I’ve been reading Ann S. Lainhart’s Digging for Genealogical Treasure in New England Town Records. I’ve already gotten several good ideas for my own research (I take notes in pencil right in the book) and, through reading the book, have added to my list of additional books that will help my understanding of records in this area. While I’ve researched for thirty years, I’ve only recently discovered my New England forebears. When was the last time you read a guide book?
I have an uncle who was born the year his father died. Any stories he knew about his paternal family would either have been filtered through his mother (who did not know her husband or her husband’s family until she was approximately sixteen) or have been stories his siblings told him. It does not mean the stories are wrong, but could explain why there are not too many or why some are incorrect.
A relative told me that my ancestor was named Trientje Katherine Behrens. It turned out that Katherine was not really her middle name–instead it was the anglicization of her first name, Trientje. If anything, in this case it was an alternate first name.
Happy US Thanksgiving from Genealogy Tip of the Day. Don’t forget to preserve some of those Thanksgiving traditions and recipes for future generations.
A 19th century ancestor outlived his first three wives. His fourth wife survived him and married another man after his death. I thought the ancestor was only married four times, and figured I’d found all his wives. Turned out that three year gap was just enough time for him to squeeze in another one who also died. There may be room for just one more–check that chronology.
Variations in how your ancestor’s name was spelled can be endlessly frustrating. However, it’s worth remembering that a variation of how your ancestor’s name appears in an index can arise from a variety of situations: Your ancestor did not know how to spell his name Your ancestor could not read Your ancestor did not speak clearly Your ancestor had an accent with which the writer of his name was unfamiliar The clerk didn’t care The clerk had bad writing The transcriber could not read the name The transcriber did not care The transcriber made a typographical error The document has faded over time and is difficult to read Or something else Keep in mind that one of more of these could explain why James Rampley ends up indexed […]
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.”
Is there a family you have not worked on in a long time because it’s already been “done?” Review it to look for: citations that are missing or incomplete records that were never used at all records that weren’t used because they were not easy to access individuals who were not completely researched New ancestors may not be discovered, but this can be an excellent way to discover there was an omission, a mistake, or colorful stories that went undiscovered–all because you thought the research was “done.”
Thanks to those who read and follow our blog. We do appreciate all of those who participate in Genealogy Tip of the Day, either directly or indirectly. Please let others know about us or our other blogs. Sharing information about us helps and is appreciated.
For every census there is supposed to be an official census date. It does not always work out that way as census takers cannot be at every home on the precise date of the census. While respondents were told to answer questions as of the census date, there is no doubt that some got confused and answered questions as of the date the census taker was at their home. Sometimes the extra month (or two or three) did not change the answers. But sometimes it did.
Pay close attention to those non-relatives in your ancestor’s census enumeration. While they could be non-relatives renting a room or hired hands to help with field work, it’s also very possible they are relatives who needed a place to land until they got settled. Don’t just write those “other people” in an enumeration off as someone not worth researching. You could be missing out on making a connection.
A few reminders for those who need them: Are you backing up your files? Are there photographs you don’t have identified? Are there any relatives of whom you need to ask questions? Are there personal family photographs, papers, etc. of which you havehte only copy and that copy has not been digitized?
Every database, index, finding aid, etc. has one “pitfall.” There may be a small portion of records that are missing. There may be a location whose name is spelled wrong in the database. The search screen may not work quite like other search screens you use. Every name listed on every record may not be in the index. If all you can think of are the “pros” it may be the “cons” that get you. Being aware of pitfalls does not mean you are focusing on the negative. It means you are aware of the limitations of the finding aid. And that makes you better able to use it appropriately.
The 1890 census is essentially destroyed. Only fragments remain. As a genealogy exercise, pretend you are the census enumerator for your family and “take their census.” It may just get you thinking about some things you’ve never thought before when you fill in each and every blank for those who probably were living in your ancestral household in 1890. There’s a blank modernized 1890 US schedule here. While census enumerators didn’t ask for sources, it might be good to try and locate them when compiling your ancestral census record. Our tongue-in-cheek “Complete 1890 Census Released!” can be found on our Rootdig blog.
When locating records and putting them in your files, make certain that just because the “name’s the same,” that you actually have the same person. Make certain age, location, implied social status and other information “match.” Sometimes records that you think are on the same person, are actually referring to two separate people with the same or similar names.
Recent Comments