Unique number for relatives in a manual system?

[Mutley]

I have decided to set up a manual Family Tree Card Index System stored in a little box on my desk .
One card for each person with birth, baptism, marriage, census, death and burial details etc with references.

I would like to number everyone for easy access.

If I start with myself as number 1, then what numbers are my children, my husband, my parents. Do I go up or do I go down? If the furthest back is number 1 and I find more, or the last born is number 1 and another child arrives, then surely I must get into minus numbers?

Where do I start from?

[susan-y]

What if you numbered families by the 100's?
Your immediate family starts in the first 0-99
Next generation your mom's side ..100-199
Next generation your dad's side...200-299
and so on.. then within each hundred, divide by 10's the different families, then your mom's mom would be 1000 and your mom's dad would be 1500
Does that make sense? or are you:confused:?
Sue

[Pam Downes]

Hi Mutley,
I started trying to do a similar system, though I perhaps tried to complicate mine a little too much as I wanted to incororate generations, male/female, and all sorts of other weird and wonderful combinations. I soon gave it up as unworkable. :D
Surely an alpha system is far easier?
However, using numbers can be advantageous if you have several people with the same name. I have three brothers Richard, Robert and Thomas, each having three sons, who they called Richard, Robert, and Thomas :eek: so knowing that Richard number 103 is the son of Robert number 59 can be a means of a quick and easy cross-reference.
The most I would try to split numbers is by your grandparents' families. So your paternal grandfather could be 1/1 (or 1 -1). Paternal grandmother 2/1; maternal grandfather 3/1; maternal grandmother 4/1. Though thinking about it perhaps a letter code would be easier A, B, C, D, because you could then allocate ........nah. Still too complicated. :D:D
Alpha-sort the people. Give everyone 'the next number' as you write out the cards, regardless of the fact that you might be 1 and your hubby 559. Maintain a numerical list in a spreadsheet/exercise book with the relevant name. Maintain a similar alpha list with the allocated number if you wish.

In fact, going to start a similar system myself now.:) I currently have a spreadsheet with columns for noting which details I have (birth/bapt/marriage/death/burial plus the various census) which I use as a done/still to do list. So instead of listing one of the Roberts as 'riw/es' meaning his parents were Richard Wood and Elizabeth Smith I can just put '10 & 74' with 10 being Richard's number and 74 Elizabeth's. It'll certainly save me having to remember who the heck 'riw/es' are! :D (So thanks for making me think of that, Mutley.)

You could if you wish, expand your spreadsheet so you have columns for number, person's name, followed by columns with the reference numbers of the spouse(s), and children.
Pam

[Ladkyis]

You start with yourself as 1, your father is 2 your mother 3 - that's what I was taught when I started pre computers.

I still have my little cards from way back then but I use the puter now - with a backup on the laptop and on a disk.

[Geoffers]

I have decided to set up a manual Family Tree Card Index System stored in a little box on my desk .

As a fellow card enthuisiast - well done. I still maintain an index of 36,000+ cards, which I began in 1974, as my main reference system

I don't rely just on numerals. I take the initials of the first name and surname and reverse them (so Thomas Lowe becomes LT), this is the followed by a three digit number. The first Thomas Lowe is LT001, the second is LT002.

Each card has the reference IDs for parents, spouse(s) and also children, so I can quickly locate related individuals - whatever system you use this is something that I think you have to do.

When I get beyond 999 people with the same initials, I simply change the first digit to the letter 'a' (e.g. LTA01), which increases the number people who can be recorded with the same initials by 2,600. As and when this becomes full, then I can change the second digit to a letter, etc.

This way I ensure that no reference number is more than five characters.

I don't number by generation as getting back in time it can be difficult to identify into which generation someone falls. Also, if you have a very simple numerical system for ancestors, beginning with yourself as 1 - how do you then number descendents? If you ignore numbering by generation, you avoid this problem.

[Pam Downes]

I have decided to set up a manual Family Tree Card Index System stored in a little box on my desk .

After reading about the numbers of cards Geoffers has in his system, just be prepared for needing a big little box. :D (Though I think Geoffers' cards also cover details of the fiche he has for various parishes, and possibly other records he holds.)
Nice to know that Geoffers agrees with my idea of cross-referencing numbers for spouses and children.:) Even though I didn't actually say about putting the reference numbers on the cards, just on the spreadsheet. Strangely, considering that I'm such a computer dimbo, I do rely very much on my computer for all sorts of lists - though the aim is that they will eventually be printed on paper.:D
Pam

p.s. (12.10) The apostrophe WAS in the correct place, so I've now re-edited. (Not having a very good day today with my thoughts, grammar, etc - and then I'm trying to talk about being methodical. The irony!!)

[Mutley]

Pam, You may be right, the little box is getting bigger all the time!

I was originally looking at small cards, 7.5 cm x 10.5 cm but maybe I should consider the next size up.

I want to have a card system so that when searching for information on people I can have their card in front of me with the details I already have and fill in what I find. I do have it on the PC but tend to write new information on post it notes and lose them or forget to go back and update the computer files.

Also my daughter is now involved and we are having trouble identifying people we find, "I've found the birth of the John who is the son of Charles, no not that one, the other one, which one? my 3xxgrandfather, your 4xx grandfather... " As Pam says, too complicated.

I don't rely just on numerals. I take the initials of the first name and surname and reverse them (so Thomas Lowe becomes LT), this is the followed by a three digit number. The first Thomas Lowe is LT001, the second is LT002.


I like Geoffers idea, that sounds fairly easy but what do you do with two different families with same initials or same initials in same family.
Say John Smith and James Shaw?
Say John Smith and daughter Jane Smith and son James Smith?

And women whose maiden name I don't yet know?

[Pam Downes]

I like Geoffers idea, that sounds fairly easy but what do you do with two different families with same initials.
Say John Smith and James Shaw?
Mutley, the family name doesn't matter. It's the ref number that is important.
Under Geoffer's system John Smith is say, SJ001 and James Shaw might be SJ012.
When it comes to listing their wives - even if they're both Mary :D - Mary Smith might be SM099, cross-referenced to SJ001 while Mary Shaw might be SM001 and is cross-referenced to SJ012.
The most important thing is to make sure you get your numbers right :D so I would perhaps initially enter them as families, e.g. John and Mary Smith and their children as one block of numbers and double-check the cross-referenced numbers are correct. Then perhaps move on to the eldest of the children, and enter their spouse and children as another block of numbers. Though any way is fine as long as you do it methodically (says scatter-brained me!) till you get the system up and running.

ADDED: Geoffers obviously has a way round the unknown maiden names. Perhaps list as ZZ001, ZZ002, etc though once you do find the missing name you'll have to amend the cards with the relevant spouse and children on. The beauty though of having their numbers on the ZZ cards is that it won't take long to find the spouse and childrens' cards and amend them.

FURTHER ADDED (at approx 11.53am): Just noticed the bit about the childen with the same initials as the parents. Same answer - name and initials are not important - it's the number. So John Smith's children Jane and James could be SJ185 and SJ463. How far apart the numbers are really doesn't matter, recording the correct numbers is the important thing.
Pam

[Pam Downes]

I was originally looking at small cards, 7.5 cm x 10.5 cm but maybe I should consider the next size up.

I want to have a card system so that when searching for information on people I can have their card in front of me with the details I already have and fill in what I find. I do have it on the PC but tend to write new information on post it notes and lose them or forget to go back and update the computer files.

I have so been there and done that :D, though since I started the spreadsheet with the birth, bapt, etc columns I have been a lot more methodical.
Re the size of the cards - decide what infomation you feel you want to record and get a card to fit. If you later decide you need to record further info, then you still have the back of the card 'spare'.
And also when you start looking for further information make sure you detail any list you take from from the house with the name and the reference number. e.g. John Smith, SJ854. That should ensure that when you return home you enter the new details on the correct card. :)
Pam

[Mutley]

OK, Thank you, I am going to go for it!!

Number 3 daughter is arriving here next week. We have three days on the PC each filling in our cards so we have the same information. (I think we will be staying in our jim jams while hubby keeps us supplied with tea and sarnies ;)).

Re the size of the cards - decide what information you feel you want to record and get a card to fit. If you later decide you need to record further info, then you still have the back of the card 'spare'.


I think I will create a form in Word with the spaces to fill in and tick boxes etc and run that out onto card. That way all the cards will be the same and nothing will get left off. Also we will not have to keep writing the same words, BIRTH DATE, DEATH etc.
(Pink card for the ladies and blue for the gents?? :))

I am going to put on the census dates so I can add the reference. Any other suggestions for Field Titles gratefully received...

[busyglen]

(Pink card for the ladies and blue for the gents?)

Er...just a thought, what do you do with the `civil partners'? If you have any that is? ;) That threw me, when I had to enter one into my tree.

Glenys

[Pam Downes]

(Pink card for the ladies and blue for the gents?? :))
Nice idea but could perhaps look a bit messy if you can't get the same shade of pink or blue next time.
Would use a lot of ink (don't forget to stock up on cartridges anyway! :)) but you could perhaps print a blue or pink strip across the top of the card where you're going to write the name. Also have to be careful that your pen colour will show up clearly against the colour.


I am going to put on the census dates so I can add the reference. Any other suggestions for Field Titles gratefully received...
Depends how 'deep' you want to go -
birth, baptism, marriage, death, burial, addresses/towns/churches associated with these events; GRO Index ref numbers/years/quarters. The latter might be handy where you have a person whose not a direct line but whose registration details you've found. Alternatively you can just stick the GRO details on the BMD line as appropriate.

Census date, as opposed to just census year, is a brilliant idea, and yes census ref, plus possibly name of town/village where living.
Don't forget to print a line for for the 1911 and even the 1921 :D census.

Lines for spouse'(s) and childrens' reference numbers. If you draw boxes you can get several children (and spouses if need be!) on one line.

If you have a web site or a family history programme which generates number references, spaces for those numbers?
Pam

[Pam Downes]

(Pink card for the ladies and blue for the gents?)

Er...just a thought, what do you do with the `civil partners'? If you have any that is? ;) That threw me, when I had to enter one into my tree.

Glenys
Civil partners are still (usually) male or female, Glenys. :D (Shall I put a |doh|for you?)
Pam

[Geoffers]

I was originally looking at small cards, 7.5 cm x 10.5 cm but maybe I should consider the next size up.

The small 5" x 3" lined cards are what I use.

On the front of each card I have the name by which they are first found and the reference at the top.
Below this I have lines for Bth/Bap. Mar, Dth/Bur. Occupation. Issue and sources. I add second and third marriages below this. The reverse of the card I use to add notes as I wish.

I like Geoffers idea, that sounds fairly easy but what do you do with two different families with same initials or same initials in same family.
Say John Smith and James Shaw?
Say John Smith and daughter Jane Smith and son James Smith?

This doesn't affect the system. You can keep it simple - or, amend it slightly to indicate two different families. My main card system is a one-name study. I have a second card index for families into which my married. This is much smaller in size as I'm not interested in following distant relationships to the nth degree.

For the second card index for related families - my mum's family, my wife's family, etc, I have changed the reference slightly by putting a character (digit or letter) in front of the reference.

If you are equally interested in all family lines you could increase the reference code to six characters, I'm less interested in these related lines so keep it at five. For example: my maternal grandmother was a HOLDEN by birth, to identify all her HOLDEN family I put a figure 1 in front of her ID, which is 1HF01. My maternal gt-grandmother was also a HOLDEN, but a different family, so to show that this is a second family, her reference is 2HA01. I have a third HOLDEN family whose reference is 8H, two HAWORTH families 4H and 6H.

1H indicates the first HOLDEN family, 2H indicates the second HOLDEN family. If I get to the stage of having more than 10 families whose surname begins with the same letter, I simply change the first numeral to a letter - e.g. AH, BH, CH - etc.

A reference system of this nature is useful in that if used in spreadsheets, it quickly brings together everyone from the same family.

I store all census information on spreadsheet, each line has the personal ID of everyone, so using filters I can easily extract all entries relating to an individual. It's the same with GRO index and registers which I have on spreadsheet

As I mentioned, I am less interested in these families and so only have a few hundred cards to cover them all - so I keep the reference to just five characters - but it none-the-less allows for up to 1,270+ people with the same initials from the same family group.

If your research is planned to be a really large study (I have begun to use it for referencing the 400,000+ entries I have for NE Norfolk - a project to keep me going for a few years) - then increasing the number of characters in the reference to six might be worthwhile.

And women whose maiden name I don't yet know?

If it is not known whether the woman is married - or not, I use the surname found in the record (Parish registers from pre-1780 in my area of interest do not always identify whether a female burial relates to an adult, juvenile or child - or if single/married).

If the person is known to be married I give them all the reference 'X' as initial of surname - my 8xgt grandfather married a woman who was called Elizabeth, I don't know her maiden name, in my card index she is 1XE03.

Edit - By the way, wherever I have a source document - census return, birth certificate, will - whatever, each document has the reference numbers of those involved - that way it is easy to then look the person up in the card index. Everything has to be cross-referenced for the system work properly.

[busyglen]

Civil partners are still (usually) male or female, Glenys. :D (Shall I put a |doh|for you?)
Pam

Oh alright then! :o

What I really meant was, when you have the same sex `marriages', it could look a bit odd with two blue, or two pink cards. I think I had better give up whilst I am winning, as I shall only dig myself in deeper! |banghead|

Glenys

[Pam Downes]

Oh alright then! :o

What I really meant was, when you have the same sex `marriages', it could look a bit odd with two blue, or two pink cards. I think I had better give up whilst I am winning, as I shall only dig myself in deeper! |banghead|

Glenys
Sorry Glenys, hadn't thought about the 'two cards of the same colour' angle. |doh|Though the only time they are likely to be next to each other is when you're writing any details on them. The rest of the time they will be alpha-filed under 'maiden surname' (so to speak! :D )
Pam

[Barnzzz]

I've just spent about 3 weeks attempting to reorganise mine by giving everyone a folder containing all their documents, and completing a 'top sheet' for each one. This shows, name, birth date and death date, parents, spouse, children, and places they lived. This system was supposed to make everyone easy to find and to highlight gaps in knowledge of which there are many !

Now I've read this, I might have to start all over again !

Sue

[Pam Downes]

I've just spent about 3 weeks attempting to reorganise mine by giving everyone a folder containing all their documents, and completing a 'top sheet' for each one. This shows, name, birth date and death date, parents, spouse, children, and places they lived. This system was supposed to make everyone easy to find and to highlight gaps in knowledge of which there are many !

Now I've read this, I might have to start all over again !

Sue
Sue, I've refined my system about 6 times so far. Still not sure if the last tweak was an improvement or not. :)
And now Mutley's made me think I ought to add a number. :D
Pam

[Barnzzz]

Hi Pam, my thoughts exactly. Numbers may be the way forward, I shall think more about this.

Sue

[Mutley]

OK, I think, with all your comments I am getting there.

I have lots of family names, he who married she, who married he (but not a he to he or she to she yet!).:confused:

I have three families of Smith, my maternal grandmother, my 1xg uncle's wife and 1xg aunts husband! So....

My main line is Selby = 01S and Searles = 02S, Smith = 03S, Smith = 04S, Smith = 05S, Stockman = 06S. I can have 99 families beginning with S.
Horsnell = 01H, Hogan = 02H, Harris = 03H, Hussey = 04H, Hatcher = 05H. and so on...

Each family name will have it's own unique reference. Up to 99 Names for each letter of the alphabet.
Alice, whose maiden name I don't know will be X/A001 until I find her family name.

Following the family ref. I will add their first name initial but then I must decide if I am going to give two or three numbers after.
Great Granddad will be 01S/C001, Grandad will be 01S/C002 and my dad will be 01S/C003. or 01S/C01, 01S/C02 and 01S/C03?

I think by having the family name at the front I can just have 2 numbers with the first name initial. That gives me 99 people with the same first name initial and same surname.

I have also decided that I will create the card in Word with four cards to a page in Landscape mode. When I have done that, I will turn it to a .JPeg and hopefully link it here.

Thank you so much and give me a few days......

[v.wells]

Your ideas are all brilliant of course. I, on the other hand, while not lazy, cringe at the amount of work this would take for me as I am always adding stuff. I have 4 sets of coloured file folders with the head of each line stuck with a coloured circle with their childrens families dble stuck. Not great but it semi works for me. I also have tree charts pinned on the wall so I can follow who I am looking at. And my desk is awash in paper (my things to order that I am currently weeding through and have now cut in 1/2).:)

[Peter_uk_can]

I have followed this thread with interest. I will admit that, on occasion, I have been known to make some sarcastic comment, however this is not such an occassion. I have to ask "Why".

We use "Legacy 6" as a database for our genealogy. A new version, Legacy 7, was rolled out this week and it has some very promising features. Using version 6, we hold the information on sources, family anecdotes, locations and other information pertaining to an individual within the database. The relationship calculator also helps understand mutliple times removed cousins and perhaps even the occasional 4 generation intermarriages. It will handle, maiden names and AKA's.

If an individual family expands then so does the database. We can search any word within the database, so that even a reference like "had a black cat called Snowy" would pull out the information on the individual and the associated family.

I know that there is some comfort in having paper records and believe me our 30+ loose leaf binders are evidence of that, however, a copy of the actual paper content can be recovered more quickly by accessing the computer database than by finding the appropriate binder and then the particular page.

So, in the fear that maybe something very basic has slipped past me, can I please ask "Why" ?

Respectfully.

Peter

[Pam Downes]

So, in the fear that maybe something very basic has slipped past me, can I please ask "Why" ? Peter
The 'very basic' in my case Peter is that I'm still very computer-illiterate. I do have a FH program, which I got when I was fairly new to FH. But obviously being fairly new also meant that I didn't have that many people and details to enter. And when I tried to follow the manual and enter census details - disaster. So until I could go to an FH fair and ask an expert what I was doing wrong I had to improvise. At the fair a year later I was shown what to do, and thought I'd written down the instructions fairly well, but still couldn't get it right on my computer. Back to the fair the following year, and when I got home I almost got the right result, but then family reasons meant that genealogy took a back seat so I never had a chance to input lots of entries so that the 'how to' really sank into my brain. Since then I've had new computer(s) and there's been a new version of the program released. The new version is now on my computer, but it's been so long since I input any entries (2003 from what I can see though I did think I'd entered a few more recently than that - perhaps I forgot to 'save' :eek: ) that I've virtually forgotten how to enter names and BMD dates. :D
'One of these days' |biggrin| I will get back into the program but for the moment my improvised system and my 'hand-drawn' (on Excel) family tree will have to suffice.
I have to add that I am quite proud of my 'names and what info I have on them' spreadsheet. BBMDB entries are colour-coded for certificates, PRs, IGI, NBI, transcriptions, GRO Index, and the names are colour-coded/in bold to signify close family/details as complete and written up as currently possible, and distant family/details as complete and written up as currently possible.
Like any system, open to criticism/scorn from other people and even I admit that it's a bit long-winded when I enter BMD and census details on the individual spreadsheets I have for people, but it works for me - and that is the very short answer to your 'why'. :)
Pam

[Pam Downes]

I should perhaps also add that some people began their FH in the days when computers with less 'power' than even the most basic models of today sent the most powerful engines ever developed (before 1998) to the moon and back.
Card indexes were the only way to go then, and proved their worth over subsequent years. :)
Pam

[Geoffers]

I have followed this thread with interest. I will admit that, on occasion, I have been known to make some sarcastic comment, however this is not such an occassion. I have to ask "Why". We use "Legacy 6" as a database for our genealogy. A new version, Legacy 7, was rolled out this week and it has some very promising features. Using version 6, we hold the information on sources, family anecdotes, locations and other information pertaining to an individual within the database. The relationship calculator also helps understand mutliple times removed cousins and perhaps even the occasional 4 generation intermarriages. It will handle, maiden names and AKA's.

A fair enough question.........

For me, I began my system before the advent of home computing and family history programmes. I needed some system to organise my records. I have tinkered with things a bit and now have something with which I am happy. I find the cards very usful in being able to layout several cards on a table to try and work out how people may fit into my research - physically moving cards around helps me to sort out information in my mind and work out strategies for research.

I have tried various computer programmes and found them all wanting - The nearest to what I want is Custodian III. I use Excel spreadsheets a lot, they are designed how I want them - I can even design family trees on spreadsheet. The advantage of Custodian is that I can create blank documents in a similar fashion to my spreadsheets. Custodian, spreadsheets and cards are very flexible and it is that flexibility that I seek.

I'm not intersted in producing a book from a family history programme - all of those I have seen are quite frankly rubbish. I'm not interested multiple removed cousins or programmes which can calculate that relationship. There are programmes with maps to pinpoint where family lived - but the maps are very poor. The ability to exchange information is useful, but I know that people exchange information by gedcom and import it direct into their own 'research' without any checking - the result is a lot of disinformation being exchanged. A lot of the bits and pieces added onto programmes are just gimmicks.

Most of you will be quite happy with your own programme for what you want and that's fine, good luck to you. My own system works for me and I'll keep to it.

[Geoffers]

My main line is Selby = 01S and Searles = 02S, Smith = 03S, Smith = 04S, Smith = 05S, Stockman = 06S. I can have 99 families beginning with S.....Each family name will have it's own unique reference. Up to 99 Names for each letter of the alphabet.

You can actually extend this simply if needed. If you get a 100th person whose surname begins with H, simply change the first numeral to a letter, you immediately add 260 more entries that can be used.

This can then be extended quite simply to add an extra 916 entries for surnames beginning with the same letter, without increasing the number of charcaters in a personal ID.

[Peter_uk_can]

Pam and Geoffers. Many thanks for your informative replies. I am not crass enough to think that "my way is the only way" and today I learn't a little more about how people handle genealogy.

Regards

Peter

[Pam Downes]

Pam and Geoffers. Many thanks for your informative replies. I am not crass enough to think that "my way is the only way" and today I learn't a little more about how people handle genealogy.
Regards
Peter
Or not. :)
I said in a previous post that I'd tried to set up one particular numbering system but made it too complicated by trying to incorporate generations, and male/female grandparents into the scheme, so decided that a simple numbering system was the best way to go.
Geoffers then convinced Mutley that a system of numbers and letters was a good way of showing families - though I still thought that a little complicated.
However I did become convinced of the merits of using numbers as a quick reference aid, and thought it might be a good idea to use the ID numbers allocated by my FH program.
Now (as in 24 hours later :D ), I can see the merits of incorporating a letter to denote a family so have been thinking along the lines of using the four letters of my grandparents surnames - E, W, S, and C - because that would help in identifying the people who married into the families, and the children of the women who married 'out' of the family. But using the computer-generated ID numbers and the letters means that although I might have S1, S2, S3, the next numbers for that family might be S78, S79, S112, S124, S125 which isn't a very logical system.
So now I'm back to deciding again. (a) Straightforward numbering 1,2,3,4,
(b) Numbering as per ID numbers on computer program. (c) Either of previous methods combined with one of four letters denoting to which family line a person belongs.
If I'd known family history was going to be this difficult I'd have never have started it. |biggrin||biggrin|
Pam

[Geoffers]

I don't think there is any one way - whatever suits one individual will not necessarily suit another - hence all the different programmes available, and old stick-in-the-muds like me who use older technology.

What is important of course, is methodical research and recording that research accurately together with its source(s).

Fare y'well tergether

[Geoffers]

So now I'm back to deciding again. (a) Straightforward numbering 1,2,3,4,
(b) Numbering as per ID numbers on computer program. (c) Either of previous methods combined with one of four letters denoting to which family line a person belongs.

I think that using numerals alone is limiting and every factor of 10 you increase the number of digits. If you intend to store those purely numerical references on computer, you will need to include zeros in front of the digits in order to sort them correctly and then have to decide from the outset how many people you are going to record. using 5 digits will allow you to store up to 99,999 people - but if things get out of hand (as they have a habit of doing), changing the whole lot to extend to 100,000 makes things complicated.

Keeping to five characters and using an alpha-numeric system expands the number who can be recorded enormously. Extend this to six characters expands the available number of references multiplies by a factor of 36 - 26 letters and 10 digits - though you may want to ignore zero as being too close to the letter 'O'.

[Pam Downes]

I think that using numerals alone is limiting and every factor of 10 you increase the number of digits. If you intend to store those purely numerical references on computer, you will need to include zeros in front of the digits in order to sort them correctly and then have to decide from the outset how many people you are going to record. using 5 digits will allow you to store up to 99,999 people - but if things get out of hand (as they have a habit of doing), changing the whole lot to extend to 100,000 makes things complicated.

Keeping to five characters and using an alpha-numeric system expands the number who can be recorded enormously. Extend this to six characters expands the available number of references multiplies by a factor of 36 - 26 letters and 10 digits - though you may want to ignore zero as being too close to the letter 'O'.
Geoffers, you're trying to blind me with science. :) (Not very difficult in my case!)
I have got some way to go to reach even 999 people, let alone a hundred times that :D but thank you for the info about the pitfalls of using a purely numerical system.
My FH is on the back burner at the moment, so I have plenty of time to think things through.
Pam

[Mutley]

To answer Peter,

I have the information in a program that gives me bells and whistles and I will also continue to use that but I wanted something more personal. I wanted to give them a reference that I could relate to and that was not a computer generated ID. Thanks to Geoffers help, I already know the main players references in my mind and I have not started writing yet but I have no idea who 2905 on the computer system is.

I, like Geoffers prefer the physical feel of paper work. I want to move the cards around on the desk. I want to put the family out in front of me in a group. Most of these people I do not have a photograph for and never will have. The card will, sort of, become the person with their brief history which is all I have for them. If I am searching for a birth, I want to be able to look at what I have in my hand, I want to hold the card, shake it, if I feel like it, "where are you?"

It is a personal thing but all systems have a place somewhere.

[Peter_uk_can]

Thanks for the reply.


To answer Peter,
I want to be able to look at what I have in my hand, I want to hold the card, shake it, if I feel like it, "where are you?"



Or even wring its little neck ? :)

[Mutley]

Thanks for the reply.
Or even wring its little neck ? :)

Maybe, if I do have a picture of someone, I will stick head and shoulders to the card. Then I can imagine doing "Just That"
http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j22/celtroz/strangle.gif


Thank you to both Geoffers and Pam. Your contributions have helped me enormously. Thank you also to the others that have joined this thread. I am grateful to you all.

|hug|

[Mutley]

Geoffers,
Quick simple question please?

I would like to put SURNAME on the top line of the card. The one that actually is and any variations this person has used and REFERENCE/ID

Which have you found the easiest for flicking through?
To put the surname on the left and the ID on the right (my natural instinct) or the other way around.

[Geoffers]

I would like to put SURNAME on the top line of the card. The one that actually is and any variations this person has used and REFERENCE/ID

Good idea - it helps to make things stand out.

Which have you found the easiest for flicking through?
To put the surname on the left and the ID on the right (my natural instinct) or the other way around.

I put the ID in the top right corner of the card and the full name of the person in the centre of the top line. Any variant spellings used I add to the reverse of the card - along with the date and source of the information.

[Mutley]

Thank you kind sir,
Much appreciated.

That is exactly what I will do too.

[Mutley]

Well, this is the first attempt.

There are four cards on an A4, landscaped page in Word.
The formatting has gone slightly askew and the tick boxes have changed to question marks when I converted it to a Jpg but you can see the general idea.

http://i147.photobucket.com/albums/r297/MutleyBG/INDEXCARD.jpg

[Astoria]

I too enjoy moving people around manually, on cards, I use excell, A _G, 16 rows, on this I can record BMD baptisms and buriels and census info for all years, I put in everthing I can find on the web. Print, and laminate it ,the card is then a standard size for my index. Each person has a unique number which I keep in a file, with a tick list as to what I know about them, also this cross references to family or others mentioned
Also with a dry wipe pen you can add notes to your card for future searches.

Bit late to join in but I hope you are getting there,

Astoria.

[Geoffers]

Well, this is the first attempt.
There are four cards on an A4, landscaped page in Word.
The formatting has gone slightly askew and the tick boxes have changed to question marks when I converted it to a Jpg but you can see the general idea.

Whatever works for you is fine, I keep my cards simpler. I can scan one and e-mail t you if it helps at all. The layout is something like this:

Forename(s) SURNAME ID

Born/Bap [date, place] Source (e.g. BC, CR, PR)
Mar [date/place - to whom] Source (e.g. MC, PR, SR, W)
Dth/Bur [date/place - cause] Source (CWGC, DC, L, PR, W)

Occupation [Year - occupation]

Issue - children's name(s), year, ID

Sources which I hold

If needed add Mar 2, Mar 3 here

On the reverse of the card I add notes, usually quite short that point me to my sources. e.g. 1841 - CR Horstead HO107/****/** f** p**

I might add information to these notes - e.g. boarding in Portsmouth, parents visiting pat.gfather in Lowestoft (CR RG13/*** f ** p**)

[Mutley]

Yes Please Geoffers,
I will PM you with my email.

I thought I would put the children on the back as I have one family with 12 and some with none.
Also, as you suggest, notes that put them in a certain place at a certain time.


Bit late to join in but I hope you are getting there,
Astoria.


Oh the more the merrier, it's never to late to join a thread:)

I was going to use acid free card and acid free pens. I know this has been discussed before but I cannot remember what was said about laminating? If it was a good idea or not?