Every once in awhile, I’ll come back to my research after several days away. And no matter how good my notes are, it usually takes me a little bit to really get back into it. To get back into the swing, I like to think about the information that I have and how I might organize the information in a new way in order to answer some question, look for patterns, see what information I’m missing, or just get names and locations back into my brain.
Today, I decided to put together a table of 3 generations of Smiths, the year they died and where they were buried.
What might be the next steps for this table? I could add some columns to track whether I have a photo of the cemetery stone or if I have an obituary. I might decide to spend some time in some of the cemeteries that are not in the area I normally research to see if there are other family members buried there or if there are any biographies attached to the Findagrave memorials. I could start working on the next generation. I could begin looking for new resources to help me fill in some of the blanks.
But if nothing else, it puts family names back into my mind and helps me get back on track with my research after a little time away.
I came across a great source of information about Russell County, Kentucky on the Morehead State website and thought this was very interesting! This paper mentions all kinds of post offices within the county, no matter how short-lived they were. And I had no idea how many post offices were named for wives! A lot of maiden names in the document!!
I know I haven’t been posting much lately, but I HAVE been writing, writing, writing! I have a lot in the works, but the more I research, the more great resources I find and the more questions I have! I keep planning to start a series of posts “at the first of the month” but then I come across a great new lead to follow up on! It may not be till the new year, but it’s coming for sure!!
I’ve been doing a lot of work with Ancestry’s ThruLines. ThruLines takes a look at your DNA matches and their trees. It then looks at information in ALL of the Ancestry trees and attempts to map a path from the DNA match to a “common ancestor” in both trees.
How nice to have this all worked out for you!! But is it really? Is this helping us with our research, or is it multiplying incorrect information?
My 3x great-grandparents are Andrew Scott and Elizabeth Wade. Every tree I have ever seen for Elizabeth Wade has her parents as Joseph Wade and Henrietta Nelson.
When I put together my public tree that would be connected to my DNA results, I decided that I only wanted to add direct ancestors if I had a decent confidence level in the information. So in my private tree, I have Joseph Wade and Henrietta Nelson, but they are not in my public tree. In my private tree, I have 3 pre-1850 census records and 4 Land Grant records – all in the right part of Kentucky. But for Henrietta Nelson – zero. Of course, in this time period, it is difficult to find records for women, so maybe this is a lost cause.
So I decided to take a deeper look at other people’s trees. What do they have that shows that these people were ever a couple?
Looking at ThruLines, it tell me “ThruLines uses Ancestry trees to suggest that (kit name) may be related to 157 DNA matches through Henriette “Ritter” Nelson Callicut.” Wow! 157 DNA matches? That has GOT to make it true, doesn’t it? But I wanted to see what sources all these people have that I don’t have. In ThruLines, there is a dotted line around Henriette because she is not in my public tree. There is also a button that says “Evaluate”. When you click on the green button, you can see the different trees that have Henriette in them.
When I click that button, I can see that there are 27 trees that are linked to DNA matches who ThruLines has connected to Henriette. I believe all of these trees actually have Henriette in their tree. Then there are 13 additional trees that have Henriette, but these trees don’t have a DNA connection. If each of the DNA connected trees have 1 DNA match associated with them – or let’s even say 2 DNA matches, that would be 54 DNA matches. So where do the other 100 or so DNA matches come from? It’s Ancestry searching through the trees of my DNA matches and all other trees – including the 13 none DNA related trees – to find common surnames that MIGHT lead to a common Ancestor. That’s a lot of hypothesizing!
When I look at the list of trees that are revealed after clicking “evaluate”, each one in the list also tells how many records are attached to the common ancestor – in this case, Henriette. And every single tree says the same thing…
ZERO records! EVERY SINGLE ONE! That means that these 40 trees are all taking the name Henriette Nelson Callicut on faith – probably because they are seeing it in so many other trees.
I’m sure that this name comes from some older research and that someone had a reason for adding it to their tree. Maybe a family bible, or a tree that was written down generations ago from someone who actually knew Joseph and Henrietta. But is that the standard we are all taking for our family research now? That someone, somewhere, must have known that this was true?
So now, how many people will add Henrietta to their tree because of what they are seeing in ThruLines? That will increase the number of trees that I see when I click on “evaluate” which will seem to add weight to those trees being true. And maybe they are….but can this ever be proven?
If there ever comes a time when someone does find some relevant information that points to a different wife for Joseph Wade, will that name even appear as a potential name in ThruLines? If 40 trees say Henrietta and 1 tree says something else – even if it has records attached – will that tree even show up? I don’t know.
I am now 2 weeks into the “21 Day Extreme DNA Challenge” that Scott Fisher of “Extreme Genes” is hosting on Facebook. I have a rudimentary understanding of how DNA works, but I don’t think I’ve spent very much time really thinking through what it all means and how it can help my research.
If you are new to using DNA to help you figure out your family tree, there are very few relationships that are more helpful than 2nd cousins. According to the Genetic Genealogist (2016), there has NEVER been a single demonstrated case of 2nd cousins or closer who fail to share DNA. It IS possible for 3rd cousins and even 2nd cousins twice removed to share no common DNA with the test taker.
Most people who are not searching for birth parents know who their grandparents are/were. But unless you have been doing family history research, you may not know who your great-grandparents are. You and your 2nd cousin share the same great-grandparents!
But not all 2nd cousin relationships are the same. Second cousins once removed (1 generation before or after the DNA tester) MIGHT share the same great-grandparents. This is the case for all children of full 2nd cousins. But if a 2nd cousin once removed is one generation older than the test taker, then THEY are part of your family through a SIBLING of your great-grandparents. THESE matches can help you find your 2x great-grandparents. These great-grandparents and great-great-grandparents should have census entries that can help you find dates and locations to keep you moving in the right direction for your research. Or if you already have information for your great and great-great-grandparents, finding DNA matches will help to confirm the information. This can be a HUGE help if you have ancestors with common names or if there’s more than 1 person with the same name in the location you are researching.
FamilySearch has a nice chart that you can download for free here.
But what if you don’t KNOW how a cousin is related to you? Then you need to look at the number of centimorgans (cM) you share plus do a little detective work. There are MANY possibilities for relationships based on centimorgans alone, but to keep this simple, let’s just think about 2nd cousins and 2nd cousins once removed.
2nd cousins will share between 41-592 cM with the test taker with the average amount being 229. 2nd cousins once removed will share between 14-353 with an average amount of 122.
You can take a look at this interactive chart showing all of the centimorgan amounts for many, many, MANY relationships on dnapainter.com. A REALLY cool feature of this interactive chart is that you can enter the number of cMs shared with a match in the box at the top and they will give you percentages for how likely the potential relationships are. Give it a try with 300 cM to get a feel for the information you can get with this tool.
Most of the websites that have DNA information will give you an estimate of a relationship, but don’t take those as gospel. For example, Ancestry never gives you an estimate of a half-relationship or a “removed” relationship.
If you are trying to figure out who a test taker’s great-grandparents are, begin looking at matches that have between 14-592 cM. This should find all of the 2nd cousins and 2nd cousins once removed. But be aware that it will also find other relationships as well. If you have many matches in that range, begin with the matches that are closest to the average amount of 122-229 cM. Focus on the matches that have trees attached to their results and look for surnames that you recognize. Keep good notes – whether it’s online or on paper. Sooner or later you’re going to be saying, “Now where did I see that name?” and you’ll be happy that you took those notes.
So how does it help you to know which of your matches are 2nd cousins?
It can confirm the research that you have been working so hard to collect.
They may have branches of your tree that you have not discovered yet. (Never accept someone else’s information without good documentation! But DO use all information as clues to be followed up on!)
You might find photos or documents in a cousin’s public tree that you’ve never seen before.
If you can communicate with your cousin, you might find that they have more information or photos, etc. that they haven’t put online in their tree.
They may want to work together on researching your family – and it’s pretty fun to have someone to share the highs and lows of family research!
Take a look at your matches now and good luck with your search!
I’ve been absent from the blog for a little while. Part of that is due to the current situation with the virus. You’d think that being in “lock-down” for a few weeks would have given me extra genealogy time, but a great deal of the work for our business has fallen on me while my husband took a 2nd job because business slowed down quite a bit at the beginning of the year. The other (and much happier) reason is that I now have a 3 week old grand-daughter who joyfully occupies a lot of my free time! Her mommy never has to ask twice if she’s looking for a babysitter for an hour or two! Add in some gardening now that the weather has finally straightened up and you can see why I haven’t been thinking about the blog!
But about a week ago, I began working with a group on Facebook for a 21 day “Extreme DNA Challenge”. The group was put together by Scott Fisher of the radio program/podcast “Extreme Genes”. I have enjoyed every minute of what we have done so far and I can’t imagine what is yet to come over the next 2 weeks! My favorite aspect of the group is receiving a video tutorial and then small task to complete each day. Some of the tasks are things we all will be working on for a long time to come, but little bites every day will bring that elephant down! Since everyone in the group is working on the same tasks, I know that questions will be answered quickly and success stories are celebrated by everyone!
And once again, my genealogy ADD has kicked in to take me away from my biographies project and now I’m knee deep in my DNA. And THAT has taken me back to my obsessive focus on John M. Smith. The WONDERFUL news is that I have been able to use the DNA matches for my mother, 2 aunts and 1 of their cousins to confirm my theory that his wife was Elizabeth Arbuckle! I have changed her Ancestry tag from “Theory” to “DNA Connection”. Whew! Which places my John smack in the middle of Mercer County, Kentucky, just as the tiny hint I found years ago had led me.
Elizabeth’s line is pretty “easy” (ok, even I had an eye roll there) to follow back. She explains at least part of the Scottish DNA I see in the kits I manage. So my next task is to focus what I’ve learned and have yet to learn about my DNA matches on John M. Smith’s parents. Again, I have a pretty good lead for him, but I need some DNA connections to help me feel more confident. As we all know, you can find a Smith family on just about every corner!
I hope you all are well and staying safe wherever you are!
I’ve been working on keeping a Research Notebook based on a single surname. For example, I have an Excel Workbook with worksheets for 4 generations of my Smith line starting with my great-grandfather. Each family has a worksheet for their Research Plan and Inventory. I have a single worksheet to keep track of all Land Transactions for the Smith surname in the counties I am researching including siblings of my direct line ancestors.
Recently, I was asked about a way to keep track of DNA matches in my notebooks. This could be an additional worksheet within my workbook. My family is quite a tangled mess due to lots of intermarrying, so if I decide that I want to attempt this in my Smith notebook, I’ll probably have to come up with a 2 color system to show if a match is related in more than one way to explain why the cM numbers are so high. For this post, I thought I’d show an example of what I did for my son-in-law’s DNA matches.
What I’m doing is creating a “tree” of sorts. The top line shows the common ancestor that a group of matches has. The row below that has all of the children for that couple. I decided to go ahead and include all of the children instead of just the ones that have matches to save me a little time later on as more matches become available. (Although I do have some families that have more than a dozen kids and I might rethink how many to include for those lines!) Once children are entered, I merge all of the cells above into one wide cell to show that Oscar and Louise are the parents of all the cells in the next row.
When entering the 3rd generation, I insert columns to have enough for those kids and after entering the names, I merge the cells above those children into 1 parent cell. (I usually have more information in the cells like full names, relevant dates, etc. but I switched to initials for this example because some of these people are still living.)
I have also done with with 4 generations with even more DNA matches, but the chart becomes quite wide at that point, so I didn’t want to use that as my example.
When I find a DNA match, I include the number of centimorgans and I add color to a cell to see the matches quickly.
In my son-in-law’s case, we don’t know how he is related to this family. If we did, I would include his direct line all the way back to the common ancestor to help determine if a match is a 2nd cousin once removed, etc. I’d then confirm the relationship makes sense by using the free Shared cM tool found on the DNA Painter website.
I do like the idea of having everything possible about a surname available in one master workbook, so this may be something for me to consider as well!
Hello fellow Russell County researchers! Yesterday, I updated the links for land records, which you can find in the “Russell County Resources” tab at the top of the page. But I thought I’d post them here as well to give you a quick look. Everything below Deed Book S is a new link.
Russell County, Kentucky Deeds:
The left pages list Grantor (seller) to Grantee (buyer) and the right pages list Grantee from Grantor. Because of the tight binding in V. 1, it is sometimes difficult to read the information in the center of 2 pages. In cases where you cannot read a complete page number on the left page, it can be helpful to look for the same entry for the Grantee, which will be on a page on the right side.
These indexes are arranged loosely alphabetically. All the A’s (although not alphabetical within the A’s) then all of the B’s etc. Within each letter, records are listed in order by book. All of the A’s in book A in order, then all of the A’s in book B in order, etc.
I have found instances where the General Index is incorrect. The index with each book, when available, will be the most accurate. Each book’s index lists Grantor to Grantee, but not Grantee from Grantor. If you are looking for a deed where your ancestor is purchasing land, you may have better luck looking in the General Index.
Commissioner’s deed books 1-4, 1877 – 1945 – Book 1 – 1877 – 1888 – includes an index (nothing for letter A) – Book 2 – 1887 – 1912 – includes an index – Book 3 – 1912 – 1928 – includes an index – Book 4 – 1928 – 1945 – includes an index
I will have to be honest with you here. My life under quarantine is not THAT different from a typical day. I work from home anyway and work has dramatically slowed down, so I’ve got nothing but time to do research (and to disinfect, LOL!) The biggest difference is that I can’t visit with my kids here in town. Even that isn’t so different when it comes to my sons, who I don’t see quite as often, but I am used to seeing my daughter a couple of times a week. But she is 33 weeks pregnant, so we are taking no chances.
But what I’m finding is that my Genealogy ADD is worse than ever! Unless it’s a very hands-on task, like scanning negatives, I just cannot seem to keep myself from flying from project to project.
Early last week, when we started seeing all of the notices for archives and libraries closing down, I realized that it was only a matter of time before my local library would also close. There was 1 specific county whose records on FamilySearch could only be viewed from the library, so I took a day (and hand sanitizer, cleaning wipes, and my own wireless mouse and keyboard) and I went to the library and downloaded everything I could find for a specific surname. I didn’t read anything, I just downloaded.
Yesterday, I was transcribing some of the deed records. Some deeds gave me relationships, so I was adding my own notes at the end of a transcription to help me remember how people were related. After a couple of those, I decided that I needed to start a new group sheet for that family, which lead me to FamilySearch to give me a head start on information.
I was using Excel, so I decided that I not only needed a group sheet for the head of the family, but then I also needed to create a workbook of group sheets for each of his descendants so I would recognize children’s and grand-children’s names as the land passed from person to person. But that lead me to some probate records which I has downloaded – and oh, wasn’t there a new webinar I wanted to take a look at? But wait, I’ve got this stack of negatives and envelopes and work project stuff all over my desk, so I’d better straighten some stuff up. But first, I’d better get some meat out of my freezer so it will be ready for dinner tonight. And while I’m downstairs, I’ll start a load of laundry. But hey! Aren’t I supposed to be working on those biographies? …it goes on and on.
Now I know that this is a result of “stress” of not being able to leave the house. (Why is it that knowing that you’d CAN’T do something makes you want to do it even more???) We are quite lucky with the work situation that we are in and I am not a social butterfly, by any means, so I’m not bothered by staying home. So I’m not complaining, but I feel like I’m not taking good advantage of this time. I’ve decided to try making a list of 3 specific things I’d like to accomplish. How many negatives to scan? How many documents to transcribe? What is my ultimate research question? I HOPE that this will help my mind to settle and to begin to see that I really AM getting stuff accomplished. And I will tape this list to my monitor and any time I feel a need to zoom off to something else, I will look at my note and try to have some self control!
I hope you all are staying safe and healthy AND getting lots of extra research done! Who knows, maybe I’ll break through my brick wall before normal activities resume again!
It’s no secret that when it comes to organizing or keep track of genealogical information, my first thought is to use Excel. Each Excel worksheet has a different purpose. But for my latest project, I wanted all of the various worksheets to be easily and quickly located.
I’ve decided to try to collect information and write biographies for my “top 12” ancestral couples in preparation for a printed book to give to my children. I decided to begin with my Smith line because that line has been the focus of my research more than any other. When I began about 6 weeks ago, I was focusing on 1 ancestral couple at a time, beginning with my great-grandfather and working backward. But as I go through all of the records that I have and compare with what is now available online, I’ve decided that as long as I’m looking at indexes or going through a section, it will save me time in the long run to be on the lookout for all of my ancestors in the same line. Honestly, I keep getting pulled into the records for other members of this line anyway, so I feel like if I at least keep track of what I’m seeing as I go through these records, I can do a little better job of trying to focus on analyzing documents for one person at a time!
To be most efficient with this research plan, I’ve decided to consolidate all of my tracking forms for ancestors from a specific line into one “Smith” workbook. That meant starting with worksheets for 4 different families – Oliver, Elias, George, and John M. Smith. I have a Research Plan, Inventory Page 1, Inventory Page 2 and Land Sheet for each family. Four pages each for 4 ancestors led to a lot of tabs at the bottom of the screen once they were all combined into one workbook! And while it is nice to have them all in the same workbook, I need to have the smallest number of tabs possible to make it easier to find the relevant tab. So I began consolidating worksheets.
The first worksheet for a family is the Research Plan. I created these plans to be printed out, so when I look at them on my widescreen monitor, I have lots of extra space to the right of the Plan.
I decided that because the Plan is the place that I write my questions and steps I plan to take to find the answers to those question, this would also be a good place to keep my 15-minute biography. Excel doesn’t handle large amount of text easily, so I highlighted a huge chunk of cells on the right side of the Plan and merged them all and then copied the biography into that mega-cell. This didn’t help me with consolidating tabs, but it did help me with having all of the information that I’m using for this project into one research notebook. And rather than adding research questions in my biography each time I read it, I can add them directly to the Research Plan. I will probably be tweaking this as the biographies get longer, so this will be an interesting experiment.
I had two tabs per family for the Inventory. Just like the Research Plan, these sheets were created to be printed, so I had plenty of room on my computer screen on the right side of each inventory sheet, so I simply copied page 2 of the Inventory to be right next to page 1 of the Inventory.
I did have to do a couple of simple layout edits to make this work, but I actually ended up liking it better because I don’t have to click back and forth between tabs to see all of the information I’ve been collecting in these inventory sheets.
I can also customize these Inventories to help me collect as much information as possible in this one location. For example, because I now have the Research Plan in the same workbook as the Inventory, I don’t need a “To Do” section in the Inventory. Instead, I changed this section to be a list of Siblings and their spouses to help me notice possible relationships in Deeds and Tax Records. I also “compacted” my column for census records because no ancestor has an entry in every census year, although I created the sheet to have space for every census as well as state census records and non-population schedules, if desired. Once I was able to adjust the census section, that gave me room to include birth and death sections for the wife.
My final tab for each couple was to be the Land Record worksheet. I decided that it would be most helpful to have all of the land records for this surname together in one worksheet. This allows me to follow along when land is passed from father to son or when it is sold between siblings. I’ve decided to use colors in the cells to quickly distinguish between the generations because I do have multiple generations that used the same names for their sons.
After making these adjustments, I have gone from 16 total tabs in my workbook to 9 tabs. I have more information in the workbook now than I originally did, making it more useful while researching. I’m sure that as the project continues, I will continue to customize these sheets so that I am able to track all of the information of have found as well as keeping track of all of the locations that I have searched. Which hopefully saves me time and helps me to find every possible record that I can.
The last thing that I have started doing is to add a link to every document that I find so that if I have a question, I can quickly find the document with a single click.
If you’d like to download blank versions of these worksheets, you can find them all in the “Downloads” menu at the top of the page.
It’s been almost a month since I wrote the 15-minute biography for Oliver and Mintie Smith – my great-grandparents. Since then, I came across a large bag of negatives which I was given years ago and that became a new scanning project which became the newest distraction to pull me away from my biography work. Sigh…
I spent the day yesterday trying to get this project back on track and I worked on updating the Ancestor Inventory for Oliver. Then I spent a little time looking at records available on FamilySearch that pertained to Oliver and his wife, Mintie. I find researching “recent” ancestors like this to be a little frustrating because of the lack of resources that are available online. I live a considerable distance from Russell County, so I can’t get there to do on-site research, even if I know that a document exists. But I did find a couple of new items, so I’m glad I took the time for that.
Now I’m trying to think of other things to use to “beef up” the biography. Today, I have read through the original 15-minute biography and added questions and ideas for other things I might be able to gather to add to what I started with. I have tried to look for opportunities to add photographs or illustrations as well as ways to incorporate census information into an interesting look at life for the family through the years. These thoughts I’ve added to my document in red so that the new thoughts will stand out to me.
So now, I will begin to go through these new ideas. I will add what I can find and add updates to things that I can’t find. But I do think that I’m getting close to the point where I’m just going to have to say that it’s time to move on to the next ancestor, so write a “final” biography with what I have, knowing that this is the first of many biographies. If any additional things come to light, I can always go back and add more. But I can’t keep putting this off because I’ll always be thinking that there is more to research.