* How to start new project

[cj avlis]

Hello. I'm new and evaluating the product...so much to learn, but looks like it might be well worth the effort.
Sorry if my question seems silly, but i just don't want to start off on the wrong foot.

Unlike many folks, I am NOT doing the typical documenting of my family/ancestors, but rather the lines of those interred in the 1st burial ground of a small New England town. The latest/last burial is approx 1825 and I'm hoping to document those folks back to the original settlers between 1620 & 1630.

My concern is that a good number of those folks in the "starting" generation (born in mid to late 1700'S) don't start sharing significant/direct ancestors until a couple of generations before them. Who should be my "start"or project name? Do I just start plugging in entries like a database and let the software do its thing as it grows, or do I need to import "families" in any particular order/manner?

Regards

[klm2OUMK]

Welcome to FHUG and I hope you enjoy exploring /recording your New England records in 18th Century.

Interesting question you have posed. My first question might be -'do you know if you have any current direct ancestors linking to any of the interred names' you have so far? If so this 'might' be your starting point as the new project family name. If not then this might be more problematic and I am not sure what to advise on FH7?

I usually only start to work backwards one generation at a time once I have 1 (or 2) confirmed pieces of evidence such as Birth, Marriage of Death (BMD) certificates or actual church baptism parish records. There is a danger that unconfirmed evidence could send you down the wrong pathway/family tree . Best of luck with your research

[ColeValleyGirl]

I have, in the past, done something similar, trying to reconstruct the families of everyone who was in a small Welsh village in the 1841 census, and trace them forwards and backwards. Another family historian, who I have helped occasionally, has been tracing the family trees of everyone who appears on our village's war memorial. I don't think it's as an unusual approach as some might think.

In both cases above the project was named after the village in question.

Yes, start plugging people into the database and link them up as you find the connections, and let the software do its thing. You won't have a 'file root' (or rather, you can have, but you have to re-designate it to switch between different lines, and you might find -- as I did -- that is isn't necessary.)

You will have to think carefully how you're going to keep track of people so you don't end up with duplicate entries -- which aren't hard to sort out if you find it's happened, but better to avoid it if you can! Do you already have data in another product? If so, what techniques have you evolved for managing the work? If you've got methods that work for you, we can help you achieve the equivalent in FH (and also advise on importing your data).

Have you found our Knowledge Base. If you're trying to get to grips with the product, there's a lot of usual information there.

[tatewise]

What you are constructing is a 'One-Place Study' so the Project name could be that New England town burial ground.
You may be interested in the Society for One-Place Studies.

As you add each person they become the default person shown in the Focus Window next time you open FH.
However, it is easy to navigate around unrelated people via the Records Window.
Most of the features of FH apply to documenting the history of people whether they are related or not, so it is worth spending some time investigating the alternative methods available before starting your project in earnest.
See Key Features for Newcomers for some pointers.

I believe there are other members of this FHUG who have undertaken One-Place Studies and who may be able to offer more specific advice.

[cj avlis]

Thank you to those who have taken the time to reach out. To answer the questions posed...

I do NOT have ancestors within these lines nor do I expect to uncover any.
I DO use another product and have about 3,000 people within that database.
As far as duplicates...that product has a tool to detect and although maybe redundant, I always search for an individual and compare notes before adding them.

LOL...though I've been at this about 7 years, I've never opened/seen a GEDCOM file. I think I will begin slowly with a few at a time to gain a better understanding.

So perhaps this is another silly question, but you don't always know what you don't know...

When it comes to the GEDCOM files are all family connections/relations preserved/documented within that file or is it the software that "makes" the connection? For example...will FH recognize (by importing a GEDCOM) that married couple Mary & Joe, share a grandmother, but perhaps not the grandfather (perhaps he died younger)?

Thanks and Regards

[AdrianBruce]

When it comes to the GEDCOM files are all family connections/relations preserved/documented within that file or is it the software that "makes" the connection?

The GEDCOM file contains "families" in the sense of "parents" plus children - I put those in quotes because GEDCOM and FamilyHistorian can encode adoptions, step-parents and all sorts of variations on the standard nuclear family. Those are the only ways to encode the relationships. If X is a grandfather of Z, FH can, in various ways, display that, but only if the families inbetween, record that X is a father of Y and Y is a mother of Z.

will FH recognize (by importing a GEDCOM) that married couple Mary & Joe, share a grandmother, but perhaps not the grandfather (perhaps he died younger)?

Depends on what the families above Mary and Joe contain. If an intermediate level contains an illogical parent (e.g. they die years before their child is born), then that illogical parentage will apply. The onus is then on the researcher to identify and fix the illogic. There is a plug-in with the underwhelming name of Show Project Statistics which will analyse a whole bunch of oddities that might - or might not - identify such illogic. I don't know if it will actually detect parents dying before the birth of their children but I do remember that it highlighted step-parents who were "too young" at the birth of their step-children. Written like that, it might be thought inadequate but false positives can be a pain and the more complex your checking, the more likely you are to have false positives so the ultimate aribter has to be the user.

To summarise - FH will only work on what it finds in the GEDCOM but there are means to help identify possible illogic.

[cj avlis]

Thank you for the prompt and concise reply!