Couldn't you say that more directly?

OK, so this is probably old information and I'm the last girl on the block to "get it" but I have to make a confession: I've not been very good at those designations for evidence such as primary and secondary, direct and indirect, original or derivative. Just not thought about them much. But while taking the DAR Genealogy Education Program (GEP) course online, I finally understood and could see how designating a record or a piece of evidence on that record as one of those just listed would really help. When I'm digging for ancestors and  looking at some piece of paper or image on Ancestry or Family Search, I can know in a moment how helpful that item is going to be for me by using those designations. And if the document or info on it is not "good enough" then I know what I need to do to find better. And we want the very best when we look for records, don't we? Sure we do!

I get the difference between original and derivative. It has to do with whether the record is the original, in its original form, or some other version. An example is the Declaration of Independence. If you're looking at the original Declaration of Independence, unless you're in the National Archives in D.C. than you're probably looking at a copy, a derivative version. Is it a transcript that you're looking at? Did someone transcribe it and type it up? That's one example of a derivative version. It's legit alright, but it's not the original so it's derivative. Or maybe you're looking at a short write up version, a synopsis or abstract. That's another version and it's going to give you less information so maybe you'll miss the very bit you really wanted to see. Get it? If you had the original of the Declaration of Independence you'd have a national treasure. If you have an abstract, what do you have? A derivative version.

Same with the records we look at. Take wills for example. I love to look at original wills online. Love to see the handwriting, the X or signature telling me if the person who wrote the will could read or write. Transcripts are OK but they can be full of errors. And of course we can label them derivative. Will abstracts are the worst for me! You just know when you look at one it's leaving out the good stuff you want to know! Derivative.

Direct and indirect were terms that I have to admit I didn't really understand or see how they could be helpful. Let me elaborate on that. When someone explained them I understood for a little while but then in a few minutes I'd forget again because I couldn't see the helpfulness of the terms. Well, I get it now! If you ask someone how to get to First and Elm they can tell you, go straight two blocks, then left for five more blocks and you'll be at First and Elm, that's pretty direct information, don't you think? And if you asked another guy how to get to the same place and he rattled on and on describing landmarks and building that were there 40 years ago, maybe you could figure out how to get there, but maybe you couldn't. That's indirect information. Yuck. Give us direct information, please!

Indirect evidence leads you to a conclusion only by stringing together a series of pieces of evidence. Why can't it be stated directly, we ask ourselves along the way? Because there's no direct evidence available, only indirect evidence. It's a puzzle that needs to be put together... by you.

That only leaves primary and secondary to be sorted out. This one is pretty easy and I thought I understood how to use the two terms. But then I dug into a simple death certificate and -- bam! -- a big light went off that showed me the very heart of the matter and why it's important to know and use this type of evidence analysis. Who was that informant and what did they really know anyhow? The date and place of death was a sure bet. It was most likely to be correct (and was primary evidence) because it was very close in time (primary) to the event. The informant had usually been witness to the death and so probably knew exactly when and where it happened. But what of the birth place? Or the subjects parents, or get ready, the subject's parents place of birth! See how that could go all wrong and lead to incorrect information?

So now I'm not too surprised when I think about my 4th GGF's death certificate and how the informant, his undoubtedly upset and grieving wife, mixed up his parents surnames. It showed me just how easy it was to get incorrect secondary info on a vital record. Wow!

Primary and secondary. (Think death certificate.)
Direct and indirect. (Think driving directions.)
Original or derivative. (Think Declaration of Independence.)

There are more complex ways to sort documents and evidence. Elizabeth Shown Mills has a good one here and there's more info on her method here.

Now wasn't that fun?

Samuel Albert House (1832 - 1917) and
Mary Elizabeth Farrell House (1835 - 1919)

His death certificate, the Informant his wife. Notice the surnames of his parents! They were mixed and his parents were Rebecca House and Isaac Biggerstaff. He did not take his fathers surname for a big reason. More on that later, of just search on Biggerstaff in the search box on the top, right.

 

 

 

The URL for this post is: 

 

Oh no! It happened again!

This really makes me sad and I bet it will you too. I just heard another story of a family's lost history. Weren't we going to do something about this problem? I thought we did. It's not enough sorrow that our oldest generation loses their best story tellers all the time but the deliberate destruction of personal family treasures is hard to take. My heart breaks.

Here's what happened recently and it tells of two kinds of family history loss. I sent a message to a user on Ancestry.com when I found her tree with some of Mom's House people. She's descended from one of Samuel Albert House and Mary Elizabeth (Farrell) House's 15 children and Mom and I descend from another. We messaged back and forth a while in the beginning of the year and then she got busy with life, as we do from time to time. But a couple of days ago we got messaging again.

Now I'm super fortunate in that Mom saves everything. We have photos, birth and death certificated, copies of wills and land transactions. It's a vast treasury of our family's history. But not everyone is so lucky, and my House cousin isn't one of us in that regard.

Her mother wasn't one to keep ties strong so when her immediate family moved far away, that was pretty much the last my House cousin saw of her extended family. There was one trip back east when cousin visited her Aunt Sue and noticed all the old family photos on the wall. I thought about how different that was than my upbringing where we just about lived in everyone else's pockets. Grandmas told stories, aunties shared traditions, and you knew your immediate family tree because they all sat at the supper table. I tell ya, I felt bad for my new-to-me House cousin and wanted to reach right out and give her a big hug. I'm guessing that because of that physical distance as well as the emotional distance from relatives, she didn't feel that she was able to make a deeper connection there. I've done that same thing with certain family connections and just didn't take full advantage of what they know or had in their stash. Opportunity lost.

I have come to think that most of us yearn for the knowledge of family and to know how we're connected to them. We want to feel connected to our own people. Our House cousin could see that there was a family to be connected to, just out of reach. After cousin's mom's health failed as well as her memory, she realized that the connections were also fading. She remembered her Aunt Sue and these photos and wished that she'd paid more attention. Who hasn't done that?

And then House cousin related a story about her Aunt Sue and when she passed. Aunt Sue had three boys and she left them everything, including the family home place and all the family history treasures. Which they threw out. House cousin would have gladly taken all of the old family stuff, but they hardly knew her and if they remembered her at all probably wouldn't have guessed that she of all people would be interested in that old stuff. So, not knowing what to do with it all, they just went on and threw it all out.

You've likely heard of stories that are greatly similar to this one. Gosh, my own Dad's aunt died without passing on her holdings of family history and photos. So, not knowing what to do with it all and not wanting to take it on themselves, her sons burned it all out in the yard. Oh, what Mom and I would give right this minute to have it! But we'd grown distant from the boys and they had no way of knowing that we wanted it, would have gladly taken it all.

It's like that sometimes. We keep from reaching out because of something or other when all the while all we want is to be closer and to share.

 

 

No photo today

to represent all the lost photos.

 

 



The URL for this post is: http://nutsfromthefamilytree.blogspot.com/2014/06/oh-no-it-happened-again.html

The Thomas and Judah Farrell Project: DNA connections using AncestryDNA, Part 2

I need to emphasize again that I do really like AncestryDNA and it's key feature: using the Ancestry Member Trees to find matches and make cousin connections.  The interface is super user friendly and it's easy to navigate when seeking and finding DNA matches. I like that. Of course, I wish I'd find even more matches... don't we all?)

In the last post I wrote about our recent Biggerstaff side project and my longing for a chromosome browser built in to AncestryDNA. Now I want to turn the spotlight on a search mystery that's got Cousin Rich and me scratching our heads. The mystery has to do with the AncestryDNA search function especially as it relates to surname matching. You need to know right here that I have a very limited grasp of the mechanics behind how search apps work and that extends to the AncestryDNA search app as well. I just know what happens when I do this or that.

If you remember from the last post, Mom matches Cousin Joseph because they are both descended from Isaac Biggerstaff (1798-18440). Uncle Sonny is also a descendant of this Biggerstaff line, but not from Isaac Biggerstaff. But Uncle Sonny doesn't match Cousin Joseph. Why?

The answer could be as obvious as Mom and Cousin Joseph sharing Bigerstaff DNA that came right from Isaac Biggerstaff. The DNA shared between Mom and Uncle Sonny could actually be Farrell or House DNA. It remains to be seen and more will be known once Cousin Joseph uploads his raw file to GEDmatch so we can play around with the chromosome matcher utility.

When I found Cousin Joseph's match for Mom I emailed Cousin Rich and he went to see if Uncle Sonny or Aunt Mary also matched him. Joseph wasn't to be found amongst the regular list of matching people so Rich did a surname search on Biggerstaff. Still no Cousin Joseph.

Rich has a good sense of these things and it was Rich who first questioned if the AncestryDNA search function might have something off-kilter going on.

To double check I searched on Whetstone. Used that surname because I'd recently been in touch with a high confidence match who shared our Whetstone ancestors. When I did the surname search, whatta ya know, she didn't show up!

I have no idea why this should be. Is AncestryDNA looking at the same main match list and just searching for surname matches?

Now do you see why I really, really want AncestryDNA to tweek their search function and hopefully making it as good as the search function on the geanealogy side of the house?

 

 

Click here to get to this next search box, below, and enter your desired surname.

 

Late breaking update: tried the Whetstone surname search just now and it worked! But why didn't it before? Now I'm more confused than ever.


The URL for this post is:  http://nutsfromthefamilytree.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-thomas-and-judah-farrell-project_15.html

The Thomas and Judah Farrell Project: DNA connections using AncestryDNA, Part I

Let me say right off the bat that I do enjoy and appreciate AncestryDNA. But people, for Pete's sake, get yourselves a chromosome browser! And maybe take a second look at your search function especially as it relates to surname matching. Otherwise you're fine... but I really need these two things, ASAP. Now here's why I need this, and I'm going to talk about the chromosome browser thing first and in another post address the issues we're having when we use the search function for surnames.

Let's chat about the usefulness of a chromosome browser. What's a chromosome browser, you say? In a nutshell, it's the ability to run a search or matching app to see exactly where in their DNA two people share the same chromosomes. When we're lucky, some segments of those chromosomes  come down through the generations from the shared common ancestor relatively in tact in each person's DNA. A chromosome browser will find the matching segments for you.

How important is this? I've read a genealogy blog recently (wish I could remember which one, dang it) that compared the chromosome browser to the idea of "original source" in standard genealogy. I can use a chromosome browser to find out which chromosomes exactly match Mom and Uncle Sonny's DNA.

Here's a look at the GEDmatch comparison of Mom and Uncle Sonny's matching chromosomes. Mom first tested with 23andMe and Uncle Sonny and Aunt Mary tested with AncestryDNA.  In order to see exactly how and on which chromosomes they match we needed the help of a 3rd party service like GEDmatch. Here are the results for Mom and Uncle Sonny.

 

In order to get this report both parties must upload their raw data file to GEDmatch, and that's no trouble really, but if the other party is reluctant for no particular reason, then you're out of luck. If you have a chromosome browser built-in to the DNA service you are using, you can just go on ahead and see where you match with the other person's DNA, without the fuss.

Here's a link to Ce Ce Moore's blog where she talks about all this and Ancestry's plans to add their own chromosome browser. I can't wait... but there's no release date at of yet. And I really have a personal problem with waiting because I WANT IT NOW!

And now about our situation which is, I'm willing to bet, typical. Mom and Uncle Sonny are each descended from the oldest daughters of Thomas and Judah Farrell. You can read about them and the Farrell Project here. Mom descends from Mary Elizabeth (Farrell) House (1835-1919) and Uncle Sonny descends from her sister Catherine (Farrell) Boxwell (1838-1910). I'll show you both trees on down.

As we work through Mom's and Uncles Sonny's DNA matches we're always looking for people who match someone in this cluster of people and surnames that fan out around the Farrells. The main surnames are: Farrell, House, Hartley, and Biggerstaff.

Now the Biggerstaff surname is interesting and there's a distinct way that it's important to Mom and I. Samuel Albert House (1832-1917), the husband of Mary Elizabeth Farrell, was the illegitimate son of Isaac Biggerstaff (1798-1844). Proving this paternity is one the top items on my wish list of what I'm looking to find using DNA for genealogy. In order to accomplish that task I would have to find an undeniable DNA match to Mom who has a solid tree tracing back to an offspring of Isaac Biggerstaff through his marriage with Elizabeth Longstreath.

But there's another big problem: Samuel Albert could have also received Biggerstaff DNA from his mother. Keep reading to see how.

Now this next part is a bit sticky and complicated and I hope that the two trees below will help. Back to Uncle Sonny. The top tree for Uncle Sonny's ancestors shows the line back from James E. Boxwell, husband of Catherine Farrell. You'll notice that his mother is Dinah House, and her parents are James House and Margaret Hartley. Now look at Margaret Hartley's mother! Rebecca Biggerstaff! Which means that any of the descendants of James Boxwell and Dinah House could have Biggerstaff DNA... and in theory Uncle Sonny should too.

Uncle Sonny is a descendant of Aaron Boxwell and Dinah House.

Dinah House's grandmother was a Biggerstaff.

Now look at the this tree segment below from Mom's tree. There's Isaac Biggerstaff, presumed father of Samuel Albert House. (Are you wondering about the surname and why Samuel Albert took his mother's surname? He didn't at first and you can find him in the 1850 census listed as Samuel Biggerstaff and living in the home of his mother and step-father, Patrick Caton.)

In this tree below you'll see the biggest problem for me, and that is that Samuel Albert's father was a Biggerstaff and on his mother's side, his grandmother was a Biggerstaff. As a matter of fact, Samuel Albert's great grandmother on his mother's side was sister to his grandfather on his father's side. That's a whole big mess of Biggerstaff DNA! Is there any chance at all for me to sort it out and make a case for Isaac Biggerstaff being Samuel Albert's father using DNA?

I know, I know, I could do some Y-DNA testing with direct males descendants of SA House and Isaac Biggerstaff. I'm trying!

Here, I should mention that we've found a Biggerstaff match with Mom on AncestryDNA and he's a descendant of Isaac and Elizabeth. Nice, huh? He's Cousin Joseph and he came up with a 95% confidence rating. He's great to work with and has already shared some very useful info about local records:)

So, if Uncle Sonny has Biggerstaff  DNA he should in theory show up as a match with others who have this Biggerstaff DNA. Except that Cousin Joseph matched Mom but not Uncle Sonny. Hmmm. See, I wish Ancestry had a chromosome browser because I could use it to see right away how Cousin Joseph and Mom match and on which chromosomes.

Cousin Rich and I are scratching our heads and wondering why. Why new-to-us Cousin Joseph, the direct descendant of Isaac Biggerstaff and his wife Elizabeth Longstreth, should match Mom and not Uncle Sonny. Two answers come to mind immediately. First is that Joseph and Mom both have DNA that comes down through Isaac and no one else in our Farrell group, and I'll need a chromosome browser to answer that question. The other answer is that there is a problem with AncestryDNA's matching function. Or maybe it's both. Next time I'll talk about an issue we might have uncovered with AncestryDNA's search function.

Now do you see why I really, really want AncestryDNA to get a chromosome browser? Soon.



The URL for this post is:
http://nutsfromthefamilytree.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-thomas-and-judah-farrell-project.html

The Thomas and Judah Farrell DNA Project: The Connections Tree

See previous posts to find out about this project.

One thing you need when chasing the DNA rabbit down a hole is a tree that contacts can look at to see if you two match. If they don't have a tree (or a clue) at least you can send them on to your tree to window shop for a connection. Surnames and a surname list with locations and years is a good tool as well, but for my money, you can't beat a good tree. Give me a tree over a surname list any day.

I've been reading a couple of blog posts from wise writers that make the case for not posting a tree online in special or unusual situations and it opened my eyes. I now understand about the need to protect the innocent from prying eyes looking for character flaws, crimes, and the unspoken terrors of family life gone very wrong. I'm with them and to be candid there is one person, living, not on our tree because, well, of the mess. One has a moral responsibility to protect those who might be harmed from such messes made public. Doing genealogy in circumstances such as this makes the going dicey. For those of us who have garden variety family issues peppering our tree, most have a good-hearted desire to share the fun with others. After all we weren't there and we don't really know all the facts.

Mom, who you might know is 95 and been doing genealogy since the early 1970s, was reluctant to share her tree online. She'd happily send family group sheets and then GEDCOMs to anyone researching our ancestors, but putting her tree on Ancestry? She had to warm up to that. "I'm not done with it'" she said about her tree on more than one occasion. But as time went by we both came to see that even though every tree run by a living person is a work in progress, putting Mom's tree online was the best way to share her substantial work with the most people.

But not all searchers feel that way. I get it. How frustrating to see your work copied and recopied without a mention of where the document, photo or rare index came from. Recently, I had the pleasure (?) of finding a rare photo of a 2nd great grandparent I'd uploaded a while back and now on another tree without attribution. Someone had downloaded the picture and then uploaded it again and attached their name as the original submitting person. Is there a hidden tag on it stating who originally had the photo (Mom) and who cleaned it up (moi) in a photo editing program? Take a guess! But never mind about that. Back to The Farrell Project and cousin Rich's great idea.

So, cousin Rich and I had been sifting through some GEDmatch results and emailing back and forth about this and that, looking for people who matched Mom and Uncle Sonny. (See previous post or this will make no sense whatsoever!) We were working informally then, and each on his or her own avenues of pursuit when Rich emailed and said, in a nutshell, hey do you want to work together on this? You in, he asked? I immediately replied, YES!

Rich and I are trying to link as many of the descendants of Thomas and Judah Farrell by specific DNA segment and pedigree as we can. We know of a couple of hundred direct descendants, both living and dead, but just a handful of those have taken a DNA for genealogy test and are known to us. After a couple of goes at locating descendant's places on trees, both theirs and ours, Rich suggested that we needed a tree of only direct descendants - blood descendants - that could be available for prospective DNA match candidates to peruse.

Just to underline the problems faced without the Farrell Connections tree, here's what happened before we built it. If I sent GEDmatch matches to Mom's tree, they would have to either follow my very tedious instructions on how to locate the Farrell family group or try searching, or just start wading through over 60,000 individuals on Mom's tree. Either way, it's enough to send someone fleeing from the room, and not return emails.

Rich's personal tree focuses on only his wife's family in Cumberland, Allegany, Maryland. For example, Rich's tree only lists one child of Samuel Albert House (1832-1919) and Mary Elizabeth Farrell (1835-1919) whereas Mom's tree lists all 16 kids as well as each of their descendants and their kids. Yeah, we needed a new tree, a tree in common. Good idea, Rich!

As of right now there are a tidy 252 individuals on the Thomas & Judah Farrell Connections tree, all well researched, all blood descendants or spouses of blood descendants. Nice and tidy. Some descendants are sure to be missing but it's a work in progress, as are all trees. It's a fine tool to use when helping DNA cousins try to locate their ancestors within the Farrell big picture. Yeah, and it's Private. It's a research tool for us, not a tree for public consumption.

Joseph H. Whetstone (1858-1939) and Katherine Elizabeth House (1865-1947).

Kate was just one of the 16 children of Mary Elizabeth Farrell (1835-1919) and Samuel Albert House (1832-1917). Mary Elizabeth was born in Ireland.

 

 

The URL for this post is: http://nutsfromthefamilytree.blogspot.com/2014/04/the-thomas-and-judah-farrell-dna_16.html 

Surname Saturday: House, but not those other House people

It's time for this week's version of one of my favorite blogging prompts from GeneaBloggers called Surname Saturday. If you are a blogger and not doing Surname Saturday, please let me encourage you to give it a try! Here's my own blog post about Cousin Bait and Surname Saturday has been the very best one for me. Randy Seaver over at his excellent blog, Genea-Musings left a comment and be sure to read that too because it gives clear instructions on how to construct a Surname Saturday post!

This week we're into the 3rd great grandmothers, already having covered earlier grandmothers and a bunch of grandfathers in previous Surname Saturday posts. To check a surname, just plug it into the search box near the top right under the surname graphic. Are we related? I'm continuing to include some of the collateral folks as better cousin bait. It seems to be working:)

OK, so about that title for this post. You ever go charging into a line of ancestors and run across a really juicy story and get all excited about it and the way it could add pizazz to your family history? And then wake up one morning, have a cup of coffee and think, hey, that's not right! Yeah, it happens. And it happened on this House line.

For a really long time, Mom thought that we were descended from the famed Andrew V. House and John Valentine House of the House Heirs Association events, which is a very juicy story with millions of dollars hanging in the balance. You can read about it by clicking here for Part I to find the basics of the whole affair, then here for Part II where we follow the money, and finally here for Part III in a post that tries to uncover what is known about all that land the King of England supposedly gave the Count. It's complicated! Just know that even though we have in our possession copies of some of the House Heirs papers, now Mom and I are totally doubting that we're connected to this line at all!! Begging the question: if not them, who do we descend from?


1. Diane Kelly Weintraub

2. Francis Patrick " Pat" Kelly 1916 - 2007
3. Virginia Williams, living and loving it

6. Cambria Williams 1897 - 1960
7. Emma Susan Whetstone 1897 - 1956

14. Joseph Hampton Whetstone 1858 - 1938
15. Catherine Elizabeth House 1865 - 1947

30. Samuel Albert House 1832 - 1917
31. Mary Elizabeth Farrell 1835 - 1919
I wrote a longish blog post about Samuel Albert House on February 25, 2013 and his strange life which you can find here. It tells the story of various jobs and moving and finally settling in Frostburg, Allegany, Maryland.
There's also an amusing post about the Counterfeiting Twins here, and those two, Rev. Edward Francis and Joseph Martin, were SA and Mary Elizabeth's children.
They had these 16 children:
* James I. House 1844 - ????. He married Sara C. Wilson
* John T. House 1855 - 1954. He married Sarah Dennison.
* William H. House 1858 - 1907. He married Ada Elizabeth Garlitz.
* Mary Amelia "Molly" House 1861 - 1949. She married John R. Davis.
* Samuel T. House about 1862 - ????. He married Emma Siebert.
* Garnet Soloman House 1864 - ????. He married Rhoda ?.
15. Catherine Elizabeth House 1865 - 1947
The following were the twins:
* Rev. Edward Francis House 1868 - 1926. He married Martha Edith Dennison.
* Joseph Martin House 1868 - 1950. He married Rose Praut and upon her death married Madge Cook.
*George House 1870 - 1871.
* Sarah Ellen "Sadie" House 1870 - ????. She married William Harvey Reckley.
* Margaret Anna "Nan" House 1872 - 1968. She married Philip Long.
* Sadie F. House 1873 - ????.
* Charles Harley House 1875 - 1945. He married Blanch Perdue.
* Michael A. House 1878 - ????. He married Lillian Meade.
* Nora House 1879 - 1964. She married Denton R. Kaseycamp.

Samuel Albert took his mother's surname as his own and changed it from Biggerstaff, his natural father's surname, to House some time after the 1850 US census. The presumption is that he was illegitimate and his father was Isaac Biggerstaff. Some records/ trees have him as the son of a House man who lived in Harper's Ferry but there is not evidence of that suitable to quote. What we do have is this index from Hampshire County Virginia/ West Virginia. Here's what that index looks like, along with the 1850 census listing:

1850 US Census

 

Hampshire County (now West Virginia) index of births.

 

And here's the URL of the index at "Hamshire County VA: Vitals: Births":

http://files.usgwarchives.net/wv/hampshire/vitals/Births.txt

Now let's check out this House line back from Samuel Albert House's mother, Rebecca House Caton, and then his maternal grandfather.

60. Patrick Caton 1814 - 1861
61. Rebecca House 1808 - after 1861
Remember we're after following the House family line back so we'll leave the Catons alone except to say that Patrick Caton came here from Ireland. Because of where he ended up in America, which is now West Virginia on the Potomac River near the long gone town of Magnolia, he most probably was lured by work on the railroads or the canal, as were countless other Irishmen. In the 1850 US Census he's listed as a farmer, but Samuel (calling himself Samuel Biggerstaff) and Patrick's brother, Francis Caton a man of 30 years living in the household, are listed as laborers. Presumably based on history of the area they were most likely employed by the railroad or the canal digs.
Patrick and Rebecca had the following children together:
* Mary Caton 1846 - ????
* Margaret Caton  1847 - ????. She married George W. Meade
And then of course they cared for:
30. Samuel Albert House 1832 - 1917

122. James House 1777 - 1862
123. Margaret Hartley about 1787 - about 1847
James House was born in the western frontier, also called at this time the Far West, in Morgan County (was Hampshire County), Virginia, now West Virginia. I can not even imagine what life was like for him growing up and later caring for his family! He owned at least 115 acres of farm land on the Potomac River, that became the subject of legal wrangling after his death.
Margaret was also born in the same area in Morgan County (was Hampshire County).
They had the following children:
* Dinah House 1803 - after 1880. She married Aaron W. Boxwell.
61. Rebecca House 1808 - after 1861
* William House 1811 - 1881. He married Susannah Johnston.
* Mary House 1814 - 1905. She married Jacob Snyder who died. Then she married Elijah Shambaugh.
* Susan House 1818 - 1854. She married George Washington Athey.

Well, there you have it. Who was James House's father? If you know or have a clue please let me know because it's driving Mom and I crazy!

Jame's wife, Margaret Hartley's parents were Rebecca Biggerstaff  (1754 - 1826) and John Hartley (1750 - 1825). The 1782 census for Hampshire County shows a William Biggerstaff Jr. and Sr. living in proximity to a Thomas Hartley.

 

Head of Families - Virginia 1782

 

 

So here's the deal and if you are confused, it's real easy to get that way. Samuel Albert House' mother and natural father were related. Rebecca House, his mother was great granddaughter to that William Biggerstaff Sr listed above. Isaac Biggerstaff, his natural father was great grand son to the same William Biggerstaff Sr. And see that George Tarvin who is next on the list above? That was the minister of the church the Biggerstaffs were prominent members of. Interesting, huh?

Well, at least none of this bunch owned slaves. That's something to be happy about.


The URL for this post is: http://nutsfromthefamilytree.blogspot.com/2013/07/surname-saturday-house-but-not-those.html

House Heirs Association: Part III, Where Did They Get All That Land?

If you've been following along on this crazy journey to resurrect the collected facts, trivia, and stories about the House Heirs Association (HHA) you'll remember in Part I we checked out the basics of it all and in Part II we followed the money. In this post we'll try to figure out and untangle what's known about how the House men got possession of that land in the first place. But first the usual recap of the HHA.

Here's a recap of what the House Heirs Association is all about. In a nutshell, the descendants of one Andrew V. House (1700 - 1797) believed that he and his son, John Valentine House (1739 - 1843), had supposedly been swindled out of payment from the US Government for a 99 year land lease on an immense tract of land they owned, reported to be as large as 64,000 acres. At the end of the lease the government and people living on that land in about 1884 or 85, located roughly in Frederick County, Maryland, all forgot that the House family were the rightful owners.

So where the heck did they get all that land? I'm still curious even though lately I've been suspicious that we're actually related to this House line! In an old document in Mom's possession our connection through Samuel Albert House, my 2nd great grandfather, is outlined. It was about 1900 and times were hard and people must have seen this as an opportunity to enjoy wealth, because the estimate was that everyone would get $2 million. Now, you need to know that Samuel Albert lived in a small rural village in the back woods of West Virginia and scraped by, as best we can tell. It amuses me to think what he might have done with a $2M pay day:)

Back to the main question of the day: where did they get that land? It was a gigantic parcel, some 64,000 acres. Where would they get that?! There are mentions about the original land grant in HHA documents but the attorney who represented the HHA states in a letter (with no date but presumably after the 1901 Kokomo Indiana meeting) that "much time and effort has been spent in writing to parties who were said to have papers and records but none have been found to throw any light on the matter." He goes on to say, "we have found nothing, except, perhaps family history".

That said, the next posting by Mr. Granger to the RootsWeb message board listed as House Heirs Association meeting Williamstown, KY, Jan 9th, 1899, concerns a letter dated December 18, 1899, reportedly coming from "a London Law Office" and here's what it said, in a nutshell. (I've underlined the descendancy stuff for easier reference.)

1.  The House records and estate of Andrew House by metes and bounds was first ceded to Count Frederick Edward Van Hautzen by Pudshers from the English Government, in the 16th Century.
2. It was attached as part of the Commonwealth of Maryland to the Calvert Government, which with the Estate of Lord Baltimore, it reverted back to the Crown, being regranted in the 17th Century to Andrew House, who was the Great Grandson of Count Frederick, from the latter Frederick County was named.
3. This land was given to Andrew House as a birthday present, if he would enter this grant: he was also given the coat of arms: signatures and seals (a different House Mediveael Coat of Arms), cord and dagger.
4. From Andrew House it descended to John Valentine House, the eldest child and his heirs.
5. Neither patent or grant was ever recorded in Maryland, but a search of the British Colonies Offices in the 17th and 18th Century will reveal the Grant and old will of those records.

The writer of this letter, who sounds awfully certain of it all, states,"The search for you will cost about ten pounds, or fifty dollars. But before coming to England, it might be well to satisfy that there was no assignment or quit-claim from John Valentine House, who was son of Count Frederick Edward Van Hautzen, who was a son of Andrew Van Hautzen, in times the last of the Counts of the Barony."

Confused? Yeah, me too. Next time, Dastardly Deeds!

(Insert Cheezy Coat of Arms Here;)





Update, 6/25/2013: Here's a link to the page on Len Granger's web site where he talks about the House Heirs Association. Thanks, Len!!
http://www.tiptopwebsite.com/websites/index2.php?username=len1932&page=31


The URL for this post is: http://nutsfromthefamilytree.blogspot.com/2013/05/house-heirs-association-part-iii-where.html

House Heirs Association: Part II: Follow the Money

If you missed the first installment of this new series you can find it here. I promise, this is interesting to more people than just Mom and me!

Here's a recap of what the House Heirs Association is all about. In a nutshell, the descendants of one Andrew V. House (1700 - 1797) believed that he and his son, John Valentine House (1739 - 1843), had supposedly been swindled out of payment from the US Government for a 99 year land lease on an immense tract of land they owned, reported to be as large as 64,000 acres. At the end of the lease the government and people living on that land in about 1884 or 85, located roughly in Frederick County, Maryland, all forgot that the House family were the rightful owners.

In this installment we'll follow the money and watch the numbers in an attempt to uncover some of the tangled plot. So here it is, by the numbers.

1. The value of the land, if one can believe its size, is estimated at 64,000 acres, was claimed to be $6 billion in 1899 by the National Secretary of the House Heirs Association (HHA).

2. The US Government offered the House heirs a deal of $30 million sometime before the first large general meeting of the HHA in 1899. If accepted, this deal would have resulted in approximately $2 million for each of the House heirs, and ... a $2.5 million dollar pay day for the attorney. (Too bad they didn't take it!)

3. The attorneys. By the meeting of the HHA in1900 in Chicago, funds had been collected from the 300 members (or continued to be collected) for paying an attorney. It seems that Messrs. Marchant & Clay (perhaps the guys who had negotiated the deal mentioned in #2 above) were no longer involved. A Mr. Hutson, who was put forth as the man to do the job, stated through his representative at the meeting, that he "gained a great deal of valuable information through his recent investigating" and that he was "confident" that a "settlement could be reached in 18 months time".

4. Where is Mr. Huton? At the meeting of 1901 in Kokoma, Indiana, Mr. Huton was a no-show. He said that he "found it impossible to be present", but felt that a meeting with himself and the House heirs was still necessary. He also reported by letter that a settlement was possible "but it would take time and a considerable amount of patience." (He was no longer talking about that 18 month time table!)

5. Dissatisfaction with the representation? The HHA notes from the 1901 meeting indicate members discussed that Mr. Huton should be "investigated." A committee was formed to take a closer look at the contract with Mr. Huton.

6. Mo' money needed. A collection was taken at that 1901 meeting for "current expenses".

7. Circular letter, date unknown. Throughout this whole HHA saga, letters were circulated informing members of what was going on. The problem expressed in one letter is that Mr. Huton is slow in gathering supporting documentation. By the time of this particular letter it is reported that the attorney has found "no important records."

8. Time and trouble. In a letter dated 26 Sept, 1906 from the HHA Secretary, it's stated that there are now over 450 House heirs. The letter goes on to say that, "We have never been able to raise sufficient money to carry it through," referring to documentation that was already in hand and important documents that needed to be found. It's at the point, I think from reading this, that the attorney (not mentioned by name and likely not Mr. Huton) consulting with the HHA Secretary believes that an deal could still be reached.

Yikes! Looks like no one got anything out of this House Heirs Association, except the lawyers! I'd guess that Messrs. Marchant & Clay worked on contingency. When they saw the House heirs not jumping at the $30 million settlement, they bailed. Looks to me like Mr. Huton milked them for what he could doing as little work as possible himself and letting members bring him documentation. I surmise this because it was about that time that the House heirs started submitting whatever they had about the matter of the land as well as their ancestral history tracing back to John V. House. Just my guess.

I feel especially bad for the writer of that 1906 letter who had worked tirelessly on this for four years investigating what she could. By that time people might have gotten weary of contributing to a case that went no where. By 1923 the HHA is disbanded when someone absconds with whatever funds are left... but I'm getting ahead of myself!

Next time, more about how the property came to Andrew V. House. That's really interesting!

Marriage record for Samuel Albert House (1832 - 1917) and Mary Elizabeth Farrell (1835 - 1919), dated 20 Aug 1855.

 

 

The URL for this post is: http://nutsfromthefamilytree.blogspot.com/2013/04/house-heirs-association-part-ii-follow.html

House Heirs Association: Part I, The Basics of the Case

This is a case that has some real juicy bits: land swindles, embezzlement, fraud, malfeasance, and a whole lot more including a group that tried to do legal battle with the US Government. It starts almost 200 years ago and even today some riddles still are not solved! But let's begin at the beginning, and I'll tell you how it all started, at least as I see it.

One day not too long ago Mom said to me, very casually, "Oh, those are the papers from the House Heirs Association meeting held about 1900 or so." And I nearly flipped my wig. What?!! What's the House Heirs Association, I bleated over the phone?! Poor Mom. I've always been the kid asking all the questions.

In a nutshell, the descendants of one Andrew V. House believed that he and his son, John Valentine House, had been swindled out of payment from the US Government for a 99 year land lease on an immense tract of land they owned reported to be as large as 64,000 acres. At the end of the lease the government and people living on that land in about 1884 or 85, located roughly in Frederick County, Maryland, all forgot that the House family were the rightful owners.

Around 1887 a bunch of descendants of those two House men got together, thinking, "It ain't right", and decided to sue the government. (Good luck with that.) They called themselves the House Heirs Association. At the first there were about 30 or so individuals who claimed to be House Heirs and chipped in to pay for the services of a lawyer. By 1900 there were 300 to 400 individuals involved, and from all reports, even more money for more lawyers.

The really cool thing for researchers is that in order to make claim to being a House Heir people had to provide their ancestral history tracing back to John V. House as well as report on all that they knew about the land lease. You can still find some of the correspondences online on a RootsWeb message board listed as House Heirs Association meeting Williamstown, KY, Jan 9th, 1899. The author of the bulk of these post is Leonard Granger who began the lengthy and laborious task of transcribing the minutes of the meetings as well as the letters and posting them to the RootsWeb board. He started posting on 25 March, 2002 and got most of it posted by 19 May of that year. Looks like he went back and updated and edited the posts around 17 November of 2003. I sent him a message through Ancestry.com messages system and hope to hear back... please let me hear back. I thanked him for transcribing and posting all he did, without which we'd surely be losing another piece of our shared history. Bless him.

I also stumbled over a RootsWeb orphan page about the House Heirs Association that looked promising but goes no where. No name or contact info is available and I can't tell when it was set up so that's a dead end. One more dead end is the link on the House Heirs message board about a GeoCities web page on this topic. That page is long gone.

My thought is to post here for a while and see if anyone else is interested in this aspect of the history of our House ancestors. If this topic interests you or you are a House descendant, please email me at dianew858@hotmail.com . And let me be clear: I have no intention of reviving that suit! Makes me laugh to think about it:) Mom has some papers that are relevant and Cousin Karen does too, so maybe we can share what's known with our House cousins thereby keeping this story alive and moving it down the road a bit. Imagine: 400 of them intended to sue the US Government... for $300 billion dollars!

Overview
The best short overview available online comes from that old and now orphaned and archived RootsWeb page mentioned above, with no date or name attributed. As you can see, for a very long time these descendants hoped to get payment from the government. They were from "the middle walk of life" and saw this as a way to improve their lives and provide a better life for their families. Here's the text:

Welcome to a website I created to provided information on the House Heirs Association of years 1889 to 1923. The House Heirs at that time felt a real injustice had occurred on their ancestors, Andrew V House and his son John Valentine House, when the United States Government failed to make payment on a 99 year lease for a large estate located in State of Maryland. The organization held several meetings around the eastern and mid-west states, appointed several investigation committees and asked all House Heirs to submit their family ancestry lists, if they felt they were related to John Valentine House. Many House families of the time submitted letters, some up to six pages in length, when making their claim. The letters will be listed as found in the files, and I hope no one is upset if a House relative talks about their family. They all meant good and saw a real opportunity to have a better life, as most had experienced a difficult time around the turn of the century.

I have no idea who the "I" is in the first line and would love to know, as well as when he or she created it. Too bad it all got lost to the vagaries of time on the internet.

Just the facts
Here's a short list in no particular order of the facts gleaned from the copious material Leonard Granger posted to the House Heirs Association message board on RootsWeb. Without his posts, there would be close to nothing on the web about the House Heirs Association.

Timeline (short) of the House Heirs Association (HHA):
1896: A few (estimated at 30 people) House Heirs "instituted proceedings" against the government.
Jan 9, 1899: First meeting in Williamstown KY. About 300 to 400 in attendance.
1900: Meeting of HHA in Chicago
1901: Meeting of the HHA in Kokoma Indiana
1902: Meeitng of HHA in Ohio (?)
1923: HHA, one family accused of embezzling money collected to fund the suit. HHA disbanded.

About the land:
64,000 acres
Value in 1785 was about $6 billion.
Origins of House ownership: 1715, attributed to inheritance from a member of the English Royal Family.

Lease:
Began in 1785 just about the time iron mines discovered on the property.
Lease length: 99 years
Terms: 14 cents per acre per year
Lease would have expired in 1884.
Terms at end of lease: ownership to revert to House heirs.

There's more, way more! Next time let's have some fun and follow the money:)

My 2nd great grandfather, Samuel Albert House (1832 - 1917).

Wonder how much he knew about the House Heirs Association?

The URL for this post is: http://nutsfromthefamilytree.blogspot.com/2013/04/house-heirs-association-part-i-basics.html

Sentimental Sunday: I Hardly Know Ya'

 But what were they like?

 

Was watching the live stream from RootsTech online and listening to Ron Tanner's presentation about FamilySearch Family Tree. He said a lot of fascinating things and one of them struck me hard. He said that after four generations no one knows us.

Oh sure, they can research the facts of us, but will they be able to answer that question we've all as family history buffs asked of living relatives: what was he or she like? "He was a tall bear of a man with big strong embracing arms." "She was a small woman who was the strongest person I ever met." "He was ill most of the time, but he had a wickedly good sense of humor. It kept him going." When it all boils down, that's the stuff we, or at least I, want most and is hardest to come by. I'll give up more than a couple of records to hear the answer to that one question: What was he or she like?

While watching RootsTech I was struck by how much emphasis there was on images (photos and video) as well as narrative, the stories. In the past I've heard a lot of folks be dismissive of "soft" information as compared to records. But now it seems the world is balancing out. We want those records but as human beings we need those photos and stories. They warm our hearts and sustain us.

Let's touch our collective toe in the water with my GGF, Daniel Williams (1852 - 1920). He was Mom's father's father and three generations back for me. He died a couple of years after Mom was born, and I'm guessing he held her in his arms. I can feel the soft information slipping away as I try to document his life. He's right there on the cusp and because of him, I get it how exactly people are forgotten by the fourth generation.

Now let's go just one more generation to that elusive and too easily forgotten fourth generation back and the 2nd great grandparents, another way to put it, my grandparent's grandparents. I'll list who is there and what I know about them in the way of soft info. Here's the line up, first with Mom's side and then with Dad's. Maybe some cousin out there will search and find me so we can connect. Maybe they will have a photo. Hey, a girl can hope:)

Here are Mom's people starting with her paternal grandfather, Daniel William's parents:

Thomas Williams (1815 - 1868)
He was a coal miner in Wales and lived in a small market town of Strata Florida, Cardiganshire. We think he died about 1868. He had seven children. What was he like? Probably strong and maybe big because all of his sons were large men. You'd have to be strong to work in a coal mine. No picture of him yet found.

Jane (James) Williams (1815 - ????)
Small, sturdy. Jane was the one who birthed those seven children, kept the house, made do when times were hard in the Welsh mine fields. After Thomas died she immigrated to the US and was in Upstate New York. Where she lived and died is still a mystery to us. But what was she like? In the one photo of her she looks delicate and frail but she's old.

 

 

Daniel William's wife was Jane Price and here are her parents:

 



William Price (1829 - 1872)
William Jr. was born in Bedfordshire, England, and died in Aux Sable Township, Grundy County, Illinois. Our working theory is that they went west, possibly mining, and to be with family. He's listed in the 1841 English Census living with his mother, Ann who is a lace maker. In both the 1850 and 1870 US Census he is listed as a miner and then more specifically, a coal miner.
Here's another coal miner who was likely strong and sturdy. But I still don't know what he was like.

 

Diane Thomas Price (1832 - 1871)

Diane was born in Wales. She died in Mount Savage, Allegany County, Maryland. Mom believes that she traveled back to where family was to have her last child and died in childbirth or shortly thereafter. That's very little to know about a person. And there's no photo of her in our possession so I can't look into her eyes and wish I knew her.

Mom's mother was Susan Whetstone Williams (1897 - 1965). Here are her grandparents.

Joseph Edward Whetstone (1816 - 1997)
We know quite a bit about my grandma Williams' grandparents by comparison to some of the others listed here. There are stories and some photos too. Here's Joseph E, Whatstone who started working as a blacksmith in conjunction with his father in law, Peter Yeast, who owned an roadhouse on the Old Pike going west near Grantsville, Garrett County, Maryland. He later became a stone mason and enjoyed a nice career in that work. Here's his photo. He looks strong and stone masonry was probably work for a very able-bodied man then. But look, he's holding a book. He was literate and my guess is that it's a bible. And look at those eyes!

Sarah Waggoner Whetstone (1825 - 1880)
Sarah was the step-daughter of the roadhouse and inn owner mentioned above, Peter Yeast. We have no photo of her but we do have an amazing letter written by Sarah to her daughter, so I'll post that instead. As you can see, she was literate and that was quite an accomplishment for the time - about 1869 - and place - extreme wilds of Western Maryland. Perhaps it was from her that Mom and I got our love of reading and writing.

Samuel Albert House (1832 - 1917)
We know a lot about Samuel Albert House and you can see it here. He's just that far out of immediate reach but somehow he imposed his presence down through four generations. Maybe you have to be quite the character in order to do that? I feel as though I'd know him if he walked into the room today, and that's saying something.

Mary Elizabeth Farrell (1835 - 1919)
We know about Mary Elizabeth by way of her husband and in many regards she has been defined by him. She had 16 children with him and that couldn't have been easy given his life. Well, at least we have a photo of her, for which I am very glad.

Here's Dad's line up starting with his father's grandparents.

John Kelly (1821 - 1891)
Born in Shannonbridge, Clonmacnoise Parrish, County Offlay, Ireland and died in Eckhart, Allegany County, Maryland. We have no idea why or when he came over . And the only photo we have for him is his grave marker, a lovely Irish cross, in St. Michaels Cemetery, in Frostburg, Allegany County, Maryland. I have no idea what he or his wife were like.

Bridget Cockrane (1830 - 1910)
Bridget married John Kelly on 21 June 1846 in Cumberland, Allegany County, Maryland. We know she was born in Ireland but don't know where. And we don't know when she died or where she's buried. It's a mess. And lastly, very sad, we have no picture of her even though she lived till 1910. Why?

John Eckhart (1831 - 1917)
Mary Myers Eckhart (1837 - 1909)
I think of these two as a couple because the visual I have for them is a couple graphic made by a cousin I found through facebook. I just did a post about them and you can see it here. I know where they lived and what work he did, but other than that, I don't know what they were like.

Dad's mother's grandparents were:

Charles William Zeller ( 1829 - 1901)
We have a nice portrait photo of Charles William and you see it below. There's a very recent post recapping all that's known about him and his wife Anna Mary. But it's not enough. I deduce that he was resourceful and ambitious having brought his candy making skills from Germany then moved his them from the little mountain town of Frostburg in Western Maryland and finally to the metropolis of Chicago where real money was to be made. He does look prosperous in this photo, don't you think?

Anna Mary (possibly Breuning/ Browning/ Bruning) Zeller (1834 - 1906)
Because of the comment to the post mentioned under Charles above, I now want and need to go research Anna Mary! She is probably not the woman I think and now I'm not sure what I think. But never mind because I love a mystery:) Do I know her and what she was like? No way.

When family stories were told, the exotic Zellers often took the spotlight and the couple below were left in the shadows.

Elijah Workman (1816 - 1864)
Nancy Ann Troutman (1826 - 1882)
I know very little about either person of this couple. Both families have long lines that go back to the earliest frontier days in the area now known as Allegany County, Maryland. But personal information that would help a descendant know what they were like? Forget it. A photo? No way. One tiny story? Forget it.

So there you have it. It's sad really, and that's why it's here on Sentimental Sunday. Four generations back and forgotten about. I can do better for them. How are you doing with your fourth generation back? Do you know what they were like?

NOTE: I finished this post Saturday late and checked it out later to edit. Blogger, it seems, had eaten the whole last half of my work here. So if you see something that needs a bit more polish, please have mercy. Sorry.

The URL for this post is: http://nutsfromthefamilytree.blogspot.com/2013/03/sentimental-sunday-i-hardly-know-ya.html

Treasure Chest Thursday: Biggerstaff Book

I'm so lucky to have Mom and all of her excellent work! I thank the genealogy gods every day for every scrap of what she's done over the years. Whenever I get stuck she's the first person I call or email. I wouldn't think of posting a Surname Saturday report without checking with her first. So when I launched into the Biggerstaff family this week I checked in with Momsie. She had a Biggerstaff book in her treasury and mailed it to me.

Here's the book, pictured below, fresh from Mom's treasure chest to mine. As you can see Biggerstaff is a branch on the Isaac Garinger Davis tree, but I'm happy to have any and all information about the Biggerstaff line. This book was privately published by Elizabeth Davis Thompson in 1979. She did a remarkable job of it that long ago before desktop publishing.

I'm thinking that this book is the earliest genealogy published on the Biggerstaff's from Hampshire County, Virginia then West Virginia. There are other Biggerstaff and Bickerstaff lines in the South and in Pennsylvania but they have not been proven to have any connection to the Biggerstaffs of Hampshire County. At all. The other Biggerstaff/Bickerstaff lines apparently trace down from England and there's every possibility that our Biggerstaffs (and it's always Biggerstaff with the double "g") were originally Blickenstaff from Germany or Switzerland. Wouldn't a lovely yDNA test help out sorting them?

Cousin William has done a fine job of constructing the first three generations back from Issac Biggerstaff (1798 - 1844), natural father of my 2nd GGF Samuel Albert House (1832 - 1917). Here they are, as per Cousin William.

Samuel Albert House (1832 - 1917)
Issac Biggerstaff (1798 - 1844)
Samuel Biggerstaff (1760 - 1804)
William Biggerstaff (1720 - 1803)

Treasure Chest Thursday is a blogging prompt of GeneaBloggers.


The URL for this post is: http://nutsfromthefamilytree.blogspot.com/2013/03/treasure-chest-thursday-biggerstaff-book_14.html

Wisdom Wednesday: Moving Right Along

See, the thing is that I'm an intermediate genealogy kinda person, just a bit beyond the newbie phase and just getting going on the middle part. This week I got that middle school feeling where you see beginners over there but the really cool kids are in a big crowd over in high school having so much fun, and you can see how much growing you have yet to do.

Honestly, I have so very much to learn and feel that every day, no make that every hour, there's even more than there was yesterday. Is it just me or is this whole area of interest growing at an explosive rate? And did I hear that the number two searched term now is "genealogy" or some variation. Go ahead and guess what the number one search term is...? Porn.

I have finished up my research for Samuel Albert House and you can see my long post here and the last post here. When I finished that last one I had a really nice feeling that I'd done a pretty good job of it and executed what for me, where I now am, might be called a Junior Grade Reasonably Exhaustive Search.

I celebrated by reorganizing all of his research and making sure the printed materials and the digital materials were soundly put together so that I could easily find anything with out too much digging. Then as one should, wrote it all up as a report, printed it out, and did an edit. I'll let it sit for a bit and then go back over making sure it's sourced (good girl) and viewing it in such a way that anyone picking it up would know what I'm talking about. Also shared SA House's death certificate with Cousin William because he's a good researcher and has shared with me and didn't have it. Because it cost me $25 to get from the Maryland State Archives, this sharing will save him time and money and who doesn't like that?

Once that was done and SA House was put to bed, so to speak, I just went ahead and gave the whole area a spruce up over here under the Nut Tree. This time around I felt like the materials on the shelf had some better organization than they ever had before. I know that as this work goes along it gets harder to drop everything and organize it all. (I've seen Mom's space and she's been doing this since 1970s so you can imagine what she has to deal with if she wants to "organize".) I felt great when everything was properly labeled and sitting in its place on shelves.

Last, it's time to start on Samuel Albert House's natural father Isaac Biggerstaff. The first step was to gather all of the materials I had on him, read them through and put them in proper order. Called Mom and we chatted about what's already known on him. Mom has a book about the Davis and Biggerstaff families that she mailed to me last week and I'm reading it now. Also have reread Allegany Passage, which is the story of the Church of the Brethren community, or Dunkards, in Maryland and their migration to what's now West Virginia. The Biggerstaff family is mentioned there. I figure that I need to be familiar with what's at hand before I can move forward and find the missing. We're back in the frontier of the 1700s "over the mountain" so it will be rough going. It's all land records, wills and probate, and tax reports. I do find it fascinating!

For the first time I gathered all of my tools and helpful hint sheets and put them together in the FAN Principle folder, which I live by lately and will help with the Dunkards who stuck together. That felt really good. Made certain that all my tools for the states of West Virginia and before that Virginia were at the top of the stack. Are these called finding aides or is that something else, I don't know? Now my goodie pack is together and I'll no longer have to hunt for each item. You would have thought I'd have figured out to do that before this!

And then there's the DNA results which were the sum of yesterday's posting! Whoop! I got totally immersed in that for two days and counting. I can not believe that the 23andMe test and massive results were only $99. Whatta deal! Randy Seaver of the wonderful Genea-Musings blog just posted more of his 23andMe results yesterday and his writing helped me think deeper into what I was looking at. I really couldn't believe it but at 99.9% European I'm more Caucasian than Randy who was wondering if he's the whitest guy in the world in his first post! How can that be possible with all his New England ancestors?! But I'm a tad jealous because he has Native American DNA, or that's the presumption. Oh well, I'm very happy with my .1% Sub Saharan African DNA. Wonder where that came from and if it's just a tiny vestige of a long ago migration. Fascinating!!


Photo of the Day from the Archive:

A lovely old post card of

Cumberland, Allegany, Maryland, 1906.

 

 

GeneaBlogger's blogging prompt for this post and day of the week is called Wisdom Wednesdays. Thank you, GeneaBloggers:)


The URL for this post is: http://nutsfromthefamilytree.blogspot.com/2013/03/wisdom-wednesday-moving-right-along.html