Ancestry Magazine

Most of us started our family research looking for our parents, grandparents, great-grandparents, and so on. We may have occasionally branched out to include one of their siblings when that sibling was our own aunt or uncle, particularly if we already knew or had heard stories about that person. But, eventually, the tendency to concentrate only on our narrow, direct line returned.

Computer data entry has propelled this direct-line tendency. In years past, family researchers used printed-forms—family group sheets—to record collected family history information. These sheets served as continual reminders of the need to include information about all of the children associated with a parental couple. Computer family history programs, however, tend to focus more on each individual, no longer reminding us to consider everyone.

When you focus only on direct lines of descent—your parents, grandparents, great-grandparents, and so on—it becomes pretty easy to fall into some of the following traps:

Overlooking distant, yet unidentified cousins who may possess records, heirlooms, or family traditions that didn’t survive in your line of descent.

Missing important indirect evidence that might be needed to establish your own line of descent, particularly when there is no direct evidence to be found.

Losing valuable insights that a more detailed look at the whole family would reveal, like earlier marriages by one or both spouses.

In every ancestral line, there comes a point when no direct evidence can be found to identify the next generation back—no document that declares a particular man and woman are the parents of that ancestor. However, with indirect evidence about the ancestor’s brothers and sisters, you may be able to construct a solid argument for the identity of the parents.

Take an ancestor listed as a 13-year-old son in the 1900 census, in a household with a male head, wife, other sons ages 11 and five, and daughters ages eight and two. Without a birth record for the 13-year-old, the obvious assumption is that the male head of household and wife are the boy’s parents. But this assumption is premature until records for each child are checked. A birth, marriage, or death certificate for the 11-year-old might identify a different mother than the wife listed in 1900, and that wife also would be much more likely to be the mother of the 13-year old.

Still, the greatest benefit to seeking collateral relatives might come in what their direct-line descendants possess—records that don’t exist in any online database, public repository, or your own collection. Say, for example, the old family Bible wasn’t passed down in your line; there is still the possibility that it survives in the hands of a second, third, or even more distant cousin, and it’s almost guaranteed to be a real treasure for tracing the generations before modern vital records. And, as a bonus, you may even stumble upon a collateral line that includes a genealogist who has already compiled the family’s ancestry, hopefully with just as much as care as you would take.

Donn Devine, CG, CGI, is an attorney and archivist in Wilmington, Delaware. He is a former National Genealogical Society board member and currently chairs the society’s Standards Committee.