It can be dangerous business delving into family trees published online. We never know the true intent of the author. Are they sincere to their work or do they seek faux glorification, tying their bloodline to a famous historical figure. I’ll admit, whenever someone of historical significance pops up in my genealogy I get excited. I’m a history buff.
Yet, there are those who falsify their branches to make connections – to what ends? You’re only lying to yourself and causing confusion to other researchers. Any researcher worth their salt will know what you’ve done. You cannot gain acceptance into a Society for your targeted historical figure, should one exist. There is no benefit. And what of your real ancestors who you’ve turned a blind eye to…?
Family trees published online, while often sketchy, can afford us valuable tips. It’s okay to take a peek now and then, especially when we’ve exhausted all our leads. In genealogy, sometimes all it takes is one little nugget of information to unlock generations.
This week, along my quest for the Clan MacDonald of Glencoe, an ancestral branch stemming from my ancestor Elizabeth McDaniel, wife of Benjamin Becraft, I came across such a tree. I turned to online trees to hunt for clues. While most of the information was solid, one tree had some truly inspiring branches – but sadly, they were false. Two things tipped me off:
First, dates and locations began to jumble. Second, one of the “wives”, a daughter of a king, happened to already be my ancestor. I’d previously done extensive research on her and knew this second husband was false.
My advice, be weary of online genealogies. Look for red flags and use good judgment. It’s okay to follow tips from someone’s tree, but verify it for yourself. False information sweeps through research communities like an epidemic. Be the cure.
Heritage Genealogy CTM 