt Dec 1843, parents JS and SD, married Jan 1844". I think that's pretty clear in itself. I'd just add a note against KAS D's birth event saying that she was born before her parents were married. To make this work you must have dates against her birth and against the marriage, with the one clearly being before the other (e.g. "abt Dec 1843" and "Jan 1844" respectively.) You might also try putting a date-phrase in for the birth, e.g. "before her parents' marriage", with an interpretation for that of "abt Dec 1843". I've tried it once or twice but never been quite happy with the output words. Creating two families - with the same parents - would seem painful and lead to as many questions being asked by your readers as you're trying to solve. I think you're entitled to make the audience read and think a little bit!! Adrian B

No, it is definitely a case of illegitimacy, although she does appear with Silvester as her surname in 1851. By 1851 Sarah the mother was dead, and Sarah's sister Hannah was living in as housekeeper! Anne Anne Cole, President, Lincolnshire Family History Society Duncalf(e)/Duncuff/Duncuft One-name Study GOONS member 513 http://www.one-name.org/profiles/duncalf.html Lincolnshire Post 1837 Marriage Index http://mi.lincolnshiremarriages.org.uk/ Lincolnshire Family History Society http://www.lincolnshirefhs.org.uk > -----Original Message----- > From: family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:family- > historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Graham Anstey > Sent: 07 November 2011 20:38 > To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [FHU] Illegimacy problem with a difference > > Hi Anne, > > Don't know about entering it, but is it possible that the mother kept her > maiden name after marriage, for whatever reason? > > Just a thought > Graham > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:family- > > historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Anne Cole > > Sent: 07 November 2011 19:54 > > To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com > > Subject: [FHU] Illegimacy problem with a difference > > > > KAS Duncalf was the daughter of J Silvester and S Duncalf. The child > > was > > registered in the March quarter of 1844 and baptised in May 1844. The > > couple > > actually married in January 1844, but as both surnames are given in the > > baptism registers and she is registered as KAS Duncalf she must have > > been > > illegitimate. How do I show this? Can I put J Silvester in twice both > > as a > > putative father and part of an unmarried couple, and as a husband after > > the > > marriage? I realise that I could mark KAS as being illegitimate, but at > > the > > same time her parents will show up as being married. > > > > Anne > > > > Anne Cole, President, Lincolnshire Family History Society > > > > Duncalf(e)/Duncuff/Duncuft One-name Study GOONS member 513 > > > > http://www.one-name.org/profiles/duncalf.html > > > > Lincolnshire Post 1837 Marriage Index > > > > http://mi.lincolnshiremarriages.org.uk/ > > > > Lincolnshire Family History Society > > > > http://www.lincolnshirefhs.org.uk > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN- > > USERS-request@rootsweb.com 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: 9.0.920 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/4000 - Release Date: > > 11/07/11 07:35:00 > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 9.0.920 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/4000 - Release Date: 11/07/11 > 07:35:00 > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN- > USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message

Hi Anne, Don't know about entering it, but is it possible that the mother kept her maiden name after marriage, for whatever reason? Just a thought Graham > -----Original Message----- > From: family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:family- > historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Anne Cole > Sent: 07 November 2011 19:54 > To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com > Subject: [FHU] Illegimacy problem with a difference > > KAS Duncalf was the daughter of J Silvester and S Duncalf. The child > was > registered in the March quarter of 1844 and baptised in May 1844. The > couple > actually married in January 1844, but as both surnames are given in the > baptism registers and she is registered as KAS Duncalf she must have > been > illegitimate. How do I show this? Can I put J Silvester in twice both > as a > putative father and part of an unmarried couple, and as a husband after > the > marriage? I realise that I could mark KAS as being illegitimate, but at > the > same time her parents will show up as being married. > > Anne > > Anne Cole, President, Lincolnshire Family History Society > > Duncalf(e)/Duncuff/Duncuft One-name Study GOONS member 513 > > http://www.one-name.org/profiles/duncalf.html > > Lincolnshire Post 1837 Marriage Index > > http://mi.lincolnshiremarriages.org.uk/ > > Lincolnshire Family History Society > > http://www.lincolnshirefhs.org.uk > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN- > USERS-request@rootsweb.com 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: 9.0.920 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/4000 - Release Date: > 11/07/11 07:35:00 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.920 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/4000 - Release Date: 11/07/11 07:35:00

KAS Duncalf was the daughter of J Silvester and S Duncalf. The child was registered in the March quarter of 1844 and baptised in May 1844. The couple actually married in January 1844, but as both surnames are given in the baptism registers and she is registered as KAS Duncalf she must have been illegitimate. How do I show this? Can I put J Silvester in twice both as a putative father and part of an unmarried couple, and as a husband after the marriage? I realise that I could mark KAS as being illegitimate, but at the same time her parents will show up as being married. Anne Anne Cole, President, Lincolnshire Family History Society Duncalf(e)/Duncuff/Duncuft One-name Study GOONS member 513 http://www.one-name.org/profiles/duncalf.html Lincolnshire Post 1837 Marriage Index http://mi.lincolnshiremarriages.org.uk/ Lincolnshire Family History Society http://www.lincolnshirefhs.org.uk

Why not simply add the Family Records to the List rather than the individuals? On 7 November 2011 08:15, Martin Mitchell <magmart@talktalk.net> wrote: > My question is, how (if atall) does a second Marriage Certificate, for those > whose name appears on more then one Marriage Certificate, show up in my > Named List of individuals for whom I hold such certificates. -- Jane. Jane Taubman | www.rjt.org.uk | www.taubman.org.uk |www.fhug.org.uk

Understood, Mike, and thankyou. The Records Window and Property Dialog are in order, precisely as you describe, each individual appearing only once; with any subsequent marriages correctly ordered. My question is, how (if atall) does a second Marriage Certificate, for those whose name appears on more then one Marriage Certificate, show up in my Named List of individuals for whom I hold such certificates. E.g. Person A certificate of marriage to Person X; Person A certificate of marriage to Person Y. Then the corresponding entries, which present no problem; Person X certificate of marriage to Person A; Person Y certificate of marriage to Person A. Each Marriage Certificate in my possession thus results in two entries in that list. In general. Might it be simplest to add a column to that list to indicate instances where (or whether) an individual has made multiple marriages, showing 1, 2, 3 or whatever? Regards, Martin Mitchell.