She was commenting on my latest labor of genealogical love: a five-generation harlequin pedigree chart of my ancestors along with my husband’s.
LOTS of cutting. Yes, our wedding information is in the heart....
My daughter came by to visit on Sunday while I was away. They looked at the pedigree and my daughter commented on what a good job I had done.
“She agreed with me that is was simply beautiful,” the Senior Citizen reported. “But we have one question.”
“What’s that?” I asked, wincing mentally.
“We want to know why you didn’t put Michael’s sister on there. Did you forget her? And where are your brother and sister on there? And why aren’t your kids on there?”
It became crystal clear that all this had probably been stickin’ in her craw since she first saw it but she didn’t say anything. Until she found a questioner in crime....
“Well, that’s actually three questions, but the answer’s the same: it’s a pedigree chart—my and Michael’s ancestors are the ones who go on there. Not our siblings or our kids. Family group sheets show kids and, therefore, siblings.”
“Yes, Liz! Why isn’t she on there?” Then, lower, “Is he upset because you didn’t put her on there?”
“What? No! He knows she doesn’t go on there!”
“Well, why doesn’t she go on there? Sharon’s her mom too!”
“I know Sharon is her mom. But Liz is a sibling, a collateral relative, not a direct line descendant in this chart. Siblings go on family group sheets.”
“Huh.” Clearly unconvinced.
“Think about like this: Where would I have put her? Where would I have put Steve and Tanya (my brother and sister)? Where would I have put YOUR seven brothers and sisters at the next level? The chart would have had to have been about eleventy feet tall to fit all those people in and it would be very confusing.”
“Ohhh. I guess that could be true. It would be a lot of people.”
Next labor of love: eleventy family group sheets!