When starting with an analysis of DNA matches, it can be tempting to work on solving that “brick wall” problem right away. That might be a mistake. Two good approaches are to sort out the low-hanging genealogical fruit–those matches that are easy to figure out. This should be done even if the family some of these matches are related on are not the “brick wall” family. The other approach is to sort out matches on those families where you already “know everything.” This can be a good way to improve your DNA analysis skills in order to help you work on your true brick wall.
Often when looking through search results researchers quickly eye each returned entry and determine if it’s “close enough” match to warrant looking at or not. That analysis sometimes is done quickly and is based on what we “have in our head” about the person for whom we are searching. Other times it is easy to get the details of the person I am searching for mixed up with details of other people. To help keep me on track, I quickly jot down what the search results should look like if I were to find the person. If I’m looking for a person in the 1850 US census, I have written down their name, what their approximate age should be in 1850, where they were roughly born, and whatever […]
I made up a silly little story about the dog, the cricket, and the rubber band and posted it to my personal Facebook page. The story was pure fiction and the rubber band had nothing to do with anything–it was just there. Are you trying make all the details fit into one genealogy story that is consistent? Maybe the problem is that one detail really doesn’t fit–because it is incorrect. Does someone appear on a document simply because they were in “the right place at the right time?” Witnesses aren’t always relatives–sometimes they are “warm bodies” who are legally able to witness a document or an event. Is there another way to interpret the document that you have? It can be easy to get stuck in our “first […]
There is a limit to how far back Autosomal DNA testing can be used to determine genealogical relationships simply because a person gets half their DNA from each parent and the further back you go the smaller the potential share you get from each ancestor. That’s why it’s advised that people have parents and grandparents or other relatives of that generation tested. But are there some cousins who are not quite as distant from your ancestors as you are? My great-grandmother Ufkes has several descendants. Two of them are in their late twenties. One of those twenty-somethings is also her great-granddaughter. The other twenty-something is her great-great-granddaughter. Which would be preferable for testing if you could only afford one test? The great-granddaughter would be preferred as she’s “closer” […]
Census records suggest that there are “gaps” in the dates of birth for the children of an ancestral couple. Don’t just conclude that they didn’t have any more or that they died young at birth. While those situations are indeed possible, it is also possible that some children were apprenticed out or lived with other family members who needed extra help in one way or another. It’s also possible your ancestor had more than one spouse and that those “gaps” are when the ancestor was not married.
Military pension files may contain dates of death for veterans and can be good places to find this information if death records are not extant in the time and place where the veteran died.
My Henry and Barbara Trautvetter are living together as husband and wife in Hancock County, Illinois, in 1860, with their children. Their immigration date is unknown, but it likely was in the 1845-1855 time frame. There apparently is another Henry and Barbara Trautvetter living in Baltimore, Maryland, in 1850. Based upon the ages of Henry and Barbara and the children in the enumerations, they appear to be separate couples. All of them are German immigrants. Never assume that there couldn’t be more than one couple with what you think is an unusual name combination. Do some research. The sites that do “automatic matching” make it easier than it already is to merge people like this together.
Sometimes you just need to think about what you have found, what you don’t know, and what you want to know. It can be easy to jump online and immediately search the minute we find something new or have a flash of insight. But sometimes it’s best to get away from the constant availability of “searching,” the constant rush to “find something new,” and the seemingly endless online barrage of messages and communications that demand our attention. And just to think. And not to react. Think about what we know and realize there are things that we don’t. Think about how accurate what we know really is and make a plan to learn more about those things that we don’t and, perhaps most importantly, to also learn more […]
…from you. If you can’t immediately think of several ways a specific ancestor was different from you, it could be creating problems for your research. Some ways are relatively easy to potentially see: occupation, educational level, religious practice, probable political belief, general lifestyle, health practices, etc. Think about it.
State statute dictates how the estate of a deceased person who dies without a will is to be disbursed among the heirs. That process can be complicated if the deceased person dies without leaving any descendants of their own. That process can change slightly over time. It is important to know what laws were in effect at the time an estate was being settled. John Trautvetter died in 1937 in Illinois leaving no children and his mother and six siblings as his heirs. Contemporary statute gave his mother a double share compared to his siblings. For that reason the estate was divided into eighths, with his mother to receive two of those shares and his six siblings to each receive one share. The estate was to be divided […]
If your relative laid “claim” to a piece of property, what documents might have been generated as a result? Did he pay taxes on it before the title was actually clear? Did he have to find a land claim or some sort to obtain title to the property? If so, before the American Revolution the place to look for land claim records are at the appropriate state archives. Land claims after the Revolution are at the National Archives. It’s possible that your relative filed a pre-emption claim if he settled on property in the federal domain. That’s a federal land record and the completed claim would have generated a patent. The process for completing a pre-emption claim is different from that of filing a homestead claim. If your […]
Widow’s military pension records often contain affidavits from individuals who knew the widow before she was married, were at her wedding, knew that she and the veteran lived as husband and wife, knew the widow had not married again, etc. Always ask yourself: How long has this person known my ancestor? Have they lived in more than one place where my ancestor also lived? How did this person come to know this information about my ancestor? If that person has known your seventy-something year old ancestor since she was married at the age of twenty, that’s someone you want to research in a little more detail.
The bill from the “office of L. U. Albers” indicated that he was located in Keokuk Junct. and that the bill was dated 5 April 1875. No state is listed on the document. That is not to confuse the reader over one hundred years later. It is because the information was not needed by the reader in 1875. The reader knew where Keokuk Junction was located. It’s also possible that Albers paid slightly less for his stationery since there were fewer printed letters on it. Many records that genealogists use have “missing” details that we would like to know today. A significant number of those details were “obvious” to the creator and user of the document at the time it was created. They saw no need to state […]
Genealogical researchers are reminded to be aware that any record can contain an incorrect piece of information. That’s true. A document can contain 15 pieces of information and 14 of them can be totally correct and that one last piece can be a mistake. Maybe. Don’t conclude immediately that something is wrong just because it looks off. Make certain that: You have the correct person. You’ve transcribed the item correctly. You have a good clear image of the record. You are understanding all the terminology in the record. The other information you have about the person is correct.
Riley Rampley has three tombstones in the Buckeye Cemetery in rural Hancock County, Illinois. Two of them have different dates of birth. My transcription of these stones should be true to the original–exactly as they are written. Comments about the accuracy of the information on any stones should be made in my notes. That should be done in such a way as to make it clear what the transcription is and what my comments are. I should not correct the information when I make my transcription. This also serves as a reminder to consider the possibility that your ancestor has more than one tombstone. Although I just wish more of my relatives had one stone–I’d be happy with that!
Recent Comments