The new website https://www.birls.org/ includes a searchable version of this database of more than 18 million US veterans. From the website: “The Beneficiary Identification Records Locator Subsystem (BIRLS) database was originally created and maintained by the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (the VA). It provides an index to basic biographical information on more than 18 million deceased American veterans…The BIRLS database includes people who served in all branches of the US military, including some branches that no longer exist, such as the Women’s Army Corps (WACs) and the Army Air Corps, as well as a few associated non-military groups and government agencies, such as NOAA. “ Also included a screenshot of my uncle’s record in this database.
It’s impossible to save every family history artifact or piece of paper that comes your way. Even if you are able to save and pass on items, creating a digital book of images of your items lets more than one person at least see what the item was. There’s no need to get fancy. Simple photographs of items incorporated into a word processing document can be augmented with stories of the items. The document can be saved as a PDF file and shared with others. The text can include provenance of the item, memories of the item, who is to receive it upon your demise, etc. Actually it can include whatever you want. It can also allow you to keep images of the items you have memories of […]
Researching the entire family is advised, but we don’t always do it. I was trying to pin down information on an aunt, Wilhelmina (Trautvetter) Senf Kraft. While researching a person’s entire life is advised, my research was focused on when she settled in Illinois as it appeared she did not arrive at the same time as her brothers and their families. It was not until I obtained the christening record of each of her grandchildren that I was able to do that. There as one of the sponsors for one of her grandchildren on their baptism at an Illinois church was Wilhelmina.
Genealogists try to be specific when stating relationships between individuals. Your relative from Omaha might not be as specific when discussing family members. Grandma may have written “Cousin Myrtle” on the back of a photograph. The relationship might not be as clear as it seems. If the person referring to their cousin is still alive, try and get them to be more specific about the relationship, if possible. Don’t suggest what the relationship is. Sometimes “cousins” were were actually cousins (just further down the line than you thought), were related by marriage, or were just neighbors with whom the family was close. It’s not just a cousin for whom the relationship may be confusing. An aunt may be the sister of a parent or the spouse of a parental […]
When searching for a family in an every name census (or any record that lists all family members), search for the family member whose name is the least likely to be spelled or enumerated incorrectly. It is no guarantee you will find the right people, but sometimes it’s easier to find John than it is to find Fredericka or a Noentjelena. It often is easier to find a Willm that it is to find a Trientje when the census enumerator has never heard of a either non-English name (Willm is more likely to be rendered as the more familiar Will or William while Trientje can be spelled in any of a number of incorrect ways) . It’s not just non-English names that can be a challenge. Common one […]
Sometimes we may be tempted to “start over” on a genealogical problem. It’s hard to really start over with a fresh approach. You can’t unlearn what you think you have discovered and you can’t just forget the information that’s confused you–or at least the conclusions you came to from that information. What you can do is go back and double-check each fact or piece of data to see if you made a mistake. You can read documents again, focusing on every term you do not understand and researching every name mentioned in the document. You can determine the source of each piece of data you have involving the difficult problem (creating a citation for each piece of data while you do it). You can reanalyze something to see […]
Happy Holidays! This image is made from Christmas cards my parents received in the early 2000s.
When using a record series, do you think about how the originals were recorded and organized? It’s usually worth a thought:
Your ancestors may have permanently separated but never divorced. In some cases, one spouse may have sued the other one for separate maintenance (in which case there may be a court record). If there’s not a court case, a deed separating property may be recorded wherein who has sole title to what property is clearly stated. If the couple had no real or personal assets, there is a lower chance of any resulting record. They may have also married other people after their separation–even if they never divorced. It was sometimes cheaper and easier to simply go their separate ways. The times these situations became issues where when there were significant assets or a military pension involved.
If you have the one of the few paper copies of a family item–funeral folders, mass cards, wedding announcements, photographs, etc., have you digitized it? That way the paper copy you have is not the only copy of it in existence. Be certain to share the copies with others who are interested in the family. Copies can be more easily shared than originals. Always consider using a camera instead of a scanner on fragile items. Check out Genealogy Tip of the Day book version for other tips and questions you should ask yourself about your research.
Many databases will be titled something like “Blah Blah Records of Blah Blah: 1800-1900.” Always try and determine just years are really included in the database. It could be that the “Blah Blah Records of Blah Blah: 1800-1900” actually only contains entries for: Read the “more about,” “FAQ,” or whatever they call it to determine just how complete the database is. It does include records between 1800 and 1900, but there are gaps. And of course, your person of interest lived in the area from 1830 until 1840…and his grandson lived there from 1892-1898.
If you are fortunate enough to find a newspaper reference to a family reunion that lists all the attendees, determine their connection to each other. A 1930s reference to a family reunion for one of my family contained the names of nearly eighty relatives. I thought they were all descendants of my 3rd great-grandparents. But when I went through the list, there were several individuals I could not connect to the known descendants of my 3rd great-grandparents (occasionally a friend of the family, long-time neighbor, or significant other of a relative will also attend). A little research indicated that three of those “non-relatives” were related to each other. Because of that they were researched a little further and their ancestry traced a few generations further back. It turned […]
They say when filing and organizing materials that you should only touch them once to be efficient and winnow down your collection of materials. Looking at things once when analyzing genealogical records is not a recommended approach. It is easy to overlook details in an initial review of a record. It may be that over time we have learned more about the family and names on a record that were initially meaningless now have relevance. It’s also possible that we have learned more about genealogical research and methods and now see clues in words or turns of phrase that were un-noticed before. Take an additional look at that record you’ve not seen in ages. There may be something there you’ve not noticed before.
Sooner or later it is necessary to estimate a date of a genealogical event. Often this is to help us sort out individuals with the same name, determining when a person is too old to be having children, determining that a person is likely too young to be a certain person’s parent, etc. But when you estimate a date of an event–say “born about 1870,” have a source or a reason for that estimated date. Margaret Smith was born by 1850 because it is assumed she was twenty-one when she married in 1871–then use the marriage record as the source of the age. Thomas Jones was dead by 1880 because his wife is listed as a widow in the 1880 census–then use that census enumeration as the source […]
This obviously is a World War II era photograph of my grandmother’s brother and his wife. The clothes and the apparent age of the image make that clear. But there are some things about this photograph that are not quite so clear. I’m not certain if they were married yet when this photograph was taken. I’m thinking they weren’t because of how the names are written on the back of the photograph–Aunt Alice is listed with her maiden name of “Alice Cherrill” while my uncle is only listed as “Ed.” It would seem more likely if they had been married when the photograph was taken they would have been styled “Ed and Alice” or something similar. “Calif motel” is a very specific location. I’m assuming it was near […]
Recent Comments