Did your relative have such an odd way of saying a word or a phrase that a census taker or clerk would be hard-pressed to spell it correctly? The reason you are unable to find a name that’s clearly written on a record could be because your relative had a highly unusual way of saying it and the clerk simply did the best he could. The problem is compounded if the clerk was unfamiliar with your relative’s family and simply wrote what he heard. Clerks in small towns are more often to know what someone really means when the use their own unique pronunciation. Today’s post title is how it would have sounded if my grandmother had said “Use the bulldozer to push the multiflora roses in the […]
These two checks were written by my grandfather in the spring of 1941. They appear to have been written to pay for the medical expenses from the birth of his son Keith (my Dad) who was born in April of 1941. Dr. C. A. Runyon signed Dad’s birth certificate which indicated he was born in St. Joseph’s hospital. That’s a strong connection. The checks were located in a envelope that was tucked in a scrapbook of photographs, newspaper clippings, and other paper ephemera that included or mentioned my Dad. That’s another clue suggesting the purpose of the checks. The dates on the checks were also interesting and remind us that the dates documents are executed or recorded can also be a clue. Dad was born on 14 April […]
Stopping because you have located one record is never a good idea. By keeping on going, I discovered that an ancestor was divorced from the same man not once, but twice. By keeping on going, I also discovered that another relative’s first marriage “didn’t happen” and they were actually married two years later. Combine these unusual circumstances with the occasional record that gets entered or indexed late and you have even more reason to look for entries or documents “after you think you should.”
A good genealogy activity is to see if you can determine who the unnamed relatives are in an obituary–particularly if the number of grand and great-grandchildren are mentioned. Of course these totals can be wrong, but an attempt at “proving” the number may lead to some discoveries. And if pallbearers are mentioned, determine if they had a relationship to the deceased. Both of these activities may lead you to some new pieces of information.
We need to make assumptions in our genealogy research. Many times assumptions are necessary in order to get our work off the ground. But after a point, it may be that the assumption is hindering our work or that we have forgotten that an assumption was made. If you are guessing that the parents were married near where the first child was born, that is a good start. But somewhere in your notes, indicate why you believe where they were married and that you have no proof. If research does not validate your assumption, it may be that your assumption was incorrect. And if you enter your assumption in your genealogical database as fact, it can be very difficult for that information to go back to being an […]
Before interviewing relatives who were alive at the time of the 1940 census, try locating them in that record. Note the names of neighbors and ask your relative about these individuals. Giving your interviewee specific names may help to jog memories and get them to recall events they might not otherwise have thought about. This is helpful even if the person was not alive in 1940. Neighbors might have been neighbors for decades and even if the person did not know the former neighbors personally they might remember hearing their name mentioned. Anything that might help jog a memory is good.
When analyzing a record or set of materials that does not make sense, get away from what you “want to prove” and try to think “what do these documents really say?” You may find that they do not say what you think they do. And not every record says what we want or expect it to say. Sometimes our preconceived notions are what is getting in the way.
When using a record set with which you are not familiar, think about how someone gets into the record, how the information in the record is obtained, how the record is organized, and how the original record got from its original state to you. Do not just “guess” or assume that how things work today is how they necessarily worked one hundred years ago. All if these issues get to how we use and analyze the information contained in the record.
Are you looking in other records besides census records for occupational clues on your ancestor? Estate inventories are good places to get an idea of what occupation your ancestor might have had. Those with city-dwellers in their family tree should use city directories for clues of this type. Land records in some locations may provide occupations as a way to clearly distinguish the individuals involved in the transaction. And don’t forget some European church records use occupations to distinguish men of the same names from each other.
From a few years back… I have been reading First Generations: Women in Colonial America for the past several days. It has given me some insight into the Colonial experience of women and cause to think about a few things in ways I never have. Is there a history text or sociological study that might expand your knowledge even if it doesn’t directly expand your family tree?
If possible, interview as many family members as you can about a specific event or their entire family history. Individuals who are significantly older than their siblings may remember relatives that younger ones do not. Even siblings close in age may recall different details of events or, for one reason or another, have a different perspective. Those who lived with or near their parents or extended family their entire lives may have more stories than those who moved away after growing up.
Years ago I was stuck on my Ira Sargent. I spent a fair amount of time locating men with this name in the 1860 and 1870 census in an attempt to show they were “my guy” who first appeared in the 1880 census. For one reason or another I was able to eliminate them as being mine. The one thing I did was keep a list of every one I found along with the reason why he was not mine. The reasons varied, but included: too old, too young, born in wrong place, wrong wife, etc. Keeping track of the reasons was important for two reasons. One was so that I didn’t redo the research. The second was that I could go back and revisit these “wrong” guys […]
It is important somewhere to keep track of your research logic as you progress. Otherwise you might not remember “why” you are researching a certain person. Several years ago, I focused on a certain Benjamin Butler in the 1850 census as being “mine.” Using that enumeration as the starting point, I searched other records and made research progress–on the apparent family listed in that enumeration. A stack of papers and records. One problem–I didn’t track WHY I thought this 1850 census entry was for the my Benjamin. It took me hours to reconstruct my reason–time wasted. When I decided the 1850 guy was “mine,” I should have written down my reasons. That would have saved time later and made it easier to review my reasons should that have […]
Some documents clearly state who was the informant. Many though do not provide this information. When considering the accuracy of information on any document, consider the probable informant and how likely they were to know the information being provided.
Your relative may know more about deceased family members than they are willing to tell you. And they may never tell you everything you know, no matter how much you wish they would or how many times you ask. For reasons that are entirely too long for a “short tip,” I know my own grandmother knew more about her grandfather than she ever told me, including the fact that he had a second wife. Yet my queries about him always received a “don’t know anything response.” Sometimes that is all you are going to get and sometimes you have to let it go to preserve relationships with your living relatives.
Recent Comments