Treat burial as death in relationship graph

I have an ancestor for whom I have a precise burial date, but no death date. The relationship graph shows the lifetime as ‘1234-5-6 -’ ie, with no end. Working on the presumption that my ancestor was dead when he was buried, is it possible for the relationship graph to treat the burial date as the death date when only the former is present?

That’s the Fallback Events system.

There are fallbacks for Birth, Death, Marriage, Divorce

Hmm. Neither the people list nor the relationship graph are showing this person as dead. Either the column cell is blank, or the date is open-ended.

Does this fallback system have to be enabled somewhere?

Yes. The feature has to be told to look for Fallback (for a Death Event) instead of the Death Event. The Reports → Graphs → Relationship Graph already does that.

But sometimes the Event Role has not been set to “Primary” for the Person’s fallback event. Correct setting of Roles is absolutely necessary for the fallback system to work.

Look at the Person in the Pedigree view mode in the Charts category or the Relationships view. A person with a dated Burial event but no Death event for the Person will have an italicized date.

The Death event has been deleted from “Webb, Livingstone Martin” in the following capture from the Pedigree Charts of the example.gramps tree. The Burial date of “April 13, 1902” is shown in italics.
image

Ah! Thank you! Everything is working as expected now.

Thanks for your help.

1 Like

You ought to do a comprehensive search for (and correct) any Event with an “Unknown” Role.

The 5.2 Tools → Utilities → Verify the Data tool added 2 checks (Person and Family) for Events with Unknown Roles.

And @prculley created addon rules (Families with events with a selected role [Rule] and People with events with a selected role [Rule]) so that you can create a custom filter in the Events category to search. (In case you haven’t upgraded to the 5.2 version of Gramps.)

Still on 5.1.6-1, so I should be upgrading soon.

1 Like

Apologies for re-opening a closed topic, but this is related.

I have a date and place for baptism, but only a date for birth. Is it possible for the relationship graph to fall back and use the baptism-place when there is no birth-place?

I appreciate this generates misleading data, but it would still give an indication of where the parents were at that point in time.

I am sorry but why do wish to include something you cannot prove I have
numerous example of births many miles from the place of baptism it was
quite common for pregnant women to return home to mother to give birth
and then return to her husband complete with baby these places in some
case being many miles apart.
phil

If the child was baptised in town X… it’s a pretty good bet that the parents were there too, and that helps me in filtering out other children or events.

Is it precise, accurate and correct? No. Would I present it in a finished tree? Also no. Does it aid me in building the tree? Yes. As long I as note the uncertainty of the data, it can be helpful.

Regardless, this seems to be a ‘hack it in yourself’ situation.