From roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com Tue Mar 21 12:12:32 2006 Received: from mail.rootsweb.com (mail.rootsweb.com [192.168.65.34]) by admin.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k2LJCWjb000638; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 12:12:32 -0700 Received: from roots-l.rootsweb.com (roots-l.rootsweb.com [66.43.16.22]) by mail.rootsweb.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k2LJCVVt028661 for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 12:12:31 -0700 Received: from roots-l.rootsweb.com (roots-l [127.0.0.1]) by roots-l.rootsweb.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id k2LGfZFI031711 for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 11:41:35 -0500 Received: (from roots-in@localhost) by roots-l.rootsweb.com (8.12.10/8.12.8/Submit) id k2LGfZDQ031710 for roots-approved@rootsweb.com; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 11:41:35 -0500 Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [66.43.27.41]) by roots-l.rootsweb.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id k2LGPLFI031632 for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 11:25:22 -0500 Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) id k2LIu7so010796 for roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 11:56:07 -0700 X-Envelope-From: Kith-n-Kin@cox.net Tue Mar 21 11:56:07 2006 Received: from mail.rootsweb.com (mail.rootsweb.com [192.168.65.34]) by admin.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k2LIu7jb010787 for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 11:56:07 -0700 Received: from fed1rmmtao03.cox.net (fed1rmmtao03.cox.net [68.230.241.36]) by mail.rootsweb.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k2LIu3pN020296 for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 11:56:04 -0700 Received: from TOWER ([68.0.155.47]) by fed1rmmtao03.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with ESMTP id <20060321185415.DQVR20875.fed1rmmtao03.cox.net@TOWER>; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 13:54:15 -0500 From: "Kith-n-Kin" To: , Subject: RE: [ROOTS-L] Limiting research to what relationship? Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 11:55:50 -0700 Message-ID: <010101c64d19$15b93be0$6601a8c0@TOWER> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 In-reply-to: <343.3c5947.3150e198@aol.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 Importance: Normal X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.52 on 192.168.65.34 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.52 on 192.168.65.34 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by admin.rootsweb.com id k2LIu7jb010787 Sender: roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com Jo, you said: |I got many different responses regarding limiting my database. |Apparently it |seemed to most people that I figured I had finished my |genealogy research and | was ready to quit - NO WAY. I am just trying to make things more |manageable for the family book I am work on. I didn't reply to the original question, on "limiting research. . ." because I really had no answer. To this question, "how to make things more manageable" however, I can speak with some authority. (1) Remember your audience! 15,000 or so names are overwhelming. And, since you want (good for you) to add stories and historical references, your book is now some 3000 pages. (Think of the size of the Oxford dictionary). (2) You're going to have to source, bibliograph, and index this thing. Oooo, biiiig pain. Make it too involved and you may never finish. I am completing the editing of a cousin's "masterwork", with probably a couple thousand names. It was going to be five or six chapters. And, frankly, it was never going to be finished. I finally convinced him to do "volumes", with three related families in one volume, and the rest "to be continued". So, we have the mother's line in one volume and the father's line in the other. The criteria for inclusion was also that these three families had common "time and place" in Kentucky the latter part of the 18th century, and there is a lot of reader interest in the families. This was important in terms of the whole thing making at least a "start" of sense. Especially when it comes to sources. He did include the "progenitors" of the families, and did some culling by generally "daughtering out" the lines. That is when you stop a line when there are no heirs left with the male surname. (By the way, I personally think that was bad, but then, it's not my book!) As it is, we have a nice letter-size book of some 300 pages, which has a natural audience who will pay for the privilege (the printing cost) of having the book near at hand. The original book would have been in excess of 600 pages. And, most people interested in the first half would not be interested in the second half. Not to mention the heft of the thing. So, you decide if you are going to do "every descendant I can find of Adam and Eve (Smith) Jones", or "selected descendants of Adam and Eve (Smith) Jones and some allied families." In a book I am writing, I am placing the criteria on three families who passed through Missouri in the first quarter of the 1800s, left there from 1848 to 1853 to cross the Oregon Trail, and settle in the same county in Oregon. These families intermarried in Missouri, so again, there is a natural audience for the information. I have researched some of the allied families (in-laws), as they had a hand in the building of the family and in Oregon, and deserve some mention. But, I don't go "all the way back" on these people, just a sketch. And, generally, I'm not following their kin who didn't choose to go to Oregon. I am also stopping the generations with the grand-children of these pioneers. In my case, that is my grandmother. I may or may not include an addendum with the "modern descendants down to WW II" -- but no further than that, for sure. I hope this helps, and now, since I just prodded myself, I better get cracking on the "MO to OR" book Good luck, Pat (in Tucson)