A remainderman usually is someone whose title to property does not become realized until the termination of the ownership of that property by a former owner. Usually this former owner has a life estate in the property and usually has been given that life estate by someone else. Mimke wills his wife Antje a life estate in his real property and then at her demise title is to pass to his children Johann, Jann, and Metha. Johann, Jann, and Metha are the remaindermen. Mimke’s will may not use the word “remaindermen,” but it’s possible they are referred to by that term in other legal documents.
If you have been fortunate to locate new information on a family–particularly new names, dates, and locations: stop. Take time to organize the information. Cite the sources. Put it in your genealogical database. Then continue on your research. Otherwise “the stack” just gets bigger to the point where you don’t know what you have and what you don’t and your research starts to go in circles. It can be exciting to locate new information. It can be boring to organize it and put it into your computer. But it can be frustrating to be stymied in your research later because you refused to organize anything you found.
As you trace a relative over time and through various records, make certain the occupations listed for him (if they are given) are relatively consistent over time and with his age and probable educational status. While occupations can change and evolve during an ancestor’s life, the change should usually not be dramatic. Or if there is a dramatic change, there should be a reason for it–war, economic depression, etc.
Always look at the names of other individuals who are travelling with your ancestor and listed on a passenger manifest–especially if they are from the same village. I had often wondered who the 12-year old (was that traveled with my uncle John Adam Trautvetter. Turns out that John Valentine Senf was the son of John Adam’s sister. Those travelling companions might be more connected than you think.
Can’t find that ancestor in a certain record? Can’t find the parents for a certain ancestor? Write up all the work you have done to find that record or set of parents. Explain the sources you have used, why they were used, and what was located. Pretend that you are writing it for someone who knows nothing about your family and not much about the time period or location in which you are researching. When you explain something to someone who does not have your familiarity with the details, you are apt to notice gaps. And any of those gaps could be part of your problem.
It can be frustrating to not be able to locate a record. As a problem-solving approach to try and locate it, pretend you found it. What would be on the record? Where would it be located? Where would it have been recorded? All of those are details that may help you actually find the record.
Reminder that all US federal censuses are free on FamilySearch: United States Census, 1940 United States Census, 1930 United States Census, 1920 United States Census, 1910 United States Census, 1900 United States Census, 1890 United States Census, 1880 United States Census, 1870 United States Census, 1860 United States Census, 1850 United States Census, 1840 United States Census, 1830 United States Census, 1820 United States Census, 1810 United States Census, 1800 United States Census, 1790
Just because seemingly different sources agree does not mean that they have to be correct–it just means that they agree. Consider whether or not the sources are truly independent. Sometimes different “sources” have the same actual person directly or indirectly providing the information. My grandmother’s 1935 marriage record, 1994 death certificate, and 1994 obituary all provide the same place of birth for her. Grandma was essentially the informant on all three because her children provided what they were told for the death certificate and the obituary. And all three gave places different from Grandma was actually born. Just because Grandma was consistent does not necessarily mean that she was correct.
Some researchers ask “Why search for someone I already know ‘everything’ on?” or someone “I’m not really researching?” This is why. Because they can lead you to someone else. A search for my great-uncle, Alvin Ufkes, located a reference to him as a pallbearer at the 1962 funeral in Quincy, Illinois, for sister of his grandmother . I may never have located the death notice and the obituary for Anna Buhrmeister (a few days earlier) if I had not searched for my great-uncle in the collection from which this image was taken.
Stones aren’t always correct. This stone has a date of death for the wife that differs from the date of birth listed on her guardianship in the 1850s. The stone is transcribed as written–I don’t change what something says. But the guardianship record is more contemporary to Franciska’s birth and the informant on that record is likely her mother. Based on estate records for husband John, this stone was erected after his death in 1917–some time after Franciska died with information provided by someone who did not have first hand knowledge. I indicate exactly what the stone says, but for I would give the most credence to the date of birth from the record that was created most closely to her actual birth.
Response to our initial webinar on AncestryDNA that we are working on a new presentation for 8 September–“Working with Your DNA Matches.” This session will focus only on using your matches and working with them. Registration is limited. There are more details on our announcement page.
I maintain the following genealogy blogs: Rootdig.com—Michael’s thoughts, research problems, suggestions, and whatever else crosses his desk Genealogy Tip of the Day—one genealogy research tip every day–short and to the point Genealogy Search Tip—websites I’ve discovered and the occasional online research tip–short and to the point? Subscription/Unsubscription links are on the top of each page. Unsubscription links are also in each email sent.
When dating pictures, look to see if anyone in the photograph is wearing a ring on their “wedding finger.” This could be a clue as to when the photograph was taken. Unless the ring is very clear and easy to compare to the “known wedding ring,” be careful using the presence of a ring on the “right” finger as 100% proof of marriage and photograph date. Like most things, it is a clue.
DNA tests for genealogical research have been heavily marketed. There are times when they will solve problems–or at least help to solve a problem. But DNA needs to be used in concert with other forms of documentation that researchers have been using for years. And DNA will not necessarily make your genealogical research easy. It will give you one more tool in your research toolbox. But it is not the only tool.
Ira Sargent is enumerated in the 1850 and 1860 US Census under the last name of his step-father, Asa Landon. Ira was born in the 1840s and his father, Clark Sargent, died around 1848. By 1850 his mother had married Asa Landon. Ira’s 1870 marriage record is probably the first document where he actually provided his name to the records clerk. Chances are someone else gave his name to the 1850 and 1860 census enumerator. Your relative might have known his “name,” but might never have had a chance to give it to the clerk, enumerator, etc. until after he was “of age.” Is that why you can’t find your person in any record until they get married?
Recent Comments