So who was John DAWE in Whitchurch the son of? (The end of my Spot the Flaw post refers)
An Isaac and Sarah DAW, where the baptism entry holds no further clues, no occupation, no residence.
Who are my 3greats grandparents
An Isaac and Sarah DAWE / DAW.
Did I have a John in the family?
No.
Did any of the online trees readily available to check have one?
No.
How many Isaac and Sarah DAW couples around this time (or ever?) are there in this area?
The only one I know of are my lot, Isaac a miller of Newton Mill and wife Sarah SMITH.
The only other marriage that comes up on FindMyPast when searched for Isaac (with variants) DAW or DAWE between 1770 and 1810 is a Jun 1783 Halwill marriage of an Isaac DAWE and Grace PAGE, where that Isaac seems to have died in Sep, leaving Grace with an unborn son (John born the next year).
Not all the baptisms have been checked for any others showing parents as Isaac and Sarah that aren't already allocated to the family.
Can John "fit" with the existing children?
Yes.
At first glance I thought maybe not given he was baptized 1798 and their first child Isaac Smith DAWE, was baptized in 1797.
But looking at the actual baptismal dates:
Isaac Smith DAWE 31 Mar 1797
John DAW 26 Oct 1798
Sarah DAWE 15 Dec 1800
It looks like yes he can fit.
Is this John the John who married Mary FRIEND?
Can't prove that as there are likely to be other candidates, but when the details of the ancestry DNA match can be explored on GEDMatch and compared with more than just my data we may have more of an idea about that from the DNA aspect.
Monday, 27 June 2016
Saturday, 25 June 2016
Spot the flaw
"CEN: l850 Michigan, p.ll0 - DAW, William - KARO, l55R, Kalamazoo Co., Ross Township, l840 Mich..no Daw..3 Daws..no Wm. 2228/224l Wm. DAW 25 m Labouer b N.Y. Cornelia 22 f " " " John 3 m " Mich....l850 Ross Twp., census....he was the only one in the entire l850 cen., so he must be fa of Robert b after l850c. REF: Family Tree Maker: 1860 census: DAW, William - NJ P. 848 - Red Hook Twp., Dutchess Co., NJ"
Yes I'm back on a DAW(E) trail again.
Been a while, or at least it seems so.
This voyage started the other day with a new Ancestry DNA match, one with a shared ancestor hint no less.
Yes, we both have the same DAWE family in our respective trees, Isaac and Sarah (SMITH) DAWE of Lamerton (that's WikiTree, and this is my webpage link). I descend from son Isaac, my match from son Thomas.
Now if only we could see the DNA details to prove that this is where the match actually lies?
I'll have to wait for my match to upload to GEDMatch where comparisons can be made against several other kits who also descend from Isaac and Sarah.
While I wait, comparisons were made between our shared match lists and only one of interest popped up - sharing 24cMs with me but far less with my match, but previously on my alert list as there was a DAW showing in the tree. In California, recent-ish timeframe, but no ancestors shown.
Last time I explored tentative ancestors for this mysterious DAW I'd merely quickly tracked around published trees with some spot checks against census data. That led me to a Robert son of a William supposedly born in New York around the 1820s, where I lost interest.
This time round details were checked a bit more thoroughly.
Although I cannot yet document the link between a Robert DAW born Michigan, marrying and fathering a son in 1892 in California and dying before the 1900 census, and the Robert Henry in the 1870 and 1880 census records in Whitewater, Grand Traverse, Michigan, I do have a whiff of potential success.
The flaw of the title?
"...he was the only one in the entire l850 cen., so he must be fa of Robert b after l850c."
Actually two flaws. One was the assumption that Robert was born between 1850 and 1860, the other that noone could possibly have entered the State after the 1850 census and still be in contention as the candidate family.
Tweaking the search parameters for Roberts in Michigan born around the same time as his Californian wife (about 1865) brought up what looks like gold.
There, in 1870, is a family of an Isaac and Nellie (actually should be Nettie) DAW, both born England.
My genie radar is fairly finely attuned to mentions of Isaac DAW(E)s of England anywhere in the world. My tree abounds in the blighters. And very hard to distinguish they can be too sometimes.
Luckily this one had a handy death certificate, which only looks to have a couple of small errors - mother's name missing an I (FREND instead of FRIEND), and a couple of years out on a birth date.
BUT it did have the gem of saying that Isaac was born in Tavistock. Which my radar is doubly attuned to in association with DAW(E)s.
Sure enough there was an Isaac Friend DAW being baptized in Tavistock to a John and Mary, and a handy set of banns several years prior showing a John DAW, hatter, marrying a Mary FRIEND.
I was already quite excited by all of this, nothing like the whiff of success and dots being joined.
But who was John?
Luckily for me, unhappily for the family, there was a sad little set of records showing a baptism in 1832 of a Mary Sarah Jane, daughter of "the late John DAW, hatter, and Mary his wife".
Which made it rather easy to spot John's burial record a few months prior.
Same street address as on Mary Sarah Jane's baptism, and an age that placed him as born around 1799. But where? And which John?
Nothing suitable in Tavistock presented itself. So I tried the Whitchurch John, baptized in Oct 1798 - to ......
The next post may reveal all :)
I'm still convincing myself of the dots being joined here.
Yes I'm back on a DAW(E) trail again.
Been a while, or at least it seems so.
This voyage started the other day with a new Ancestry DNA match, one with a shared ancestor hint no less.
Yes, we both have the same DAWE family in our respective trees, Isaac and Sarah (SMITH) DAWE of Lamerton (that's WikiTree, and this is my webpage link). I descend from son Isaac, my match from son Thomas.
Now if only we could see the DNA details to prove that this is where the match actually lies?
I'll have to wait for my match to upload to GEDMatch where comparisons can be made against several other kits who also descend from Isaac and Sarah.
While I wait, comparisons were made between our shared match lists and only one of interest popped up - sharing 24cMs with me but far less with my match, but previously on my alert list as there was a DAW showing in the tree. In California, recent-ish timeframe, but no ancestors shown.
Last time I explored tentative ancestors for this mysterious DAW I'd merely quickly tracked around published trees with some spot checks against census data. That led me to a Robert son of a William supposedly born in New York around the 1820s, where I lost interest.
This time round details were checked a bit more thoroughly.
Although I cannot yet document the link between a Robert DAW born Michigan, marrying and fathering a son in 1892 in California and dying before the 1900 census, and the Robert Henry in the 1870 and 1880 census records in Whitewater, Grand Traverse, Michigan, I do have a whiff of potential success.
The flaw of the title?
"...he was the only one in the entire l850 cen., so he must be fa of Robert b after l850c."
Actually two flaws. One was the assumption that Robert was born between 1850 and 1860, the other that noone could possibly have entered the State after the 1850 census and still be in contention as the candidate family.
Tweaking the search parameters for Roberts in Michigan born around the same time as his Californian wife (about 1865) brought up what looks like gold.
There, in 1870, is a family of an Isaac and Nellie (actually should be Nettie) DAW, both born England.
My genie radar is fairly finely attuned to mentions of Isaac DAW(E)s of England anywhere in the world. My tree abounds in the blighters. And very hard to distinguish they can be too sometimes.
Luckily this one had a handy death certificate, which only looks to have a couple of small errors - mother's name missing an I (FREND instead of FRIEND), and a couple of years out on a birth date.
BUT it did have the gem of saying that Isaac was born in Tavistock. Which my radar is doubly attuned to in association with DAW(E)s.
Sure enough there was an Isaac Friend DAW being baptized in Tavistock to a John and Mary, and a handy set of banns several years prior showing a John DAW, hatter, marrying a Mary FRIEND.
I was already quite excited by all of this, nothing like the whiff of success and dots being joined.
But who was John?
Luckily for me, unhappily for the family, there was a sad little set of records showing a baptism in 1832 of a Mary Sarah Jane, daughter of "the late John DAW, hatter, and Mary his wife".
Which made it rather easy to spot John's burial record a few months prior.
Same street address as on Mary Sarah Jane's baptism, and an age that placed him as born around 1799. But where? And which John?
Nothing suitable in Tavistock presented itself. So I tried the Whitchurch John, baptized in Oct 1798 - to ......
The next post may reveal all :)
I'm still convincing myself of the dots being joined here.
Saturday, 9 April 2016
Hidden in plain view
I do so love serendipity in genealogy.
Researching to answer a question on a list I monitor, about what may or may not have been possible when downloading family tree data out of FamilySearch* I decided to try using my own tree as the guineapig.
For some reason I chose James TURNBULL, my 2* great grandfather.
No idea why, I've not recently been working on the family at all.
If I had been, what I found might not have been a surprise, as I would have diligently noticed that the gaps in his information may well have been able to be filled long before now :).
A busy beaver (thank you Ellen) had attached an immigration passenger list to James' son James, whom I had assumed to have died in Cumberland prior to their emigration to New Zealand by around 1862/4 ish (according to conflicting death certs for the family).
Not that I'd ever found a satisfactory death entry for him in England.
James, Jane and all four children had departed from Liverpool in April 1862, arriving Melbourne in September.
Son James' 1863 death cert. shows they were living at Geelong, where James was working as a carpenter.
Some 20+ years ago I had painstakingly searched the assisted immigrants into New Zealand for James and Jane and concluded that they were not assisted here by the NZ government.
My excuse for leaving things there was that 20+ years ago records were by no means as easily accessible as now.
It's a poor excuse however as I could easily have subsequently checked the Victoria (Australia) to New Zealand - 1852-1923 migration fiche, which would have shown me Mr James, Mrs James, Robert, Stephen and Ellen all on the "S.S. Tararua" departing Melbourne on the 10 Aug 1866.
Which date is 4 years later than implied by James' 1891 NZ death cert, and 2 years later than that implied by daughter Ellen's.
Where they disembarked however remains to be discovered.
Take your pick! My assumption is Wellington. The next snippet of previously gleaned information was that James was in Tikorangi when son Robert fell from a horse breaking his arm in 1873.
Which I suspect was meant to be Huirangi instead.
This information was definitely worth updating my website for.
James' entry on my webpages is now a little more complete and should shortly be even more so, as I've found that Archway has digitized the Taranaki Land District Primary Deeds Indexes 1856-1998. So instead of heading for Wellington, I'm working my way through assorted books online in the comfort of my own home, checking to see which relative bought, mortgaged or sold which parcel of land, swapping out every so often to the New Plymouth City Council Maps to figure out where each Lot was.
All because of a casual, completely unrelated, enquiry.
*
The query was whether or not a gedcom from FamilySearch FamilyTree was
a) possible,
b) included the Memories and Photos attached.
The short answer being no.
The long answer: https://familysearch.org/ask/salesforce/viewArticle?urlname=GEDCOM-Frequently-Asked-Questions-FAQs&lang=en
But you can use those programs that integrate with the tree, eg RootsMagic and Legacy, to download (or upload) the basic data, just not the Memories and Photos.
Researching to answer a question on a list I monitor, about what may or may not have been possible when downloading family tree data out of FamilySearch* I decided to try using my own tree as the guineapig.
For some reason I chose James TURNBULL, my 2* great grandfather.
No idea why, I've not recently been working on the family at all.
If I had been, what I found might not have been a surprise, as I would have diligently noticed that the gaps in his information may well have been able to be filled long before now :).
A busy beaver (thank you Ellen) had attached an immigration passenger list to James' son James, whom I had assumed to have died in Cumberland prior to their emigration to New Zealand by around 1862/4 ish (according to conflicting death certs for the family).
Not that I'd ever found a satisfactory death entry for him in England.
James, Jane and all four children had departed from Liverpool in April 1862, arriving Melbourne in September.
Son James' 1863 death cert. shows they were living at Geelong, where James was working as a carpenter.
Some 20+ years ago I had painstakingly searched the assisted immigrants into New Zealand for James and Jane and concluded that they were not assisted here by the NZ government.
My excuse for leaving things there was that 20+ years ago records were by no means as easily accessible as now.
It's a poor excuse however as I could easily have subsequently checked the Victoria (Australia) to New Zealand - 1852-1923 migration fiche, which would have shown me Mr James, Mrs James, Robert, Stephen and Ellen all on the "S.S. Tararua" departing Melbourne on the 10 Aug 1866.
Which date is 4 years later than implied by James' 1891 NZ death cert, and 2 years later than that implied by daughter Ellen's.
Where they disembarked however remains to be discovered.
Which I suspect was meant to be Huirangi instead.
This information was definitely worth updating my website for.
James' entry on my webpages is now a little more complete and should shortly be even more so, as I've found that Archway has digitized the Taranaki Land District Primary Deeds Indexes 1856-1998. So instead of heading for Wellington, I'm working my way through assorted books online in the comfort of my own home, checking to see which relative bought, mortgaged or sold which parcel of land, swapping out every so often to the New Plymouth City Council Maps to figure out where each Lot was.
All because of a casual, completely unrelated, enquiry.
*
The query was whether or not a gedcom from FamilySearch FamilyTree was
a) possible,
b) included the Memories and Photos attached.
The short answer being no.
The long answer: https://familysearch.org/ask/salesforce/viewArticle?urlname=GEDCOM-Frequently-Asked-Questions-FAQs&lang=en
But you can use those programs that integrate with the tree, eg RootsMagic and Legacy, to download (or upload) the basic data, just not the Memories and Photos.
Wednesday, 30 March 2016
Not genealogy but...
Only 9 days left for this project to meet its crowd funding target.
Just picture me zooming along the beach !
Tuesday, 1 March 2016
Segment Traceability
Just found a new toy at GEDMatch, not sure how long it has been there, but it is labelled as "new".
What on earth is THAT?
THAT is a pictorial representation of which of the atDNA tested descendants of Archibald HENDERSON and Margaret McEWAN who have uploaded their raw data file(s) from their test to GEDMatch, have matches to each other.
(Archibald and Margaret married in1804 at Stirling, Archibald being one of my brickwalls.)
The associated data and generational estimates between the matches are shown on the DNASurnames HENDERSON FamilyFinder page.
Other than being a pretty picture, the generation estimate table very quickly shows the randomness of atDNA inheritance and how many of the descendants shown did not inherit any significantly sized segments from Archibald & Margaret that also matched another tested descendant.
Now if the others tested would only upload to GEDmatch as well, we'd have a more complete picture - as well an ability to place several more of our matches who tested at other companies, or come in below the FamilyTreeDNA thresholds.
THAT is a pictorial representation of which of the atDNA tested descendants of Archibald HENDERSON and Margaret McEWAN who have uploaded their raw data file(s) from their test to GEDMatch, have matches to each other.
(Archibald and Margaret married in1804 at Stirling, Archibald being one of my brickwalls.)
The associated data and generational estimates between the matches are shown on the DNASurnames HENDERSON FamilyFinder page.
Other than being a pretty picture, the generation estimate table very quickly shows the randomness of atDNA inheritance and how many of the descendants shown did not inherit any significantly sized segments from Archibald & Margaret that also matched another tested descendant.
Now if the others tested would only upload to GEDmatch as well, we'd have a more complete picture - as well an ability to place several more of our matches who tested at other companies, or come in below the FamilyTreeDNA thresholds.
Sunday, 21 February 2016
BINGO
For quite some years I've been trying to determine the fate of William the brother of my 2* great grandfather James HENDERSON. They were the sons of Archibald, a smith at the Bridge of Allan, Stirlingshire. who sprang into existence from apparently nowhere in time to be paid for smithing work in the Stirling of Keir estates and to marry in 1804 to Margaret McEWAN.
Back in 1994 a researcher in Australia contacted one of my cousins about her husband's ancestor William HENDERSON, who had married a Margaret SINCLAIR, and whose family had emigrated to Australia.
The data shown was, however, that for a different HENDERSON family back up the chain.
Time passed.
A couple of years ago I got more stubborn about trying to find any signs of "my" William having survived beyond his baptism and found a smith at the Bridge of Allan with a wife Margaret that just "felt right" - you know how it is when you get a feeling about a family, even if you can't find proof :)
As I dug away discovering his family I was reminded of the 1994 letter, dug it out, and sure enough, the descendants matched but the parents given for William didn't.
Back at Christmas time Diane contacted me about this family on WikiTree, kindly providing some modern day updates.
But even better, her husband was willing to humour me in seeing if we could prove his ancestor William was indeed brother of my James.
No Y-DNA candidates appear to be available so we used atDNA with our fingers firmly crossed that even though the odds of a specific pair of 4th cousins actually turning up a detectable atDNA match were only 50%.
With all the HENDERSON kits we have on file, surely one would match?
Results are just in.
Given the subject line of this post, I think you already know the outcome!
We have significant matches with one descendant of William and James' sister Margaret, and 8 significant segment matches with 7 descendants of my James (including to me).
I think I've definitely found William.
(I don't yet know if the tree of our 1994 correspondent has changed tack over the years)
The HENDERSON chromosome map will be updated shortly (to also include results from another of James' descendants)
Back in 1994 a researcher in Australia contacted one of my cousins about her husband's ancestor William HENDERSON, who had married a Margaret SINCLAIR, and whose family had emigrated to Australia.
The data shown was, however, that for a different HENDERSON family back up the chain.
Time passed.
A couple of years ago I got more stubborn about trying to find any signs of "my" William having survived beyond his baptism and found a smith at the Bridge of Allan with a wife Margaret that just "felt right" - you know how it is when you get a feeling about a family, even if you can't find proof :)
As I dug away discovering his family I was reminded of the 1994 letter, dug it out, and sure enough, the descendants matched but the parents given for William didn't.
Back at Christmas time Diane contacted me about this family on WikiTree, kindly providing some modern day updates.
But even better, her husband was willing to humour me in seeing if we could prove his ancestor William was indeed brother of my James.
No Y-DNA candidates appear to be available so we used atDNA with our fingers firmly crossed that even though the odds of a specific pair of 4th cousins actually turning up a detectable atDNA match were only 50%.
With all the HENDERSON kits we have on file, surely one would match?
Results are just in.
Given the subject line of this post, I think you already know the outcome!
We have significant matches with one descendant of William and James' sister Margaret, and 8 significant segment matches with 7 descendants of my James (including to me).
I think I've definitely found William.
(I don't yet know if the tree of our 1994 correspondent has changed tack over the years)
The HENDERSON chromosome map will be updated shortly (to also include results from another of James' descendants)
Thursday, 18 February 2016
GPS
I had the privilege of hearing Judy RUSSELL, the Legal Genealogist speak in Wellington today.
Two talks, one on DNA, the other on using circumstantial evidence to piece together families when records are not available.
No, the latter wasn't a fairy story, but evidence of what must have been a very persistent, long search piecing together scraps of this and that to form the family involved.
It made frequent reference to the Genealogical Proof Standard, which reminded me of her post from 2014 (http://www.legalgenealogist.com/blog/2014/11/03/just-a-little-book/).
It was good to actually meet Judy - one of her 3rd cousins is one of my closest non known family DNA matches - which must mean that one or t'other side of this match has cousin marriages somewhere, or we have a larger than normal long lasting segment of DNA. Our respective trees have no obvious connection yet at all.
Two talks, one on DNA, the other on using circumstantial evidence to piece together families when records are not available.
No, the latter wasn't a fairy story, but evidence of what must have been a very persistent, long search piecing together scraps of this and that to form the family involved.
It made frequent reference to the Genealogical Proof Standard, which reminded me of her post from 2014 (http://www.legalgenealogist.com/blog/2014/11/03/just-a-little-book/).
It was good to actually meet Judy - one of her 3rd cousins is one of my closest non known family DNA matches - which must mean that one or t'other side of this match has cousin marriages somewhere, or we have a larger than normal long lasting segment of DNA. Our respective trees have no obvious connection yet at all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
