Hi there,
I have often thought about this as well but doing so using an earlier
timeframe. If you encompassed the 1851 census it would be much easier and
more reliable - less people, less mobile, and closer to the "source".
Starting closer to the source would include more Cat*ley trees as each
generation does not necessarily produce Cat*leys or males. A prime example
of this is mine and Anne's Zachariah of Hackney tree. This tree will not
feature if you used the ~1850-1911 timeframes or even anything after 1840.
There may will be unidentified cousins or great aunts and uncles out there
but they could not be linked to this tree unless you looked at the data
prior to 1800.
Maybe a two pronged approach would work, one prior to 1800 and the other
using ~1860-1911 ??
I have often also thought about plotting the birth places of these earlier
Cat*leys on a map much like I did with the Cat*ley DNA results. This
approach might be more useful if once this proposed exercise has been
undertaken and there are still outliers.
Jocelyn
-----Original Message-----
From: catley-bounces(a)rootsweb.com [mailto:catley-bounces@rootsweb.com] On
Behalf Of Tim Cattley
Sent: Saturday, 30 October 2010 5:36 a.m.
To: catley(a)rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: [CATLEY] how many catley trees
OK Liz,
Shall I do them in baches of ten years at a time?
Tim
----- Original Message -----
From: "lizcordingley" <lizcordingley(a)blueyonder.co.uk>
To: <catley(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 5:02 PM
Subject: Re: [CATLEY] how many catley trees
Hi Tim,
Can you send me the details for the ones no accounted for only.
Cheers
Liz
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Cattley" <felis(a)mypostoffice.co.uk>
To: <catley(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 1:18 PM
Subject: Re: [CATLEY] how many catley trees
> Hi Liz,
>
> Glad you think it feasible and worth the effort. Am with you about
> starting
> at the 1911 census and tracking back from there.
> So, the target window would be 1860-1910 ish.
> Just had a quick reckon up with the outstanding (UK) births for this 50
> year
> period and estimate it gives us about 600 to look at, which at first
> impression sounds a trifle daunting but of course, is only an average of
> about 12/annum which is not bad I think.
>
> Tim
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "lizcordingley" <lizcordingley(a)blueyonder.co.uk>
> To: <catley(a)rootsweb.com>
> Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 10:57 AM
> Subject: [CATLEY] how many catley trees
>
>
>> Hi Tim
>> I'm game. It would be helpful if you started at the 1911 census and
>> worked
>> backwards.
>> Liz
>>
>> -------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
>> CATLEY-request(a)rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
>> quotes
>> in the subject and the body of the message
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> This email has been scanned by Netintelligence
>>
http://www.netintelligence.com/email
>>
>
>
> ______________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by Netintelligence
>
http://www.netintelligence.com/email
>
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> CATLEY-request(a)rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
> quotes
> in the subject and the body of the message
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
CATLEY-request(a)rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes
in the subject and the body of the message
______________________________________________
This email has been scanned by Netintelligence
http://www.netintelligence.com/email
______________________________________________
This email has been scanned by Netintelligence
http://www.netintelligence.com/email
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
CATLEY-request(a)rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes
in the subject and the body of the message