My wifes family descends from Alfred king of Wessex, really?
Last week I navigated up the family tree of my wife and noticed that someone made a connection between AethelFlaed (daughter of Alfred, king of Wessex) and a male in Belgium (id=G8Y4-2ZZ). History tells us that AethelFlaed had a daughter and no more children. I expect that some people are trying to make their family tree more interesting.
What is the correct FamilySearch response to practices like that?
Answers
-
As FamilySearch does not have the resources to monitor issues like this, the open-edit nature of the Family Tree program allows for individual users to address such matters themselves.
In this case, I would go as far back on her branch as seems to reflect accuracy - well, at least plausibility - then disconnect that furthest-back likely ancestor from the preceding (questionable) parent(s). To do this click on the pencil / paper icon against that ancestor's name. This will take you to the Parent-Child Relationship box. Under "Child", click on Remove or Replace, check the "I have reviewed the relationships, sources, and notes for these individuals" box and Remove the child from the current relationship to these parents. Provide a reason statement such as, "No historical evidence of any relationship with these parents". Sorry if you already knew the procedure for this.
You could go on to the next stage and detach relationships through further generations (going back down the line) but, unless you wish to take wider responsibility for monitoring / policing the tree, I would be inclined to leave things alone after removing your wife from an untrustworthy branch.
Other users may have alternative suggestions, as there is no FamilySearch "rule" for dealing with such issues, as far as I am aware.
Incidentally, Family Tree has a huge amount of similar examples - the main aim of some users appears to be to connect themselves to some noble or royal line, rather than accept the alternative possibility of their descent being through a long line of agricultural labourers!
2 -
The vast majority of us are descended from royalty - enough generations back. (whether we can prove it or not is another story)
going back 20-30 generations we have MILLIONS of ancestral lines - at some point the statistics of it all almost make it certain that on at least one of those lines we descend from a royal line.
TWO different links below:
0 -
if you have European ancestors - then you also descend from Charlemagne and numerous other European royalty - even if you cant trace the line like your wife.
0 -
. . . but I agree with Paul about the specific link in question.
1 -
The problem with encouraging individuals to think along these lines is (as has been proven) they will probably feel far less inclined to worry whether a recorded link to royalty is based on fact, but link themselves to such a line, regardless.
I really don't understand why we should be concerned about the status of our ancestors. I do not think you are helping here with such assertions as , "if you have European ancestors - then you also descend from Charlemagne and numerous other European royalty". I'm afraid this might only encourage some users to try to prove exactly that - without a shred of evidence - and cause even further damage to the integrity of Family Tree.
Why can't we just be proud to know most of our ancestors were good, hard-working folk - with probably far higher moral values than those of royal blood, too?
2 -
I totally agree with you!!!!
I agree: "Why can't we just be proud to know our most of our ancestors were good, hard-working folk"
I very much uphold that stance
BUT none the less - I was just stating facts - that indeed the vast majority of us DO descend from Royalty.
BUT I am not one to be overly focused on it - nor do I think others should be.
But when the subject comes up - I simply point out that we are all descended from royalty - its NO BIG DEAL
and doesnt need any special focus or attention.
and I totally agree - we should not try to establish lines where the evidence is lacking.
BUT NONE The less - I still think it is important to understand what those links try to convey - without peopel being fixated on the subject
0 -
After PaulW replied, I didn't watch this page and I did not see the other reactions until now. Sorry about that.
I understand that some of us descend from royalty, but that was not the question. I wanted to know how to handle someone who "willingly" makes a wrong connection in the tree. Aethelflaed is a quite famous woman in history and from a number of documentaries we know that she did not have a son. So I removed the son's relationship from the tree and my wife no longer descends from king Alfred. :-)
I hoped that there was (a kind of) supervision and that in case of a dispute we could report an issue. I wouldn't know what to do if someone else stubbornly makes that same mistake again.
0
