Years ago, I used a series of records. I didn’t find my relatives in them and made some incorrect conclusions about how the records were organized and what time period they covered. Twenty years later, on a whim I searched them again. Knowing more about records and research, I found some of my relatives in the records. Did you make assumptions about records early in your research…and would it be worth your while to revisit those records and assumptions?
If you don’t care what happens to your genealogy stuff after you die, please ignore this post. If you do, consider devoting a certain percentage of your “genealogy time” to planning for after you leave this Earthly existence. It can be digitizing and identifying photographs, organizing materials, culling (yes…culling) your collection, photographing items that can’t easily be preserved, writing your own stories, writing up ancestral problems, etc. The list is personal to you. Not to be morbid, but we never know when our time is up. So think about devoting some of your genealogy time to not getting more information and details, but to doing what you can to preserve things past your existence on this planet. Unless that doesn’t interest you and it’s fine if it doesn’t. […]
If you are working on a more recent relative and you’ve got a copy of their “funeral book,” look and see if the names of those who came to pay their respects are in the book. Relatives may have copies of these books in with any personal family papers that they have. It is a good way to get ideas of who might have been your ancestor’s associates and who was alive when your ancestor died. They may have even written in their city of residence. And there’s always their signatures…hopefully they are readable.
It stands to reason that your direct-line relative will be married a justice of the peace or another warm body able to certify marriages in close proximity to the bridal couple at the time of the event. In these cases the genealogical clues that can be ascertained from the officiant are minimal. Determine who married all the ancestral siblings. If the family was remotely religious (and potentially listed in church records), there’s a good chance at least one of the family members took the time to have a religious ceremony. In terms of it being a clue it doesn’t matter much if it your ancestor of interest or their sibling. Unless the church member was the in-law. But then you’ll have to research to know that. Which is […]
Sometimes it appears that we are being overly persnickety when we talk about the specific definition of a word–like the difference between diminutives and nicknames or referring to sources as original or derivative and information as primary or secondary. The reason is that understanding terminology helps us to understand materials when we find them, to draw appropriate and reasonable conclusions, and to communicate clearly when we write. For the record, diminutives are names that are based on a shortened or affectionate form of a name where nicknames are ones based on something else–a physical characteristic, residence, occupation, or the like. Sources are generally original when they are in their first form–otherwise they are said to be secondary. Information is primary when it is provided within a reasonable amount […]
If you can’t find a deed of sale for your ancestor’s real property that he owned at one time but apparently did not own later, consider the fact that he didn’t acctually sell it. If your ancestor’s taxes became sufficiently delinquent, his property would be sold to pay those taxes. In the United States these sales are usually indexed under “Sheriff” as the grantor on the deed and not the name of your ancestor.
Names are one thing about an ancestor that sometimes can be more fluid than we would like them to be. Research would be easier if a person just stuck with one name–even if it was not their birth name. I have a great aunt whose birth name was Adolphena Katherine Trautvetter. As a child she went by “Kate” and as an adult she went by “Pheenie.” It’s possible that her diminutive of “Kate” was chosen for her by someone else and that “Pheenie” was the one she chose to use as an adult. I was fortunate that the origin of the diminutives was fairly clear. That’s not always the case.
When transcribing a document or an item from a document, use brackets to indicate when you are “guessing” at a word or phrase or adding a word or phrase of your own. Personally I add words or phrases rarely, preferring to comment later if something warrants it. The word sic (Latin for “as is”) should be bracketed as well when it is used to indicate that you copied something exactly as it was in the document–even though it looked wrong. For example, “…to my son[sic] Elizabeth I leave my farm…”
The will of Peter Rucker from the Orange County, Virginia, record book appears to contain his mark–an apparent “R” instead of an “X.” The “R” serves to remind us that all marks are not the letter “x” and that what is in a record copy is usually the clerk’s transcription and not the actual record or signature. Rucker’s will is dated January 1742/3. This was during that time when the start of the new year was somewhat in flux and generally still considered to be in March. January of 1742 would have been the old style and January of 1743 would have been the new style–which we use today. Under the old style, December of 1742 would have been followed by January of 1742, February of 1742 and […]
It’s always helpful to think of what the original purpose of a record was and what details mattered and what ones did not. A relative died in 1869 with no descendants. Several of his heirs were children of his deceased siblings. His sister had children with more than one husband and some of those children daughters who were married. Those daughters were listed by their married names–not their maiden name. From the estate settlement it could not be determined which husband was the father of the married daughters. The court was concerned about the names of the sister’s children–not the names of her husbands–as the sister’s children were all heirs of their deceased mother’s brother.
My aunt had a baby several years before she was married in the early 1870s. Family members had always assumed that the baby was the child of the aunt’s eventual husband. Court records indicated that the “early” child was not the child of the eventual husband, but was instead the child of another man who left shortly after he learned my aunt was pregnant.
A death certificate indicates that a relative was born in Rush County, Indiana, on 23 December 1846. The tombstone indicates that the relative was born on 25 December 1846. The 1850 census indicates that the same relative was a native of Indiana and was three years of old at the time of the enumeration. That means that the person was born in either sometime in 1846 or 1847. It’s not additional evidence that the person was born specifically on 23 December 1846. It is consistent with that date of birth (which is good), but the census does not indicate that precise date of birth. Use the death certificate as the source for the 23 December 1846 birth in Indiana. Use the tombstone as the source for the 25 […]
Old deeds or surveys taken in metes and bounds states may have individuals listed besides the grantors, grantees, and witnesses. There may be individuals listed with “cc” or “cb” listed after their name. Chain carriers or chain bearers helped the surveyor by carrying the measuring chain. These individuals generally had to swear an oath, had to be of legal age, and some times were relatives of the surveyor. “CC” on an old deed does not mean “Carbon Copy.” [That was an attempt at humor.]
A good reminder from a while back Some families are a little bit complicated. And if one is not careful it can be easy to enter the incorrect relationships in our genealogical database. What I do in these situations is to map out the relationships on paper first in an attempt to get a broader view of the family and in an attempt to understand the relationships correctly. Once I think I have the relationships down, I begin my data entry. Wasting time “fixing” relationship mistakes is time I could spend doing actual research. Another option is to put the individuals in your database, but not include any relationship data until you have it determined. Sometimes if we don’t enter information in when we find it, we are […]
Recent Comments