Genealogy questions....

[Oldgringo]

I've got a pretty fair idea where I'm going but am starting to have questions about where I'm from. Has anyone used any of the various internet genealogy sites to trace their ancestors? If so, which one/s and how'd it work out for you?

[Ark03]

I tried Ancestry.com for a while. It is like the Wikipedia of ancestry research ... meaning if you find any pre-fabricated family trees for some of your ancestors, they where likely filled in by other users. In just about all branches I found in my and my wife's family, there were gross inconsistencies and errors in the online "ancestors" we were finding. In other words, cool that it says I'm related to Catherine the Great, but it is terribly unreliable to the point that I don't believe anything user-sourced for an instant. I saw too many cases where people were erroneously linked.

I'd be interested if you found a place for legitimate research - but ancestry.com is not it.

[Oldgringo]

OG,

start with the free one.. https://familysearch.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

funded by the LDS Genealogy group... That will give you some starting areas..

Thanks guys,

A brief stop in Salt Lake City and visit to Temple Square in October of '10 is what piqued our interest. If all goes well, we plan on a longer stay with our new friends in Temple Square on our way back to the Pineywoods at next summer's end.

[jimlongley]

Been doing genealogy for decades. I use Family Tree Maker, which became owned by Ancestry.com some time back, so I am a member but have not posted my tree, partly because due to its extensive nature I have a great deal of "private" data in it which I do not want to publish, such as birth dates of living people and such things.

I have used Ancestry.com, Genealogy.com, and LDS information, and actually have found the LDS to be the least reliable data. Psrt of the problem with LDS has been their lack of updating mechanism, so when an error was found and a correction submitted, it might not make it in. An awful lot of their stuff was on fiche and even paper back when I started, so what you saw locally might get corrected there, but not in every other locale.

One example is my my maternal grandfather, who was never very forthcoming about his family. We spent decades attempting to find information based on the spotty stuff we had. His father had several wives, serially, and not all of the kids had the same surname (Wallender vs Wallander) and the previous generation had a surname change that made matters even worse: Cadwallader became Wallander. OK, getting ahead of myself, much of this was never known until an accidental misspelling during "just one more search" resulted in records found that we didn't know existed, because the branch of the family that had custody of the records had my grandfather's name spelled "Elmore" instead of "Elmer" and the last name was the one he didn't use but a couple of his brothers and sisters did.

And the name differences between siblings? Well, maybe great grandpappy was a creative speller.

And the big name change from one generation to the next? Well, for years we thought it was because the Tennessee branch of the family came to Texas after the late lamented War of Northern Aggression and changed their name to hide, but it turns out that it might have been a census taker who got a little creative in spelling; great great grandpappy morphed from John Cadwallader in one census to "John Cad Wallander" in the next, and all of his kids and his wife all ended up with the middle name "Cad."

Genealogy can be great fun.

[Oldgringo]

Thanks Jim,

I had occassion to discuss my Scots/Irish surname with a couple of bona fide Brits several years ago. She was Irish and he was a Scot. She absolutely despised the English! When I told her my surame, she informed me my name became what the guy at the end of the gangplank on the dock thought he heard because the {darned} English kept our ancestors enslaved and illiterate and they couldn't spell their names. It could actually be any of many variations of the same starting with Mc or O' or neither.

This sounds like fun. Tally Ho!

[seamusTX]

The actual research using the U.S. census and older records is fascinating. I wasn't listening when the elders talked about the good old days, and now that they are gone I hardly have a clue about where they were and what they did before I was born.

The U.S., U.K., and Ireland have a wealth of information that you can actually read in English. People who were displaced by wars or otherwise from other parts of the world aren't so lucky.

I advise not wasting your money or brain cells on DNA tests. Either they tell you something you already knew, or something you didn't want to know. I'm aware of one woman who found out her mother's husband was not her biological father, which kind of throws cold water on the holiday and anniversary celebrations.

For the record, I had one of those tests, and it came back as being 96% likely from the British Isles (that is, Great Britain, Ireland, and all those specs of rock like the Hebrides). That is as specific as the tests get. Many come back as Central European. I don't know what they would show for Asian, African, or other non-European people, as their database is rather narrow.

- Jim

[Vol Texan]

Genealogical research for me has been extremely rewarding. My father's parents died when he was very young, and he was raised by an uncle on his mother's side. For that reason, most everything we know about his father's family was lost.

About 3-4 years ago, I thought it would be interesting to investigate, and I started building a family tree. I downloaded a free software offered by the Mormons (I'm Catholic, but I don't mind good software for free!!!), and started by interviewing my mom, my aunts, siblings, etc., plus as many people as I could from my wife's family.

After building about 70 people on the tree, I ran into a brick wall, so I figured I'd upload to Ancestry to see if it got me anywhere. I dug around a bit, found a few more links to other family members, and then I found something interesting: someone else had a family tree with my same great-great grandfather on my father's father's side!

Next thing I know, I'm emailing back and forth with 'D. Wells' somewhere in Massachusetts, and she lets me know that she has some second cousins down in Houston, not far from where I live. She introduced us, and I found not only the cousins, but also their mom who was still alive (and she's my dad's first cousin). I met them, and brought some photos of my dad and his uncles for her to look over (she's in her 80's now, but still quite spry). She took one look, and started naming each of the people in the photos - getting them all right!!!

Just this past weekend, one of my new cousins called me on the phone. "Can you take me to the gun show at the GRB center in Houston? I've been talking with my husband, and we agreed that we should have one. I need your advice on what to get."

So yes, Ancestry.com has been good in my instance. I've got FOUR new 2nd cousins that I'd never heard of, right here in Texas. I've met my dad's first cousin, and I've found a lot more people. And yes, we have one new proud member of the 2nd Ammendment-loving community.

If you want any help on getting started with this, I'll be happy to give you all the info I can. Feel free to send me a PM anytime, and I'll share better contact info with you so we can get started.

[seamusTX]

A bit tongue in cheek, but if my ancestors were anything like me, then I don't want to know them!

Few of us would be here if our ancestors weren't harder to kill than crabgrass.

I don't have much occasion to say this on this forum, but no matter how ethical and principled a person considers himself today, he is standing on a billion-years-high pyramid of bloody conquest and death. You don't see a lot of trilobites or dinosaurs running around.

We do have the luxury now of not eating or killing everything in sight.

- Jim

[Oldgringo]

A bit tongue in cheek, but if my ancestors were anything like me, then I don't want to know them!

What if they weren't?

[Jaguar]

I only dabble in genealogy on occasion. Furthest I could trace my family back is 1621 to my 8th great grandfather, George Geer, born in England, Died in Connecticut. Lived to be 105 years old, fathered twelve kids, and I am sure I have family around the world due to this man.

Here is his grave. http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cg ... d=41346410" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ETA, GG grandfather's photo from 1888 is my avatar, his grave is found here. http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cg ... d=11419397" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[WildBill]

I've got a pretty fair idea where I'm going but am starting to have questions about where I'm from. Has anyone used any of the various internet genealogy sites to trace their ancestors? If so, which one/s and how'd it work out for you?

Watch out Oldgringo, this genealogy stuff can be more addicting than crack. Thrity years ago, my older brother starting doing it as a "hobby". Since then he has spent thousands of hours tracking down stuff. He has made several trips to Salt Lake City as well as spending money on postage and phone calls to request records from Europe.

The records he found were interesting, informative and sometimes entertaining. The only record he found about one of our distant relatives from the 1800s was about his death: "Killed by Indians"

[jimlongley]

The actual research using the U.S. census and older records is fascinating. I wasn't listening when the elders talked about the good old days, and now that they are gone I hardly have a clue about where they were and what they did before I was born.

The U.S., U.K., and Ireland have a wealth of information that you can actually read in English. People who were displaced by wars or otherwise from other parts of the world aren't so lucky.

I advise not wasting your money or brain cells on DNA tests. Either they tell you something you already knew, or something you didn't want to know. I'm aware of one woman who found out her mother's husband was not her biological father, which kind of throws cold water on the holiday and anniversary celebrations.

For the record, I had one of those tests, and it came back as being 96% likely from the British Isles (that is, Great Britain, Ireland, and all those specs of rock like the Hebrides). That is as specific as the tests get. Many come back as Central European. I don't know what they would show for Asian, African, or other non-European people, as their database is rather narrow.

- Jim

I agree about DNA, generally, but my family has three distinct branches in the US, with several sub branches, and a few years back, after some dissent about which was the original and whether they all came from the same progenitor, etc, etc, etc, particularly with one very adamant relative who was sure HER branch was the most original, etc, etc, etc, we got together, one male from each branch, and had the DNA test. The result was conclusive, all three branches are related, and the NJ and VA branches are so closely related that they probably split in the US. That/those branches have the disadvantage of some lost records, which my branch doesn't.

My branch has the dubious advantage of a choke point in our ancestry, the entire family, with the exception of two girls and one boy, was wiped out by the Abenacki indians on July 27th 1694. One of the girls died in captivity, the other was ransomed to the French in Montreal and eventually became a Catholic nun, and the boy stayed with the indians for several years, eventually becoming a sachem before being semi-forcibly repatriated, which was not unusual in the era. He became the progenitor for my large branch, and we have had good records right from him down.

The DNA from my branch shows a relationship to the other two, but the split is one to many generations earlier than their split from each other, maybe back in England.

DNA doesn't settle everything, and the lady with the issue still has an issue.

Thanks Jim,

I had occassion to discuss my Scots/Irish surname with a couple of bona fide Brits several years ago. She was Irish and he was a Scot. She absolutely despised the English! When I told her my surame, she informed me my name became what the guy at the end of the gangplank on the dock thought he heard because the {darned} English kept our ancestors enslaved and illiterate and they couldn't spell their names. It could actually be any of many variations of the same starting with Mc or O' or neither.

This sounds like fun. Tally Ho!

Recent research into my wife's family, which has been a real challenge, found that one branch of her "German" ancestry is actually Irish/Scots, and worse, he was an Irish COP in NY City.

My family tree database runs to more than 18 thousand individuals, most of whom I am related to, including George Bush, a ninth cousin, and Al Gore, another ninth cousin.

[seamusTX]

DNA tests are more meaningful if multiple relatives get them, and more if they are males (because of the conservation of the Y chromosome).

I literally have no known living relatives, so I didn't get a useful correlation.

My wife got herself and her full brother tested, but the results were no better. When you start looking at 4th-degree relations, with a common ancestor centuries back, they're not likely to show up at the family reunion.

On a more serious note, look at the dust-storm stirred up by testing the descendants of Thomas Jefferson.

- Jim