tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-46915523226950704952024-02-20T08:02:29.437-06:00Genealogy for the EverymanIt's not easy tracing one's lineage. There are more questions than answers, and a slew of dead ends. But when you get past the hurdles, the experience is one of the most rewarding you can ever have. This blog chronicles my own search, lists my favorite (and least favorite) finds and links, and much more.Rhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.comBlogger74125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4691552322695070495.post-39470497186454663022014-03-31T18:57:00.005-05:002014-03-31T19:19:40.333-05:00Correct vs IncorrectI often pull topics for my blog from genealogy pages and groups. Whatever question is most often found for the week is the question I will try to answer. About a month ago, the question became "How do I do this right?" People were asking how to rate a source to determine it's accuracy, how to cite their sources, how to create research notes, how to make family charts.......... but it was all about doing it "right". Often, I answered the query as honestly as I could based on genealogical standards and personal preferences. Then someone else would come along and accuse me of being the Genealogy Police and saying I had no right to tell people how to handle their family history. Every. Single. Time.<br />
<br />
Did they not notice the original question was asking how to do this right?<br />
<br />
In the end, I came to the conclusion that I would devote more time to breaking down records and showing people what facts were available and how to source those records for themselves and others. Between the online conversations and a few tutoring opportunities (including teaching an aunt how to research for adoptees), I realised the new direction I wanted to take with my blog was going to be important for many who were just starting out or wanting to take genealogy more seriously. And that others would think that I was talking down to or otherwise insulting people "doing their own thing." So before I start my new format, I want to take a post to explain why there is a correct way of doing things and an incorrect way.<br />
<br />
Now, in reality, there is only one truly incorrect way in genealogy: Clickophilia. If you start building your tree by turning off your brain, you're doing it wrong. Genealogy is "the study of generations" and does require your mental engagement in order to be successful. Whether that means you're going to draw your tree on the wall with crayons or write it out in a ten volume book set including glossy photos and detailed bibliography doesn't matter as long as you are willing to put on your thinking helmet. If your entire tree is made out of blindly clicking on leaf hints on Ancestry.com, uploading and merging other family member's Gedcom files, and entering in compiled genealogy books you find in the library (or more likely, Google Books), you are doing this wrong. So very wrong. But what is the "right" way? There is no *one* right way. There are no genealogy laws, so there are no Genealogy Police............. but there are genealogy software programs.<br />
<br />
Now, I've said before, if you're going to have a paper research format, or keep your online work private, go ahead and add undocumented lines or links to Adam and Eve (or Odin or Hercules). You don't need to take research notes or write down your sources if you don't want to. I mean, you'll end up with loads of mistakes and no way to know if you looked at this record or that one, but that's your deal. When you collaborate with others, however, there is the unspoken agreement that you are both trying to be as accurate as possible. The other person won't grill you on your sources, but it's good to be prepared to give them as proof of your conclusions. Despite the connotations some would give it, a genealogist gets used to crafting a "Proof Argument". Basically, it's "I've found these records that prove my theory that X person lived in Y place and married Z person with these kids. I've also considered these records, but they can't be X person due to such and such reasonable doubt." The sources don't have to presented in MLA format and the argument doesn't have to be written out like a thesis. But when I talk about my grandfather being born in Morganfield Kentucky, I can "prove" that with his birth record, 1930 and 1940 U.S. censuses, World War II enlistment form, and SS5. I can argue that a similarly named fellow living at the same time in Arkansas is *not* my grandfather, because that man's death record doesn't have the same parents listed as the records I've found for my grandfather. That man's census records don't intersect with the rest of grandpa's family, and is miles away from any place he ever lived. But if I didn't have those sources, if I didn't craft a compelling argument, another cousin who only knew grandpa lived in Arkansas when he died may mistakenly believe this other man is our grandfather and start clicking away. They'd have to seriously shut off their brain, but it happens.<br />
<br />
And that's the point: people have to shut off their brains to make a mistake and perpetuate it to others. Computers don't have brains. Remember the old adage "Garbage in, garbage out". If you're getting wild hints for an ancestor, it could be the algorithm pulling up records based on part but not all of your information in an attempt to find you records............. but it's more likely that a relative has connected that record to your ancestor in *their* tree and the computer system is giving weight to the record based on their attachment. Computer systems are built on the information that humans give them. Which is important to remember when crafting a search, too. How someone decided to index a record can affect how it shows in a search. If women are indexed with their maiden name, and you don't know it, having listed them in your tree with their married name won't help you. If an ancestor was born in, say, Orange County NC, but the part of the county he lived in became Caswell County by the time he died, you may be able to search for his death in Caswell and find it easily, but there won't be a birth record for him there! On the other hand, if you're using the system's mapping tools, those are based on today's landscape........ so listing his birthplace as Orange County will make it look like he moved when he didn't. Or if his town/county no longer exists, the map won't know where to pin him down. If you don't know a first name or a surname and you add characters like ? or * to indicate that, you could be using the search tool's wildcard characters by mistake and now come up with completely different results versus leaving the field blank. And while I'd like to agree with people who say that a couple that never married should never be listed as each other's "spouse", I've had unmarried couples identify each other as "spouse" in a record (for whatever purpose) and be indexed as such. Not having their profiles attached simply because I don't want to identify them as "spouse" means their names won't be included in a general search for each other and I may miss the very record I'm looking for. The computer system may ignore the record and not return it at all, or it may have it 10 pages in because it isn't weighted higher in the algorithm.<br />
<br />
Search algorithms........ a computer programmer sat down and decided what fields would be included, and how close to the data input a record needs to be in order to be included. Without getting too technical, each field gets a score range and results are "weighted" based on score ranges. If I look for John Smith, I could get returns for John Cooper and Rob Smith just as much as I get John Smith. If I look for John Smith in Virginia, my first results should/could be for John Smith in Virginia, but could also be John Cooper in Virginia and John Smith in Maryland. If I look for John Smith born in 1940 Virginia, I get that and John Cooper born 1940 in Virginia, John Smith born 1900 in Virginia, John Smith born 1940 in Carolina............... with the most matched fields coming up to the top. And what I attach to my John Smith affects other John Smith searches (think of how Google will bring popular websites to the first page of search results). If a person is attached to me via Ancestry's Member Connect, that is taken into account by the system and the computer shows first what I've attached to our common ancestor. If 100 people attach the same photo to the same/similar John Smith, then that is ranked higher in the algorithm than the 1 person who attached the right photo to *my* John Smith (which I find on page 3 if I am willing to click through).<br />
<br />
To better illustrate this: John Kemper of Fauquier County Virginia, born 1692 in Germany, died abt. 1758 in Virginia, married abt. 1716 to Ailsey Utterbach. Several hundred trees on Ancestry can be found. Hundreds of descendants connect to him. He's my favorite. His wife is alternatively listed as Alice or Alce, Otterback or Otterbach or Utterback. We all agree this is the same person and we attach the same familiar 9 records. One day...... or rather, one week, I decided to do a full search of Ancestry. The results were 70,000+ even with all the information I have available on him. Were there really only 9 real hits for this man in all of those 70,000? I made it about halfway through the results, I admit it. But I found 70 more entries for John Kemper than anyone else had attached to their tree. Many of them were genealogies of other surnames that connected to him via a child, but still. So now, when my aunt searches John Kemper with the same information, instead of the hundreds of descendants who couldn't think of a better name coming up first, she gets more of these lesser known hits. And the next cousin sees them higher up on the list because my aunt and I have attached them. And the cousin who's connected via Member Connect doesn't have to do a search because the system sends them an alert that we've attached the record first.............. and so on. But of those hundreds of trees, at least half of them have added census and land records for John Kemper II to his father John (I told you they had no imagination). So while the correct records are out there, census records are weighted very high and many will blindly connect to them. Now, those of you who have your thinking caps on are already aware that John Kemper d. 1758 couldn't possibly be listed in the first U.S. census of 1790. And while it may make sense to believe John had land, digging into the records would indicate he wasn't legally eligible to own land and records stating he lived on land owned by his son back this up. But the land records are only indexed online, so people see the name and the location and click click click............ <br />
<br />
<br />
So for the sake of the computer systems that know no better, there are some things we must consider a "rule":<br />
- Date format: whether you put the month first or the day first, the month must be SPELLED OUT to avoid confusion. I've gotten so used to putting day first that in my everyday American life, I often confuse the dates my friends and coworkers write down (until the 13th day of a month, I lose my mind). If you don't know the exact date (or can't find documentation of a date for a fact) add Abt. for "about or around", Bef. for "before", and Aft. for "after". A baptismal record isn't proof of birth, so a birth year would be "qualified" by adding Abt. to the year or Bef. added to the date of the baptism. Same philosophy for burial records and censuses. If it doesn't directly describe an event, it isn't concrete proof of a date and qualification must be made.<br />
- Locations: the old genealogy standard is to use the location name as it was at the time the record was made. Go ahead and keep that standard if you wish, but any location service provided by a computer will not put the results where they actually need to go. I use the current location in the field, and the original location in the description. I also put in my research notes a timeline of when the change happened. If you have FTM, you can add events to a general timeline that you can view for your person. It already has world events and will add family events (like the birth of children), so adding one for the change of a county name could help remind you.<br />
- Maiden names: A woman should always be listed in a tree by her maiden name. ALWAYS. If you don't know a maiden name, I recommend leaving it blank. Some say dashes or underscores work for them ( - or _ ) without ruining the search algorithm and keeps them in some kind of order in their name index, and that's fine. But don't use any character that is a wildcard in the search tool! And LNU and MNU shouldn't be used as there are actual surnames Lnu and Mnu. Unknown shouldn't be added as the search tool will try to find that as a surname and when it can't, it will give extra weight to names that start with U or possibly sound like Unknown.<br />
- Unknown first or last name: Like I said, no wildcard characters. If you don't know parents, but want to add siblings you do know, add a father profile with the surname but no first name. That's enough. You don't need to add a mother too, so there's no reason I should be getting tree hints for John being married to Unknown Unknown or my personal favorite: Mother MNU.<br />
- Cite your sources!: When you attach a record from the search tool to your tree, Ancestry does the citing for you. Same with any tree service that also provides a search tool: you find the record and attach it to the profile, the company makes the link for you. But if you find records on one site and transfer the information to your tree on another site (or on paper/computer program if you aren't an online tree person), then you have to make some kind of citation for that source. WHY? First for yourself: if you know where you've looked, you won't look there again. And for others: you can save someone else a step. You don't have to put up images of a document you paid money for, or just hand over your research to complete strangers, but giving at least a citation of "found this death record on Missouri's Digital Heritage collection" could be enough to keep someone going. How detailed you make that citation is up to you (and I'll give you a couple of alternative citations in my upcoming records series).<br />
<br />
There are more ways to create and maintain a family tree than there are flavors of ice cream at Baskin Robbins. But no one walks around with a lump of ice cream in their naked hand.<br />
-AnaRhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4691552322695070495.post-20614910511428591852014-02-24T12:53:00.003-06:002014-02-24T13:04:14.302-06:00Speak to What You KnowSome time ago, a friend of mine directed me to a review online about Ancestry.com. She was amused at the misinformation and misunderstanding from the blogger himself as well as the claims made in the comments by others. Much of what was said were things I had seen a hundred times already and I took it upon myself to comment. I received notifications on occasion that a reply or new comment had been made and I'd go back to it if I felt it warranted another go. After a while, I pretty much gave up on the comments as they all seemed to just want to pat themselves on the back and agree that Ancestry.com was horrible. This weekend another comment was made and it was full of ridiculous statements that only proved that these people continue to not know what is going on or read what has already been said. That the reviewer didn't give the site a fair trial is ignored by these people who seem to believe that all the information they need should be and is somewhere free on the internet "if you look hard enough". So instead of continuing to argue with them on that page, and knowing that there are many who aren't on that review (now very old, like 2010) who spew the same silly things, I thought I'd address the objections here for a moment. I'm going to quote and breakdown the argument from the most recent comment.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: #cc0000; font-family: "Courier New", Courier, monospace;">"</span><span style="color: #cc0000; font-family: "Courier New", Courier, monospace;">The whole setup is a huge earner for many companies as people business, is big business and they are simply cashing in on it.<br /> Firstly, most of the information found in their public records can be found online if you are persistent and know where to look and even a lot of that data is either not precise or incorrect.<br /> The parts that would be of interest to me is the public member trees, photos and scanned documents which of course is only put up by people, these are not official public records and I am not going to pay hundreds of dollars per year just for that, because it`s simply not good value for money.<br /> So in fact </span><a href="http://ancestry.com/" target="_blank"><span style="color: #cc0000; font-family: "Courier New", Courier, monospace;">ancestry.com</span></a><span style="color: #cc0000; font-family: "Courier New", Courier, monospace;"> and their subsidiary companies change a fee to subscribed members to place their data onto their site and others have to pay subscribe in order to access that information, then all the owners do is sit back and watch all the paid subscriptions coming in, or in other words, this racket is a nice little earner. </span><br />
<div style="color: #444444; direction: ltr; font-family: "Helvetica Neue",Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;">
<span style="color: #cc0000; font-family: "Courier New", Courier, monospace;">Also there are probably many of our details on the </span><a href="http://ancestry.com/" target="_blank"><span style="color: #cc0000; font-family: "Courier New", Courier, monospace;">ancestry.com</span></a><span style="color: #cc0000; font-family: "Courier New", Courier, monospace;"> site or as parts of others family trees, without our knowledge and without our permission and if discovered </span><a href="http://ancestry.com/" target="_blank"><span style="color: #cc0000; font-family: "Courier New", Courier, monospace;">ancestry.com</span></a><span style="color: #cc0000; font-family: "Courier New", Courier, monospace;"> gives the complainants a real hard time trying to have the stuff deleted. People can publish a lot of private material about others on </span><a href="http://ancestry.com/" target="_blank"><span style="color: #cc0000; font-family: "Courier New", Courier, monospace;">ancestry.com</span></a><span style="color: #cc0000; font-family: "Courier New", Courier, monospace;"> without permissions or concerns about copyrights as in many cases they are protected under the auspices of these so-called genealogical companies, which means many people unbeknown to them are making contributions to these companies and the only ways to discover if we are listed on their sites is to pay subscribe ourselves. These huge companies are in a win, win situation.</span></div>
<div style="color: #444444; direction: ltr; font-family: "Helvetica Neue",Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;">
<span style="color: #cc0000; font-family: "Courier New", Courier, monospace;">I have no prejudices against any companies making achievements and becoming successful, but my grievances are; is that anyone can place data about anyone on there with virtually no questions asked and I ask; why should I or others have no say with our details being publish on those sites and why should people have to pay subscribe to access information about themselves?"</span></div>
<div style="color: #444444; direction: ltr; font-family: "Helvetica Neue",Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;">
<span style="color: #cc0000; font-family: Courier New;"></span> </div>
<div style="color: #444444; direction: ltr; font-family: "Helvetica Neue",Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;">
<span style="color: black; font-family: inherit;">My responses will be highlighted<span style="color: black;">:</span></span></div>
<span style="color: black; font-family: Times New Roman;"></span><div style="color: #444444; direction: ltr; font-family: "Helvetica Neue",Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Times New Roman;">"Firstly, most of the information found in their public records can be found online if you are persistent and know where to look and even a lot of that data is either not precise or incorrect." <span style="background-color: orange;">Since Ancestry.com compiles records from other repositories, yes you can find many collections elsewhere. Vital records, for instance, but not every state/country provides their own online database. As for the information not being precise or correct, welcome to genealogy, the microfiche is to your left and the pots of coffee for your midnight searches is on the right. Use pencil in your notes, because you'll be making a lot of adjustments to what you "know" as you learn. But please don't ignore the many collections digitised and compiled by Ancestry.com itself and available nowhere else.</span></span><br />
<span style="color: black; font-family: Times New Roman;">"The parts that would be of interest to me is the public member trees, photos and scanned documents which of course is only put up by people, these are not official public records and I am not going to pay hundreds of dollars per year just for that, because it`s simply not good value for money." <span style="background-color: orange;">If anyone is paying hundreds of dollars to take the photos and scanned documents from public member trees, they are wasting their money. Mundia.com allows you to see the same public trees for free. You pay Ancestry.com for the records that are not found elsewhere online or not found elsewhere for free. And if all you do is pull your information from other people's research, no wonder you find so many errors.</span></span><br />
<span style="color: black; font-family: Times New Roman;">"So in fact <a href="http://ancestry.com/" target="_blank"><span style="color: #1155cc;">ancestry.com</span></a> and their subsidiary companies change a fee to subscribed members to place their data onto their site and others have to pay subscribe in order to access that information, then all the owners do is sit back and watch all the paid subscriptions coming in, or in other words, this racket is a nice little earner." <span style="background-color: orange;">Again, you pay for records access, not to steal/borrow/take/collaborate/whatever off a public member's tree. And since you can upload and build a tree for free, subscribers aren't being charged to "place their data onto [Ancestry.com]". You want just public member tree information? Try Mundia.com, same trees, same fluff, no records.</span></span></div>
<span style="color: black; font-family: Times New Roman;">
<div style="color: #444444; direction: ltr; font-family: "Helvetica Neue",Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;">
"Also there are probably many of our details on the <a href="http://ancestry.com/" target="_blank"><span style="color: #1155cc;">ancestry.com</span></a> site or as parts of others family trees, without our knowledge and without our permission and if discovered <a href="http://ancestry.com/" target="_blank"><span style="color: #1155cc;">ancestry.com</span></a> gives the complainants a real hard time trying to have the stuff deleted. People can publish a lot of private material about others on <a href="http://ancestry.com/" target="_blank"><span style="color: #1155cc;">ancestry.com</span></a> without permissions or concerns about copyrights as in many cases they are protected under the auspices of these so-called genealogical companies, which means many people unbeknown to them are making contributions to these companies and the only ways to discover if we are listed on their sites is to pay subscribe ourselves. These huge companies are in a win, win situation."<span style="background-color: orange;"> First, searching is free, it's accessing records that is a charge. You can search yourself out to see if you are listed. As said before, Mundia.com shows public trees, so you can search and view public trees from Ancestry.com for free to see if you've been placed in someone's tree. Second, facts are not copyrighted. The fact that you were born in Oklahoma is not copyrighted and anyone can place a profile of you with that fact on it. Now, a photo of your first birthday taken by your mother is copyrighted by your mother and must have permissions from your mother prior to upload <strong>*if it bothers your mother*</strong> but you have no copyright claim to that photo and cannot request it's removal based on a copyright claim. If you write a story about your life, that story is under copyright, but the facts *inside* that story are not and can be used. Living people are supposed to be private, so if you were to find yourself on a public tree and clearly visible, you can have the profile removed or privatised in the tree as a breach in TOS. This whole paragraph seems to be the commentor's effort to prove how greedy genealogy companies are without actually knowing how they make money or what copyright means.</span></div>
<div style="color: #444444; direction: ltr; font-family: "Helvetica Neue",Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;">
"I have no prejudices against any companies making achievements and becoming successful, but my grievances are; is that anyone can place data about anyone on there with virtually no questions asked and I ask; why should I or others have no say with our details being publish on those sites and why should people have to pay subscribe to access information about themselves?" <span style="background-color: orange;">Just one more paragraph illustrating that this person, much like others who commented, have no idea what genealogy is or how these genealogy sites really work. That they chose Ancestry.com for this particular review doesn't matter. These complaints are out there for every site.</span></div>
</span><br />
<div style="color: #444444; direction: ltr; font-family: "Helvetica Neue",Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">This is just one seemingly rational person making the worst mistakes of assumption about Ancestry.com. I see these same arguments a hundred times a day. Right up there with the charge per month being too much (which is still the cheapest out there and much cheaper than offline research), bashing Mormons (there is some serious misinformation about Mormons and genealogy/Ancestry.com that never goes away), and automatic subscription renewal being unethical (I would seriously love a list of the websites for any service that don't autorenew your subscription). And I'll close this brief rant with two problems I had with the initial review:<br /><br />1. The reviewer never does the 14 day trial, because he won't put in a credit card number. That's all well and good, but it's not a fair trial of the site. He could've gone to the library to use their edition for free. He could've used a prepaid credit card if his worry was protecting his privacy and financial accounts. He could've done as normal people do and tried it out for a day or two and then cancelled the trial prior to charging (saving his cancellation number should a charge go through anyway). I would never accept the review for any product from someone who didn't actually use the product. He doesn't even seem to attempt to check the card catalogue for the hundreds of free databases that could've been of use to him without a subscription. He doesn't even acknowledge they exist.</span></div>
<div style="color: #444444; direction: ltr; font-family: "Helvetica Neue",Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">2. The reviewer seems to think that one day we'll have this large crowd sourced site that will take over for the pay sites. An interesting idea........ that's already been tried. Rootsweb, Geni, Mundia, MyHeritage, and even the one Family Tree on FamilySearch.org all try to put researchers in the driver's seat. And we all know how those user submitted parts of sites do, don't we? (One World Tree ringing any bells?) There is nothing more frustrating or error-ridden than user submitted information without source citation. What I also find confusing is where he and his supporters think all the documents for this crowd source are going to come from. Obviously they believe most of the information available anywhere is completely free if you just search hard enough. But anyone who's done genealogy for even a few months knows how much is payment only, even offline. I may be able to get a free copy of a vital record in many states as long as it's 100 years old or more, but I'm going to have to pay for my grandparents', parents', and my own certificates. And don't get me started with sites like ScotlandsPeople, which I love but have to pay for each search page and each image I want to view on the search page. And while I enjoy sharing my paid research with family so they can save some money, I'm not about to break copyright laws just so complete strangers don't have to pay money. People who believe genealogy should be free seem to ignore how many of the sources we use weren't made for the benefit of genealogists (census, anyone?) and we are lucky they exist! Just because your family is listed doesn't mean you own the records. The cost of housing, digitising, transcribing, indexing, and protecting these sources have to be covered somewhere. And no, </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">not every source of genealogical information is paid for with your tax money since not every source is governmental in origin (baptismal records?). But the reviewer keeps insisting that one day this will be possible. One day we will have a Wikipedia style genealogy site that is totally free and totally user submitted public information.</span></div>
<div style="color: #444444; direction: ltr; font-family: "Helvetica Neue",Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">You have fun with that, Sunshine. I'll pay to actually get somewhere in my research.</span></div>
<div style="color: #444444; direction: ltr; font-family: "Helvetica Neue",Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">-Ana</span></div>
<div style="color: #444444; direction: ltr; font-family: "Helvetica Neue",Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; line-height: 1.4em; margin: 0px 0px 1em;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">(I considered not linking to the review so as to not give this man more traffic, but I thought others should have as much fun as I have: </span><a href="http://shoutsfromtheabyss.wordpress.com/2010/03/18/ancestry-com-can-eat-my-ass/"><span style="font-family: inherit;">http://shoutsfromtheabyss.wordpress.com/2010/03/18/ancestry-com-can-eat-my-ass/</span></a><span style="font-family: inherit;"> )</span></div>
Rhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4691552322695070495.post-38714550797278581952014-02-17T11:14:00.001-06:002014-02-17T11:14:27.170-06:00More Than One Road to RoamIt happens in every skill: you reach the level of expertise that you forget the basics. Trying to explain to a beginner how to start isn't as easy as it used to be. You do the first steps by instinct more than conscious action. Math teachers were hounding us as children to "show the work", because they wanted to make sure we had the fundamentals clearly in hand. Sometimes you found a faster route; other times you just "knew" the answer. When you have to split a restaurant bill between your friends, do you pull out a pencil and do it longhand or do you figure it quickly in your head? This is why professionals and enthusiasts in every hobby will recommend a frequent and regular refresher on the very basic rules of any endeavor. Genealogy is no exception. Once you've gotten your tree on a healthy growth spurt, you just "know" what the next steps will be. You know what paths to take in your research even when the evidence isn't conclusive. Explaining either the conclusion or the road you travelled to anyone else is made difficult because you've forgotten how to "show the work". And when you forget the starting steps, you can sometimes get into a rut of which road you take.<br />
<br />
One of the most popular ruts is the census. For most people, outside of interviewing family, this is the first document one will try to find. It's a good document! Every 10 years, family names and relationships, occupations, birth years and locations...... lots of information. A snapshot of your family unit. But some people become so blinded by the need to find a census, that when one is not available (1890 US census, anyone?), they are at a loss for next steps. Their usual route is washed out and they're lost in the woods. So they relearn the need to look at siblings and neighbors for clues. They need reminding to review city directories, newspapers, military history, land deeds, or occupation. They know of the other records, to be sure. But they are used to a different starting point, so starting somewhere else is too foreign a concept. It takes a minute to readjust.<br />
<br />
My own personal genealogy has seen a boom in activity thanks to new digitised records (one less trek in the snow!!!), DNA tests, and more receptive family. I've never pestered any family member to share information and always believed that was the best way to go about it. I want people to feel comfortable talking to me, not feel interrogated. But I'm always excited to find someone finally willing to open up. Until we start talking and they can't remember names or dates. Or they leave things out, because they don't think it's "important" and I spend two hours prying stories out of them to hopefully glean some sort of fact out of it all. My fiance, who has done research for his lines but never really gotten the "genealogy bug", is slowly sharing what he knows. Suddenly I've got a new to me country with new to me relatives. And I've got new to me hurdles.<br />
<br />
You see, my fiance is British. His family is English and Welsh. I've got a lot to learn about what I can find long distance and what I need local access to work. I need to work around a 100 year privacy law and an ocean. And I need to start at the beginning. He was smart enough to ask relatives for their information and share what he had already researched. I am smart enough to take this unsourced information and verify. As I worked on the information, I often found myself texting or calling my fiance to ask for clarification. Having already done the work, he was giving me a lot of conclusions without the show.......... which meant we had some problems remembering how we got where we did.<br />
<br />
Just part of the conversation:<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #38761d;">N: So grandpa Ken, what have you found out?<br /><br />A: Ken? Your mom's dad.</span></strong><br />
<strong><span style="color: #38761d;"></span></strong><br />
<strong><span style="color: #38761d;">N: Yeah, Kenneth. Mum's dad. He was nice. (family story time)</span></strong><br />
<strong><span style="color: #38761d;"></span></strong><br />
<strong><span style="color: #38761d;">A: Okay, when did he die? When was he born? When did he marry your grandmother? Was your mom their first kid?<br /><br />N: (to all of them) Dunno. Can't remember.</span></strong><br />
<strong><span style="color: #38761d;"></span></strong><br />
<strong><span style="color: #38761d;">A: Okay....... um, how old were you when he died?<br /><br />N: 11 or 12 I think. Grandma moved. (New family story time)</span></strong><br />
<strong><span style="color: #38761d;"></span></strong><br />
<strong><span style="color: #38761d;">A: Oh? Moved to where?<br /><br />N: I dunno....... they used to live in .......</span></strong><br />
<strong><span style="color: #38761d;"></span></strong><br />
<strong><span style="color: #38761d;">A: Okay, I have a Kenneth James who died '88 in that town. Maybe?<br /><br />N: I dunno. You're the genealogist.<br /><br />A: Good thing I love you.</span></strong><br />
<br />
Now I'll use this to illustrate my point (thank goodness, right?). I work backwards, so first I want to know when Ken died. My fiance couldn't remember exactly, but he was there. Okay, so I can either ask if he remembers how old grandpa was or if he remembers how old he was. Adding in the little tidbit about where he remembered visiting grandpa and where grandma moved to after his death helped me narrow down where he possibly died. Being a recent death, my access is limited to an index, so without a little bit of information, I would never be sure who was *my* Ken and who wasn't. For those of us who've gotten into that rut of research, we could give up. We could start aimlessly looking for his birth record instead. Or maybe I could hope to recognise his name in a census. But the last UK census released was the 1911 census......... would Ken even be old enough to be on it? He wasn't. Thankfully, Ken died where he lived so I was able to get his birthdate on the death index. Sadly, he wasn't born there. So how to know which birth record was his? The index available to me would show his name, his mother's maiden name, location of birth, and the quarter of the year he was born in. Was that enough? No! The index doesn't even narrow down male and female..... what if his name is misspelled? What if he's actually James Kenneth, not Kenneth James? It didn't specify month nor day of birth. No father's information! And I didn't have his mother's name, so how would I know which maiden name was hers?<br />
<br />
After we get "good" at genealogy, it's actually very easy for us to fall into what is usually a "newbie" mistake: attaching records that are close enough without researching them. There was a birth close to his death location..... I could add that one and assume his family didn't move far. Or, I could make a map. I took each maiden name and searched for marriage records. I found the names of the husband/wife and where they were married. I then found them in the 1911 census (alone or married). I then tried to find their death index entry. I could now see who had moved and who had stayed put. Couple #1 never left Yorkshire, already had tons of kids by 1911, and didn't fit Ken's life (spent mostly around London). Couple #2 wasn't too far outside Kent, but never left their little town either. Couple #3, however, started south of London, and moved slowly North and West to where Ken ended up living most of his adult life. I was pretty sure I had the right folks. I also searched birth entries for other children with that mother's maiden name and was able to find possible siblings who were born either where Ken was born or where Ken lived later in life. I've tasked my fiance with original records gathering, but I feel that the initial work is good.<br />
<br />
I'm also really excited by all this research. My family has mostly been in the US for hundreds of years. My last immigrant ancestor is from Scotland. Something like England, but not the same. I am feeling the thrill of being a new researcher again. I am not only having to learn about his family's life, but my fiance's country as well. I mean, I've learned the basics to be sure. But now I've got to really understand the county lines, the privacy rules, the records available, the records lost, wars fought, illnesses suffered......... I'm at the beginning of the beginning all over again. I can do US research in my sleep. I am fairly good at Scottish research. But England? And Wales? Please. Fish out of water time, my friend. Suddenly, I'm attacking history books. I'm searching out wiki pages. I'm rewatching old videos from Crista Cowan's learning series. I love Crista. I watch all her videos, even when I don't need that specific topic. At least I think I don't. But I usually get reminded about a little trick that will help me in my regular work. Or I later remember that I saw a video that will help me with my new work. Like this new venue of family research. Crista has videos dealing with how to use UK records and next steps. Some of the tricks are the same the world over, but other's aren't. My fiance did ask me why I wasn't done yet and I just laughed. When I told him it wasn't the same kind of research, he said, "sure it is." No, it isn't.<br />
<br />
Every branch is a new journey with an old friend.<br />
-AnaRhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4691552322695070495.post-87020346220761492352014-02-10T21:51:00.001-06:002014-02-10T21:51:51.441-06:00Passive Research<strong><span style="background-color: white; color: #45818e; font-size: large;">"Hey, ya'll. Looking for my <relative>. He was born <date> and died <date>, I think, but not sure. Thanks!"<br /><br />"Looking for relatives of <chain of surnames>! If you are related, or know someone who is, pm me!"<br /><br />"<random person's full name and vital statistics>"</span></strong><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEitHnLBJwsCn2YBCBuoBoQVFXDL_XuOP1FTjmwSCzQUfcZl3mKbgX70x9x6qMuCRV0wGMMV3uf9r5Y1wWBVT7lxoTGgJrZ6P-evOFDo1j0FAnE7homA2YWzawYp3ZkIYnp7gg9DX4Kjgf2N/s1600/chip.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEitHnLBJwsCn2YBCBuoBoQVFXDL_XuOP1FTjmwSCzQUfcZl3mKbgX70x9x6qMuCRV0wGMMV3uf9r5Y1wWBVT7lxoTGgJrZ6P-evOFDo1j0FAnE7homA2YWzawYp3ZkIYnp7gg9DX4Kjgf2N/s1600/chip.JPG" height="320" width="239" /></a></div>
I'm sure we've all seen the half dozen or more daily posts like these. What are they hoping will happen? Some random post on a random page on a random website is going to be seen by someone who is related to them and then they'll message the OP to share years worth of research and photos? I'm sorry, not "share". They are looking for people to "give" information, because they don't have a lot to go on themselves. They want someone else to break the brick wall by already having the missing information and recognising the random name thrown out there. If we're lucky, they post this on a forum where people can see it years after it's creation when there's been enough work done to make the connection. But we're not that lucky, are we? It's usually posted like spammy flotsam on Facebook pages that aren't searchable or groups where the topics move fast. Sometimes you get to play the game of "Where Do You Think You Are?" as the request is nested as a comment to someone else's unrelated thread. Most of the time, there's not even enough in the request to try to help the poster find relatives. Other times, you point out how the post will be lost within a day or two. They respond that they had to take a shot in the dark. It's not a shot in the dark, it's lazy nongenealogy.<br />
<br />
What is genealogy? It's the study of generations. It is the personal history of your family. Your effort determines your outcome. Want to just interview living family and work with hearsay? Fine. You won't get too far back, but you'll be well informed on recent additions to the branches. You want to only work with online databases? I get that. Some folks don't have the luxury of traveling to research. However, you hinder the depth of your research and install your own brick walls when local laws keep the documents you need offline. You want to work diligently on records and what you can prove via real documentation (on and offline) and aren't interested in connecting with all the distant cousins you have that are also researching? Okay, maybe you trust only what you can find or aren't very good talking to others. It's still solid research. On the other hand, a second set of eyes or someone to bounce ideas off of can help you work when faced with the absence of definitive records.<br />
<br />
But if your plan includes just throwing out a handful of names and dates and "hoping" someone will stumble along and want to compare notes, GTFO. You aren't doing genealogy. You're expecting someone to do genealogy and give you the results of their efforts. More than that, you want it free. Free of money or effort spent on your part. I have a public tree. I put as much documentation I can on it. I share photos, albeit watermarked to protect my photo from being misused. I cite on my online tree other sources I use so people can find the same information or just ask me for a copy of the document they now know I have. I have no problem with people contacting me and asking for watermark free images of better quality on photos and documents I've already found. I have no problem sending my entire tree in a Gedcom to someone so they can quickly add it to their own work. I keep purchased documents offline to protect the rights of the archive I got them from, but I share them freely with anyone who asks me for them. I don't even care if I have more than the requestor does information wise. Heck, there are times when I'm the one at a loss and I am always grateful for those who can fill in a few blanks. These people are working on their tree and happened across information that led to them finding me, whether it was an old forum post, Ancestry's member connect, or my name on a Google search. What really gets my tights in a twist is the idea that out there is someone just waiting for me to come across a random request and give them what I have. They aren't looking for the information I have readily available on Ancestry.com, FamilySearch.org, Geni.com, MyHeritage.com, Genforum.com, or half a dozen files in Facebook groups. No. Not only do I have to find the information about our common ancestor, I have to find the person and contact them. I have to say, "Here! Here is my work! I'm so glad I finally found you, because all this effort has finally paid off as I can now hand you the whole of my knowledge that I was sure someone was wanting but not participating in looking for!" I can't get my own father interested in genealogy for more than 5 minutes straight, but I'm going to be so relieved when a complete stranger shoots off the shortest, laziest missive they can on a public internet page.<br />
<br />
/rant<br />
AnaRhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4691552322695070495.post-81740464980094892742014-01-20T08:25:00.000-06:002014-01-20T08:25:12.654-06:00You've Got It So Wrong, You Don't Want To Be RightThere comes a time in every life when we have to admit we made a mistake. Some errors are "small". Transposition of numbers in a birth year (how did 1795 become 1975?), and we don't even break a sweat. What really keeps us up at night are those mistaken identities. You know the ones. Only a few generations back, you have the wrong person. And after that wrong person, you've gone back several generations more. You've added their "aunts" and "uncles" and second cousins........ to remove this person means an entire entourage needs to go too. To make matters worse, this wrong person is also your link to that famous or infamous relative you just love to show off. Ugh. When this happens, there's usually one of two camps you'll land in: The Pronials or the Blangers.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #8e7cc3; font-size: large;">Pronial</span></strong><br />
<br />
What makes you a Pronial? You'd rather rip out your own eyeballs than have to delete each person out of your tree one by one, so you ignore that mistake "for now". You know you have something to fix, but it's on that "unimportant" line. I mean, you've just found some really great info about your mother's father's 2nd great uncle! You will get back to fixing this. It's just going to be so much work. And work isn't fun. Genealogy is fun, dang it! When you're ready for the not fun part of genealogy, you'll clear this whole thing up. Promise.<br />
<br />
How long can you put it off? Forever!!!!! As long as no one points it out. Then comes the defensive, "yeah I know, but I've not had time to fix it." You've had time. Just no motivation. Some people are so ensconced in this Pronial culture that they'd rather take their tree private so other people can't find the mistake rather than fix it! There's just so much to do........ anywhere else but on that line. You'll even *gasp* stop working on your tree and do housework instead! But every day you don't repair this mistake, the true relatives aren't found. Every week that passes is one less week you have to find them. Soon enough, you'll get confused and frustrated with your work. You'll avoid challenging yourself by fixing this error and it will fester. A dead limb on an otherwise vibrant tree.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: #8e7cc3; font-size: large;"><strong>Blanger</strong></span><br />
<span style="color: black;"></span><br />
The Blanger takes no responsibility for the mistake. They've used other people's research. They can't afford to get a copy of the original, so they had to make a best guess from the index. They may have even paid someone else to do it, so how dare you suggest the mistake is theirs! What about all these other people that have the same information? Huh? Are you going to <em>hound</em> the others as much as this one person??? How dare you criticise their work! You must be an unemployed fat loser with lots of time on your hands that you use only to tear other people down. For shame! It's their tree and if you don't like it, then just don't look at it! That's it, if you won't leave them alone, then you are <strong>blocked.</strong><br />
<br />
Is anyone else's left arm going numb? Seriously, what is with the rage? A mistaken ancestor isn't going to bring about a nuclear war or kill puppies. It isn't a critique of you as a person for someone else to point out the mistake. It's not a big deal. But Blangers think it is a very big deal. And it's someone else's fault! Unless another person has access to your tree and is randomly inserting people without your knowledge, then how is someone else to blame? Even if you have invited a crazy realtive to your tree who is desperately (and incorrectly) trying to connect you to the House of Stuart, doesn't mean you can't just go fix it. And what is with the blocking? I see people on the groups and forums saying, "Just block them and don't worry about it." Really? Because if you ignore them, the mistake goes away? Unless someone is threatening you with bodily harm or calling you names, there's no reason to start blocking people. Keep in mind, disagreement isn't bullying, it's a healthy exchange of ideas.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #674ea7; font-size: large;">You're wrong today, You're wrong tomorrow</span></strong><br />
<span style="color: black;"></span><br />
One thing I have noticed from the folks completely unwilling to even consider the errors in their tree is a knee-jerk reaction that this one error calls into question their entire tree. Rarely is this true. Yes, you will now have to erase (or at least call into question) a portion of your tree. But isn't it the thrill of the hunt that drives us? Instead of imagining all the work you're going to have to put into fixing this problem, how about focusing on how you'll feel when you finally know the right answer? It's not actually about the error, is it? It's about admitting you're wrong. I know, it's hard. We all struggle with the skill of admitting our mistakes. Even I can first take a defensive posture on a discussion if it calls into question any "fact" I believe in firmly. Sometimes I've dug in too hard and come out with egg on my face.<br />
<br />
Which is why I've learned to take a "question everything" approach. If I haven't seen it with my own eyes, I now qualify any statement to include "supposedly", "according to", "so I've heard", or some variation. If I wasn't a witness, I question the sources about their reliability. Were they there? Did they hear it from someone else? Is it written or oral history? Do separate independent witnesses confirm the report? And this goes well beyond genealogy. I'll rarely share a Facebook post without checking two or more hoax sites to make sure I'm not perpetuating a lie (much to my trigger-happy friends' dismay). I don't spread celebrity gossip. And I sure as heck wheel away from political or religious debates. Seriously, those last two are no-wins. I may point out a falsehood or misconception, but I love my friends and family enough to stop short of shaking the pillars of their faith. Forget about getting me to talk about ongoing criminal investigations. Police and lawyers don't make every discovery public, so unless I'm on the jury, it makes no nevermind to me. I can't tell you the number of times my dad and I will start talking about an actor only for both of us to stop and head to IMDB to "settle it". The point is, if you can't back up an assertion with consistent evidence, then there's no solid footing to stand your ground when conflicting stories come to light.<br />
<br />
In genealogy, you won't always be able to prove definitively the facts that make up your tree. Sometimes it will be an absence of evidence that speaks volumes. Because your case may be best made by circumstantial evidence, the most important phrase for many genealogists can be "a thorough and reasonably exhaustive search". Before you make any "solid" claim about any ancestor, ask yourself if you've made a thorough and exhaustive search. If someone comes around saying you've got it wrong, consider their evidence. Did you review those materials and dismissed them due to overwhelming evidence in another direction? Or have you never seen them before? Does the other person even have evidence to the contrary of your case? And what is a thorough and exhaustive search? It's all about available records. Have you looked for all census records, birth certificates, death notices, land grants, newspaper articles, etc. that could possibly exist for the relative in question? Online only research isn't thorough or exhaustive. Censuses used as the only residence evidence isn't thorough or exhaustive. And while I appreciate volunteer researchers (and count myself among them), I question the exhaustiveness of any research I haven't done myself, especially if I'm not paying for it. Research I pay for has to come with evidence of where the person has looked, even if nothing was found, in order to prove the thoroughness of the research (or at least should if the researcher is worth their salt). A volunteer usually just plugs the names and dates you give them into a database and pulls the best match for you. Not always wrong, but there's going to be that possibility that one of the other matches is better. My biggest peeve on the volunteer front is when a person requests information on a relative and all they give is a name, no dates or locations, but volunteers start flooding them with "possible" record matches. It's so easy to get it wrong in such a situation. And when your less than exhaustive research proves to bear poisoned fruit, it's not the volunteer that chokes on it.<br />
<br />
There are many many times in my own research that I've been wrong. I may still be wrong on some maiden names that are proving to be my brickwalls. If someone comes along who can tell me what the right name is, and can provide even a small amount of evidence to support their claim, then it's time to consider it. I know that my so-called "brickwall" in my maternal line is due to a less than thorough search. But I either have to pay a local researcher or make a research trip as the information isn't available online. And I am a total "thrill of the hunt" genealogist. I'll wait til I can look for myself, thank you. But if a relative comes along who says, "hey, I have that information as I've already made that trip," I'm not going to look in that gift horse's mouth, even if the trip proves I'm on the wrong path.<br />
<br />
I will pretend my grandmother is right behind me and accept these clues with grace.<br />
-AnaRhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4691552322695070495.post-73061297637917062682014-01-13T02:09:00.001-06:002014-01-13T02:19:21.210-06:00Oh the Games We PlayWell, hello there! Thanks to some professional endeavors, personal genealogy triumphs, holiday parties, and the general malaise of writer's block, it's been a while. As I start this new year with new energy for my work and research, I dive back into my blog with hope of new exciting topics to propel us further in our shared passion for genealogy! Now, if you're like me, you've spent a great deal of your holiday season with family, talking about family, sharing stories about family........ boring your family to tears with genealogy. I honestly can't remember the last time I didn't "genealogify" a conversation. At my father's Christmas dinner, I became acutely aware of just how much I had talked about the family tree or the family history discoveries of my friends. I also found myself nearly cutting my tongue in two biting down to keep from "correcting" a relative who insisted we were royalty or that their aunt had traced their other side's native history in a weekend. It was a bit disheartening to think that, as of now, I have no young successor in my immediate family to receive the benefit of my research. My younger cousins haven't built the skill set needed to patiently research, nor the enthusiasm for family. I also realised that my research was beginning to feel more like a chore I <strong>had</strong> to do, rather than the fun game of "hide and seek" I'd always enjoyed.<br />
<br />
That's what I was missing. The fun of a game. Suddenly, I lit upon a new idea. When I was a child, the family get-togethers often included board games. A great deal of my favorite family stories start with "So there we were in the middle of the most intense Monopoly game of the century...." or end with "...then your uncle accused your father and aunt of conspiracy, vowed to never play Risk again, and stormed out of the room." Many members of my family still have personal game nights. I'm going to make more of an effort to join them. More than that, I want to start a few to engage those relations that have lost the tradition. But I also have a very sneaky reason: <strong>I can "genealogify" anything</strong>. Here is a perfect opportunity to get family together for story and photo trading <strong>and</strong> build up the skill level of potential future researchers! Hear me out.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #0b5394; font-size: large;">Clue</span></strong><br />
I am the Clue Queen. Admittedly, I'll have to let a few wins slip past to keep people playing this one, but there is no better illustration of genealogy research. Seriously. Okay, so the rules of Clue are so simple. Someone has been murdered. You have a list of suspects, murder weapons, and rooms that the actual murder took place. Each one is on their own card. You shuffle the suspect cards and select one without looking at it. You do the same for the weapon and room cards. The three selected cards are placed in an envelope in the center of the board. No one knows what's on those cards. The rest of the cards are shuffled together and distributed to the players. Using the process of elimination, you are then supposed to guess who, what, and where of the murder. Obviously the cards in your hand aren't involved in the murder, but what about everyone else's? That's where "suspect" and "accuse" come into play. As your piece moves about the board, you "suspect" a person, weapon, and room. If other players have one of those things in their hand, they can privately display them to you so you can eliminate them. When you are sure of how it all went down, you "accuse". If you accuse, you check the envelope. If you are right, you win. If you are wrong, you are out the rest of the game as the other players suspect and accuse without you.<br />
<br />
<strong>Skills learned:</strong> Everything in genealogy is a process of elimination. Every search is going to have multiple potential records for your one ancestor. Is it this census record or that one? The only way to confirm the right one is to evaluate the evidence. Is it the right name? Is he approximately the right age? Are others named on the record known family? Do the ages of other family members coincide with what you know? Is the location correct or within a reasonable traveling distance from his last known residence? In the ideal situation, there is a list of records that you easily eliminate, because only one meets all the criteria. In real life, however, you are often going to find yourself looking at records that have the same name, around the same time, and in the same place. Which one is your guy? Could it be he was recorded more than once? Is this his father, brother, cousin, or an unrelated man? This is where it's best to "suspect" rather than "accuse". For Ancestry users, you have a Shoebox option that allows you to save the record for later viewing. I never let the Shoebox get too full without reviewing and eliminating records. What I try to do is search one ancestor at a time and then review my potential records <em>before</em> moving on to another ancestor. For those who don't have Ancestry, don't use the Shoebox, or are paper people... bookmark the link, write the info down, print it out. Whatever you do, don't save it to your tree or source it as fact in your notes. Yes, it's so easy to say we'll one day go back and reevaluate that potential record. But when did you last look at that record? I bet it's been a while. While you're putting off confirming that record, others are taking your potential record as gospel and one day you'll stumble across their work and think "oh, they found the proof" when what really happened was the snake eating it's own body. Then we all lose the game.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #0b5394; font-size: large;">Pictionary and Charades</span></strong><br />
Oh this is so much fun! You group off into teams or pairs and take turns choosing a word or phrase. One member of the team then draws a picture (Pictionary) or acts out a scene (Charades) about the word or phrase, but they can't speak or give verbal clues. The rest of the team must guess what's going on within a time limit. Sometimes it seems the team is psychic and just knows. Other times you'd think they had never met before. I know there's some kind of point system, but usually this one goes on in my family until someone is hoarse from screaming their answers or frustrated that their team "doesn't get it". My brother usually wins this one. He sits back while the rest of his team shouts out a guess at every line and squiggle ("A circle! Uh, a line! Is it a cookie????"). Suddenly he calmly states the answer while the rest of them are still trying to figure out if it's a car or an elephant (seriously, my dad cannot draw to save his life).<br />
<br />
<strong>Skills learned: </strong>Ah the power of assumptions! What often defeats the Pictionary player is their own assumptions. My brother wins because he asks himself "what does this drawing mean to the other person?" When looking for clues on your ancestor, ask what the records mean to them. Why would someone bother creating said record? Why did they move? Why did they leave their family? Why did they join the military (or decline service)? Why did they chose the names they did for their children? Let's consider that last one. There's always the traditional names passed down from generation to generation. But just like today, celebrity can influence names. In a fit of patriotism, your family starts naming the children George Washington, Ben Franklin, Abraham Lincoln, John Quincy. They chose to name their children after their favorite authors or actors of the time. Or maybe they chose a famous religious leader like<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorenzo_Dow" target="_blank"> Lorenzo Dow</a>. If you didn't know better, you may assume there was a familial connection that they were honoring. Or it would just be a "weird" name. But knowing that Lorenzo Dow was an author and well-traveled preacher may clue you in to your family's religious beliefs (and the potential records to be found in their churches). Knowing what famous people may have influenced their lives enough to gain immortality in a namesake may hold clues to the one thing a genealogist loves the most: the true heart of another human being.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #0b5394; font-size: large;">Risk</span></strong><br />
<span style="color: black;">While many games are held aloft as the end all be all of family warfare, I truly believe that no other game can tear a family apart like Risk. The board is a map of the world. You chose a color for your army and are given a set of units to start the game. The players take turns placing one unit on a country/region to "claim" it. Once all areas are claimed, you use the rest of your army to fortify your defenses. But choose carefully. You don't want to spread too thin, or have too much of your army surrounded by itself. For as the game commences, you are given cards that you can trade in for more military and you begin a campaign to conquer it all. You choose another player and challenge their army adjoining one of your territories. You each roll a number of dice based on the size of your army (and how much you choose to invest in the attack) to determine the attrition. If you eliminate the enemy army, you move part of your army into the new territory. If you lose the battle, you could abandon the attack or lose your territory. At the same time you are plotting to destroy, your opponents are plotting to destroy you....... so watch your six. I've seen Risk games last hours, even days. On more than one occasion, the winner was determined by who had the most territory before my uncle flipped the board and declared the unfairness of playing with cheaters. Dad usually one this one, because of his deep love for military history and tactics. He usually only lost when relatives made peace accords and ganged up on him. My fiance, who is not a board game player, was the only one to legit defeat him. When my dad complemented him on his win, he shrugged and said "British". And it's true. He is British and there is a reason why a small island ruled so much of the world!</span><br />
<br />
<strong>Skills learned: </strong>When you play Risk, or at least classic Risk, you are learning military strategy, geography, and migration. Australia is an excellent place to start your campaign because of it's defensibility. There's usually two ways in, but both require you to control Indonesia. Forget about early control of Russia. As the largest landmass, there's just too many fronts for a beginning army. Best practice is to gain control of the rest of the world and push back opponent armies into Russia. Once their numbers are reduced, it's all clean up. Now, using a classic version of the game is an excellent way to teach geography to children. The paths allowed between continents also follow traditional (albeit basic) migration routes. So it can be an excellent way to discuss why the family may not have come directly to the US from the Ukraine. Or it can illustrate why your family may have always identified as German, but your DNA results suggest some Western Asian or North African DNA. And of course, it can foster an interest in military history for you or your children. Like I said, dad won most often because he knew military history. While one player was deciding where to place his armies, dad would tell us about the Civil War, Vietnam, War of the Roses, Spain's colonization of the America's........ He'd discuss Sun Tzu, Hannibal, General Grant, Napoleon, Julius Caesar, and other influential leaders and strategists all while the game raged on. I know the military history of a few of my family members, so I could personalise the "history lesson" with the next generation. How fun!<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #0b5394; font-size: large;">Stratego</span></strong><br />
<span style="color: black;">Stratego is another military game. The board is a territory that is divided between your army and your opponents. The point of the game is to capture your opponent's flag. But be warned, besides the randomly placed army, your opponent also has placed a few mines in your way. Each time one of your pieces advances, trying to discover the flag, it could run up against a more powerful enemy or mine and be removed from the game. Each piece looks the same in shape and color, so the only way to know when you've reached the flag, is to plow ahead and try them out.</span><br />
<br />
<strong>Skills learned: </strong>I like two things about this game. The first is that it can teach you about ranks. There are privates, sergeants, generals, etc. The higher the rank, the more "powerful" the piece. Highest rank wins. So you can use this time to discuss rank hierarchy in military. Talk with relatives about what ranks your ancestors held. Dad was Navy, my uncle was Marine, and my grandfather was Army, so we often discussed differences in rank by military branch and who would overrule whom on the field between them. It got us discussing enlisted versus officers and their experiences with "the draft". And these discussions often led me to wonder if there was a document out there related to an ancestor's promotion to a higher rank or discharge. The second thing I love is that this is another example of process of elimination. The flag could be any place in their army. You could just plunge ahead and hope for the best, but your best strategy is going to be knowing your opponent. Where would <em>he </em>place his flag? And when looking for your ancestor in a record collection or choosing between similar documents, it can help to look at them not from <em>your</em> perspective, but your ancestor's.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #0b5394; font-size: large;">MadGabs and Telephone</span></strong><br />
<span style="color: black;">Most children have played Telephone at some point in their school lives. Everyone sits in a circle. One person whispers a sentence into the ear of their neighbor. No repeats, so you hear what you hear. The neighbor turns to the person beside them and whispers what they heard. The last person in the circle then proclaims what was whispered in their ear and everyone laughs at how a simple sentence has been convoluted and changed in the end. MadGabs is similar. You pull a card and read a nonsense sentence out loud. The more you do it, the faster or slower you do it, the more you piece together the real meaning. The example from the commercial (so as to not ruin the fun should you play) is "eye mull of ma sheen." Say it out loud and you quickly hear "I'm a love machine", which gives you a nice ear worm for the day. The game has a time limit of course, and points awarded for correct guesses to choose a winner.</span><br />
<br />
<strong>Skills learned: </strong>I doubt there is any family historian who has never had a name misspelled in a record. My 2nd great grandfather Briody was listed as Brady in a census. My 2nd great grandfather Eonas was listed as Jonas on a birth record for one of his children. And there's still some debate if my 3rd great grandmother's maiden name was Colby or Covey! When looking for relatives, it's often good to say their names out loud. Say them fast. Say them slow. Say them with an accent. Spell out each possible misrepresentation. Spell them phonetically, even. Then check the records against those "alternatives". You may be surprised to find them in plain sight! I also like this particular game as an illustration about what we "hear" and what is "true". I had a friend ask me to help me with her Native American research. She had heard her great grandmother was Cherokee (aren't they all?). Well, her great grandmother was not. At first this upset her greatly, but soon came a pleasant enough surprise. Since we knew more about her great grandmother, I decided to dig up some "real" information about her family (to cheer her up). It turned out that there was a Native American line. Her <strong>3rd</strong> great grandmother was in fact native. After we talked for a while, she began to realise that she had heard the stories about her great grandmother from her grandmother. So grandma was most likely saying "great grandma", meaning <em>her</em> great grandmother, not my friend's. It was all in how she heard it. When I get lost in a line, I will often go back over what I've "known" and try to "hear" it for the first time again.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #0b5394; font-size: large;">Monopoly</span></strong><br />
<span style="color: black;">Monopoly is a fun game and if you've never played it, I am so sorry for you. The board is a series of squares representing "land". Your piece travels around and if you land on a square, and if no one has yet done so, you can purchase the property from the "bank". If the property is owned, you pay the owner rent for landing there. If you own property, you can add houses to increase the value (and subsequently the rent). You win by bankrupting your opponents. Many families add different rules, like the "Free Parking" rule. There's a square marked "Free Parking". If you land there, in a normal game, you don't have to worry about paying a rent. But in an "advanced" game, you get a pot of money for landing there. What money is contributed to the pot? Well there are penalty cards you can land on. In the advanced game, you put your penalty fee in a pot instead of just paying the person designated banker. Some games require a player to own the complete collection of a series of properties before adding homes to any of those squares. In any case, it's not always the player that runs the board buying all the properties first that ends up owning everything at the end. And some times, the winner is the one who was willing to forego a property with high rent in favor of a series of properties with cheaper upkeep.</span><br />
<br />
<strong>Skills learned: </strong>What can a genealogist possibly learn from Monopoly? Only the most important skill! Monopoly has always been a great way to teach younger folk the power of budgets, and it works for genealogists too. No one place will hold all the records for all of our ancestors. Heck, no one place will have all the records for <strong>one</strong> of our ancestors. And no matter how hard we try, eventually we are going to have to pay for something. It could be a subscription to a pay site, a membership to a society, a record from an archive, or a professional researcher. In the game of Monopoly, a player could go around buying up all the properties they land on. But it could leave them in the lurch should they land on an owned property or receive a penalty card. And if no one lands on the properties they own, they won't get any of their money back. In genealogy, you could pay for websites and records willy-nilly. But you could end up bankrupting your budget on unrelated records. You could be short the cash needed to buy that one packet from the courthouse that could solve your brick wall. So it's all about budgeting and patience. And just like Boardwalk (the most expensive rent on the board), you could run across a really great packet of information on your relative that may not be worth the money........ at least your first go 'round the board. An example of this is a recent trip to the state archives taken by a friend of mine. She found a court document about her relative that was 500 pages. 500! The detail was amazing. The information was dizzying. The copy fees were insane! In the end, her desire to possess this record was outweighed by her desire to be able to continue to feed her family. Does it mean she'll never own it? Probably not, but it's gonna take a few passes over "Go" first. When you are choosing where to spend your money, take the time to consider how often you'll "land" there as well. Boardwalk is the most expensive rent, this is true. But it's also less likely to be landed upon by renters, so you'll make less money on it than a spot more middle road. When looking at genealogy pay sites, browse their collection titles. I may love looking through old newspapers, but if <a href="http://www.genealogybank.com/" target="_blank">GenealogyBank</a> doesn't have editions from areas my family lived in (or at the time they lived there), there is no point in paying for their records. And pay per view sites like <a href="http://www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk/" target="_blank">ScotlandsPeople</a> are best when you have enough information on your ancestor to narrow the results down to more specific possibilities. If I want just one record on one ancestor, I may wait to pay for access until I have more information or relatives to work with.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #0b5394; font-size: large;">Life</span></strong><br />
<span style="color: black;">This last game is really just a lot of fun. No specific skill set to practice here. In Life, you start off as a single person in a little car. You choose to go to college or head directly into the workforce. You get married and have a random number of kids. You buy stock and insurance. You may even go back to school for higher education later in Life. Eventually you retire. Winner gets to retirement first, has the best financial value at retirement, or (if it's my family) is the one who declares "I'm bored now!" when they land on a car accident for the third time.</span><br />
<br />
So why is Life on the list? Why, because it is Life. Your player does things that many of our ancestors will have done. My niece loves this game (she names all her daughters after me, and yes, we have to name our children- her rule). And the whole time we're playing, I'm thinking about the records. My player chooses college..... there would be yearbooks. Maybe I could find an announcement at their graduation. Oh, married! There'll be banns, bonds, and licenses. Yay, twins! Birth record, newspaper announcement, possibly a naming pattern. Dang, a fire. News articles, Sanborn maps, and maybe medical/death records. Stock investment payoff? Business records, tax records, and maybe deeds. Next time you play Life, try to list the records you may find. Do it in your head if your family thinks you're crazy like mine does. If you have an awesome family that loves history and genealogy, engage others. Every time an event happens, have everyone call out possible records and give points or "cash" as a prize to tally in the game.<br />
<br />
Actually, that last bit sounds like fun. I need to find the awesome family that does that.<br />
-AnaRhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4691552322695070495.post-89291784501848253542013-11-08T05:00:00.000-06:002013-11-08T05:00:02.388-06:00You Can't Get There From Here<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; height: 298px; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left; width: 332px;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><div align="left">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNuncBEDz9VaL2Qk53i1CUU5mLKZltllw1Am_iQSH6Rcqx-_Xvxrk620trYO1wudWuQc54JTy3Gk97GkIzbJ7XWOeLNvHEvhLsiROIgcvqeVXuVI47FJF8Ug-zDqR7Jq5DWVVfHuI1-bK7/s1600/fauquier.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="246" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNuncBEDz9VaL2Qk53i1CUU5mLKZltllw1Am_iQSH6Rcqx-_Xvxrk620trYO1wudWuQc54JTy3Gk97GkIzbJ7XWOeLNvHEvhLsiROIgcvqeVXuVI47FJF8Ug-zDqR7Jq5DWVVfHuI1-bK7/s320/fauquier.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
</td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?gmd:9:./temp/~ammem_wXmp:" target="_blank">Fauquier, VA</a></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
When I was young, the family would often spend a part of the summer vacation in Arkansas with my paternal grandparents. We'd go to Heber Springs and climb Sugar Loaf mountain. We would fish in grandpa's man-made catfish pond or the natural rivers. We investigated innumerable forests and caverns. After one trek out to see some of Arkansas' natural wonderment, dad decided to proclaim that he had seen all that was to be seen. A local quizzed him and found his knowledge was truly vast. He had taken the family as far south as Little Rock looking for new woods, rocks, and rivers. Ah, but the local man grinned a crooked smile when he discovered that dad's experiences lacked a view of the "Devil's Tea Table". He hadn't been? How could this be? Where was it? Kids, get in the car! Oh, the old man could tell us the way. Just past the gas station, we'd find the Piggly Wiggly on our right. Go 'bout a mile and half and hook a left. 12 miles later we would come upon an old barn. Well, not really. You see, the barn burned down, but the remnants were still there. Get to the barn and turn slightly right. It's a hidden road, but you'll know if you missed it if you end up at a fruit stand talkin' to a guy named Jim.<br />
<br />
Well, we ended up talking to Jim. He told us that the road was out of use and over grown. But if we went back the way we came and turned left at the old school house, there would be another road. An hour later, we're at the gas station asking where the school house was. To which the attendant replied that the old school house was now a dress shop. Couldn't have missed it.... except we did. Exasperated, and with two unruly children in the back seat, we went home. For years dad was on a quest to find the Table. Always the directions seemed to send us on wild chases that often found us lost (and sometimes buying fruit from Jim). Some even suggested that the Table wasn't here, but a county or three over. Or maybe it was part of the national park. No, no, no, it was on private property. One time, dad asked what the address was. "You mean like a house number? We h'ain't got those out here." And then came my favorite reply: "Oh, you can't get there from here. You gotta go somewheres else first." Like the fabled unicorn, the Table became forever hunted and never found.<br />
<br />
What genealogist doesn't have a similar story? You want to visit the places your family lived for sentimental reasons or to check local repositories for records not available online. You've made a list of relatives that lived and died in a particular location and you take off a few days from work, hoping to make some real progress and step inside history. And what do you find? Your ancestor is buried in a family cemetery that has been gobbled up by nature, leaving no markers above ground. Or the family lived in a county that was absorbed by the neighboring ones, so you're not sure if it's County A or County B that now houses the records you need.. The progenitor of your line helped to found a town that no longer exists and the local researchers have not heard of it before. The family purchased land and the boundaries are described in relation to physical markers that have moved or are worn away due to flood or earthquake. You've traveled miles to find out "you can't get there from here."<br />
<br />
It is so very important to know the history of the land as much as the history of the people. We must always remember that borders are just lines drawn on paper. And a map will often describe a territory, but it is not the territory itself. In my own tree I am reminded of several examples: Germantown in Virginia. The German immigrants who settled in Fauquier County isolated themselves and soon were their own community. But Germantown doesn't exist now as the town was moved and renamed. Then there's Reelfoot lake in Tennessee. It was created in 1811 by an earthquake that actually caused the Mississippi River to flow backwards into the newly depressed land. Any territories described prior to 1811 would be underwater, or have a serious face-lift, when sought out by modern researchers. And there's any number of instances of territories becoming counties and states, like Kentucky being carved out of Virginia's territory.<br />
<br />
In many genealogy circles, it's an accepted practice to use the place name that is listed in the document we are citing. First, it is more historically accurate; closer to the truth of the time. Second, knowing that the town was in an adjacent county 100 years ago helps you, because those early records will often be housed in the original county instead of the one in which the town now resides. I have a will for one 4th great grandfather that was in another state than the one he died in only because, after his death, the borders were redrawn. It's not like the counties exchanged records so future genealogists wouldn't have problems. Also, contemporary newspapers and literature will reference those old names, so knowing what it was called (even before your ancestor was born) may help guide your research to the correct collections. If I can't find a commonly named ancestor, I often search the towns he/she lived in. If I know that Newton was originally Jo-Bob's Bluff (random example), then I would be better off searching out Jo-Bob's Bluff.<br />
<br />
But if we want to get a clearer picture, we must know what it was then and what it is now. I've always argued for the modern place name being used in all facts. First, many of us are using some sort of software or online option to house our research. These computer programs use either Bing or Google Maps or some other similar mapping tool. These tools use today's names, so having the historical name will confuse the mapping tool. When you plan a research trip, modern place names can help you. Your ancestor may be found in three censuses with three different counties listed. He didn't move three times, but the borders of the surrounding governments did. Knowing where his homestead is now listed will help you locate it. Second, it's not unusual for your family lines to converge on the same place at different times. So mom's side helped found Orange County, North Carolina. After World War II, dad's side immigrates to Caswell County, which was carved out of Orange County and includes mom's ancestral lands. Using the modern name helps you realise just how closely connected they are. Third, while the record may be using the contemporary name for the date of it's publication, it may not be describing a current event. A great example is my 2nd great grandfather Levingskas. His birthplace alternates between Lithuania, Poland and Russia dependent upon the time period and who "owned" the land at that exact moment that the record was created, not the event itself. The most accurate truth would be to name the birthplace by whatever location name was in effect on the day of his birth (or as close as I can get to it). But we again run into the problem of that map no longer describing the territory. What was one is now the other (and 100 years from now could be something else entirely!).<br />
<br />
In reality, you need both the historical and the modern location names. The historical name is important for accuracy. I suggest putting the historical name in the description area if you use software (or as a note if you're using paper). If you're looking at an old map or land grant, the original name will be of use in describing the territory as it was. But I must reiterate that modern place names should be in the fact itself. Our new research options for organisation and mapping are easiest with modern place names. When talking to other people, they may not be familiar with the older names, but readily recognise the modern name. Genealogists don't live in a bubble. You may have to talk to a person who hasn't lived in the area "all their lives" and wouldn't know that the Wendy's used to be a Bob's Big Boy. Also, as borders are always changing, knowing what it is then <em>and now</em> can give you a leg up when the area becomes the next thing. We can't keep looking back to the exclusion of looking forward........<br />
<br />
..... or we'll have to go somewhere else first to get where we're going.<br />
-Ana<br />
<br />
<span style="color: purple;">*** Note: I found the Devil's Tea Table in 2012 using Google Maps. Dad's response? "Too late now, I'm bored with it."</span>Rhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4691552322695070495.post-809220144580699812013-09-20T21:31:00.000-05:002013-09-20T21:32:50.817-05:00When I Need You, I Just Close My EyesDear Grandpa,<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWkF8w4jmgtNhzhKCpspRh6PJW6xSwqi2wvYTREdctqo5jftQWGhfSvVqoK9KT7_-ugDd7VNjT3lurWLSOHn0e9RqIycsBNNqWTDdEDCWRSvFd7noF3x4egGc2Y96Lcl39UtreayiIaNW1/s1600/Louis+W+Gibson+II.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWkF8w4jmgtNhzhKCpspRh6PJW6xSwqi2wvYTREdctqo5jftQWGhfSvVqoK9KT7_-ugDd7VNjT3lurWLSOHn0e9RqIycsBNNqWTDdEDCWRSvFd7noF3x4egGc2Y96Lcl39UtreayiIaNW1/s320/Louis+W+Gibson+II.jpg" width="151" /></a></div>
We're coming up on the sixth year without you here. I have to admit, I find myself missing you at the oddest of times. When a moment of silence intrudes upon my day, I think of the times I didn't say enough to you. Years could roll past before I'd even consider visiting. Like every young person, I was busy. So very busy doing nothing and getting nowhere. While you weren't always in my sight, you were always in my heart. You still are. Nowadays, you are almost always on my mind.<br />
<br />
Two peas in a pod; that was us. No one was more hard-headed and stubborn than you, until there was me. You seemed to take conversations as a challenge to mentally wrestle me into a defeat, but I would never give up. No matter the subject, if you took the pro, I was the con. If you derided something for being useless, I had to extol it's intrinsic worth. If you changed your mind, so did I. And I always had to use big words. Not because I thought you were stupid. No, you were never stupid. But I had to substitute vocabulary for the size and age (wisdom?) you brought to the table. I didn't think about how it may have hurt you to have a grade-schooler outstrip you in debate. And to an outside party, I'm sure they thought I was tearing you down. But you and I knew. I could see it in your face. You enjoyed the fight. You were proud of me. And I was proud of you.<br />
<br />
I still am very proud of my grandpa. I speak about you often. I tell stories about my childhood, always with a prejudice to stories about you and me. I doubt anyone has more shaped my outlook on life than you. And who better? Born in 1927, the first child of an unmarried mother, you began life in difficult times. You were the grandchild of a farming family, so hard work would not be a stranger to you. Which would be good practice; you were barely a man when war found you. Or did you find it? You entered the U.S. Army and became a Ranger. Dad tells me you were a driver for General Patton and that you stayed in France during the war. He also says you were in Germany for reconstruction. I've filed a request for your military records.... I wonder what I'll learn or confirm? I have pictures of you from the war. Dad found an envelope with my name on it when he was clearing your house. Inside were some unmarked photos of half toppled buildings. And one of you. Where were you that day? Who were the young men in the photos with you? What story did you want to tell when you took these? How I wish you were here to tell me now.<br />
<br />
You know I've always loved history. And getting me to shut up was never easy. Now I never shut up about family history. And you've been one of my favorite subjects. Not that you've been easy to find, mind you! I've located your birth certificate.... well, a transcript. I have to get Kentucky to send me a copy. Not that it will list your father's name. Your mother listed you under her maiden name, leaving me a mystery to solve. You were living with your maternal grandfather during the 1930 census. He told the enumerator your last name was Berrio. But we both know what a dead end that is, don't we? Auntie tells me that you told her about confronting a man named Berrio, only to find out he wasn't your father. He gave you another man, Estes, but that man denied you too. I wonder if that hurt you, hardened you. I've heard that when you joined the army, you had to request a delayed birth certificate, and that you chose to stick with your stepfather's name, Gibson, when you had the chance to change it. You were used to the name? Or did you love your stepfather? Dad tells me he remembers his grandfather as being very unkind and cold to you and your children. Dad says that your stepfather didn't consider you family. But is that the truth or is dad remembering his own coldness? You wouldn't believe the number of conversations I have with him about family. In one breath he's "blood doesn't define a family" and in the next it's "I don't care about that side, they aren't really blood related". But you know dad, he's right today and he's right tomorrow. He got that from you. And so did I.<br />
<br />
I'd love to be more right about you. If I had just one more day, I'd ........... who am I kidding? I'd like to say I'd ask you all sorts of questions and pull out photos and have you identify everyone. I'd like to say I'd ask you point blank about your military career and your marriage. I pretend I'd have the guts to ask you about losing your first daughter, Evelyn, when she was only 9 hours old. I imagine the brickwalls of my family history tumble. But we both know what our one day would be. You'd make your famous cookies; I'd eat until I was sick. I'd remark on some little factoid I had learned, you'd call me Miss YellowPages. Naturally, and almost instinctively, I'd correct you. YellowPages are for phone numbers. I'm an Encyclopedia............ and we're off to the races. Then dad would have to "separate the kids", although we wouldn't understand what all the fuss was about.<br />
<br />
After all, we're just talkin'<br />
-AnaRhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4691552322695070495.post-90295961599923156412013-08-18T07:59:00.003-05:002013-08-18T07:59:48.613-05:00Can't spell Promethease.com without T-E-A-S-EWhen you get into the meat and potatoes of genetic genealogy, you will find there are many good DNA tools that can help you in your research. Some require your raw results added to their servers, others have a tool you download and use on your own. Some share your information with others, some don't. I could spend every day talking about all that is out there for you to explore.<br />
<br />
But I won't.<br />
<br />
I'm actually getting ready for a break from DNA. I've been working so hard on it for so long that I think I'll go insane soon. I've upgraded my brother's FTDNA kit to an autosomal test and with that and my maternal cousin's test, I've not only been comparing our matches, but also mapping our shared segments. My parents share a line (or two), so there is expected overlap. But I figure where my brother and I share a segment and my maternal cousin doesn't is a good place to start for paternal matches. It's still possible the segments are part of the shared line or maternal material my cousin didn't get, but there has to be something that is exclusive to dad, right? I mean, what are the odds that I got only <strong>his</strong> mother's DNA? Things to make you go crazy.....<br />
<br />
Which leads me to my last DNA post for a bit. And I promised to tell you about a tool that cost you only $5 and was a bit of fun. I will warn it may drive you crazy if you let it. The website is <a href="http://promethease.com/">Promethease.com</a>. What does Promethease give you for $5? Well, you upload your raw results and they spit back a chart of the good, bad and indifferent in your DNA. You see, ever since we could code DNA, scientists have been researching what segments control what in our bodies. So there are thousands of published works on cancer risk, heart disease, mental issues, immunities, drug interactions, etc. and this tool tells you what studies have said about alleles you carry in your DNA. Now, does that mean you have or have the potential to have a disease listed? Meh. This isn't a medical test. It's using published work that may or may not have a bias in it's research. If you're looking to solve medical mysteries or gather information prior to having children, go see a medical professional and get a "real" test done. If you just want to have a bit of fun, let's hop right in!<br />
<br />
<span style="color: black;">So I ran the tool and got my results in about 10 minutes. After playing around a bit to see what I was looking at, I reviewed my results:<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #38761d; font-size: large;">My Good</span></strong><br />
<ul>
<li>I have a lactose tolerance due to a European gene. <span style="color: #38761d;">Cool. I like milk.</span></li>
<li>I am difficult to hypnotize. <span style="color: #38761d;">This is true. I have actually had people attempt to hypnotize me with no success.</span></li>
<li>I have a resistance to HIV. <span style="color: #38761d;">Now, this one is awesome, because the theory is that this is actually an indicator of immunity against the plague. I apparently would've had to have had a relative who contracted and survived the plague in order to have this passed down to me. I've also done my maternal cousin's results and he's got a higher frequency than I, which means both of his parents carried this allele, whereas only one of my parents did.</span></li>
<li>I have lowered odds of going bald. <span style="color: #38761d;">Good to know. Oh, but my bad includes increased risk of baldness. Well crap on a cracker.</span></li>
</ul>
<strong><span style="color: #cc0000; font-size: large;">My Bad</span></strong><br />
<ul>
<li>Increased risk of cancer (breast, lung, and prostate). <span style="color: #cc0000;">Weirdly, I have also a decreased risk of cancer in other alleles. So this one's a wash, apparently.</span></li>
<li>Increased risk of diabetes. <span style="color: #cc0000;">I'm pretty sure my obsession with fast food and aversion to physical activity increases my risk of diabetes anyway.</span></li>
<li>Increased risk of Crohn's and IBS. <span style="color: #cc0000;">Interesting considering those diseases do actually run in my mother's side.</span></li>
<li>Increased mental disorder risks including dementia, bipolar disorder, depression, and suicide. On the other hand, some of these are also linked to higher intelligence and creativity. <span style="color: #cc0000;">Well I am awesome. Sometimes crazy awesome.</span></li>
</ul>
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #999999; font-size: large;">My Indifferent</span></strong><br />
<ul>
<li>Once again, this tool tells me my eyes are blue.<span style="color: #999999;"> I've already informed the creator that my eyes are brown.</span></li>
<li>Sensitivity to sunlight.<span style="color: #999999;"> I do burn easily. I avoid direct sunlight like a vampire.</span></li>
<li>I have impaired motor skills.<span style="color: #999999;"> I don't know about that.... well, my reflexes are a bit slow. And sometimes I'm a klutz.... but "impaired"? little harsh.</span></li>
<li>Loss of short term memory. <span style="color: #999999;">This one yes. A thousand times yes. It's not an all the time "Finding Nemo" Dory thing. But I do have trouble retaining information the first time through. And names? Forget it. If you tell me your name, I've already forgotten it before we're done with the handshake.</span></li>
<li>Curly hair.<span style="color: #999999;"> Nope, straight.</span></li>
</ul>
This is just a small portion of the report. You get a zip file that has the report itself, then there is a data folder that will show you medical conditions, how medicine affects you, and other things studies claim to have found that are a bit complicated. Each one of these results will come with a link to more information about the allele and the studies that "found" these conditions. Read the studies. Like I said, some will have a bias in their research. Just like any other source, you have to evaluate the informer as much as the information. That's why this should be a "just for fun" kind of thing. If you're one of those people that worries over every news story about Ebola even though you weren't anywhere near the outbreak city (or state), then don't use this site. You'll just worry over every little thing. To be sure, I'm no more worried about my risks of heart disease than I was before. And I'm not going to start kissing rats or engaging in risky behaviour just because I'm supposedly carrying a plague/HIV immunity. Again, if they can get my eye color wrong, how right can they be about my arthritis risks?<br />
<br />
When it came to this tool, I found myself interpreting the results through what I already knew about my family medical history. And maybe that's the best way to look at it. I mean, ideally I should be using the information to find new clues to unknown issues, but I get less stress by just using it as a confirmation of what I know. In the medicine interactions area, it suggests that I have an increased risk of liver damage if I use Tylenol. Well, I do use Tylenol. So should I stop based on this test? Not really, no. I had an injury that sent me to the hospital right after I received my results. The doctor told me to take some Tylenol and rest until the pain went away. I asked him if I could take aspirin and he said that it would thin my blood and that was a greater risk to my condition at the time. After talking to him about my Promethease results and reading the studies involved, I've not changed my Tylenol routine. But I will admit that sometimes, right before I take that little pill, I hear a voice in the back of my head saying, "We really need to switch it up every now and again. Just to be safe."<br />
<br />
But then my short term memory fails and I forget all about that silly little voice,<br />
-Ana</span>Rhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4691552322695070495.post-91705095204938691032013-07-20T12:36:00.000-05:002013-07-20T12:36:45.400-05:00Third Party DNA tools: Gedmatch.comI feel lazy. I haven't written in this blog in a month and I feel terribly lazy. However, I've been terribly busy. Why? Well all these wonderful DNA matches keep rolling in! I received my AncestryDNA results for my maternal 1st cousin and have been putting his results into a spreadsheet with my results to see where we *don't* overlap so I can focus on cousin matches that are probably exclusive to my father (my parents do share an ancestor, so there is a lot of overlap!). It doesn't help that Ancestry doesn't have any way to look at the chromosome data so I can see <em>where</em> I match my matches. It doesn't help that I can't look at how my matches match others to see if there is a pattern. And it really doesn't help that I can't easily compare how many matches my cousin and I have in common.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: large;">Enter </span></strong><a href="http://gedmatch.com/"><strong><span style="font-size: large;">Gedmatch.com</span></strong></a><strong><span style="font-size: large;">!</span></strong><br />
<br />
Gedmatch.com is a volunteer-run free website that allows you to upload your raw autosomal DNA data from AncestryDNA, 23andMe, and FTDNA to use their host of tools. I will start off with the warning that they are so backlogged with new uploads that they aren't accepting any new ones until mid-August (currently the 15th). But I've put off this post for so long, that I think it's best to just let you know about all the features and let you get ready. So what does Gedmatch do that's so special? Why will you be sitting on the edge of your chair waiting for August 15th?<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: purple; font-size: large;">One to Many</span></strong><br />
<span style="color: black;">The first option for analyzing your data is the "one-to-many". This option allows you to compare your data with the entirety of Gedmatch's database. Now, I'm going to take a moment to mention IBS and IBD. Inherited by Descent (IBD) is the term used when your DNA matches someone else, because you've inherited the DNA via a common ancestor. Inherited by State (IBS) is when your DNA shows a match, but is most likely due to just random jumbling of DNA that looks like someone else's DNA. How do you know if your match is IBS or IBD? General rule of thumb in genetic genealogy: a DNA segment must be at least 7cM (centiMorgans) long in order to be IBD. Now, 7 cM is terribly small. To put it into perspective: a sibling will have 2350cM in common with you. A 1st cousin will have 800 cM, 2nd 200....by 5th cousins, there's only 25cM in common! So a segment match of 7 is going to be way back there. If you're looking for close relations, you'll want to look at larger segments.</span><br />
<br />
Why is that all important? When you go to the "one-to-many" tab, you'll be asked what you want the minimum length of autosomal DNA segments to be for your matches. It's default setting is 7cM. Go no lower. A second length option you have to set is for the X chromosome. Now, there is value in an X chromosome match. If you match a male on his X chromosome, then your focus should be the maternal side of his tree. The default value for the X is 3cM, however. This tool will pull up any matches of autosomal DNA of 7cM <strong>OR</strong> 3cM on the X chromosome. So you could end up looking at a lot of matches that are high on the X chromosome, but below the threshold on the autosomal DNA. Does that mean you aren't related to them? Not entirely. The problem is that the X chromosome isn't gender specific. Yes a male has only one X and gets it from his mother, but his mother got one from her father as well as her mother. So the variety of ancestry makes the X unreliable on it's own (for right now). When you set up your defaults, set the X option higher (30 or more) to filter out any matches below the autosomal threshold. You can always look at those matches later, but your first foray will be less confusing if you leave those bits off. There is also a check box for cross referencing. I won't get into what it is, because it's unreliable. Just don't check that box.<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEijN_WZMa7QV0uMlDPw6gODp1axMzrHReU96uhrJM2Fn8EDNZOh5ZWU41Tgf8OwgCqKMDL5a5VR2e4-h2RXzL1ePgZZmRK3vu971KGt2GaUH8hCFrSjL7LjZ-j3DtjN7nsCHOsp2Z7g08mI/s1600/One+to+Many.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="274" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEijN_WZMa7QV0uMlDPw6gODp1axMzrHReU96uhrJM2Fn8EDNZOh5ZWU41Tgf8OwgCqKMDL5a5VR2e4-h2RXzL1ePgZZmRK3vu971KGt2GaUH8hCFrSjL7LjZ-j3DtjN7nsCHOsp2Z7g08mI/s320/One+to+Many.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">This is the one to one of my best match and myself.<br />I would focus on the chromosome 2 segment as it<br />meets the 7 & 700 rule.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Your results will come in a table. You can hide the autosomal column or the X column if you want to focus on the numbers in one or the other. You'll see the kit number for the match (I'll explain that later), their email if they made it public, and your estimated generations before common ancestor. There is an "L" that is a link. You click on that and you see a list of kits that person matches. You can use that to compare matches you have in common, which could help you figure out what side they match with you. The autosomal and X columns have an "A" and an "X", respectively. You click on those and it shows you the specific segments you have in common with that person. Remember, 7cM is the minimum for IBD. But that's not the only number you need to have in your head. The other is the number of SNPs (single nucleotide polymorphisms) in that segment: 700. I try to remember it as the 7&7 rule. If I find a segment that is 7cM long, I then check if it's 700 or better on SNPs. Often, you'll match a person on one chromosome and meet these parameters and then match them on other chromosomes under the minimum. Those other matches are IBS matches and should be ignored when figuring out all that is here. The best part of this table is that you can select multiple kits and compare them all at the same time. I have 6 matches that all have the same email (uploaded by the same person for different family members). I checked each one and then did a comparison. It was obvious from the segment lengths that two were siblings, one was a parent, one was a cousin and the other two were children of one or the other sibling. A message confirmed this assumption and matching all of them on a specific chromosome helped us to figure out how we connected to each other and other tests that we matched on that chromosome segment. Since the parent was their father, and I matched heavily on his X chromosome as well as the autosomal, then we were able to work on his maternal line to find the match.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: purple; font-size: large;"><strong>One to One, X One to One, Phasing, One or Both, and Specific Segment</strong></span><br />
<span style="color: black;">The next options on the home screen are "one-to-one" and "X one-to-one" comparisons. These are similar to the results you get when you click those "A" or "X" links on the "one-to-many" results, but you can better control the minimums to fine tune the comparison. To be honest, the only time I use these is when someone in a discussion group tells me their kit number and I check to see if we are matched. Same rules apply: 7 & 700. "One or Both" is the option if you want to find matches for more than one kit. When I finally am able to upload my cousin's raw data, this option will help me find the kits that match us both much quicker than running separate reports and comparing names myself.</span><br />
<br />
Phasing is an option I haven't explored as I'm not a parent, nor has either of my parents taken the test. What phasing does is take one or both parents' kits and compare them to their child's kit to figure out what DNA is mom's and what is dad's. It takes a while for the results to come back (about 3-5 days). <br />
<br />
And then there is the "Specific Segment" option. You can put in the chromosome number and the segment start and end points, with the thresholds for minimum length allowed, and a report of kits matching you specifically on that segment come up. I've tried it with the chromosome segments that my closest matches have in common with me, but haven't found anyone with a significant match on that segment other than them. Ah well.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: purple; font-size: large;">Admixture</span></strong><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7EjJkCzhKAfxV7JxLrPfEC6t-brJLSOLhOZFhxNZjeqTzeLpKaGvxa8EoS6GlfKepsGgK5wlkUhZUVjh-xVyGQ5cCml1ptoVy36247h3YysgI-xAzb0S-rSTRmL-i2pda2-7xRqqUT3_m/s1600/Pie+Charts.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-size: large;"></span></a><br /></div>
<br />
<span style="color: black;">Admixture is the fancy name for ethnicity. When you took your autosomal test, the company you chose used their own reference populations and algorithms to calculate your possible ethnicity mix. Now, as I've pointed out before, there's a lot of guess work involved. Let me illustrate the point for you:<br />
</span><br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7EjJkCzhKAfxV7JxLrPfEC6t-brJLSOLhOZFhxNZjeqTzeLpKaGvxa8EoS6GlfKepsGgK5wlkUhZUVjh-xVyGQ5cCml1ptoVy36247h3YysgI-xAzb0S-rSTRmL-i2pda2-7xRqqUT3_m/s1600/Pie+Charts.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="245" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7EjJkCzhKAfxV7JxLrPfEC6t-brJLSOLhOZFhxNZjeqTzeLpKaGvxa8EoS6GlfKepsGgK5wlkUhZUVjh-xVyGQ5cCml1ptoVy36247h3YysgI-xAzb0S-rSTRmL-i2pda2-7xRqqUT3_m/s400/Pie+Charts.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The results page for each of these tests has a link to the blog or development data. I recommend viewing those links to get information and details straight from the horse's mouth. Sometimes, if not too overworked, the developer can answer a question; or someone else has already asked your question and received an answer!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<span style="color: black;"><div align="left" class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
These four pie charts show my ethnicities according to four different calculators: MDLP, Dodecad, Eurogenes, and Harappa. You'll note that they don't use the same names for similar areas and that even when they do, the percentages can vary wildly. Eurogenes has a chart of where the populations they use as a reference are from. Does that mean that if I match them, that my family is from there? Not really. It's just a way of defining the area. Just because the "South Baltic" ethnicity uses Lithuanians to define it, doesn't mean my family is from Lithuania. Now, I have records that indicate they are, but because of migrations and border changes, they could be Polish or Russian.... all this calculator tells me is that my DNA has data in common with the Lithuanians that were tested.</div>
<br />
I used the K12 for each (save Harappa) to give a fair comparison. That means there were 12 possible categories to have represented in my DNA. Every calculator save Harappa has multiple options as far as how refined the results will be. Eurogenes will go up to 36 categories. Well that means we'll get better results, right? Not really. At some point, you can take your DNA to such a small amount that what you match isn't really proving your deep ancestry as much as reporting noise. Just like the matching needs to follow the 7&7 rule, ethnicity works best at 5% and above. Most people, including the developers of these tools, will tell you that K12 is your fairest bet.</span><div>
<br /></div>
<div>
And then there's the test to find Ashkenazi DNA............</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtfmHT1Cq_pU6-mHH1fmO2EktV7VC5eObmMgVfWXN2alKkYtsoQ4I1jF53eC9Ek6XajAp5_HWDuGVlxiyCbugLKh_4EpEtAFC1ypjJZGQ2T3lBUxKDnFLAUHlV6ig4zgZsAZ5VVYFkzE7A/s1600/Jew.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="254" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtfmHT1Cq_pU6-mHH1fmO2EktV7VC5eObmMgVfWXN2alKkYtsoQ4I1jF53eC9Ek6XajAp5_HWDuGVlxiyCbugLKh_4EpEtAFC1ypjJZGQ2T3lBUxKDnFLAUHlV6ig4zgZsAZ5VVYFkzE7A/s640/Jew.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
This is a comparison of the EU Test and the J Test options. It is recommended by the developer that you compare both as Ashkenazi can show a false positive. My supposed Jewish DNA is very small, so it's more likely than not that it's just noise. I explained all of this to my mother, but she's been convinced for years that we're Jewish, so she clung to this like the last chopper out of Nam and has told everyone how her smart daughter found the proof. Oy vey.</div>
<div>
<br /><div>
<strong><span style="color: purple; font-size: large;">Eye Color and </span></strong><strong><span style="color: purple; font-size: large;">Rare SNP</span></strong></div>
</div>
<div>
In the end, I guess what I'm saying is that the admixture tools should be used for fun, not actual science. Maybe one day, but there's no definitive proof that's going to give us the answers we're looking for without a large margin of error. And speaking of "fun" tools with large margins of error.....</div>
<div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhz3YQd7mZ35px29Q97-Wu3RnOeX-EcG8JAfwUt4A_7wNAln4vf_0IziupsLnvXdO_3jWlLJgCgdFinnodnhd9hzH9ml7f6-NFrjr1FW5hzIPI7BrQs7N2tzNZepIlJK9dNW3oQ5G0SRco1/s1600/Starr.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhz3YQd7mZ35px29Q97-Wu3RnOeX-EcG8JAfwUt4A_7wNAln4vf_0IziupsLnvXdO_3jWlLJgCgdFinnodnhd9hzH9ml7f6-NFrjr1FW5hzIPI7BrQs7N2tzNZepIlJK9dNW3oQ5G0SRco1/s320/Starr.jpg" width="226" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">I'm not sure, but I don't think they're blue...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br /></div>
<div>
There is an option to see what your eye color is. I know, a mirror works just as well, be quiet and listen. This tool looks at the multiple mutations required to make your specific eye color. If you recall my earlier posts, it's not just one gene that decides if you have blue eyes, it can be dozens. So I checked my eye color and it says they are blue/grey. There's some markers for brown and I'm supposed to have golden irises or some such thing, but the user submitted photo of an eye that matches my DNA is bluish grey. In case you've not seen me before, I have very dark brown eyes. They've lightened a bit as I've aged, but when I was a child they were almost black. I can say that I've now studied my eyes more than I've ever done before and I do see some golden flecks near the pupils. And there seems to be some bluish tones that could lead some to say I have hazel eyes. So maybe as I get older, my eyes will start to go grey like my hair? Why do I find that so cool?!</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The other supposedly fun tool is the Rare SNP calculator. This tool looks for SNPs that aren't found in the majority of the people in the database. Why would you want to know about these rare SNPs? Well, if you have something truly uncommon, it could help you connect to others who are part of that small group of people. They would be very likely related to you in order to have received that same rare mutation. There is a warning, however, that you need to take super serious: these rare SNPs can impart medical information! The medical information is based on studies (whether or not they are good studies is up for debate) that claim to connect that mutation with a disease or resistance or increased risk (or decreased risk). Please, don't use this utility as a replacement for talking to a medical professional. First, it's set up very confusing. Second, just because you carry a gene doesn't mean that gene is actively working against you. If you want to know your medical genetic information, see a genetic counselor. I need to also warn you that there is a new option to join the SNP pool. This allows you to compare your rare SNPs directly with others who have joined the pool. You will be able to see their medical information based on their DNA and <i>they will see yours.</i> I see no genealogical value in this tool at this point, so I actually don't recommend using it. It's not worth working yourself up over every cancer gene you have. And it's certainly not worth letting strangers work themselves up over every cancer gene you have.<br /></div>
<div>
So welcome to the information overload. Now you know what's been taking me so long! I've got one more utility I want to cover and then I'm thinking a wrap up on this series (I'm getting a bit tired of DNA to tell you the truth). I know I've not covered all you'll need to know about Gedmatch.com, but I have three last points:<br /><br />1. I've started a discussion group on Facebook for those looking to compare notes and ask questions:<br /><a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/540702705987151/" target="_blank">Gedmatch. Discussion Group</a>. Even though Gedmatch is in the title, we'll discuss anything related to genetic genealogy. We've got some files and explanations already up, but no question is discouraged.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
2. When you upload your raw data, you'll be given a kit number. It's usually a letter that indicates what company you took your test with and a series of numbers. You need that number to run the tests. You can share the number on discussion groups, but then anyone can input your number and see your matches, so it's up to you. Since this is true of the people who match you, note that uploading to this site allows them to see your matches and compare you to others, but only you will be able to use your rare SNP utility (unless you join the pool). Also, no one else can access your raw data. With that said, this is not for those who want to keep their DNA private. Yes, you don't have to give contact information. But I can take your anonymous kit number and look at your matches. With gumption and time, I could use that information to identify you via family trees and records. It's not easy, so it's not a large worry, but it's something those worried about privacy should consider.<br /><br />3. This is a volunteer site. They don't charge a membership fee. When AncestryDNA finally allowed raw results to be downloaded, this site crashed twice from the number of people uploading their results. Now it's backlogged and runs the risk of crashing again when it allows new uploads. PLEASE take a moment to donate to the site via Paypal or the snail mail address listed on the site. You don't have to pay, but it's the right thing to do. This site makes using third party genetic tools easier for everyone. They give you a place to compare your DNA to people who took tests from other companies. They ask for nothing. They deserve support. Your money makes sure they can keep the site running and buy the server space necessary to give you as many matches as possible. Our continued support will mean improvements to the site as well! Even if all you can give is a little, give it. Give it twice. When you have a little extra cash and think about all those wonderful new matches you've discovered, give that money to show how grateful you are for this opportunity. Encourage others to give. Donate now so they aren't forced to make it a paid site to keep the lights on! (Don't think it can't happen).</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Alright, I'm done for now. Up next is a second third party tool you may enjoy and it's only $5!</div>
<div>
-Ana</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
Rhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.com19tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4691552322695070495.post-35806817339760773052013-06-15T21:24:00.000-05:002013-06-15T21:24:54.291-05:00Banking on Family Tree DNA<div class="separator" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;">
<img border="0" height="222" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhSO97JQ-QiugZ9Q6KyZi14a85zcjPZB-9znvOXZcllzplveG0J6MirExLh6hWyDMRScHkR1UFkiM2F9w7pPcUkm9BNftjIzrspSMDRPPJ5bTY_bS3jEZPK_jaxt3Ya_kEofz_rLrJTxk-u/s320/FTDNA.jpg" width="320" /></div>
<br />
While there are dozens of companies that supply DNA tests to consumers for one reason or another, most genetic genealogists recognise or recommend only a handful. Top of that list has traditionally been Family Tree DNA. <a href="http://www.ftdna.com/" target="_blank">FTDNA</a> was founded in 1999 and it's labs are used by other companies like DNA Ancestry, African DNA, iGenea, and even National Geographic. What this means is that it's the big fish in this pond. So is it the company for you?<br />
<br />
In February of this year, I was seriously considering my testing options. I've already covered what mysteries I would like to solve and had come to the conclusion that genetic genealogy may be the only way I was ever going to get any clues. Then, like a divine sign, FTDNA reduced their 12 marker Y Chromosome test to $49! I had to get it. I begged my brother to take the test. Always supportive of my insanity, he was willing to be my guinea pig. What was I going to find out about him, he wondered. I had to be honest right off the bat.... I wasn't going to find out much. You see, when it comes to Y Chromosome tests, the more markers you test, the closer your relationship matches become. 12 markers would get us genetic matches within the last 29 generations. While I really wanted to find out about my great grandfather, I knew this test wouldn't do that. Well, I may end up finding a match to someone who is my 1st cousin, but the markers are too few to confirm such a close relationship. I would need the 37, 67, or 111 marker test to be sure. I wasn't ready to spend $170-360, so I was willing to just get a glimpse of what was possible.<br />
<br />
So I paid my $50 and waited for my kit. I received it within a week, but had to pester my brother for almost two weeks to get him to stop eating, drinking or brushing his teeth for a minute so I could get him to give a viable cheek swab sample. Until you have to get someone else's DNA, you have no idea how hard it is to keep things out of their mouth! The kit comes with two cheek swab brushes, two vials, a bag and a release form so they can share your contact info with genetic matches. I sent the kit back, finally, and waited for my results. I say waited, but I mean "checked the site every morning, afternoon, evening and twice as much on weekends" for weeks. Mid-April I had the test results back and 125 matches. What did it all mean?<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjSn_A0beeBxTAjRu_kUKglsStFpMXMyE53uIXfe9G0eVSpwgKQID02Kwd8z5vBmrl6FeCtjo6KE75TnqvWZrs9Zd9YIotenswHc69r5XJqAtl5ZR8VJFKjkmB2RiQyXhGmwq-2ygXjIMs5/s1600/Main+Page.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="176" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjSn_A0beeBxTAjRu_kUKglsStFpMXMyE53uIXfe9G0eVSpwgKQID02Kwd8z5vBmrl6FeCtjo6KE75TnqvWZrs9Zd9YIotenswHc69r5XJqAtl5ZR8VJFKjkmB2RiQyXhGmwq-2ygXjIMs5/s320/Main+Page.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
Not much, really. Like I said, I had paid for the 12 marker test. Because it is low in the number of markers checked, the common male ancestor could be centuries ago.... long before surnames were even invented. I got 125 matches and have not received any new hints since April. I did note that 27 of the matches had the same surname and that it was one of the possible surnames for my great grandfather. But in reality, this test was the genetic equivalent of a records index. I could see the names, but I couldn't look at the real facts and confirm the relationship. My goal was to find out more about our mysterious paternal line, and I do feel I accomplished that vague mission. While I cannot definitively connect the matches, there is enough new information to encourage me to work more on this line and possibly upgrade the test. FTDNA allows users to upload a GEDCOM to connect to their results. I perused a few of the trees on the matches that had chosen to do so and recognised some places if not names. Unfortunately, less than 20 had put in a tree, and most were very uninformative.<br />
<br />
But was that all I learned? Not at all! At 12 markers, Family Tree DNA told me that my brother's Y Chromosome was R1b1. What is that? Remember the post on Y Chromosomes? Every time the chromosome develops an SNP (single nucleotide polymorphism), scientists give it a letter or a number in an alternating pattern to note where it lands in the tree of Y Chromosome Adam. So from the origin of the Y Chromosome in Africa, my paternal line comes from the R branch that developed 30,000 years ago in Western Eurasia. R1 turned towards Europe as R2 moved into Asia proper. R1b travelled into Western Europe about 25,000 years ago, while R1a went to East and Northern Europe about 10,000 years ago. When you click on the tab "Migration Maps", you get all this information as well as a very cool looking map that can tell you about this early history of your family. But the information for R1b stops at 25,000 years ago. I can't take the direct paternal line past 1927 with documents.... I may be missing a few generations to make the connection. The traditional way of speaking of haplogroups means that eventually the chain of letters and numbers becomes very long and confusing for some people, so the new school of genetic genealogists talk about the "terminal SNP" which is the last mutation on the list. The 12 marker test doesn't tell me what that is, but FTDNA "predicts" it is R-M269 (R1b1a2 in the old speak). If I upgrade the test, I could confirm this terminal SNP, which would help me go back to those matches and say "Hey! You have to be a close cousin because you have the same haplogroup! Wanna connect?"<br />
<br />
Now what's all this talk showing up about upgrading my test? Well, FTDNA saves your sample so you can order an upgrade to more markers for the test you took, or a whole new test! FTDNA offers more than just Y Chromosome tests, remember? If I wanted to, I could order my brother's kit to be tested for their Family Finder (an autosomal test that connects you to cousins in their database just like AncestryDNA's autosomal test). I could order an mtDNA test to learn about my direct maternal line. Or I can upgrade the number of markers for the Y Chromosome test and get my matches confirmed to within the last 4 generations. (Hmmm, brother is 1, dad is 2, granddad 3.... hello great grandpa!). I can even order a full genome sequencing (if I'm made of money one day). And this is where the real benefit of FTDNA lies. Right now, they are still running the sale on the 12 marker Y Chromosome test. They've also added an introductory mtDNA test for the same price. Now, they won't break down your brick wall since they are so vague............ so why get one? To "bank" the sample, silly! You can always upgrade later when you can afford the more expensive tests. So get this test to just get a taste of what's out there. More importantly, get this test for any elderly relatives who may not live long enough for you to get around to the bigger tests! So who's on my list? My mother's paternal uncle is a good one. Since my grandfather is deceased, my great uncle is the best choice for an mtDNA test for their shared maternal line. If I could get my dad or one of his siblings to take the mtDNA test for their maternal line, that would also help me with some questions. And a male from my grandmother's maternal grandfather's family would tell me more about her grandfather (who I can not find before he immigrated to Scotland). I'm sure you can think of a relative who holds the genetic key to a mystery. One that is the last link to a direct maternal/paternal line (or at least the only one talking to you). Or maybe you have so many folks you want to test that the cost seems to overwhelm you. Have them take this test and then save your money for the upgrade when you are more flush. You can do the upgrade years down the road, so there's no reason to wait. Just head to a few genetic genealogy pages to see the stories of "I wish" to know how waiting any longer is a bad idea!<br />
<br />
So I'm still learning about this company and exploring all the tools available to me now. I will say that I've enjoyed my experience so far and encourage others to take advantage of one or more of the tests on one or more of your relatives. While waiting for your results, upload a GEDCOM of your tree, watch the learning videos and read the FAQ. Join genetic genealogy discussion groups and get ready for an overload of information to come at you. FTDNA has lots of help topics and forums, use them! They also have surname studies and family group pages that deal with specific haplogroups and haplotypes and finding out how everyone who is genetically connected can confirm with real documentation. Because I'm still in the vague category of the 12 marker test, I've not delved too far into the groups, but they are amazing! Users of FTDNA are serious about genealogy and making connections, so you will find more people willing to respond to inquiries here rather than other companies that emphasise learning your ethnicity over connecting to other people.<br />
<br />
The only con I really have about the site is that the FamilyFinder autosomal test is currently twice the price of AncestryDNA. And with third-party sites like Gedmatch.com accepting data from FTDNA, Ancestry and 23andMe, there's no reason to pay for the same test from all sites. You can even pay $50 to transfer your autosomal test from another company (sale price!) and use their database to connect with the testers who haven't currently transferred to Gedmatch. So paying them directly for the test isn't necessary, but it's your choice. And who knows? They could always reduce the price to better compete with the new kid in town. The current sales would suggest they're looking to stay big fish....<br />
<br />
But you know what they say about fish in the sea....<br />
-AnaRhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4691552322695070495.post-61851426794028894252013-05-30T23:41:00.000-05:002013-05-30T23:41:04.226-05:00AncestryDNA- Should You Test and What Do You Get?<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhNSK34hy73l9URO3lvMjCIxw00XE-KngWf66bwved4OWHjZVO1oOOXquGvMcLuoxvAaPHVGm99tkDTMhPyd7PtRV8EKOwQ8WxG8l5inhSRASXlavKFBORKD0NA0lWXTCW-jRhZh-BHVlR2/s1600/ADNA+offering.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="317" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhNSK34hy73l9URO3lvMjCIxw00XE-KngWf66bwved4OWHjZVO1oOOXquGvMcLuoxvAaPHVGm99tkDTMhPyd7PtRV8EKOwQ8WxG8l5inhSRASXlavKFBORKD0NA0lWXTCW-jRhZh-BHVlR2/s320/ADNA+offering.png" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Note the phone number and warning that this is currently<br />
available in the U.S. ONLY.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
We've now covered basic genetic knowledge, the kinds of tests available to genealogists, and setting expectations before testing. Today we're going to explore one of the companies that provide genetic testing: Ancestry.com<br />
<br />
Ancestry.com has provided Y Chromosome and mtDNA testing in the past, but has jumped into the autosomal testing in the last year. You can order a Y Chromsome, mtDNA or combination of both <a href="http://ldna.ancestry.com/buyKitGoals.aspx" target="_blank">here</a>. Currently, their focus is on the autosomal test, so if you select DNA from their dropdown menu, the page to the left is where you'll land. And because of it's popularity and my own genetic genealogy desires, their autosomal test is the one I took and will be reviewing for the most part (as well as providing a fabulous "how-to"!). But I wanted to be clear for those interested that the other options are still there, just tucked away.<br />
<span style="color: #6aa84f; font-size: large;"></span><br />
<span style="color: #6aa84f; font-size: large;">Why Choose Ancestry.com?</span><br />
<span style="color: black;">Of all your options, why should you consider Ancestry.com for your genetic testing? The best argument is the same one I'd give you for regular genealogy: It's the largest online repository for genealogical research. It has over 2.5 million subscribers (last time I <a href="http://corporate.ancestry.com/about-ancestry/" target="_blank">checked</a>) and that doesn't include all those folks taking the DNA test without subscribing to the research service. If you choose to include regular research along with genetic testing (which I whole-heartedly recommend), they will give you a jump start like you won't believe! And on top of all that, they have affiliate sites that include specialty records, photo sharing, and community forums at discounted rates (or free) that can help you take your research even further.</span><br />
<br />
It's basically a "one stop shop". You take a DNA test, build a tree, compare matches and reinforce with documents all in one place. The famous hint leaf system will help give you clues along the way. And if you test your Y Chromosome or mtDNA with another company, you can transfer your results to Ancestry.com by following the instructions <a href="http://ancestry.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/5500" target="_blank">here</a>. So even when you don't test with Ancestry, you can still use the system of members and hints to build your family history in ways many other genetic genealogy sites can't do simply because they don't provide family tree options!<br />
<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhppXRaviadKzt4f_ChuTSpSqDlUxAEyZv1_Dk3oMHHtkc17FJVZtotm3BUdOTDDLoNgkIzZb_5wSGBBi9b4mOyMZ5rqXBfM8MhsG4chVCg4HEix2SOlq67GxcdH_EBEBgYBMrxpeRnMyr_/s1600/ADNA+Home+Page.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="158" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhppXRaviadKzt4f_ChuTSpSqDlUxAEyZv1_Dk3oMHHtkc17FJVZtotm3BUdOTDDLoNgkIzZb_5wSGBBi9b4mOyMZ5rqXBfM8MhsG4chVCg4HEix2SOlq67GxcdH_EBEBgYBMrxpeRnMyr_/s320/ADNA+Home+Page.png" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">AncestryDNA Home Page</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<span style="color: #93c47d; font-size: large;">Getting Started</span><br />
<span style="color: black;">So on Ancestry.com's home page, there is a row of dropdown menus along the top (grey bar). One is marked "DNA". Click on that one and you'll be taken to the aforementioned autosomal offer page. If you have a test already, or set up a purchase of one, the page to the right is what you'll see. I have one test completed, one test in progress. When the test is activated, you'll see a progress bar that will show you the status of your test from purchase to completion. Like most companies, they batch the tests (I believe updates are Thursdays), so you don't need to check daily. But you will. I did. For a month. Every. Day. Anyway, back to this DNA home page. If you order one test and want another, the right hand side has a box for buying another test. Above that you'll notice a green box with "BETA Send Feedback". A <strong>BETA</strong> anything is a test. I want to be very clear about this. Ancestry.com's autosomal DNA test is so new that we're getting it while they are still refining how they want it all to go. If you don't like something, don't think it's as accurate as it should be, or want a feature added, click the feedback button and tell them about it. Changes won't happen overnight, but if you don't provide the feedback with that button, they may not happen at all!</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #93c47d; font-size: large;">Settings</span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgUZIWKgWsQ9TN-EgQcN_iZdjT5QJuTke8wBiHCk52U5u4p4kDJj8qx6lB6a-aHvCw0QLAwg7BMUwBbnZQXQhxQbxas7p7iD1X1GQi3HsjM5vMU8AeZ-rSo3NMgH15lycGcSRhiujMxqtT6/s1600/ADNA+settings.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="260" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgUZIWKgWsQ9TN-EgQcN_iZdjT5QJuTke8wBiHCk52U5u4p4kDJj8qx6lB6a-aHvCw0QLAwg7BMUwBbnZQXQhxQbxas7p7iD1X1GQi3HsjM5vMU8AeZ-rSo3NMgH15lycGcSRhiujMxqtT6/s320/ADNA+settings.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<span style="color: black;">So you order your test, get it in the mail and activate it. Your next step is the settings for the test. You'll need to decide if you want email notifications of new matches weekly, monthly or not at all. Why would you choose to not get emails? Many people, including myself, didn't take this test for anything more than learning their ethnicity mix. Now, I'm also a thorough blogger, so I've used the other options of connecting to cousins and such, but it wasn't my focus. And it's not going to be the focus for everyone. After that is your privacy settings. You can show your real name or a user ID or something else. If the test is for someone else with you just administering the test, then their initials will show with a note that you're the administrator and that's it. The other privacy option is to show only matched ethnicities to other people. You'll see all your ethnic percentages, but your matches will only see the ones they have in common with you. Anything else will be marked as "other" to them. I'm not sure how this helps protect your privacy more than just making you feel like it does.</span><br />
<br />
The grey box to the right is very important. When you first activate a test, you see the terms and conditions of a research project using AncestryDNA's results and have to accept or deny them before continuing. If you wish to review them, there is a link here. I like the idea of printing this out to show relatives I want to get samples from. The project is much like National Geographic in that they are trying to map humanity for language, culture, and migratory patterns. They also provide medical information to the study, so for those of you worried about handing that information out willy-nilly, you can opt out of participation when activating the test. If you do participate, your personal information will be stripped away. If at any time you change your mind, just email <a href="mailto:consent@ancestry.com">consent@ancestry.com</a> to remove part or all of your information from the project.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
The next portion of the box is where you get your raw results. What are "raw results"? Simply put, it's your DNA codes. It's the information that Ancestry has found and uses in their program. Why would you want to download your raw results? There are many other websites that will accept the results to connect to their pool of participants. Also, you can use the results to try other ethnicity calculators and compare that to what you found on Ancestry.com. There are other third-party tools that will tell you about medical issues you have inherited. I'll cover third-party websites in their own posts. Many people clamored for raw results, because this is our information and we deserve to know what it says. Plus, there are tools that Ancestry hasn't implemented yet that are useful and other sites provide us access until Ancestry catches up.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Below the raw results download is a delete button. <span style="color: red;"><strong><em><u>DO NOT DELETE YOUR TEST </u></em></strong></span><span style="color: black;">. If you want to lose the ability to connect to other people, access your ethnicity or your raw results, go ahead and delete. It removes your test from Ancestry's system. They don't store your sample, so this is all they know about you. You delete it, and that's it. Game over, man. I think the only reason I would use this is if a relative wanted the test, but didn't want it attached to my tree. I'd still download the results before deleting, but I would respect my family's wishes too.</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<span style="color: #93c47d; font-size: large;">Attaching Your DNA to Your Tree</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<span style="color: black;">In the settings, you can option to add your results (or the results of a relative) to your Ancestry.com tree. You don't have to have a tree on Ancestry.com. You don't even have to be a member of Ancestry.com to get a DNA test. Like I said, some folks are just curious about their ethnicity and have no desire to compare their results with others. But for the rest of the community, a tree is helpful. More valuable still is a well-sourced public tree. I'm not here to chastise private tree owners. You have your reasons and I respect that. I simply think a public tree will do you good. A public tree means you don't have to be the only one finding the connection. Your cousins can help! So you don't want to open your whole tree up to scrutiny (or you don't have any interest in research and currently don't have a tree on Ancestry), make a direct line family tree public to attach your DNA to so others can see it. It may be all they need to find how you are related. And I mean more than four people here! Your matches are confidently placed within 10 generations (but can be farther back), so put as many ancestors as you know for sure to give them a hand.</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Another reason you'll want a tree is that you'll get hints on the DNA page for any common surnames or ancestors. So if you make a tree or already have one, while you wait for your DNA to process, go ahead and check your tree for errors. The test can take 6-8 weeks to process AFTER they receive your kit back at the lab, so you have time to do some house cleaning. Make sure surnames are spelled correctly. Remove any special characters (* _ # $ % &) that can screw up a search. Remove married names from a woman's profile. Either have her maiden name, or leave it blank. UNK or Unknown show up as their own surnames and will not lead to a hint unless I also claim her surname is UNK. Add locations if you have them! The system will show if you have surnames in common, but we all know that not everyone with the same last name is related. If I click on "Brown" in your surnames and you have Michigan listed as a location, I've got a head start on finding our connection. (And if the location says California, I can safely assume that's probably not our connection).</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
If you find a person who doesn't have a tree or has a private tree (and trust me, you will), give them a message to say hi and ask to connect. If they don't respond, what have you lost but a few seconds of time? If they do, imagine all that you'll gain! So what if you're like some of my friends and don't know what to say? Well here's the form letter I use, you are welcome to fit it to your purposes. (A note, I am now on a third-party site called Gedmatch.com which I will cover in a later post and have added that info to my message)<br /><br />"Hello,<br /><br />My name is (name here ). AncestryDNA has matched me to you as a genetic cousin. I have a public tree (link here) on Ancestry.com that you can peruse to see if you notice any common names or locations. If you prefer, I would be happy to do the legwork for you if you invite me to your tree. I have recently added my results to Gedmatch.com (Kit #) if you have uploaded there as well and would care to compare. In any case, I appreciate the time you took to read this message and hope to hear from you soon.<br /><br />Thank you,</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
(name)"<br /><br />And this seriously works. I've messaged 50 private tree owners and been invited to 10 trees, had 4 tell me of my connection rather than invite, 3 tell me that the test was for a relative and they weren't researching that line, and one tell me straight out that they weren't interested in connecting. Others haven't responded, but I don't take that as a bad thing. Maybe they haven't been on the system lately. I can wait. There's so much to do right now!</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<span style="color: #93c47d; font-size: large;">My Experience</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhUEAjtHlnwsH7UF5jlZCo1B0q9-K4Iyt-hydSPcSrWS9jv-eZ2WqZs_EPvgbVpLXSmw_nJE4ifFqlzBg0KgXRpDQn4-zN9VmpEKK47-ciGO7TroTOcfxLmuFsGY71KoIfh0a0uvVKHXFn-/s1600/ADNA+Admix.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhUEAjtHlnwsH7UF5jlZCo1B0q9-K4Iyt-hydSPcSrWS9jv-eZ2WqZs_EPvgbVpLXSmw_nJE4ifFqlzBg0KgXRpDQn4-zN9VmpEKK47-ciGO7TroTOcfxLmuFsGY71KoIfh0a0uvVKHXFn-/s320/ADNA+Admix.jpg" width="319" /></a><span style="color: black;">So now I'll wrap up with what I'd consider the review portion. I ordered the test in early April. It arrived at the house in a week and was back in the mail next day (I had the sample given within minutes I was so excited!). About a week later I received confirmation of receipt at the lab. Early May I had my results. Shown here is my ethnicity mixture. I wasn't surprised by the Central European. And the British Isles was to be expected I guess. I do have an Irish Great Great Grandfather on one side and a British Great Grandfather on another. But the Scandinavian was weird. I can assume that it was an invading Viking force.......... or I can assume that Ancestry's test is a bit skewed, which they have admitted. Either way, I didn't know what I was expecting, but wasn't terribly shocked. I will note that the proven line of Native American and the semi-proven line of Lithuanian (Eastern European) didn't show up. When I remind myself that ethnicities can drop off, it's easier to swallow. This is why family trees and documentation are still so very necessary. DNA won't prove or disprove anything on it's own. It's just one piece of our puzzle.</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Since ethnicity was my main focus, I was pretty satisfied with the $99 I slapped down for this test. But I decided to check out the results for matches. Now, I will admit I played fast and loose the first couple of days and when I started to seriously want to connect to these folks, I suddenly felt very overwhelmed. So while your test is processing, make a spreadsheet, get a notebook, do whatever to start your research in an organised way. I took some time and made a spreadsheet with my surnames in it (with locations!) in a column. Then I add each person in a new column and list their surnames. I add those surnames to the first column if new, highlight with grey if matched. If I prove the match, I highlight in blue for dad's side, pink for mom's and green for shared by both parents (they are 3rd cousins afterall). I had one good 3rd cousin match, about 80 4th-6th cousins and hundreds of 7th+ cousins. The 3rd cousin is a private tree and hasn't been on since January, so I hold out hope for her. I've connected to 3 of the 4th cousins and proven them to my family lines (including one private tree owner who had the sister of my 6th great grandmother as his 6th great grandmother, but not her family which I had). I also connected 2 8th cousins via tree hints. The rest are spreadsheeted and I'm working on the remaining 4th-6th cousins at the moment. It'll be work, but it's worth it.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
There's so much more to cover, more than I could answer in one post without confusing some and boring others. Thankfully, Ancestry.com has a Learning Center and help section. <a href="http://ancestry.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/5442" target="_blank">Here</a> is the link to the Frequent Questions. There is a video there and on their YouTube channel. Read all that you can on the website. Know what you are paying for. Join discussions in the forums and on Facebook pages before and after you test. I have many friends who are interested in the test, but haven't taken one yet. They still belong to many groups including my new one <a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/540702705987151/" target="_blank">Gedmatch Discussion Group</a> where newbies and intermediaries help each other learn about this and other genetic genealogy sites. Even if you don't join my group, join someone's. Ask questions, everyone has them. There's just so much to know.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
I will end by saying that my experience was so positive that I've ordered another test for a maternal cousin. I have made a list with the help of my mother for another of our cousins (to confirm maternal connections), her sisters (one half, one full), and herself. My father has some serious concerns about DNA testing, however, and will not participate. I respect that and am withholding from asking cousins on that side for the moment. Still, the results I've gotten from this test have really helped my research and confirmed a bit of my paper trail. It's also given me a rather scary prospect as some cousins have a surname in their lists that is very familiar to me........... as the possible surname for my grandfather's real father. It's not something I'm ready to pursue at this moment, and I have a Y Chromosome test out on my brother with another company, so I'll back burner that development in favor of other connections right now.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Do yourself one favor, don't backburner a DNA test. The price is right at $99. It's cheaper than it's ever been before. More accessible than it's ever been before. If you are ready for the ride, all you need is to buy a ticket.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
-Ana</div>
Rhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.com27tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4691552322695070495.post-50718127804082814632013-05-27T11:20:00.001-05:002013-05-27T11:20:21.968-05:00It's a Mad World<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhi77-zZ9M6ejMG88bdc7_zQuJuisSUpZ_ki9X_K0WdmD8DAt3ygaPDTD6uEmdDGD1SX-dBrVn9pA4ZntNIlwkj_oUsZOJy34C4UA5xLGWwCTr0Sx_aksnGSmbZYgQMDCANgCY7LfYXFyNT/s1600/DNA+Female.bmp" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" bua="true" height="210" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhi77-zZ9M6ejMG88bdc7_zQuJuisSUpZ_ki9X_K0WdmD8DAt3ygaPDTD6uEmdDGD1SX-dBrVn9pA4ZntNIlwkj_oUsZOJy34C4UA5xLGWwCTr0Sx_aksnGSmbZYgQMDCANgCY7LfYXFyNT/s400/DNA+Female.bmp" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">My tree</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
I love graphics. It's easier to explain complicated issues to others with a graphic or two. It's easier to understand them yourself! Sometimes, a good graphic can show you what you're missing. And what we're missing can hurt our research... To the right is my pedigree chart from Ancestry.com. The pink line is my direct maternal line. I am a female, so I can take the mtDNA test and learn about those women back through time immemorial. Unfortunately, I don't have the ability to take the Y Chromosome test (not having a Y chromosome and all), so I've "nulled" my direct paternal line. To find out about those people specifically, I'd need my brother or father to test. But what about everyone in the green section? Every generation back is just going to add more people that the DNA test doesn't find. Suddenly, my maternal line is a small and lonely fraction of what I am.......<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEisLIF_s4wzKBl9DvujG1xl_tgI0owgWHGtfrzHyzIuIDbzE8KzPTHBxvoTG2nCH9uDcZfx2whZ8hJ71sIh_Q4ShkwoaKUz3AlaD7UqrIF4LsIljHj-aGR4WwrEswEdBx3JQYRVoQ5vNUln/s1600/Missing+Home+Person+Male.bmp" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" bua="true" height="210" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEisLIF_s4wzKBl9DvujG1xl_tgI0owgWHGtfrzHyzIuIDbzE8KzPTHBxvoTG2nCH9uDcZfx2whZ8hJ71sIh_Q4ShkwoaKUz3AlaD7UqrIF4LsIljHj-aGR4WwrEswEdBx3JQYRVoQ5vNUln/s400/Missing+Home+Person+Male.bmp" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Jim's tree</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
My brother's pedigree chart is a bit more encouraging. He gets the pink line for the mtDNA test. He also gets a blue line for the Y Chromosome test. But that blasted green section! He's still only going to give us a small view of the information now available. What to do? Have no fear, Autosomal DNA is here! Remember, there are 23 chromosome pairs. You inherit one chromosome from each parent for each pair. There is one pair known as the sex chromosomes, and that's where we get the Y Chromosome test. The other 22 pairs are known as the autosomal chromosomes. These are the building blocks of all that we are. And in them is the information of a million lifetimes.<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiYioQNB-lrfI42xG2x0iJZiCreyD6qTShsZbimKoRVed7rLvZjFjOxkZSAcsjPP7rdva4KGQFnfTKCJ0StjLWcDtTOYk6v-NtlW_1MRKHF19Av8FxvLc-njeDWoYcvG1O1OiMx3yTpiDzJ/s1600/Nationality.bmp" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" bua="true" height="210" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiYioQNB-lrfI42xG2x0iJZiCreyD6qTShsZbimKoRVed7rLvZjFjOxkZSAcsjPP7rdva4KGQFnfTKCJ0StjLWcDtTOYk6v-NtlW_1MRKHF19Av8FxvLc-njeDWoYcvG1O1OiMx3yTpiDzJ/s400/Nationality.bmp" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Nationality</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
An Autosomal test is sometimes referred to as an Ethnicity test. Now, I've covered the complications of race and ethnicity <a href="http://everymangenealogy.blogspot.com/2013/02/racing-to-wrong-conclusion.html" target="_blank">before</a>, but we're going to cover it again in a different way to help those who need it. <strong>Nationality</strong> is not ethnicity. Your nationality is where you were born or where you took the oath of citizenship. I'm an American, born and raised in the United States. As you can see in the graphic on the right, so is most of my family. The black boxes are for the unknowns. My grandfather Gibson is illegitimate, so I have no idea about his father. My great grandmother Goff/Gaulf is a bit of a mystery to me. I am not certain of her parentage, although several trees on Ancestry.com are. So I am going to play it safe and say I don't know her parents' nationality either. My great grandmother Lavinski was born in Scotland, and her parents were Lithuanian. When I take the Autosomal DNA test, if I were to mistake nationality with ethnicity, I would expect my pie to be mostly American, with a small portion set out for British and Lithuanian. Now, there's already one problem: American, British and Lithuanian aren't ethnicity options!<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDFj9FN567f4JTcOC6upuclTOJqD3su5dY86CIHO2Gsj8qE7exXaXXlPAOGNdgF1yKI7JpQhbWluemWAEPZmv8vgrs-PMQL2Fx69mGq8OhFRP_FfX5cNPYYvgwiX4OEJYeSWzk11rOTbxV/s1600/Heritage.bmp" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" bua="true" height="210" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDFj9FN567f4JTcOC6upuclTOJqD3su5dY86CIHO2Gsj8qE7exXaXXlPAOGNdgF1yKI7JpQhbWluemWAEPZmv8vgrs-PMQL2Fx69mGq8OhFRP_FfX5cNPYYvgwiX4OEJYeSWzk11rOTbxV/s400/Heritage.bmp" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Heritage</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Some people confuse<strong> heritage</strong> with ethnicity. I changed up my graph. I know my grandpa Gibson is half English based on my research of his maternal line going back about 8 generations. I know my grandma was part German, part Irish and part Native American based on research and rumor (I used grey for the rumor). I know my grandpa Householder was part German and part Native American all based on provable research (I used the U.S. flag for the provable Native American heritage). My grandma Brown was part English and part Lithuanian. Note that my great grandma Lavinski has half the British flag and half the Lithuanian flag. She identified herself as Scottish for as long as I knew her. She was born and raised there. For a long time, all I knew about her was that she was Scottish. Lithuania was in her blood, but Scotland was her heart. So my square becomes a jumble of flags, cultural identities, and general confusion. If I took the autosomal test and confused heritage with ethnicity, I would expect to find Native American, German, British, and Lithuanian. But those still aren't ethnicity categories I'm going to find!</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
So what is ethnicity? When it comes to an autosomal DNA test, it's something deeper than a flag. Something richer than a culture. And something untold by written history. Since ethnicity is so enormous and far reaching, let's warm up our brains with an exercise on a smaller scale. Think of your house. More precisely, the land your house is on. Is there a fence to clearly define the border between your yard and the neighbor? Who placed the fence? Is it your fence or theirs? How long has that fence been there? Imagine your surprise if you were to get the land deed from the county office and find out that fence was on the wrong line. How were you to know? The "real" border is an imaginary line based on land markers and a general agreement between who sold the property and the buyer. That seller had a larger parcel of property that encompassed your house and your neighbor 50 years ago. He bought half your property from someone else. So straight down the middle of your house is another imaginary line from that older property marker. 100 years before that, your property was part of the U.S. government's purchase from France or Spain. 1,000 years before that, it was in the hands of this Native tribe or that. 1,000 years before that, it was used by a different tribe or another. 10,0000 years before that...........</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
That imaginary boundary has been jumping around quite a bit and for longer than you'll be able to find a paper trail to account for. And that is exactly what the problem is with defining ethnicity for the purposes of genetic genealogy. So how do the researchers define it so they can make tests for us? Well, they make reference populations and complicated math. What is a reference population? They find a living person with proven heritage of one area, say, Lithuania. They test the person's DNA and compare it to others who claim to be 100% Lithuanian and then compare those against folks who are 100% Nigerian, Chinese, French, Russian, Australian Aborigine, etc. The markers that are shared by the Lithuanians but not the other groups are chosen to mean "Lithuanian". But the borders of Lithuania have been fluid and Lithuanians have a shared cultural history with eastern Russia, Poland and the Caucasus. So instead of calling the ethnicity "Lithuanian", the scientists call it "Eastern European" or "Caucasian" or "North East European" or whatever. The names are an arbitrary label placed by the scientist based on the number of different reference populations they sample and what imaginary borders they place on the world to mark one from the other. Genetically, humans are not far enough apart to be so delineated.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
When I first heard of autosomal testing, there was something about German heritage being impossible to define. Germany is in the center of Europe. It has conquered and been conquered over and over again since the earliest Germanic tribes. The Celtic culture that many will associate with Ireland, Wales or Scotland is based on the Celtic tribe that conquered the original peoples. The Celts came from the area we now call Germany. There were several tribes from Germany that pushed into different areas surrounding them, leaving a genetic signature along the way. In the early days, the reference populations weren't large enough (or clearly defined enough) to say "this is German, this is British, this is French and this is Scandinavian". They really still aren't. But the companies you can test with do their best and are getting better. So when you take a test now, your ethnicity percentages may change later. You don't change, but the science improves. So you expect British and get a lot of Scandinavian. A year from now, those populations could be better defined and the Scandinavian will reduce. So what to do? Patience, my friend, patience.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
And you'll need a lot of patience, because to best utilize the DNA test, you'll need to read and research. DNA tests are of no use without real genealogical research. And not just the "add it because everyone's tree has it". No "I'm just having fun" research. Real "here's the hundreds of hours spent squinting at pieces of paper to prove <em>this</em> person is my relative vs. that other person with the same name" research. Documented, cited, and oft times not found online research. Also, DNA tests are useless without knowledge about the tests themselves and the companies behind them. These posts I'm writing are just a starting point. How deep you dive into your genetic past is dependent upon how much time you research this technology. Join DNA discussion boards and groups. Watch videos. Read, read, read.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<strong><span style="color: #3d85c6; font-size: large;">What Companies Test Ethnicity?</span></strong></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="color: black;"></span> </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="color: black;">National Geographic and Family Tree DNA are again a part of the list. We also add 23andMe.com and Ancestry.com. Again, there are several others, but these are the known, trusted, most used ones. I will be reviewing the companies and the third-party tools that make testing useful in upcoming posts. There is so much to read today (and so much when I write about the companies themselves), that I don't want to go too deep into the company part right now.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<strong><span style="color: #3d85c6; font-size: large;">Caveats</span></strong></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="color: black;">1. Ethnicity is region specific, not country or town specific. It will not tell you what tribe of Native American or African you come from. Even if the reference population is from Italy, your relatives may not have been Italian. The regions you know are little imaginary lines, not real facts.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
2. Ethnicity is not parent specific. You will not be able to tell what part of your ethnicity is your father and what part is your mother based on your test. Research and comparison with other tests will help, but again, this test will not tell you who your real father is. And thanks to pedigree collapse, your parents will share an ancestor or two. So some matches will be related to both sides of your family. Researching the differences between the cousins you know are exclusive to one side and cousins you aren't so sure of will help you complete the picture.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
3. Reference populations have grown, but they are still small and based on what people "know" about themselves. As people take this test, their results will help to refine the ethnicity definitions. It's not an overnight thing, however. (Ancestry.com has an alarmingly high Scandinavian error right now that people seem to expect to be "fixed" within weeks. The test is only a year old and it can take a year or more before they can clearly define the margin of error and filter out the incorrect Scandinavian results. I'll discuss this more in the upcoming AncestryDNA post). National Geographic has been doing this for quite a while as a research study. They travel to test isolated portions of the world to better refine the results. Their goal is to test as many people as possible to fully map the migration of man...........talk about a Herculean task!</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
4. A well-researched tree is necessary. Documented lines for every grandparent, great grandparent, 2nd great grandparent, etc. for 10 generations is best. Very few people have every single person for 10 generations proven and documented, so you will have holes. Your matches may fit in those holes, so don't give up just because you don't see a matching relative easily. They may hold the clues to your greatest mysteries, but you'll have to work together to solve them. And researching your collateral lines (the siblings of your grandparents, great grandparents, etc. down to the last known generation) will help match your distant cousins. Remember, a 1st cousin is related to you by 1 of your 2 parents; 2nd cousins by 1 of your 4 grandparents; 3rd cousins by 1 of your 8 great grandparents; 4th cousins by 1 of your 16 great great grandparents...... do you know all the great grandchildren of all 16 great great grandparents? Do you know all 16 great great grandparents?</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
5. DNA is more than 10 generations. You could show an ethnicity that doesn't make sense based on your detailed research. It could be an error, but it's just as likely that it's from an ancestor that lived before written history. You could be seeing the last remnants of your 45th grandfather Oook. How do you know? That's right, detailed and thorough research.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
6. DNA can disappear. Statistically, you'll share 50% of your DNA with each of your parents. 25% will be shared with your grandparents, and 12.5% with each great grandparent. Thanks to insertion, translocation, deletion and other genetic shuffling, what you share in reality can be a little different than the statistics. Naturally, you'll share 50% with your dad, but during meiosis (the creation of sperm) he may only give you his mother's chromosomes. You could have 0% of your grandfather's ethnicity markers! And that's only your grandfather; what if you're hoping this test will carry the ethnicity of your great great grandparents? You could easily have missed out on their 6.25% contribution! Unfortunately, this means that you may not show that Native American you were desperate to prove. It may mean you missed the markers. A well-researched tree will help. You can compare your results to that of the cousins you'll find and maybe their well-researched tree will have the documentation proving your heritage (or just as likely disproving it).</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
7. DNA doesn't lie. The companies that test you don't choose your matches based on your tree or your surname. They may match you differently based on what they consider a margin of error or a minimum percent to be considered a true match, but the people they say are your cousins are your cousin. Pedigree collapse could effect the generations calculator, so don't trust that the prediction of 4th cousin is accurate. They could be a little closer or farther depending on how often the family intermarried. Proper genealogy research will help. Since DNA doesn't lie, it could tell you something surprising about yourself. Even though this isn't a test specific to your father's line, you could prove a non-paternity event or adoption simply by what cousins you match. If learning your family isn't blood related will change how you feel about them, DO NOT TAKE THIS TEST. If finding a large percentage of an ethnicity other than you expect will change your personal identity, DO NOT TAKE THIS TEST.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
8. There's still a lot of confusion about how genetic genealogy can help/hurt us. You'll need to read, watch, listen............ research. It can be overwhelming. I seriously thought my brain would explode. Take it slow. Don't take everything literally until you've played with it for a while. Know that everyone knows just enough to hurt themselves. Few people are expert enough to give you clear answers. Most groups you can join to discuss DNA for genealogy purposes are started and maintained by enthusiasts just like you, not scientists who run the labs.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Now, I think I need to shut off my brain and take a nap. Get your own pillow.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
-Ana</div>
Rhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4691552322695070495.post-12349197739568893512013-05-23T20:23:00.003-05:002013-05-23T21:10:11.140-05:00All Mama's ChildrenSo last post talked about the Y Chromosome test that can tell you more about your father's direct paternal line. What about mom? Is there something that mom gives her child that dad doesn't? One would assume that if the Y Chromosome worked for dad's line, that the X Chromosome would be mom's, right? I mean, a man has a Y and an X, and the X has to come from his mother.... so .... ya know... solution. Not really. Okay, so there are 23 chromosome pairs. And one pair is known as the sex chromosomes. That's an X and a Y for a boy and two X's for a girl. For those of you noodling this out as we go along, you may have spotted the problem. To get a girl, dad has to give an X too. And because of translocation, during meiosis (the creation of an egg) the girl's X chromosomes can swap genes. So while your mother only passes down one X, she may not get one that is 100% one parent or the other. So how do we find out more about our matrilineal line like we do our paternal?<br />
<br />
There is one thing that mothers pass down that fathers do not. Mitochondria. What is it? Inside every cell are these energy producers known as mitochondria. They have their own DNA, which suggests that this organelle may have been a bacteria that evolved to live in our cells. The great thing about the mitochondria having it's own DNA is that it has specific mutations. And because a mother passes down her mitochondria (the father's sperm cells have them, but they are dissolved during fertilization of the egg), this is our best bet for knowing about our mother's direct maternal line. Now, there are exceptions to this rule. Very rarely a man will pass his mitochondria down rather than the woman. Because it does happen, there is some pushback on how accurate we can consider this test. However it's so rare that most people don't worry about it.<br />
<br />
Just like "Y Chromosome Adam", there is a "Mitochondrial Eve". Eve lived approximately 200,000 years ago and is the MRCA (Most Common Recent Ancestor) of every living human (on their mother's side). As Eve had daughters, the mitochondria changed and mutated. The mutations are now used to know what branch of the family tree is yours and how you connect to humanity as a whole. MtDNA uses SNPs (Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms), so the results are considered more "ancient". The fact that mtDNA isn't as accurate for recent generations is used by detractors more than the whole "men can sometimes pass down their mtDNA instead of women" thing. But this one's a little harder to refute. I would like to point out that currently it's considered the most accurate matrilineal test we have AND that no test is really useful without real genealogical research to back it up. So don't neglect your documentation just because you take a DNA test!<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgZkwjXk4sDUw_jeK6IKx34tSkyxefjrYoICIxgaQ8eSIk1pKizANl1cgO2Kh_TzfqrmreQ-w9s2__8_QumWfuDuF690EQ88mxd0ISaXxC83iXKp71Y4dCI0wc2eTOlZBm8rya79xg9FnS-/s1600/untitled.bmp" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" bua="true" height="332" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgZkwjXk4sDUw_jeK6IKx34tSkyxefjrYoICIxgaQ8eSIk1pKizANl1cgO2Kh_TzfqrmreQ-w9s2__8_QumWfuDuF690EQ88mxd0ISaXxC83iXKp71Y4dCI0wc2eTOlZBm8rya79xg9FnS-/s640/untitled.bmp" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A mother passes down her mtDNA to <u>all</u> children.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Because mothers pass down this DNA to all their children, sons and daughters can both take the mitochondrial DNA test (mtDNA). You can test to find out about your mother and her matrilineal line, but what if you want to know about her father's mother? Just like the Y Chromosome test, choosing a subject for testing is easiest when using a pedigree chart to help visualise. Above is the same chart we used for the YDNA test. This time, we're hoping to solve the identity of Mystery Mother. Again, the S/P indicates "sans progeny" and those children have died without producing a child to test. You could choose any of her sons or any of her daughters. You can choose any of the daughters' sons or daughters. But notice all of the sons' children are crossed out. The children of the sons will get the mtDNA of the spouse and therefore will not help us find Mystery Mother. So while a male <em>can</em> take this test, testing your brother to find out about your father's mother won't help you. I personally would love it if my father would test his mtDNA so we could know more about his mother's maternal line (another of my little brick walls). My brother is taking the National Geographic test and will have his mtDNA tested for our mother's maternal line, which will help us learn more about our great grandmother's mother (my current maternal brick wall).<br />
<br />
So what companies will you be able to get the test from? Just like the Y Chromosome test, the big two are Family Tree DNA (<a href="http://ftdna.com/">Ftdna.com</a>) and <a href="http://shop.nationalgeographic.com/ngs/browse/productDetail.jsp?productId=2001246&gsk&code=MR20936" target="_blank">National Geographic</a>. Family Tree DNA is having a sale right now for either introductory Y Chromosome or mtDNA testing for only $49. These are introductory, so they aren't really "useful" to your genealogical research. However, if you have an elderly relative you are worried will pass away before you can afford to get the more detailed tests, this is the perfect way to "save" their DNA for later. FTDNA stores their sample for retesting for years. And you don't have to buy both tests for your male relatives. You will be able to upgrade the Y Chromosome test to a combo test later without having to purchase the separate mtDNA test now. National Geographic is $200 whether you are male or female. Men will get the added bonus of Y Chromosome testing, but both men and women get mtDNA and autosomal testing. There are of course other sites and companies, but these are the most recognised.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjQYg9PSHUPTd_RnKEJFtN1VbWFgCFYOlR3foex1QtVCPY6Xkem3zXqDzOSKtMSI69Bn6Wa2v4rDmRkIOFmDSEWwIq4_pZqvrgmeuxWCuBQ05s8E67pufWXg-NQdZczY2M7IanM1FVwCRiZ/s1600/mtDNA+Home+Person.bmp" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" bua="true" height="210" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjQYg9PSHUPTd_RnKEJFtN1VbWFgCFYOlR3foex1QtVCPY6Xkem3zXqDzOSKtMSI69Bn6Wa2v4rDmRkIOFmDSEWwIq4_pZqvrgmeuxWCuBQ05s8E67pufWXg-NQdZczY2M7IanM1FVwCRiZ/s400/mtDNA+Home+Person.bmp" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">An mtDNA test is just like the Y-Chromosome inasmuch as it only traces one direct line (in this case, your mother's mother's mother etc.)<br />
<div align="left">
<br />
</div>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div align="left">
<strong><span style="color: #6fa8dc; font-size: medium;">The Caveats</span></strong><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="color: black;"></span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="color: black;">1. This test is considered more accurate for your deep maternal ancestry rather than the recent stuff. It can help you find your mother, but only in conjunction with real research. Even the "Full Maternal DNA" test provided by Family Tree DNA can only get within 9 generations (while a Y Chromosome test at 111 markers can get as close as 4).</span><br /><br /> 2. Because you may need to test another person, be ready to answer questions by doing a lot of research. Be able to tell that other person what company you are using. What the results may show. How they will participate (most tests require the subject not eat or drink before giving a sample). What the realistic turnaround time is. How you will use their results: Do you want to make them public so you can connect to living relatives or will you keep them private and are only satisfying your own curiosity. The more you know before you ask for their help, the more likely they will help.<br /><br /> 3. The number of markers matters. An introductory mtDNA test from Family Tree DNA will only get you within the last 28 generations.<br /><br /> 4. And more markers means more money. Even at the "high" prices, however, I'd like to point out how affordable DNA research has become in less than 20 years. We couldn't even dream of something like this a mere two decades ago. Be thankful that it costs as little as it does.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"> 5. DNA test are <span style="color: red;"><strong><em><u>non-refundable</u></em></strong><span style="color: black;">. Notice I used red, underlined and italicised bold-faced large font "non-refundable". If you don't like the results, tough tits. The labs aren't out to get you, that's your DNA.</span></span></span></div>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;"></span></span></span><br />
<div align="left">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;">So there you have it. An mtDNA test will get you your direct maternal line just like a Y Chromosome test will get you your direct paternal line. There's still the possibility of a surprise "hiccup" in your ancestry. We're all pretty sure of who our mother is. What if you were adopted and don't know it? What if you are one of those "switched at birth" babies? What if your "mother" is your aunt or grandmother who took you as their own because your mother was a teenager unable to care for you? Just like a non-paternity event (NPE), you have to be ready. And just like before, I can't tell you how to do that. If "family" means "biologically connected", then DO NOT TAKE A DNA TEST. Something this deeply personal requires self-possession, demands the ability to take yourself out of the situation, and insists on a rational mind over an emotional heart. If you aren't strong enough, the current of unbridled truth will take you under and drown you.</span></span></span></div>
<div align="left">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;"></span></span></span> </div>
<div align="left">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;">Only the brave need jump into this gene pool.</span></span></span></div>
<div align="left">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;">-Ana</span></span></span></div>
Rhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4691552322695070495.post-16635954928080303932013-05-22T22:22:00.001-05:002013-05-23T21:10:28.788-05:00Papa Was a Rolling Stone
<br />
So you want to know more about your paternal ancestry. Maybe you don't know your dad, or paternal grandfather. Maybe you know your paternal line for the last 10 generations, but want to connect to living cousins or get an idea about your genealogy from beyond written history. And maybe you don't know what the difference is in genetic tests and expect this to do something it won't. I'm here to help.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #3d85c6; font-size: large;">My Story</span></strong><br />
<span style="color: black;">So I've talked about it before: my father's father (my paternal grandfather) was illegitimate. We knew it, but didn't talk about it. We had a surname possibility, but no leads and the man in question definitely denied paternity. Before genetic genealogy, this branch was essentially a dead end. Now that there are relatively affordable direct-to-consumer DNA tests, I can find out more about this line.... if I can get a male in the family to agree to do some testing. I can't test myself, because I'm female.</span><br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgxwSlp1e8kbUzPQj4cn-kaSSEezw_8mmy1bagbS8DvfpiSwEefm9SKoAw2ymQJm0RNKSy0K_LmE6E2pGhGzLMxIW-ACoIf7nOpYfTocyySkaNHa4WM7d-UKuwZ8JKSgyAWc77eZt4k4sXy/s1600/Y+DNA+Home+Person.bmp" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" bua="true" height="210" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgxwSlp1e8kbUzPQj4cn-kaSSEezw_8mmy1bagbS8DvfpiSwEefm9SKoAw2ymQJm0RNKSy0K_LmE6E2pGhGzLMxIW-ACoIf7nOpYfTocyySkaNHa4WM7d-UKuwZ8JKSgyAWc77eZt4k4sXy/s400/Y+DNA+Home+Person.bmp" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">This is my family tree (my brother the home person). As you can see, I don't have information on my paternal grandfather's father. A Y-Chromosome test could potentially lead to some answers.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #6fa8dc; font-size: large;">Why Men?</span></strong><br />
If you don't know <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bryan_Sykes" target="_blank">Bryan Sykes</a>, you need to get on the ball! He's pretty much "The Man" in genetic genealogy. He's also written several books that can go deeper than any one blogger could even imagine on the subject of genetics. There are many in the field, but he's going to be a name you need to know (like <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustave_Anjou" target="_blank">Anjou</a> when talking royalty). At the very beginnings of genetic genealogy, Sykes researched men with his surname and looked at four markers on the Y Chromosome to see if they matched in any significant way. They did. Another study used the Y Chromosome information for men with clear Jewish lineages from the Cohen surname. Again, it was believed that these men would be more closely related to each other than to the average man off the street. They were and this lead to more refining of the methods of mapping and grouping the mutations of the Y Chromosome. The methodology was expanded and improved until it was finally offered to regular people by a company named GeneTree in 1997. In the early days, the market (and technology) was all about paternity testing. It's grown from those four simple markers to up to 111.<br />
<br />
So why is this a male only test? Why did research focus on men only? First, the basics: the Y Chromosome is male-only. A father passes it to his son. The son passes it down to his son. The "markers" we talk about are STRs (Short Tandem Repeats). The longer the segment, the closer the match. Because the Y Chromosome is specifically from father to son, it was a perfect way to test theories on genetic inheritance. The 22 autosomal chromosomes can swap information between pairs and pass information from both parents down to the child, leading to confusing results. The first research used good old fashioned family history and new fangled DNA testing to prove men with the same surname were related. This was then expanded to prove how small groups of men were related farther in time to other groups of men (connecting people together to a time before surnames existed).<br />
<br />
All men are considered to be related to "Y Chromosome Adam". This is the MRCA (Most Recent Common Ancestor) for all men in the entire world. Depending on the study and the theory in action, a DNA company's report will have "Adam" as living anywhere from 200,000 to 500,000 years ago. As "Adam" had sons, those men separated and populated the world. Occasionally a mutation would occur. These became<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup" target="_blank"> haplogroups</a>. These groups further broke down into smaller communities with their own mutations. When a man is tested, he finds out his haplotype. Basically, he learns what subset of what community of what group of what branch of "Adam" he belongs to.<br />
<br />
Let's put this another way any genealogist will understand. Consider "Adam" to be Adam Smith. Mr. Smith has two sons, John Smith and James Smith. John travels to West Africa and starts a family there. James prefers Asia. John has two sons, Caden and Casey. Caden heads to Europe; Casey sticks around in Africa. James also has two sons, Michael and Mordecai. Michael heads so far east, he ends up in North America. Mordecai heads from Asia to Australia. So you're doing your family research into the Smith line and you find out that your grandfather Moses is the son of Mordecai. You will be more closely related to the great grandsons of Michael than you will be the great grandsons of Caden. And because of this closer connection, you know more about the migratory pattern of your family. You can focus your efforts on other Smiths who have history in Australia even if they don't know how they connect to the tree of Adam. And any adoptee who uses DNA testing and finds out they are the descendant of Mordecai can compare their results to yours (if you choose to make them public). The closer you are related to the adoptee, the closer they get to knowing where their paternal line started.<br />
<br />
 <strong><span style="color: #6fa8dc; font-size: large;">Choosing What Family to Test</span></strong>
<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4jGQSkKbPGbt3bRwBMjOo0yBAiXojmzJHDJ6iTKEOXcDH5Vi9qGs1B7WrWZiOBrhOvwaXqs5cJRMnPTW0dBovSDN2lwxQC2oEfMiYoAk2_diBz8H_cIqbq7nqMwsFnrUiBQVvcCTpO-gB/s1600/Y+Chromosome+Family.bmp" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" bua="true" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4jGQSkKbPGbt3bRwBMjOo0yBAiXojmzJHDJ6iTKEOXcDH5Vi9qGs1B7WrWZiOBrhOvwaXqs5cJRMnPTW0dBovSDN2lwxQC2oEfMiYoAk2_diBz8H_cIqbq7nqMwsFnrUiBQVvcCTpO-gB/s400/Y+Chromosome+Family.bmp" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">S/P means the child died without producing a biological child. Assuming the rest of the tree represents living relatives, to find out about the common male (top), I would need to test a connected male relative. A daughter (or a child of a daughter) will do me no good.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
So who should you test? Because this is a male-only test, women are excluded. If you are a woman, you'll need a male relative. Also, because this is father to son, having your brother tested to find your mother's father won't help. The pedigree chart can be helpful to visualise who is "eligible" for testing. Take the photo above as an example. The man at the top is our Mystery Father. He has 5 sons who live long enough to have children. (Note the S/P for "sans progeny". Those children didn't live long enough to produce children.) The daughters and their children are of no use as they won't have the Y Chromosome needed, so I crossed them out. The sons have their own children and I cross out the granddaughters. Grandsons, great grandsons, great great grandsons...... the better your research into the tree, the more possible tests. You only need one.... unless you worry about nonpaternity events (which I will discuss in "Caveats"). If you want mom's dad, you'll need mom's brother or uncle to test.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #6fa8dc; font-size: large;">What Company to Choose</span></strong><br />
<span style="color: black;">Family Tree DNA (<a href="http://ftdna.com/">ftdna.com</a>) has a sale for their 12 marker test right now. That's only 12 markers, so it will give you cousin matches from 29 generations ago. Genealogically useless, but it's a start. And they store your tests so you can upgrade later or order a different test, so the intro price is a great way to store the DNA of older relatives who may not be around when you're actually ready to test. There are three other levels (36, 64, 111) that are progressively more expensive. The more markers tested, the closer your matches will be. The 111 marker test can match you within 4 generations.</span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://shop.nationalgeographic.com/ngs/browse/productDetail.jsp?productId=2001246&gsk&code=MR20936" target="_blank">National Geographic</a> also has a Y Chromosome test. The bonus of their test is that for $200, they test your father's line, your mother's line and your autosomal chromosomes. The drawback is the wait. I'm on 2 months of waiting to hear if they've even received my sample. And from what friends have told me, it'll be a long time before I get my results. If you're impatient to know the truth, this isn't the test for you. Still, the value is worth the wait. While Nat. Geo. won't directly connect you to relatives (they are doing it as a scientific "how we all relate" kind of study), you can take your results to several other sites and connect to people who've taken tests on many platforms.<br />
<br />
There are more, but these are the big two and should be the first you consider. With ANY large and important purchase like this, read as much as you can. Read their blogs, watch their videos. Find out how they test, how long results typically take, and what support they offer. Stick to sites that people know and trust. Watch out for sites with similar sounding names to popular companies. Make sure you are on the site you want to be on! Also note that some companies are strictly <em>paternity tests</em>. They will require two people to test to prove one is the father of the other (or that two men share a father). They aren't for genealogy research.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #6fa8dc; font-size: large;">The Caveats</span></strong><br />
<span style="color: black;">1. This is a male only test. If you are a woman, you can't take it. I'm sorry, I wish you could, but you can't. If you are an only child, this test will not be able to tell you about your father.</span><br />
<br />
2. Because you may need to test another person, be ready to answer questions by doing a lot of research. Be able to tell that other person what company you are using. What the results may show. How they will participate (most tests require the subject not eat or drink before giving a sample). What the realistic turnaround time is. How you will use their results: Do you want to make them public so you can connect to living relatives or will you keep them private and are only satisfying your own curiosity. The more you know before you ask for their help, the more likely they will help.<br />
<br />
3. The number of markers matters. Like I said, you can buy the introductory $49 test with 12 markers just to get your foot in the door, but you won't find much to help your research.<br />
<br />
4. And more markers means more money. Even at the "high" prices, however, I'd like to point out how affordable DNA research has become in less than 20 years. We couldn't even dream of something like this a mere two decades ago. Be thankful that it costs as little as it does.<br />
<br />
5. DNA test are <span style="color: red; font-size: large;"><strong><em><u>non-refundable</u></em></strong><span style="color: black; font-size: small;">. Notice I used red, underlined and italicised bold-faced large font "non-refundable". If you don't like the results, tough tits. The labs aren't out to get you, that's your DNA.</span></span><br />
<br />
<u><span style="background-color: yellow; color: black;">Which brings me to my last caveat. The real big one.</span></u><br />
6. Be as prepared as you can for a Non-Paternity Event (NPE). This means that someone's father isn't who you think it is. You could take the test and find out your father isn't your <a href="http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2013/05/paternity_testing_personal_genomics_companies_will_reveal_dna_secrets.html" target="_blank">father</a>. Or that your grandfather isn't your father's father. Or that a thousand years ago...... well, someone wasn't who they thought they were. And you can say all day you are ready and not be ready for it. I wish I could tell you how to prepare for such an event, but I can't. I can only tell you that it can happen and it does happen. If you can't see the man you called "father" as your father if your DNA says he isn't, then don't take this test! If you test someone else and find out they aren't related to the man they thought was their father........... God help you.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: #3d85c6; font-size: large;"><strong>In the End</strong></span><br />
Now, I know about at least one NPE in my father's line. I've taken an autosomal test and my brother has taken the National Geographic "full service" test. When all the results are in, I'll be able to compare autosomal segments and confirm we are full siblings (really, we look like twins, and we both look like our father, so I'm not really worried). IF we are, I can then use his Y Chromosome results to connect to people who are related to our grandfather's real father. My father has no interest in knowing anything about this. In fact, he worries for everyone taking these tests, not myself specifically. He worries about those folks finding the NPE and having an identity crisis. And I tell him, "it happens". Some people can't handle it. But it's like taking a trip to a foreign country or learning to ski. You can either handle the challenge or you can't. And you don't really know until you try. Still, he doesn't want me to try. And I respect his opinions, but I'm still curious. He may not want to know about his "real" grandfather, but to be honest, neither do I. I am curious about the possibility of finding living relatives, but I asked my brother to take this particular test just to know without connecting to others. I had my brother tested via National Geographic and Family Tree DNA. Like I said, I'm still waiting on National Geographic. FTDNA, however, is a little quicker. I only did the 12 marker test, so again, not going to tell me about my great grandfather. BUT I did notice that the majority of matches had the same surname as the rumored father of my grandfather. Not conclusive proof, but encouraging. I could pay for the upgrade and know more, but I am willing to wait for the full results from National Geographic.<br />
<br />
And what about telling dad? Well, I've decided not to. I've approached him about a test for his mother's maternal line (to be covered in the mtDNA test post to come), but even that is getting pushback. So he's not interested, fine. And if I find out my brother is not my brother? I've already made the decision to keep that to myself. My brother has no real interest, but supports my genealogy obsession. His reward will be to only hear the good stuff. I want to test some cousins on the Ancestry.com autosomal test. That isn't male specific and won't tell me about their paternal lines definitively, but could indicate they aren't related to me and/or my brother when I compare the results. Will I tell them of an NPE? NO. I may think my father is over worrying the situation, but I agree with him on one thing: it's not my place to break that news. I've asked my mother to choose some cousins on her side to test. I told her about NPEs. At first she said, "oh, well I have a half-brother, but we'll test my sisters' kids instead." I know what she was assuming. That being her sisters, we could all be sure that their mother was their mother and we weren't really worried about their father's side (at this point). I had to remind my mother that if her sisters have a different father, my cousins won't come up as a match to me. She agreed that if that happens, no one knows that but me. Even she doesn't want to know that one. But she still wants two cousins tested. If all goes well, she wants herself and two sisters (one half, one full) to be tested. And to know more about her father, we're trying to contact her father's very elderly brother. Again, with the understanding that I could find out that they aren't related and that no one but me will know that. You'll have to make that decision for your family too. Talk to your close relatives and be open to their concerns. You'll know best if they can handle the whole truth.<br />
<br />
But first you need to know if you can handle it.<br />
-AnaRhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4691552322695070495.post-55272014468634277172013-05-15T20:05:00.002-05:002013-05-15T20:05:51.601-05:00DNA BasicsAfter much back and forth on how to continue my DNA series, I have come to one conclusion: if this series doesn't kill me, I am immortal. There is so much info, so many companies, so many misconceptions...... if I so chose, I could write about it for the rest of my natural life. My brain would explode from overwork, but as long as you understand what we're doing, right? As previously mentioned, I am in the waiting process on a few DNA tests and I will share those results when available. I also plan to discuss the different companies available in it's own post (along with how to avoid disreputable websites). I am writing three posts, one for each of the common DNA tests used by genealogists as well. On top of that, I also want to discuss privacy laws concerning DNA results and may have to make a separate post so as to not overwhelm you. And yet.... and yet today I find myself writing about what DNA is. I have been reading forums, blogs, Facebook pages, FAQs for a dozen companies, etc. and I have learned one thing: there are people who don't know enough of the basics of genetics to have any use for these tests. Today, I plan to give you something of a glossary or reference post that you can use to help you navigate words and concepts you may have not seen since high school (if at all).<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: red; font-size: large;">Starting with the Base Pairs</span></strong><br />
<span style="color: black;"></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4RIgkNycLsLtWLxkAkGPoOuYj1yaPzqAp4RUnBblwCy0HkoVciUlY7ONSQaOeE3buzv-xyrs0x31iLHj2RPeH1_Z7CQ496DkGGxmKzM9taMUOelwf3xUroKhNk1L-Q9qNVVE8KOONOA_l/s1600/Base+Pairs.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="153" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4RIgkNycLsLtWLxkAkGPoOuYj1yaPzqAp4RUnBblwCy0HkoVciUlY7ONSQaOeE3buzv-xyrs0x31iLHj2RPeH1_Z7CQ496DkGGxmKzM9taMUOelwf3xUroKhNk1L-Q9qNVVE8KOONOA_l/s320/Base+Pairs.JPG" width="320" /></a></div>
<strong>Nucleotide pair</strong><br />
A Nucleotide pair (or Base Pair) is the starting point of DNA. There are four nucleotide molecules: Adenine, Thymine, Cytosine, and Guanine. Adenine pairs with Thymine, Cytosine with Guanine. This is important, because the order that the nucleotides are put in is the blueprint of everything. If a nucleotide is paired with the wrong partner during copying, the error becomes known as a <strong>Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP).</strong> It's these SNP's that are reviewed during a DNA test to determine your ancestors' possible origins and connect you with potential cousins. A <strong>gene</strong> is what we call a series of nucleotides. An <strong>allele</strong> is what we call versions of a gene. For example, there is a gene for the color of your eyes (a few actually, but let's keep this simple). While brown eyes are dominant, there is a mutation that allows for light colors like grey, blue and green. The color of your eyes indicates which allele you have (what version of the gene). Another way to put it: if computer operating systems were a gene, Windows 8, Vista, and Windows ME would be alleles. They all do the same thing. They all started off in the same place. But every new generation changed the basic code a little. (And just like a gene, if it doesn't make life easier, the organism dies.)<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKLTxbt_Nriom9Z8yJ8yX6Jtcn_-iYJRiD7ny_9374HCSCNbF03-tGIVYHGfObhJvdkdh7wnkV1eJgBmFWkNM4Vf7Y-Fw-rmTvCa8s2Bu6CQecg_5jFuaNFwRP2mXKifiNJMq_AKyzXb52/s1600/Double+Helix.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="165" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKLTxbt_Nriom9Z8yJ8yX6Jtcn_-iYJRiD7ny_9374HCSCNbF03-tGIVYHGfObhJvdkdh7wnkV1eJgBmFWkNM4Vf7Y-Fw-rmTvCa8s2Bu6CQecg_5jFuaNFwRP2mXKifiNJMq_AKyzXb52/s320/Double+Helix.JPG" width="320" /></a><strong>Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA)</strong><br />
DNA is a series of base pairs held together by a sugar bond. When DNA is copied (for use in making proteins, or in making new DNA for new cells), the base pairs separate. New nucleotides attach to the "unzipped" DNA to copy the information. The most common shape that people recognise is the "Double Helix". When human DNA is compressed, it twists into the helix shape. <u>However</u>, DNA can come in many shapes. In the mitochondria, DNA is shaped into a circle.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh0H7fIHbXMt0f8pxq7kAlAG3bhgn4XWHjswdpMeI5vPbOkcuM7FbRTStnk63QVxFYUA4L5nDQgIgitCR5gdFqJsiHt4-qvRmCUk44H9aM6jgnP5KxrMkABnMrepdlq2rBpr85_TagVaLHc/s1600/Chromatid.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="158" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh0H7fIHbXMt0f8pxq7kAlAG3bhgn4XWHjswdpMeI5vPbOkcuM7FbRTStnk63QVxFYUA4L5nDQgIgitCR5gdFqJsiHt4-qvRmCUk44H9aM6jgnP5KxrMkABnMrepdlq2rBpr85_TagVaLHc/s320/Chromatid.JPG" width="320" /></a><strong>Chromosome</strong><br />
Technically, the picture to the right is a <strong>Chromatid</strong>. However, many sources will use "chromosome" interchangeably with a single chromatid and a pair of chromatids, so it's important you know what we're really talking about. DNA is compressed into the chromosome shape when it's preparing to make a new cell (<strong>mitosis</strong>) or a gamete (<strong>meiosis</strong>). A <strong>gamete</strong> is the science-y term for a sperm or an egg. When a sperm or an egg is made, they get 23 chromosomes (chromatids). A human requires 46 total chromosomes in 23 pairs. You receive one set from your dad, and it's twin set from your mom. The first 22 chromosome pairs are what we call "autosomal". When we discuss ethnicity tests, we're going to be talking about the information found on these 22 pairs. The last pair is your sex chromosomes. Females only have X chromosomes. Men have one X and one Y. So, if you are a male, you received your father's Y chromosome. If you are a female, his X.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKS92yp0I54D97_z5xgKtJD5I5yPo1qZ4wVEv0L9jgzq0AGSUG8cZ2kktDz4SUO6IYCLFi97FjcwbLC4wee8R0BZghyphenhyphensha9d3xwkx3jZ874p69dc2itoNJWVW2TY22M3u3WeUEX0tg_s4y/s1600/Chromosome.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="170" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKS92yp0I54D97_z5xgKtJD5I5yPo1qZ4wVEv0L9jgzq0AGSUG8cZ2kktDz4SUO6IYCLFi97FjcwbLC4wee8R0BZghyphenhyphensha9d3xwkx3jZ874p69dc2itoNJWVW2TY22M3u3WeUEX0tg_s4y/s320/Chromosome.JPG" width="320" /></a><br />
So if we want to know more about your father's specific line, a Y chromosome test would be helpful. But only if you are a male (since women don't have a Y chromosome to test). This test usually looks for <strong>Short Tandem Repeats (STR).</strong> DNA can carry a lot of "junk" and repeats. When a base pair is repeated in a connected sequence, it's known as an STR. Y chromosome testing that looks at the length and frequency of particular STRs helps to determine a man's <strong>haplotype.</strong> A haplotype is considered the more recent ancestry markers. There's also a <strong>haplogroup</strong>. Haplogroups are usually determined by looking at SNPs. A haplotype is usually grouped with similar haplotypes into a haplogroup. A haplogroup, therefore, is considered more ancient DNA. Now, because X chromosomes are passed down from both parents, it's not considered helpful for finding out about a mother's ancestry specifically.<strong> Mitochondria</strong>, however, is passed down only by women. So an mtDNA test will test the DNA inside of mitochondria (that circular DNA) to determine a person's maternal ancestry.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: red; font-size: large;">How DNA Can Change</span></strong><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgoErAKt0RXhTYI1MJGqIGggp96WCgMcrHq8vtPs_coKr8Zbeannz-UY6utmlQA9GI-UQjYK7YB298sewhA6LYRe1iATzR_-gx6_1U8vqg6GxAEM30LNJIRtadZKyLbaL04rWdCtFsLJefD/s1600/Deletion.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="198" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgoErAKt0RXhTYI1MJGqIGggp96WCgMcrHq8vtPs_coKr8Zbeannz-UY6utmlQA9GI-UQjYK7YB298sewhA6LYRe1iATzR_-gx6_1U8vqg6GxAEM30LNJIRtadZKyLbaL04rWdCtFsLJefD/s320/Deletion.JPG" width="320" /></a></div>
<strong>Deletion</strong><br />
<span style="color: black;">During the copy process, portions of DNA can accidentally be skipped. This is deletion. As long as what is deleted isn't necessary for proper functions of the organism, it's not lethal.</span><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2VM4xAUziB-i6lnORYiQEJDLQMaZCr9TuUV0nxyjufKOdvw2bMJKI4qYMTrZeAVBZdulkoDO74vbS8fwcoreb0bBkLYUhPzBseD_qM_fyNOL8V9U2tGzVxX7A6DuyGCeyDcmcHT3gmmLv/s1600/Insertion.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="198" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2VM4xAUziB-i6lnORYiQEJDLQMaZCr9TuUV0nxyjufKOdvw2bMJKI4qYMTrZeAVBZdulkoDO74vbS8fwcoreb0bBkLYUhPzBseD_qM_fyNOL8V9U2tGzVxX7A6DuyGCeyDcmcHT3gmmLv/s320/Insertion.JPG" width="320" /></a><strong>Insertion</strong><br />
Insertion is when new sequences of DNA is added to the strand. This is how STRs are born. For whatever reason, nucleotides are repeatedly copied in the same order, leading to an insertion of genes that are superfluous. Again, unless it's going to affect the proper functions of the organism, it's not lethal. Insertions are usually considered "junk" DNA because it's also not going to improve the functions of the organism.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjiP4xuwrON5Y_qLWIEaw6QLhx73tcG0YVpmvhg2GbPbpMWXzpHjFxKsQ_q9HL_sOxrGGnwaDvZVFggTJXPC1HgaNY5Q7NqHraY6PVsHceDBBqwlfZCr8WJ8ERrGh4UoTvPufW2Kv6pwYLR/s1600/Translocation.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="205" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjiP4xuwrON5Y_qLWIEaw6QLhx73tcG0YVpmvhg2GbPbpMWXzpHjFxKsQ_q9HL_sOxrGGnwaDvZVFggTJXPC1HgaNY5Q7NqHraY6PVsHceDBBqwlfZCr8WJ8ERrGh4UoTvPufW2Kv6pwYLR/s320/Translocation.JPG" width="320" /></a></div>
<strong>Translocation</strong><br />
This is the really important one and I left it for last so you could let it sink in tonight after reading this post. When a gamete is being made, the chromosome pairs are copied. So there are 92 chromosomes. These 92 chromosomes are separated into four gametes. The crazy thing is, that the "autosomal" chromosomes have this stupid habit of swapping genes. So it becomes a genetic dice roll as to what chromosome will be in what gamete and which gamete will make one half of you. You can end up with 0% of any particular ancestor. And the farther back that ancestor is, the more likely you'll not receive any of their ethnicity markers. Also, because of this swapping, autosomal tests don't differentiate between your mother's side of your DNA and your father's. It's just not possible.<br />
<br />
So you take an autosomal test hoping to prove you're Native American and it doesn't show up, or your test reveals more West African than your tree would suggest. Does that mean your family is wrong about your tribal heritage? Not really. It just doesn't help prove it. And really, if you have Native American DNA, it doesn't necessarily prove your great grandmother was actually a Cherokee. It can be an error (I'll talk about accuracy in testing ethnicities later) or ancient DNA that you were lucky enough to receive. While DNA can be fun, it's useless to a genealogist without documentation.<br />
<br />
But that is a tale for another day,<br />
-AnaRhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4691552322695070495.post-38062798759065506532013-03-29T23:07:00.002-05:002013-03-29T23:07:30.252-05:00The Life of PIEAround 3600 BCE (give or take a millenia or two), humans of an area that may have included India and Eastern Europe (give or take a few thousand miles in any direction) spoke what linguists call Proto-Indo-European (PIE). As people spread out, conquered or were conquered, and assimilated the indigenous people around them, they began to live too far or too isolated from other related tribes. Their new environment was different from their now-distant cousin's world. Because of those environmental differences, their language gained new words, invented slang, and deleted words no longer needed. I know what you're thinking... "Come on, lady! You said you were doing a DNA series!" Well, I assure you, this is a great tie-in. Sit back and enjoy the ride.<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxexWiu7ET2pVHmrurSonPuZZo6X4zKGhi0AxNu73ow3OYCwmMy1WMJRy8quI-moyXq73whc3ppMr5cV1JOFARSKOsFKqVj6lHVJtwh5tzzQTlkiLNWfA3i_-QXoJo5g7Uybi8LmQbrmKC/s1600/PIE+Family+Tree.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="41" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxexWiu7ET2pVHmrurSonPuZZo6X4zKGhi0AxNu73ow3OYCwmMy1WMJRy8quI-moyXq73whc3ppMr5cV1JOFARSKOsFKqVj6lHVJtwh5tzzQTlkiLNWfA3i_-QXoJo5g7Uybi8LmQbrmKC/s640/PIE+Family+Tree.JPG" usa="true" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A (very) small representation of the "family tree" of Proto-Indo-European languages</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<br /></div>
Proto-Indo-European is essentially the mother-tongue of thousands of languages. PIE was the parent of Proto-Albanian, Proto-Armenian, Proto-Anatolian, Proto-Balto-Slavic, Proto-Celtic, Proto-Germannic, Proto-Greek, Proto-Indo-Iranian, Proto-Italic and Proto-Tocharian. To be sure, some researchers add more "children", some add less. Sadly, Proto-Anatolian and Proto-Tocharian have no living languages, having been replaced by the language of conquering peoples thousands of years ago. Proto-Albanian and Proto-Armenian mothered modern Albanian and Armenian, respectively (no siblings for these children!). All the others added several grandchildren (and a few great great great great grandchildren) to PIE's family tree. So what does this have to do with genetics? While a true scientific corollary between genes and language is still controversial, its hard to argue that a rough pattern doesn't exist. As man emerged from a singular origin point, he adapted to new environments. He became hairier in cold climates, had more sweat glands added in humid ones. He developed disease immunities and food allergies. Not every mutation is good, but any mutation that makes it to the next generation is a "winner".<br />
<br />
I love talking languages almost as much as I like talking genealogy (sometimes it's a dead heat). One thing I enjoy using when talking about language is my first name, Starr. There is no language that I know of that doesn't have a word for "star". So it's a perfect way to illustrate the connectivity of language. And I can use that to illustrate some of the concepts of genetic genealogy that you need in order to set expectations and choose the right tests for your research. You'll note in the pictures above and below that some words are in red. Each is the word for "star" in the neighboring language. If the large tree above is too small (click to enlarge), Proto-Indo-European has the word <span style="color: red;">H'ster</span><span style="color: black;">. As you follow the branches, you'll see similarities follow through to almost every connected language. Because of accent, slang or some other mutation due to unique environments, each language changes the word just a little bit. But PIE still lives inside.</span><br />
<br />
 <br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgEH2yxnHpx1ollCHrEQjtkdXfqP-d-_k5EZAi7bMyuZwcN8dRQ_-MQ4VYxRGTSF45oWZfliBMTPBJyeaqfGsAOML6dGZgzxgv20Xjh3AaZnzgQTZPBkjPSJ8dlcdJTnKNsY8ROLxfQiJqY/s1600/PII.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="161" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgEH2yxnHpx1ollCHrEQjtkdXfqP-d-_k5EZAi7bMyuZwcN8dRQ_-MQ4VYxRGTSF45oWZfliBMTPBJyeaqfGsAOML6dGZgzxgv20Xjh3AaZnzgQTZPBkjPSJ8dlcdJTnKNsY8ROLxfQiJqY/s400/PII.JPG" usa="true" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">I put Persian and Urdu in their alphabet so you could see the spelling similarities and the other three in Roman characters to show a similarity of pronunciation.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Naturally, no one speaks PIE now. In fact, PIE existed (if it did exist) long before written word and we speak offshoots that have small similarities to PIE. So how do we prove PIE? Well, linguists noticed that Spanish, Italian, French and Romanian (and <em>many</em> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romance_languages" target="_blank">others</a>) all had similar words. This branch was easily connected to Latin (the language of Roman conquerors who tore through most of Europe all the way to England), because scholars and churches still used Latin. the gradual change from the mother-tongue to what's called the Romance Languages was documented by their written records. Knowing when a document was created, researchers were able to identify when a spelling or total word change (mutation) happened and connect it to an earlier form of the language until they reached the purer form of Vulgar Latin (there is a so-called Church Latin that is a bit more formal). Scientists took other languages and studied their words, grammars and date of first recorded use to help group the languages together and link them to similar but now dead languages. Parent languages were determined by having the same or similar words as all their resulting languages, but missing the differences of invented words. If 3 languages have the same or similar word for bicycle, but different words for car, then their parent language had no word for car, but a similar word for bicycle. As I point out in the photo above, Sanskrit uses the word <span style="color: red;">Tara</span><span style="color: black;"> for "star". Vedic Sanskrit must have a similar word, because Sanskrit's sister, Prakrit, has children that use the same sounds in their words (</span><span style="color: red;">Sitara</span><span style="color: black;"> and </span><span style="color: red;">Takara<span style="color: black;">)</span></span><span style="color: black;">. Also note that Persian is Urdu's 2nd cousin once removed, but their spelling for the word star is very similar. To be that close, linguists argue, Proto-Indo-European (or an intervening now dead language) had to have had a similar word and alphabet. By tracing when the differences pop up, linguists can get a rough guess of when a population diverged from it's siblings.</span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; clear: both; text-align: left;">
While language "mutation" doesn't follow gene mutation exactly, the way geneticists determine parent genes is very similar to how linguists determine parent languages. When a gene strand, let's call it Ted, mutates, scientists mark the mutation. So after generations, four people decide to test their DNA. Judy has TedAB, Frank has TedABC, Mikki has TedABD, and Bernardo has TedAE. Obviously, Judy, Frank and Mikki are related more closely since they have the A and B mutations. Frank's family tree is documented to, say, Italy. Mikki is from Russia and Judy has documented Indian heritage for at least 10 generations. So scientists reason mutation C is an Italian mutation and D is an Russian mutation. At some point in the past (probably earlier than Mikki's family has documented), Frank and Mikki's ancestors were in India. Bernardo's family is less connected because he doesn't have the B mutation. At some point in ancient unknown history, Bernardo's family left the main group with the TedA mutation prior to the B mutation. Using historical documents and as many living test subjects as one can, scientists build an algorithm that guesses the most likely migration pattern of the Ted gene. Bernardo's family is connected to a large population of E mutations who still live in China. A scientist's best guess would be that the original TedA group split up with some going to India and some to China. But where did A come from? With more tests, scientists find a group of West Africans who have TedF. No A. An isolated tribe in South Africa is discovered and tested. They have TedFG. Aha! So their family originated from somewhere in West Africa. But where is the original Ted gene? As far as anyone could tell, since no one has found an unmutated Ted gene, the origins have to be somewhere between North and West Africa. That's a lot of mileage to cover. The more people who are tested, the more who have good documentation of their own personal family migration, scientists can make the picture of when and how Ted began to mutate clearer.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">

<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvPnSAAX16Rt2VYa2J5Mv9F9pGlCO9v9RBuDXkDyMRwY3s-lgqlcY2wFrcNXbVUWMO-nYy1SRh5YsIer22g7cG4MvlabHRN8gC9h7fnOYs-Y2ETxETQBF2j9U8BbzHSr7BqGCZRJjddrHx/s1600/PI.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="97" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvPnSAAX16Rt2VYa2J5Mv9F9pGlCO9v9RBuDXkDyMRwY3s-lgqlcY2wFrcNXbVUWMO-nYy1SRh5YsIer22g7cG4MvlabHRN8gC9h7fnOYs-Y2ETxETQBF2j9U8BbzHSr7BqGCZRJjddrHx/s400/PI.JPG" usa="true" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Note how similar all those "sibling" languages are. (And not too far from their "cousin" Greek.)</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
When Richard III was recently <a href="http://au.christiantoday.com/article/how-do-they-know-it-is-richard-iii-or-is-that-stuff-on-csi-real-after-all/15032.htm" target="_blank">discovered</a>, scientists used two documented living relatives of Richard's sister and tested their mitochondrial DNA. Mitochondrial DNA is passed directly from mother to child with no interference from the father's side (with few exceptions). Their mutations are specific. One can watch the family tree of mtDNA grow and see where the changes were made. The more mutative markers that match between two people's mtDNA, the more closely related their direct maternal line. It's still a bit of a best guess, but because of matches in the mtDNA (and other physical proofs), scientists feel confident enough to declare they have found Richard III. When you have your own DNA tested, whether it be the ethnicity (autosomal) test, Y chromosome, or mitochondrial DNA, you'll be matched against living people who have taken the test. You'll be connected to people who have the same mutations. The more mutations in common, the closer you're connected to that person. To find out if you are related to someone who is deceased (whether it be your unknown great grandfather or Charlemagne), you'll be matched to living people who have a documented proof for their connection. If there is no hard proof that a living person is connected to the deceased person in question, you will not be able to prove a connection yourself.<br />
<br />
 <br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhdxnqkRi_X9nxLwAs3IcYQ6yZS8EXC69ST7tOwcpwkePMNBtp_o0DEtLEvFX9wMOBKtOYgVukY_f1dwytesmfnQoxiz1vWdCGMmvzCByyq8mdL3ts9pPh-4OPCQ42ld12giqTf4dJNS7K2/s1600/PG.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="104" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhdxnqkRi_X9nxLwAs3IcYQ6yZS8EXC69ST7tOwcpwkePMNBtp_o0DEtLEvFX9wMOBKtOYgVukY_f1dwytesmfnQoxiz1vWdCGMmvzCByyq8mdL3ts9pPh-4OPCQ42ld12giqTf4dJNS7K2/s640/PG.JPG" usa="true" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Compare this to their Latin and Greek "cousins". Also note, Irish and Scot Gaelic have another name for "star" that is Seren or close to it. I wanted to show a variant that also has a similar "cousin".</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
 <br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Now, chances are you're reading this blog in English. Are you from England? Are your parents? If I went through your tree for 10 generations, would I find only English ancestry (1022 directly related people all from England)? I'm guessing not. English is of German origin. This is better seen in Old English rather than Modern English. Why? Because English has had influence from several languages since it's beginning. We no longer use "thee" and "thou", which interestingly were originally spelled with a letter that looked very similar to a y. When we dropped that letter, we replaced it with y (and that's how "thou" became "you"). We borrow from other modern languages for "taco", "kimono", and "aloha". We have thousands of borrowed or improved words from Latin, because it was the language of scholars and conquerors for so long. Prior to today's post, you may not have realised that English, Hindu and Albanian are cousins. But if you heard all three, you may have noticed similar sounds, words, or alphabets. Many people can mistakenly believe they are understanding a foreign language, because of these similarities that transcend written history.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
In genetics, mutations come in several forms. A gene can be deleted (goodbye to "thee" and "panchymagogue"). Or a gene can be mistranscribed in only one spot (what's called an SNP or single nucleotide polymorphism). This would be like the confusion of there/their or your/you're in English. A gene can be inverted (copied upside down). Similar to my new pet peeve: people who literally use <a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/literally?s=t" target="_blank">literally</a> wrong. I've already mentioned borrowed words. In genetics, that would be translocation or insertion. Every human gets 23 chromosomes from mom and 23 from dad. One pair is the sex chromosomes of XX or XY. The other 22 pairs are called autosomal and they provide most of our genetic makeup. In a chromosome pair, sometimes a gene will be transferred from mom's gene to dad's gene (or vice versa). Sometimes they'll swap genes. What this means is that when a cell is divided to make the egg or sperm, the half that is made the egg/sperm may have more or less of mom or dad in it because of which chromosome makes it to the new cell. The child made from this combination isn't an exact 25% of each grandparent and can be missing an ethnicity marker or have more than documentation would allow. You'll notice in the photo above the different words in Irish and Scots Gaelic that don't really seem to fit. There are many words for "star" in many languages and Irish Gaelic also uses "seren" like Welsh does. And because of the influence of English (due to German invaders and modern prevalence), Welsh also accepts "star" in conversation. Irish and Scots share a different word that suggests an indigenous tribes of human predate Celts and were replaced (the now defunct father-language translocated it's native word into the Celtic mother-language). And the English word "star" has been inserted into the Celtic languages.</div>
<br />
 <br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuXeF1QVnIwhDu8xJSRuKq3UMZ20MaN5oMZSuhsTTv3weYmxM3X4bN0goRSIVzjrxLXrH-Esq-6W13_NLxPPALf8RfvVnPo-zJ_m7UMmoNae8qnwmnCMY6-DAkkwtfldhRQIgs6v0zYy_Z/s1600/PBS.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="132" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuXeF1QVnIwhDu8xJSRuKq3UMZ20MaN5oMZSuhsTTv3weYmxM3X4bN0goRSIVzjrxLXrH-Esq-6W13_NLxPPALf8RfvVnPo-zJ_m7UMmoNae8qnwmnCMY6-DAkkwtfldhRQIgs6v0zYy_Z/s640/PBS.JPG" usa="true" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">These are so close to each other, they might as well be the "John Smith" of language!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
 <br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Ideally, both linguists and geneticists want to find isolated groups of people to test. The more remote and insular, the better. Because of the large influence of Latin, it shows up in English despite English's Germannic origins. The above enlargement of the Proto-Balto-Slavic branch of PIE's family tree shows what scientists really hate to find. Proto-Balto-Slavic covers Central to Eastern Europe and a great deal of Asia. Where did it start? How long ago did it break away from PIE? Is Macedonian really a cousin of Croatian, or are they siblings? Where's the conclusive proof? There is none really. It's all a best guess. Researchers look at when languages were first documented. They identify the earliest known ethnic identity that is specifically different from it's neighbor. And then they guess. (Seriously.) Anyone who has studied the history of the countries involved here knows that the borders changed more frequently than Taylor Swift's boyfriends. So where does one draw the line? Where does Lithuania end and Poland begin?</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
In genetics, this problem runs rampant. Anyone dealing with high Scandinavian or missing German ethnic markers knows what I mean. The Euro-Asiatic land mass was large and relatively accessible. People were coming and going and conquering and being conquered all of the time. One group would win today only to lose tomorrow. So testing for their specific location markers is difficult. A mutation may have originated in Scandinavia, but the vikings ran rampant all over the place (more than <a href="http://www.timeref.com/thr00003.htm#" target="_blank">once</a>). And we all know about Genghis Khan! While the labs get more tests and refine the algorithms used to decide where Central Europe turns into Eastern Europe, we just have to be patient. As far as Native American markers, many people want to know the specific tribe they belong to. That isn't possible, because so many tribes traded and intermarried leaving no definitive mutations that point to one tribe over another.</div>
 <br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiimSui45Q1N_mINy6zmF7FXK2CNMS27e1wUq8euNCYo0cTtbHtq5UkEJG8I1o0bX_sTe5gSUPxiYS2Y53linOMgU7OQBzZlMjBChCOfho0uqu7dDraWkMQeMswy72xtm4iCb2WE2lC5wGA/s1600/PA.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="48" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiimSui45Q1N_mINy6zmF7FXK2CNMS27e1wUq8euNCYo0cTtbHtq5UkEJG8I1o0bX_sTe5gSUPxiYS2Y53linOMgU7OQBzZlMjBChCOfho0uqu7dDraWkMQeMswy72xtm4iCb2WE2lC5wGA/s400/PA.JPG" usa="true" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Albanian and Armenian have changed a bit from their beginnings, but have no siblings. All Proto-Anatolian and Proto-Tocharian languages are now extinct, but notice how close they are to others like Welsh!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
 The photo above shows two still living languages (Albanian and Armenian) that have no siblings. Their respective orgin tribes remained isolated and insular to the point that they remained purer to the original PIE. Before you start pointing it out, Yll may have at one time been Hyll and before that something closer to H'ster. Note also the two dead branches of Anatolian (which had the documented language of Hittite among others before going extinct) and Tocharian. Both of them share similarities to other branches of the tree that were geographically isolated from them. Linguists argue that the only way that is possible is if they have a common ancestor. Researchers hope to one day connect PIE to it's sibling languages from around the world into a higher Proto language and go higher still. Few people give any credence to studies that try right now as there is so much we don't know that it's all guesswork. It'd be the genealogical equivalent of connecting your grandmother to Adam and Eve.<br />
<br />
Geneticists are also trying to find our origins, but have the same problems. Humans move and mate <em>a lot.</em> It's difficult to detrmine if the markers in a group's DNA are exclusive to them or a larger group. It's near impossible to be definitive on whether it proves a connection to nearby neighbors or indicates a deeper, older connection to a long dead group. All reasonable research shows a common origin point of Africa and a general migration patern from there, but genealogists want something more definitive. And it's just not there yet. It really is more guess than science right now. Should we give up on it? Not at all! The more tests taken by more people, the more information we have to narrow down the results. The science, just like humans, is in constant evolution.<br />
<br />
And I just realised I also illustrated why no one can define an origin point for a surname either. Dang, I'm good.<br />
-HoshiRhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4691552322695070495.post-7427554693160501612013-03-21T21:24:00.001-05:002013-03-21T21:24:28.819-05:00Before We Begin, Where Do We Start?In high school, a teacher once said, "Children know everything, because they don't know what they don't know." That's very true. An infant is unaware of the existence of anything outside of it's experience. If he can't see it, it ceases to be. That is why babies love Peek-a-boo! A baby is watching you leave and reenter existence and he finds that <em>fascinating</em>. As soon as he is able to recognise that "out of sight doesn't mean out of reality", the game becomes dull and useless. A toddler "knows" that Earth is populated by people who pay attention to him and ends at the edge of town (or however far his parents have taken him). When he goes to school, he learns the world is a huge place with people he may never meet and places he may never go (and yet they exist all the same). As the child advances from elementary to high school and on to college, he is introduced to a progressively larger world. He learns a great deal, but the biggest epiphany is, <strong><span style="color: red;">"There is more that you'll never know than you'll ever know."</span></strong><br />
<br />
This is a recurring theme in many spheres of humanity, so naturally I have a genealogical corollary. When we are children, our "world" is our immediate family. Our mother, father, siblings, grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins.... whatever relations we see frequently. As far as we "know", everyone has the same family structure. As we grow, we meet new relations and learn how they connect to us. We learn generational differences (uncle vs. great uncle), family "sides" (maternal vs. paternal), and how different our family dynamic is from anyone else's. If we are bitten by the genealogy bug (hello, Dear Reader) or just really anal, we learn the difference in 1st and 3rd cousins and what the heck "removed" means.<br />
<br />
We also evolve what facts we "know". As a child, I "knew" my mom, dad, siblings and cousins were born in the U.S. If I had been asked where my family was from, I would have said "America". I was about 9 when I started to help my dad with our family research. I learned that great grandma Brown was Scottish and grandma Gibson's parents were Native American. My dad, like most adults, believed children can only handle so many facts at once (and simple ones at that), so he was vague with the details of where our family was from. He knew enough to say we were from lots of places, but not very specific. So at this stage, if asked about my family, I would have said, "We're basically from everywhere." I could be specific as far as Scottish or Native, but I didn't really know more. By high school, my interest in family history was flourishing just as dad's was waning. I now "knew" from the research of many family members that great grandma Brown's parents were Russian, grandma Gibson's parents were 100% Native American, great grandpa Brown was English, and great great grandma Householder was also 100% Native American. The rest of the family was German, Irish and possibly Spanish or French. For a good long while, that was what I "knew".<br />
<br />
It can often be a jarring experience for the child-turning-adult when their world grows larger and they learn all the things they don't know. Anyone who has moved to a drastically different environment than what they grew up with (college, first-time work experience, new state/country) can certainly attest to the suddenness and disorientation of "not knowing". Many can suffer a crisis if what they "know" is totally divergent from the new reality. This happens in genealogy all the time, so it's best to prepare yourself for it. When I started my own serious adult research, my father thought I could handle the truth about my grandfather's paternity (basically that it was anyone's guess). I also uncovered greater details about truths I had previously "known". Great grandma Brown was Scottish born. Her parents weren't Russian, but Lithuanian and possibly Jewish. My grandmother had a previous marriage and two aunts and an uncle were the fruits of that union (not really a secret, just not discussed when I was a child). I uncovered murders, betrayals, and scandals galore. And more than a few "nonpaternity events" were shook out of the tree! (A "nonpaternity event" is when one proves through documentation or genetic testing that a child's known father is not their father.) If I hadn't been prepared through a solid family foundation and years of training in objective research, many of these new facts could've shaken my inner core of self-worth. I could have ended up either having a crisis of identity (if my great great grandfather was a slaver, what does that make me?) or denied the blatant truth (the documents must be lying; someone made a mistake). I would have blunted my own research in order to stick with what I "knew" rather than adapt to the ever-growing world my family really lived in.<br />
<br />
Not that long ago there was no Internet. In those days, genealogists had to travel to repositories and relatives to gather information. Or they had to write to them and wait for a response. If possible, they may call and get the information a little more quickly, but when compared with how fast the Internet is, these were the days of slow progress. This genealogical "world" was very small. One could spend a lifetime just gathering the information for one line of a branch of the family. What we could "know" was limited by distance, time and cost. Then Internet was invented and with it came message boards. Now we could expand our world to include people with similar research interests and converse with them almost in real time. As businesses started to realise the benefit of providing genealogical services online, our world was once again expanded. Now records and people are available almost immediately. The costs have drastically reduced as well, allowing us to gather more records than our budget previously could handle. Genealogical DNA testing isn't really new, but it is recent and still in the early stages of usefulness. Now our own biology is helping us to bridge the documentation gaps and confirm what we "know". Every day our skills grow as we learn something new about our family or genealogy in general. Every day our world is a little bit bigger and we know more about all that we don't know. There's a bit of a learning a curve, but everyone seems to follow the same general process whether they consciously know it or not. While I consider this my first post in a DNA series, it's really a post about expanding your mind to accept that's there's more that you'll never know than you'll ever know.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: blue; font-size: large;">Step 1- Forget What You Know</span></strong><br />
<span style="color: black;">Do you know who your parents are? For the average person, I just wrote the silliest sentence in history. But do you really? If the evidence that you know your parents is that two people who you called "mom" and "dad" raised you, you could have a nasty shock waiting for you. Every day someone experiences a nonpaternity event that refutes what they knew. Every day, a person starts their research despite the wailing and gnashing of teeth of some family member only to find out that said family didn't want to tell them that they or their parents (or grandparents) are adopted. While some can take it in stride, many are ill-equipped and insist the records or DNA must be lying (because we all know grandma didn't, right?).</span><br />
<br />
So start from the very beginning and question it all. This isn't the time to grill your mother Dateline-style, but to find the paper trail. (Where's your birth certificate, Mother? <em>If that is your real name</em>.) Interview relatives about your childhood (and theirs). Ask for birth certificates, announcements, photos, video, etc. I live by the motto of "if I know it, I can show it." Any "fact" that I don't have a record for is preceded by "allegedly", "supposedly", or some other qualifier of "as far as I know". One proof isn't enough, the more independent sources that confirm a fact, the better. Knowing something isn't black and white in the genealogy world. There are many shades of grey in between. Despite all the advances in the DNA options available to genealogists, it doesn't replace documentation. If you have reliable documentation starting with yourself and going back to your earliest known ancestor, the DNA can help to guide your next steps. Without documentation, the first contradictory genetic profile will confuse and most likely upset you. Let's be honest, no one's family tree is unbroken. Somewhere in the past is an unknown father (or two, or twelve). Proving what you know now before taking a DNA test (or two, or twelve) can help you to better interpret the results.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: blue; font-size: large;">Step 2- Know Thyself</span></strong><br />
<span style="color: black;">It's a common occurrence in genealogy for a person to have a crisis of identity when they learn something new about their ancestors. The one I see the most is the "if my ancestor was a slave owner, how does that change who I am?" In reality, it doesn't. So you're great grandmother was a gun-toting, cigar-smoking, man-hating, politically conservative yet religiously liberal woman. You are who you are and knowing or not knowing those things about her doesn't change you in the least. It's very important that you accept this basic concept before taking a DNA test. DNA isn't 50 years old, or 100 years, or even 1000. It's older than old. Millions of years of evolution scrambling and combining and changing and rearranging. You may "know" your family lines can all go back to 1700's Germany, but your DNA knows that your family goes farther back than that. I plan this as a series, so I'll get into the DNA test types and ethnicity and all that your DNA "knows" as far as we "know", but right now I just need you to accept that DNA will go back farther than you can possibly document. Know that whatever you find in records or genetics doesn't change who you have always been, it just adds to you.</span><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: blue; font-size: large;">Step 3- Follow, Don't Lead</span></strong><br />
<span style="color: black;">As I said, some people take the new facts so hard that they deny their veracity. An ethnicity test could show that your DNA isn't as Native American as you previously thought. Sometimes our documents and our DNA can contradict. Well, they contradict as far as we "know". But again, since DNA goes farther back than recent history and reliable documentation, what we perceive as a contradiction could simply be a clue to a deeper history. If we aren't prepared to accept the evidence as it is, we will try to shape it to the world that we "know". I "know" that my great grandmother's parents were Lithuanian because documents say so (censuses and death records). I recently found birth records for 5 of their 7 children that state their marriage was in Poland. Now, this could mean that the other documents are misleading and that they are really Polish. Or it could mean they lived close to the border of Poland at the time they married and used the closest or most convenient officiant. DNA could confirm Eastern European descent (still not going to differentiate between Polish or Lithuanian and I'll explain in the next post why) or it could throw me for a loop and say that they were Turkish, Jewish, Sub-Saharan African or something else entirely! My great grandmother was born in Scotland, so she's still Scottish. Her parents (if I can confirm their birthplaces) will still be Lithuanian. All the DNA will tell me is the deeper truths. It won't change who we are or were, only add.</span><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: blue; font-size: large;">Step 4- Flow With the Know</span></strong><br />
<span style="color: black;">Sometimes I like to pretend I'm a lawyer trying to prove a case in court. I gather the facts via soli</span><span style="color: black;">d and reliable documentation. Most of the time, I am the judge and jury as well, but sometimes the family at large or the genealogical community plays the part of judge. The better my documents, the stronger my case. If I've tried to lead my evidence to the facts I want to believe in, it'll be obvious and my case will be dismissed. In the end, I'm trying to prove what I know "beyond a reasonable doubt." There's always more I don't know, and some day a descendant may uncover it. Until then, I know what I know until I know better.</span><br />
<br />
My next posts will go into as much detail as I can about DNA testing for genealogy purposes. I'll cover each type of test separately and give you some links to a few places you can try testing. Thanks to a new occupational endeavor, I can finally start taking the tests (or beg my brother to do so) and will periodically update you with reviews of specific tests and my personal experience with them. Even if it is a long while before my own experiences start rolling in, I am sure that you'll have enough pros and cons from the upcoming DNA series to choose the test(s) most beneficial to you with enough understanding of how they work to set your expectations to the appropriate level. This week is about setting the expectation that what we know is always evolving, the world is always growing and family is always family. I'll give you time to let that absorb in, because I also want you to evaluate what you currently know. How good is your current documentation? How reliable are your sources? How deep has your research been for each individual? Do you look only for census records or do you include newspapers, church records, military documents, etc.? Are you prepared for unsavory truths (illegitimacy, crime, war)? Are you willing to weigh each source on it's own merits no matter your emotional attachment to the individuals you are researching?<br />
<br />
And are you willing to learn? The only way to truly bring to light the reality of our ancestors' lives is to learn not only about them, but about the processes of research and genealogy in general. There's a lot to take in on any one subject and general family research will bring you into contact with a great many of them. I know how to research in the U.S. and U.K. With the new information about my great grandmother's parents, I now have to research in Poland and Lithuania. I have to accept the fact that I don't know about naming systems, vital record repositories or general history of the areas in question. I may only scratch enough of the surface to get what I want, or I could become an all-knowing expert on Baltic genealogy (probably not). No matter what I give you in this series of DNA, there will be more I don't know. If you want to be well-versed in genetic genealogy, you'll have to do some research. You'll have to read about the various tests, genome science, anthropology, companies that provide the tests, how to share your results, geography and history...... no matter what, <strong><span style="color: red;">"There is more that you'll never know than you'll ever know."</span></strong><br />
<br />
The point is to know when you don't know enough,<br />
-AnaRhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4691552322695070495.post-18590563650215998102013-02-15T10:01:00.001-06:002013-02-15T10:01:29.417-06:00Help Me Help YouIt's becoming a common plague in forums, Facebook pages, and emails to receive a request for help from someone unwilling or unable to give you the basic information to make the search easier. If you visit the Ancestry.com Facebook page, you may have noticed the posts of a surname and nothing else. Or maybe you've seen the one asking for a specific person, but no indication if they are a recent or long past relative or where they lived. I've had folks email me for help that ask me to find "anything" about their relative. When I give them what I can find in a simple search, I get "yeah, I already found that." People, I'm not a mind reader! Every well-formed request follows the "Who, What, Where, When" format. Today I'm gonna break it down for you so you can formulate a better request.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #a64d79; font-size: large;">Who</span></strong><br />
<span style="color: black;">Who are you looking for? It seems so easy a question, but people get it wrong all the time! You cannot just type in a surname and hope someone will give you all the information ever found on that surname (especially for names like Smith or Jones or Nguyen). Questions about specific people will go over better for two reasons. First, no one wants to help someone just looking for "anything". Genealogy is a hobby of <em>research. </em>Asking nonspecific questions has the taint of "do the work for me", and that's not how research works. Second, not everyone with the same surname is related. It would be a disservice to just spew out all the names and facts for everyone with that name. You may only be related to a small fraction of those people and would be too overwhelmed by the information to make sense of it all.</span><br />
<br />
Be as specific as possible. If I want more information about John Kemper, I'm going to make sure to tell you if I'm looking for Junior or Senior. I'll add if I have a middle name or initial. Anything I can think of to narrow it down. In my tree there are over twenty John Kempers. If I asked someone for information on "John Kemper", how would they know if I meant one of these twenty, or one of the hundred others I've not connected to my tree yet?<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #a64d79; font-size: large;">What</span></strong><br />
<span style="color: black;">I am going to tell you something very personal that I try not to tell people that have the potential to become friends or clients: I call you every name under the sun when you ask me for "anything" I can find on your ancestor. What the hell does that mean? What are you hoping to see? Like I said earlier, it sounds like you don't really want to do the work and want me to hand you your family's history. Which is fine if you're willing to pay me. I mean, if I'm going to waste my time on a fishing expedition for free, it's going to be on <em>my</em> tree. What bothers me more is that I don't know what expectation you have. I offered free research to one woman to find "anything" on her relative. It was early in my effort to become a paid genealogist and I thought I would give her my time if she'd give me a written recommendation. I was looking to build a reputation. It was like pulling teeth trying to find out what she was looking for. I found birth records, death records, news articles, censuses, military records.....even made contact with a living cousin who had a photo of him! In the end she wasn't satisfied with the results. What was she looking for? <span style="color: #a64d79;">"I heard he owned a store downtown and I wanted to know if there was anything about it anywhere."</span> Um, okay. <strong>I could've talked to a few folks</strong> <strong>about that specifically if you had just told me.</strong> I went to work with some local help and found advertisements, a photo of the outside of the store, and a book made by the historical society that mentioned her relative and his store as integral to the beginnings of the town. Finally happy, she was willing to write me a shining recommendation that I could use to encourage new clients. She wasn't so happy when she asked if I'd help her with another relative and I told her it'd cost. Sorry, but I wasn't touching that family again without some incentive.</span><br />
<br />
There are thousands of people willing to do the work for free. Some do it because they need experience so they can build their skills. Others do it because they love history and the thrill of the chase. You do get what you pay for, however. And I don't mean in just monetary terms. Yes, a professional genealogist with degrees and focused training commands a large sum for their time. Yes, they are worth it. But there are also many volunteers (myself often included), who know the value of their time and are willing to forego money to help someone in need. Do not disrespect the volunteer simply because they don't charge you for the effort! If I ask for information on my great grandmother Bonnie Goff/Gaulf, it will help me and my helper if I tell them what I want to find. I already know about her married life, I need to know about her parents. So my request should be for someone to find me her parents or birth certificate. It'll keep folks from sending me information I already have which wastes their time (and mine). If I don't tell people what I've found, I'll appear rude when I have to tell them I already found that. I'll appear even more ridiculous when I don't clarify at that time what I really want. Seriously, if you make the mistake of not saying what you want the first time, don't compound it by giving nothing in your response other than "yeah, I found that already." People will remember your name and will stop helping you.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #a64d79; font-size: large;">Where </span></strong><br />
<span style="color: black;">So now I'm telling people that I'm looking for Flossie Lorraine Martin. I have her first marriage to a Gruggett. I have her second marriage to a Householder. I'm more interested in her parents and possible siblings. I've given you my who and what. Now what about my where? Where actually means two things when making a request:</span><br />
<br />
First, where was your ancestor? Flossie died in Missouri. I found her in the censuses with her second husband and it indicated her birthplace was Tennessee. Her death certificate says she was born in Reelfoot. Knowing this will help you and anyone who helps you know where to look for your relative. There is no centralised repository for documents in the US. Most of the world can't say that they house their records in one place for the entire history of their country! So if I don't give locations, I'm making the job harder for no reason. I'm also sending folks on a bit of a wild goose chase if the locations I'm looking into keep their records locally and not online. By giving the locations I know (or that documents say), people can help me narrow down my possible matches. It's much more helpful to ask for help finding a person in a specific region or city of Lithuania rather than the whole country (which has also changed shape and my ancestor may have all their records in Russia or Poland if that town is not currently considered Lithuanian!). If I don't know where, I need to do more work in the areas I know to look for clues to narrow down the search in the next country. Asking someone for help finding a needle in a haystack is best when the haystack is as small as possible.<br />
<br />
The second thing any request should include is where you have looked. If I've already looked for and found Flossie's death record on Missouri's online database, I can save folks some time and avoid the "yeah, I know that" rude response. If I've searched Ancestry.com (or any website with several collections), it helps to say whether I've used the general search or if I've looked at specific collections. No general search on any website pulls up all the available collections. And I seriously doubt anyone makes it through every record pulled up in a general search without becoming bored, too. If you've looked in specific collections, tell your helpers what those collections were. (If you don't know what collections you looked into, first get a research log. Then start reading more than just the name on a page! There is so much information you are missing when you don't explore a collection.) By excluding those collections, your assistants can look in new places and help to bring new avenues of research to the top.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #a64d79; font-size: large;">When</span></strong><br />
<span style="color: black;">When my friend Loretta asked folks for names that seemed unique for her post "<a href="http://www.buwt.blogspot.com/2012/04/its-not-unusual.html" target="_blank">It's Not Unusual</a>", she was looking for odd names that are much more common than one would think. She was given quite a few, but I was quite proud to recommend one of my own relatives: Washington District of Columbia. I'm sure I gave a few chuckles to those in the conversation on that oddity. I'm also sure that the smirk on Loretta's face quickly went away when she found more than one fellow sporting that moniker! If I wanted to know more about <em>my</em> D.C., I was going to need to tell people <em>when</em> he lived to narrow it down. Just because a name seems strange to you, doesn't mean it wasn't all the rage when your ancestors were looking for baby names.</span><br />
<br />
This is even more true for those God-awful common names like John, James, William, Mary, Elizabeth..... the surname doesn't really matter, because people would recycle these names in the same family. Often in the same generation! By providing dates, we can separate one from another. My Kemper line originates from John Kemper b. 1692, immigrated 1714, d. 1670. He had a son, John Peter b. 1717 and John II b. 1722. Sometimes, in fact often, John Peter and John II are only listed as John. Knowing where they were and when they were there helps me figure out which of these three men I'm looking at. Knowing "when" also helps on a local, national or world level. I know that land records are actually for John II, because his father was alive but not naturalised. At the time they received their land, Virginia had requirements that the elder John did not meet. His son was old enough to qualify and so the land was his. Knowing a relative moved to Australia in the 1850's recently helped a friend of mine. She was unable to understand why her relative had left his family and moved to the other side of the world until she took into account the Australian Gold Rush! "Eureka" would be an appropriate response, I believe.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #a64d79; font-size: large;">Keep It Simple</span></strong><br />
If you hired someone to look up your family information, would you be happy with someone who said, "I looked everywhere and I couldn't find anything."? Or would you prefer, "I found your great grandparents and their children in the U.S. Census for 1900, 1910, 1920 and 1930 online via Ancestry.com. I located your great great grandfather's pension request for service in the Civil War and your grandfather's WWII draft record online via Fold3. I took that information and ordered their complete files from the National Archives. I also found some birth announcements for your grandfather's siblings in the Chicago Tribune and had copies made for your records. However, I was unable to locate a birth record for your great grandmother, because she was born 5 years prior to the state required records to be kept."?<br />
<br />
If you want the second response, you need to ask for it. Researchers need specifics in order to best help you. Following "Who, What, Where, When", I can ask for help with my elusive great great grandfather Jonas Levingskas by telling people in my request some basic information I already have and what I want:<br />
<ul>
<li>Hello, I'm looking for my great great grandfather Juozas/Jonas Levingskas. I have looked on Ancestry.com, FamilySearch.org and Scotlands People. I found a death notice for his daughter Margaret Mitkus giving his name and address in Mossend, Scotland. I found a death record for Jonas stating his parents were Tomosus Levingskas and Yafilia Karezuskia. He died 26 December 1950 and the certificate indicates he was born in 1871 in Lithuania. It also indicates he changed his name to John Smith or was at least being called John Smith. I am looking for information on his immigration from Lithuania. A ships record or naturalisation record perhaps? Where should I look next?</li>
</ul>
I give enough of what I already have, where I've already tried to look and what I'm really interested in finding that someone should be able to help me. I know I can't start asking for his birth information from Lithuania, because I don't know where to start. If I had his immigration information, it may have the place where he boarded the ship or his residence or his birthplace. I won't know until I find it and I can't skip over that step. If I started a search for Levingskas in Lithuania, the number of Juozas' I'd find is insane. And while I'm hoping to find more information to go backwards, I've given enough for any descendants from the sons who stayed in Scotland to recognise their relative and connect with me on what they know.<br />
<br />
Also note that I keep the message simple and small. I get to the meat of my matter. As much as I enjoy helping others, I have to admit that I often skip over a post that has more than two paragraphs before they get to their point. And if it's just a load of names and dates, I'm even less likely to take an interest. If I have to spend 20 minutes figuring out what you know so I can start my search, you've already lost me. While I will sometimes take an interest in a general "Can you help me with this person" post, I shouldn't have to pull teeth to help. And you may notice that I ask where <em>I</em> should look. I would never turn down someone else's work, but I show that I'm willing to learn a new trick and research this myself. I am not looking for my history handed to me on a silver platter. I don't knock anyone who can't research because of time or skill, but I don't coddle laziness. <br />
<br />
Show me that you're willing to put in an equal amount of effort, and I'll teach you to fish.<br />
-AnaRhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4691552322695070495.post-10947911780439686882013-02-09T20:26:00.000-06:002013-02-09T20:26:11.353-06:00Racing To the Wrong Conclusion<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEivCsbfKTb43ok_Ih1hGWaxFftni-sVO7kFHpvl622RTnELavzFS1WmtLgrHo4dAMd7zIQurxsGJ0U5ILt42A4WhjoOCCEWBEiS08wn29rQuhAvrWk8lS0sQ2k_lqYyaAL8yAzWBCl1fbv1/s1600/article-2123050-125685B6000005DC-512_634x927.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; cssfloat: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" jea="true" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEivCsbfKTb43ok_Ih1hGWaxFftni-sVO7kFHpvl622RTnELavzFS1WmtLgrHo4dAMd7zIQurxsGJ0U5ILt42A4WhjoOCCEWBEiS08wn29rQuhAvrWk8lS0sQ2k_lqYyaAL8yAzWBCl1fbv1/s320/article-2123050-125685B6000005DC-512_634x927.jpg" width="218" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Check out the story behind these<br />
cool twins<a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2123050/Look-The-black-white-twins-turn-seven.html#axzz2KRzgeC94" target="_blank"> HERE</a></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
We've all seen that post: "I have this photo of a relative that looks like [insert race]." The poster and comments following start pointing out features. Suddenly everyone is an anthropologist! Hair texture, eye colour, cheekbones, foreheads, nose shapes..... Everyone seems to ignore a simple fact: there is no characteristic that belongs to one race. Moreover, there aren't different races genetically. Race is a human construct to divide and define, and it does a very poor job!</div>
<br />
<strong><span style="color: red; font-size: large;">Let's Play a Game</span></strong><br />
<br />
I found this really fun <a href="http://www.pbs.org/race/002_SortingPeople/002_00-home.htm" target="_blank">game</a> on PBS's website. There are 4 categories of race (White, Black, Native American, Hispanic/Latino) and you take 16 people and place them in the race category that you most think they look like. I did really well on Asians....... but not so much on anyone else (I didn't get a single White one right). After you play the game, go ahead and check out the other links, especially the timeline on race. Can you imagine a time when race wasn't a category to put people into? Well, there was a time just like that.<br />
<br />
Of course, humans love labelling things, especially other people. The problem with generic labels is that it never really fits what you're trying to label. Most race categories we think of today were made to better define humans for a census (i.e. "Hispanic"). Caucasian really means people from the Caucasus mountain region, but has morphed to mean "White" in common use. There are three basic class distinctions for forensic anthropology: Caucasoid, Negroid, Mongoloid. Because of negative connotations for the last two, many people have automatic stereotypes as to what these classifications mean based on skin colour (which is not at all part of the consideration). And because they are so general, many people don't fit one or the other which has led to some experts dividing them even more (i.e. Mongoloid has been divided from Australoid to mark the very distinct differences in Australia's Aborigines; Negroid has been divided into Congoid and Capoid for West Africa and South Africa respectively). In reality, no matter how you divide it, humans don't have any populations that are isolated enough to create a truly different genetic makeup. I could say that a Caucasian/European/Caucasoid has a long narrow face, cheekbones that don't protrude, and a narrow nose with a high bridge; a Negroid/African has a wide nose, rounded forehead, and protruding lower portion of the face; a Mongoloid has a moon shaped face, prominent cheekbones, and "shovel shaped" teeth. I could say these things. But the problems are myriad with these generalisations.<br />
<br />
The picture below was made by taking several photos of different women from the same country or region and making a composite average. I'll refer to this photo while we discuss the problems with generalising (note that this composite doesn't take into account mixed races).<br />

<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZi2CSndLlzStG0XdDaCxDfw53c6LullKdYe8tsSp9ZNAnZKK00SMbSWJm1RVtmBsmJMf44Y14MN-qJvbt1sju1MKnDYA8ORUonQXitPzxezj0RGFBreoWVQGK6MZ8tvQUIoeo9y-tITZi/s1600/average-women-faces.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" jea="true" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZi2CSndLlzStG0XdDaCxDfw53c6LullKdYe8tsSp9ZNAnZKK00SMbSWJm1RVtmBsmJMf44Y14MN-qJvbt1sju1MKnDYA8ORUonQXitPzxezj0RGFBreoWVQGK6MZ8tvQUIoeo9y-tITZi/s1600/average-women-faces.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Couldn't find who originally posted this, but found a good <a href="https://pmsol3.wordpress.com/" target="_blank">blog</a> while I was at it!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
First, the problem with averages. In order to make any average of anything, even the average of five numbers, there has to be some below the average and some above. Go ahead and find the average African American woman in the photo above. Pretty average, even reminds me of a few actresses. But to make that photo, someone had to have a larger face, smaller nose, larger eyes and have those corrected to the mathematical average. Second, do you see any Native Americans? According to the 3 categories discussed above, Native Americans fall into the Mongoloid group. The stereotype we've seen on television would make me lean towards the Samoan more than the Peruvian. But what about the Indian, Mexican, Puerto Rican or Burmese photos? I have full blood friends and kin I'd place closer to those faces. Which brings us to problem number three: skin color. I'm sure you scanned the faces for darker skin for the Native Americans. If I asked you to pick out the Whites, you'd look for the light skin.... what if I asked you to pick out the Caucasoids? Go ahead and try that: look for narrow noses, cheekbones that aren't prominent, long faces...did you pick out the Ethiopian? No? You should do. How about the Afghan and Iranian? And is the South Indian a Caucasoid and the Indian a Mongoloid? Problem number four: the characteristics that anthropologists use to identify the general categories are best applied to a skull. How can I tell whether the Filipino has the more oval eye sockets of the Mongoloid or the round ones of the Caucasoid? Does the picture of the Central African show the square sockets of the Negroid? Is she a Congoid or Capoid?<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: red; font-size: large;">Special Fun With the Census!</span></strong><br />
<br />
The US census currently divides humans into the races of White, Black/African American, American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, and Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander. It wasn't always that way. From 1790-1810 asked for Whites and Slaves. 1830 asked for White, Black, or Mulatto. The 1870 census was the first time East Asians were listed (all as Chinese) as well as American Indians. 1890 got crazy with it: White, Black, Quadroon (1/4 African ancestry), Octoroon (1/8 African ancestry), Chinese, Japanese and Indian. 1910 added an "other race" category for anyone that didn't fit anywhere else to write in their affiliation. The 1920 census finally recognised that Koreans, Filipinos and Hindus (Indians) were separate from Chinese or Japanese people but still Asians.<br />
<br />
1930 saw a few wild changes. They removed Mulatto and decided that anyone with any African ancestry or mixed Black/Native Americans with no official tribal affiliation were to be listed along with full blood Blacks as "Negro". A mixed White/Native American was to be Indian if they had a tribal affiliation, White if they were accepted in White society. "Mexican" became a category if a person or their parents were born in Mexico. In 1940, Mexicans went back to being categorised as White. In 1950, Hindu and Korean were removed. 1960, Indian was changed to American Indian and Hawaiian, part-Hawaiian, Aleut, and Eskimo were added. The "other" category was also removed. 1970 changed "Negro" to "Negro or Black" and added Korean and "other" back in. 1980 added in Indian, (East) Guamanian, Vietnamese and Samoan.<br />
<br />
Add into this the recent confusion of adding "Hispanic" in 2000. The Census Bureau defines "Hispanic or Latino" as "a person of Cuban, Mexican, Puerto Rican, South or Central American or other Spanish culture or origin regardless of race." So on the census, every person answers whether they have Hispanic ancestry or not regardless of what category (White, Black, Asian, Indian) they would place their race. So the woman in the above photo from Mexico would be Hispanic and White or American Indian depending on her family history and if she has tribal affiliation. With that said, I know a man from Spain who could say he's Hispanic by that definition (having a Spanish culture), but mistakenly regards it as a race of peoples from Central and South America that are Native Americans mixed with other races. And what about my niece? Her father is from Puerto Rico, her mother Indiana...... Does her father's influence give her enough cultural knowledge to be Hispanic? Or would she say she isn't Hispanic as she is growing up in a more Midwest American culture? Well, there's talk of allowing people to check both "Hispanic" and "Not Hispanic" on a census....... then what's the point of asking the question??? Which brings me too....<br />
 <br />
<strong><span style="color: red; font-size: large;">General Genetic Confusion</span></strong><br />
<br />
 
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgU8KzU4vqgUcMTxHkgZNyiRKE81bz68HYQCXFTACEYPG6ZBABWm-VF784TZw10s82sWpQO7FLAVjE41d3rKafxYzNIbuq3WEQhaJyMly-CpRDAeC87ccj_a2cjyvAqJb4ZShqa4j0005FA/s1600/billboard3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="121" jea="true" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgU8KzU4vqgUcMTxHkgZNyiRKE81bz68HYQCXFTACEYPG6ZBABWm-VF784TZw10s82sWpQO7FLAVjE41d3rKafxYzNIbuq3WEQhaJyMly-CpRDAeC87ccj_a2cjyvAqJb4ZShqa4j0005FA/s400/billboard3.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">From the <a href="http://nancyburson.com/pages/publicart_pages/hrmachine.html" target="_blank">Human Race Machine</a> this is one woman's face in 6 skin shades</td></tr>
</tbody></table>

If I were to say someone had thick lips, hooded eyes (the fold of the upper lid hides the lower lid), a broad nose, and brown eyes... what do you think their skin color is? The characteristics I listed are all dominant genes. When your parents made you, dad gave you one half, mom the other. So, say, dad gave you the gene for thick lips and mom thin lips..... you'll have thick lips. If you marry someone who has thin lips, there is a possibility that your child will have thin lips as you carry the gene for it, but if your child gets the thick lip gene then they'll have thick lips. Skin and eye color aren't dominant/recessive. Both are physical manifestations of the amount of melanin in our system (as is hair color!). They are actually controlled by more than one gene pair (skin has 7), so they can be in a range of shades. Brown eyes are considered dominant as originally all humans had brown eyes. It only takes one gene (OCA2) to be mutated to shut off a portion of melanin production to make blue eyes. (For a cool relationship fact: Blue eyed folk may all have the same <a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080130170343.htm" target="_blank">ancestor</a>!) In point of fact, dark hair, skin and eyes are all dominant. Since there are several genes involved, any one or more mutation can lead to a change in the color. As the photo of the twins at the top shows, skin doesn't equal ethnicity/race.<br />
<br />
Now, my good friend Loretta's blog <a href="http://buwt.blogspot.com/2012/08/dna-will-solve-everything.html" target="_blank">"Barking Up the Wrong Tree"</a> covered some interesting responses to Ancestry.com's posts regarding it's new autosomal DNA test. What it proves is that many people don't understand what genes are about. I'll have to make a post (or ten) just on genealogy and genetics, but today I'm going to give you a rough outline to explain ethnicity markers and why your identified race/ethnicity isn't what you'll always see in your DNA. So a bit of the basics on DNA: your DNA is made up of 46 chromosomes in 23 pairs. One pair is well known as it determines your sex: you'll be a female if you are XX, male if you are XY. The rest of the 22 pairs determines most everything else about you (there are some specific mutations found on the sex chromosomes for some characteristics, but again, this is a broad stroke today). <br />
<br />
Chromosomes are made up of genes. Genes are strings of molecules that are basically instructions for our cells on how to do whatever it is they do. An allele is what we call different forms of genes. For example, the gene for number of fingers has two alleles: the dominant 6-fingered option and the recessive 5-fingered one. If I wanted to trace the history of the recessive mutation, I would look for the earliest concentrated occurrence of that allele. Since there is no gene shouting "I AM WEST AFRICAN!", scientists need to look for alleles that are commonly found in West Africans. If an allele is almost exclusive to, say, Indonesians, then that mutation can be used to map migration of the Indonesians to neighboring islands. I just read a great book "<a href="http://www.pbs.org/gunsgermssteel/" target="_blank">Guns, Germs and Steel</a>" which, while a little repetitive on the conclusions, explains how genetics, language, food production, etc. can be traced from a concentrated "start point" to other areas by conquering civilisations. If you want a really detailed explanation, though, I would recommend the read.<br />
<br />

<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhBmLcc0IAweEzBbdtwhcZl17rIOBaxqcODwaCf5Pa2ghnGCjLVsfw7LuFFCJEKfaQu3N1UVAAxN68aUc7I-sauPiensIPyxDYBxO_ZU4hadJwMMnqaQCKcJqj6-xtTMPJKkH7owGgR4n8C/s1600/AncestryDNA-Ethnicity-Map.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="207" jea="true" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhBmLcc0IAweEzBbdtwhcZl17rIOBaxqcODwaCf5Pa2ghnGCjLVsfw7LuFFCJEKfaQu3N1UVAAxN68aUc7I-sauPiensIPyxDYBxO_ZU4hadJwMMnqaQCKcJqj6-xtTMPJKkH7owGgR4n8C/s400/AncestryDNA-Ethnicity-Map.png" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Please read Ancestry.com's blog post <a href="http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2013/01/11/ancestrydna-ethnicity-prediction-learning-to-speak-genetics/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ancestry+(Ancestry.com+blog)" target="_blank">HERE</a> for their explanation</td></tr>
</tbody></table>

<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
So about DNA tests: When you take a Y-DNA test, you must be a male. Women don't have Y chromosomes. Since women don't have Y Chromosomes, a Y-DNA test will tell a man about his father, grandfather, great grandfather, etc......in a straight line of descendancy. The X Chromosome is found in both men and women, so to do a test exclusive to women, scientists came up with mt-DNA testing. That test is for the DNA in your mitochondria. Mitochondria is a small organelle found in cells. It has it's own DNA with it's own mutations. Women pass mitochondria down to both their female and male children, so a man or a woman can take the test. The test will tell you about your mom, grandmother, great grandmother...... both these tests give you a very clear idea of your family migration as far as the mutations to genes on the Y chromosome and mitochondrial DNA.... but ethnicity isn't among them. To test for ethnicity, you must take an autosomal test. That tests the other 22 pairs of chromosomes. It looks for specific alleles that are found in specific areas and have clear migratory patterns to prove a point of origin. It's less accurate than the other tests and does NOT tell you whether it's your mother's or father's side that gives you a particular allele. And there isn't a time on these mutations, so your tree may go back 7 generations, but the DNA is going back 10 or 20..... so just because your grandmother was Spanish, doesn't mean your DNA won't say you're Turkish. None of the alleles that have been identified to be used in an autosomal test are for a physical appearance trait. You can "look like" an Italian, and share the alleles associated with a South Indian. And since your parents' DNA doesn't divide evenly to give you their half, you may lose an allele that is specific to one group or another. So your 4th great grandfather may in fact be Native American, but it's so far back in the DNA and has been recombined and divided so many times that you don't have a marker that says you're Native American.</div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<br /></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
It's all about human migration. People conquering the inhabitants of neighboring areas, being conquered, travelling and intermarrying for millenia..... that's why German ancestry is so hard to pin down and West African is not! Germany is the cross roads of a large land mass called Eurasia (the largest one Earth). Romans tried and failed to conquer it; Germans tried and succeeded in conquering most of the British Isles; Scandinavians tried and succeeded several conquests of most of the areas of Europe including the British Isles and Germany. West Africa was able to conquer most of South Africa, leaving only pockets of native populations there. Most African Americans will find West African links, because most slaves were collected from the West African coast. West Africans took the mutations specific to their area and bred them into their conquests. We can see a clear migratory pattern. Germany.... not so much. As more people sign up for the autosomal test, we'll get more data and a clearer picture of what mutation started where. Even still, it is not an accurate system. It's the genetic equivalent of "looks like".</div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<br /></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<strong><span style="color: red; font-size: large;">To Confuse Us Further</span></strong></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<br /></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<span style="color: black;">Most people having problems understanding their DNA results, or asking what a relative "looks like", are actually just making one big problem: defining words incorrectly. Here's what Dictionary.com says about nationality, race and ethnicity.</span></div>
<ul>
<li><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
Nationality- <span id="hotword"><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">the</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">status</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">of</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">belonging</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">to</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">a</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">particular</span> </span><a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/nation" jquery1360459142625="27" style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal;">nation</a><span id="hotword">, <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">whether</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">by</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #0055bb; cursor: pointer;">birth</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">or</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">naturalization:</span> </span><span class="ital-inline"><span id="hotword"><span id="hotword" name="hotword">the</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">nationality</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">of</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">an</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">immigrant.</span></span></span></div>
</li>
<li><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<span class="ital-inline"><span><span name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">Race- <span id="hotword"><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">a</span><span style="color: black;"> </span><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">group</span><span style="color: black;"> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">of</span> </span><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">persons</span><span style="color: black;"> </span><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #0055bb; cursor: pointer;">related</span><span style="color: black;"> </span><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">by</span><span style="color: black;"> </span><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">common</span><span style="color: black;"> </span></span><a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/descent" jquery1360459209875="55">descent</a><span id="hotword"><span style="color: black;"> </span><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">or</span><span style="color: black;"> </span><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">heredity.....<span style="color: black;"> </span><span id="hotword"><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">an</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">arbitrary</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">classification</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">of</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">modern</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">humans,</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">sometimes,</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">especially</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">formerly,</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">based</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">on</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">any</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">or</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">a</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">combination</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">of</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">various</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">physical</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #0055bb; cursor: pointer;">characteristics,</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">as</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">skin</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">color,</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">facial</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">form,</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">or</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">eye</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">shape,</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">and</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">now</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">frequently</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">based</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">on</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">such</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">genetic</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">markers</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">as</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">blood</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">groups....<span id="hotword"><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">a</span><span style="color: black;"> </span><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #0055bb; cursor: pointer;">human</span><span style="color: black;"> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">population</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">partially</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">isolated</span> </span><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">reproductively</span><span style="color: black;"> </span><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">from</span><span style="color: black;"> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">other</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">populations,</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">whose</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">members</span> </span><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">share</span><span style="color: black;"> </span><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">a</span><span style="color: black;"> </span><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">greater</span><span style="color: black;"> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">degree</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">of</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">physical</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">and</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">genetic</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">similarity</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">with</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">one</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">another</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">than</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">with</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">other</span> </span><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">humans. (This is what is meant by the Caucasoid, Negroid, Mongoloid classifications by anthropologists)</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></div>
</li>
<li><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<span class="ital-inline"><span><span name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;"><span><span name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;"><span><span name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;"><span><span name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">Ethnicity- <span id="hotword"><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">relating</span><span style="color: black;"> </span><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #0055bb; cursor: pointer;">to</span><span style="color: black;"> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">or</span> </span><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">characteristic</span><span style="color: black;"> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">of</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">a</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">human</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">group</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">having</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">racial,</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">religious,</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">linguistic,</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">and</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">certain</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">other</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">traits</span> </span><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">in</span><span style="color: black;"> </span><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">common.</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></div>
</li>
</ul>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<span class="ital-inline"><span><span name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;"><span><span name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;"><span><span name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;"><span><span name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;"><span><span name="hotword" style="color: #333333; cursor: default;">So when we ask what someone looks like, or do the autosomal test, most of us are expecting an answer of Nationality. Grandpa was from Norway, so we're hoping to hear Norwegian. When someone says that their relatives looks like a Native American, they are using an arbitrary race stereotype (dark hair, high cheekbones, dark skin). When someone finds out that their relative who was documented as from England carries Scandinavian DNA, they call the test bunk. They don't look Scandinavian! Well, what does a Scandinavian look like? The alleles are specific to an ethnicity and they're confusing it with race (both England and Scandinavia are considered to average as Caucasoid) or just nationality.</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<br /></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
Show a person a picture of a baby and an unrelated man and tell them that the man is the child's father, and most will start to see "obvious" physical traits to prove it. (I read this in a psychology magazine, but couldn't find it again to give you the exact percentage. I know it was somewhere around 80%) If you are looking for proof of a particular ethnicity, you'll probably see it, even if it isn't there. I'm not saying everyone is wrong when they think their relative looks like a particular group.... I'm saying that unless you're an expert, you're most likely wrong. I did a two part article on how to determine the age of a photo based on photograph technique and the clothing of the subject. Even at my best, I can get a range rather than an exact date. If I tried to determine what someone "looked like", I wouldn't be any more accurate. Even an expert would be uncomfortable with an absolute ethnicity. They'd say that feature suggested this and this one suggested that.... but no, they won't look at your photo of great aunt Ruth and tell you she definitely had slave ancestors and just "passed for white".</div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<br /></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
I'd rather decide if one photo of my great grandfather "looks like" the unlabelled earlier photo and leave it at that.</div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
-Ana</div>
Rhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4691552322695070495.post-48437664379975715942013-01-21T12:43:00.002-06:002013-07-25T18:17:47.974-05:00A Rose by Any Other Name...<span style="font-family: "Courier New", Courier, monospace;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">It's a brave new world out there and it's always evolving. When my father was a boy, children were expected to be raised by their mother and father in one house. By the time I was going to elementary school, there were books and after school specials talking about the many forms of family that I would encounter. I remember one that told me that being raised by one parent, grandparents, aunts and uncles, or even a foster family was normal. Divorce and blended families were on the rise, so it was becoming more likely for children to be raised with unrelated (or only half-related) siblings. I also remember a show, My Two Dads, that had a girl raised by two men. But because it would still be a few years before television was comfortable openly talking about homosexuals, these two men weren't gay. They were two ex-boyfriends of the girl's mother and one of them was the father. When the mother died (to conveniently remove her so audiences weren't confused or upset at her absence), the men were expected to raise the daughter jointly. Today we have the show Modern Family where two homosexual men raise an adopted daughter. These past few decades, I have watched as we have become more comfortable with talking about single-parent households, couples that never marry yet raise children together, adopted and step children living in blended families, and finally the same-sex couple. Not everyone agrees with or accepts all of these family styles, but the fact is that they do exist. And when dealing with something as traditional as genealogy, there are unique problems that arise.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Courier New", Courier, monospace;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br /></span><b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">My Story</span></b><b><span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br /></b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">My parents divorced when I was 11. My father was given full custody of both my brother and myself. While still a child, I was aware of a few challenges with my new family unit. First, this was the early 90s and most of my friends still had married parents. Granted, I wasn't the first kid on my block with a divorce (and this was my father's second marriage), but I now found myself part of a select group of children. Baseball games, PTA events, even visiting friends' houses meant that I would have to explain to other children why my mother wasn't there. It seemed to catch them off guard that my dad was the one baking cookies and checking for monsters under the bed. Second, other adults didn't know what to make of my parents' divorce. Most of the time, the mother had received custody of the kids. I think for the first year or so after the divorce, my dad was the only single father with custody that we knew. This made it difficult with making play-dates as the mothers had some aversion to letting a man watch the kids. I remember one friend who spent the night on a Friday and was expected to stay until we dropped her off at church on Sunday. Her mother found out that my father was the only parent in the house and picked her up right after lunch Saturday. We were both very upset (partly because we didn't understand her anxiety, mostly because dad promised us a trip to the park). After the word spread, I was invited to my friends' houses, but rarely did they accept invitations to mine. And the number of women that tsk-tsked the "tragedy" that I was a young girl without a woman's influence in the house was overwhelming. I actually made one woman cry when I assured her that my dad had told me he would be "both mommy and daddy". She scared me.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Which leads to my number three "challenge": dad's girlfriends. For those first years, he'd date a woman and eventually she'd leave saying his kids were tearing them apart. I know for a while that dad was convinced we were trying to keep him alone or force him to get back with mom. Neither of these were true. My brother and I were smart enough to 1) see the divorce coming and 2) know that both mom and dad were happier away from each other. The truth was that his girlfriends had it in their heads that they were now "mom". Almost immediately upon introduction, they would tell us what to do, how to act, when to go to bed, what to eat, and how to treat them with the respect they "deserved". I had such an aversion to women authority figures for a while that, when I started to develop, I would talk to no one but my dad. Again, while not that long ago, men weren't commonly in charge of their children (at least, not where I lived). So there's dad trying to look comfortable while sales people act like they are forced to help this poor man understand enough about bras to help his daughter. (I'd like to note that he was extremely helpful and made the experience a lot of fun for me.)</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The fourth challenge was my stepmom. She's actually not my stepmother as she and dad never married. On the other hand, she's been his stalwart companion for almost 20 years (and a family friend since they were in high school). So calling her my stepmom only seemed natural and right even if they didn't marry. I remember when they first started dating, she didn't want to be called his girlfriend. She was too old to be a girlfriend or have a boyfriend, she said. So dad called her his "significant other". All well and good for them, but most folks still called her "Lou's girlfriend". And til the day he died, grandpa called her "Louie's wife". It was a near constant struggle to get others to use the "right phrase". At one point I wondered why they bothered and was told that it was the principle of the thing. No matter how they put it, I thought it was much ado about nothing.</span><br />
<br />
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span></b><b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">"Traditional" vs. Reality</span></b><br />
<b><span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br /></b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">We all know what has been termed the "traditional family unit" by a great many folk. That's one man married to one woman who produce genetically related children. It's the vanilla in our Baskin Robbins. And just like that deliciously ubiquitous ice-cream shop, there are several other flavors to choose from. For the US: In 2011, 69% of children (aged 0-17) lived with two parents, 27% with one, and 4% with neither parent. Of the 4%, half were raised by their grandparents. 7% of children lived in a home of "cohabitation" (either both parents unmarried, or one parent and their unmarried partner). In 2010, 40.8% of births were to unmarried women. Only 48.4% of all U.S. households had married couples and 0.6% were same-sex unmarried couples.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Now, genealogy (from Greek words for "generation knowledge") started in Western Civilization as a way to prove kinship and pedigree for ruling classes. Because royalty used pure blood lines and divine right as a reason to rule, many pedigrees traced themselves back to a god or heroic (yet, mythical) figure. The United States didn't standardise genealogy research until the early 19th century. Even in it's infancy in the states, genealogy was about tracing one's family to a prominent figure in the eyes of other Americans. Eastern Civilizations created pedigrees long before the 16th century in order to avoid incestuous relationships (like the Panji of India) or record the descendants of prominent figures (like the family tree of Confucius which was started over 2,500 years ago and is still updated to track his descendants). In all of these early beginnings of genealogy, the point was to know what man (and occassionally, woman) had created what child and follow that child's decendants to the present time. The timeline of "invention" in genealogy is lost to the ages, but I doubt it took long to note an adopted/step child vs. a natural heir. I have seen histories that mention adopted children taking the seat of power from their "parent" and continue the cultural line even if not the blood line. Even still, royal pedigrees are notorious for leaving off illegitimate (or disowned) children in order to keep the lines of ascension clean. And I have seen many early 20th century documents that leave out or sideline nonblood relations, so there was no hard and fast rule about how to deal with those who didn't carry that genetic connection from the progenitor even 100 years ago. Even my Kemper book published in 1899 leaves out the stepchildren for many of the family groups. I suppose to the authors of that book, the stepkids didn't "count". Considering how young some of them were when their parent married into the Kemper clan, I wonder how they would feel about that.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So while genealogy has tried to keep to the standard of documenting blood connections, the reality of family dynamics has already required exceptions to the rules. 2001 saw the first country to recognise same-sex marriage (the Netherlands). And the 2010 census was the first time that the percentage of married couple households dropped below 50% since they started tracking it in 1940. Single parent and cohabitation households are on the rise and, for the genealogist, they must be recognised. But how?</span><span style="font-family: Arial;"></span><br /><b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Let's Not Get Bogged Down in Semantics</span></b><b><br /></b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">For a long time now, I have seen complaints on the Ancestry.com facebook page (or on forums about other websites and software) with the labels given by default to many family ties. A man and woman connection invariably leads to the label of "spouse" regardless of marital status; some systems won't recognise a same-sex union; adopted or step children want to make it clear that their biological parent(s) aren't their "real" parent(s) with a special label; and there are no special labels for pets. The complaints usually start with "How dare you tell me how to live my life" kinds of rants that suggest that the poster assumes Ancestry is trying to force them into a "traditional" lifestyle. Usually the problem is an emotional one. A woman who is no longer with her boyfriend, but has a child with him, doesn't like the thought of him being listed as her spouse. A man celebrates his state's acceptance of his marriage by adding his new husband only to find the system label the other man as his "wife". A man who doesn't recognise his abusive father as his parent resents that there is no "sperm donor" label to make it clear how he feels. A couple that never had biological children wants to show the deep connection and love they have for their dogs by listing them as children, but there is no clear label or page to dedicate to the "fur babies".</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Now first, for what you can already do: Ancestry.com already allows you the option of adding "preferred" parents. You can enter biological parents, then adoptive or step parents and chose which ones will be "preferred" and show up on the profile and tree pages. The other parents are still on the tree, but are "hidden" on the relationships tab for the child. The parents' profile pages will still show their relationship. While there is no clear indicator on the website for the relationship, there is a dropdown menu on the relationships tab (found by clicking "Edit the Person" on the profile page) that allows you to chose birth, step, adopted, other for the parents and children. As for same-sex unions: recently I accidentally attached a man to another man as a spouse and the system accepted it. I know it used to change the gender of one of the profiles, but I noticed it didn't do it this time. Either I had a computer glitch, or Ancestry finally coded the site to accept the same-sex option. And while personally I think adding pets as children is silly, I have seen many trees doing just that despite the human-centric system. And all of these are software issues. If you have a paper system, or write a family history book, then you can do as you please in whatever form you please.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">What you can't do: The profile page always says spouse. So if you're one of the unmarried masses who don't want your significant other labelled a spouse, you're out of luck. Just like parentage, you can use the dropdown menu on the relationships page to define the union as married, divorced, partner, other.... but for some, just seeing spouse on the profile page is enough to send them off. And then there's the relationship calculator. It labels spouses as husband or wife, so same-sex couples can end up with the wrong gender identifier (and again, unmarried couples are given a marriage identifier). Now, that one I think should be changed, but the problem is how. If we use "spouse", we run into the same problem we face on the profile page. If we use "partner", then there will be those (gay and straight) who disagree with using that word to describe someone they are legally married to and plan to live with for (hopefully) their entire lives. "Significant other" works for my dad, but I don't see that as a solution for genealogy for the same reason that "partner" doesn't work. Not to mention the small group of people who use "significant other" to define people who are of importance to their lives regardless of a sexual or marital relationship (my uncle considers his neighbor a "significant other", because the neighbor often checks in on his well-being and has been a confidante for over a decade). And then there's my personal favorite: "consort". It comes from the Latin word "consors" which meant "sharer". The dictionary defines a "consort" as a marriage partner, particularly of a ruler. Even if we start using it as a common partner, there's still those bitter bitter people who won't agree that it's a good term for ex's since they no longer share their home or responsibilities. Now, the dictionary defines "spouse" as a marriage partner as well. Then it goes on to say it's from a Latin word (spondere) that means "to pledge". I get that. You're pledging yourself to one person. Seems to work for me. If we ignore the more modern assumption of a marital connection, I still like this word the best to define a union between two people. To be honest, even if the union ends, for a brief period of time, you two were pledged (either by word or action) to each other.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">When I first started this article, I had planned to just tackle the spouse issue. And it has taken the bulk of my post. On the other hand, I think that all these little nit-picking complaints all come round to the same thing: individual emotional attachment. I understand the need to personalise something as personal as your family history. On the other hand, websites and software can only do so much. Heck, genealogy can only do so much! I'd like to come back now to the pets thing as it illustrates my point quite well. When you find a tree that has pets as children, there are no indications that this is not a human being. Why? Because genealogy has from it's inception been about human beings. Software and websites are all making that same assumption. Is this not fair to pet owners? Um, who cares? I have three cats. I love them to death. My brother even more so. I call them his kids. When I go to pick him up from work, I tell them I'll be home soon with Daddy. I believe they are intelligent creatures capable of love as much as they are deserving of it. Even still, neither of us would put them on our family tree. We don't want to confuse other researchers. I mean, let's be honest here. The majority of trees online are filled with perpetuated errors because one person wasn't smart enough to recognise a mistake and hundreds of others weren't smart enough to read what they were copying to their tree from that idiot. Unless y'all believe Jesus was born in Bethlehem, Ohio........ So you put your pets on your tree and some idjit puts them on his tree as your blood children. Then several someones copy that "fact". Hundreds of years from now, your great great grand nieces and nephews are saddened that of your 6 children, none lived past 13. Now they're looking for birth and death records to find out if it was a genetic defect! They're looking for burial markers! They're looking for what doesn't exist.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">And there is going to be someone that reads that paragraph and tells me I'm mean and terrible and don't understand (the first person to say "bully" gets a black eye!). Now, just like I said about fantasy trees that have gods and people from antiquity on them, if you want to add pets to your tree, that's your business. Please make your tree private so it won't sully the online community with misinformation. Because that's what we're really concerned with here: the community. So you hate your mother and want a label to reflect that; does the community benefit from it? You had a falling out with your boyfriend and are so filled with repulsion that seeing him labelled as your "spouse" turns your stomach; does the community need to be dragged into it? More than that, do website and software developers need to spend extra time (and with it, extra money) to give you those personalised options? How about how much more time the community will need to learn how to use this beyond politically-correct system of "anything goes"? If you spend any time on a forum, you will notice how many people are still confused as to whether or not a woman is listed by her maiden or married name (it's maiden by the way). Now you want them to worry if they are using the correct labels for everyone. And what if other suggestions like specialised fonts and colors, icons for profession and military service, and A FREAKING ANIMATED TREE THAT INDICATES WHAT SEASON IT IS FOR THE PERSON'S PROFILE BASED ON THEIR LOCATION are added? Seriously, people. Some of the specifics that are asked for would clutter profiles and confuse new people. (Hell, people are still complaining about a blue "Is so-n-so on Facebook" link and you want to add all this?) Other requests are for things that are available as fact dropdowns (civil union vs. marriage, professional associations, and "custom events" like the date you started dating your unmarried whatever-you-want-to-call-them) and separate pages (you can make a military page for any relative and add photos and service history).</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">And so we give you these options on your tree, because it's your tree and you don't care about the community's feelings/needs. Okay. What happens when your relative makes a tree and doesn't use the same phrase you do? Your aunt lists your biological mother as preferred (or omits your adoptive/stepmother entirely). Your ex has his own tree and is comfortable using "spouse" to define you. Your parents don't list your pets as their grandchildren. Your brother is fine with you being homosexual, but doesn't recognise same-sex marriage as part of his personal faith. He doesn't add your spouse to his tree (or if he had the option, he labels your spouse as a "partner" or "other"). Is it their business because it's their tree, or yours because it's your information? If the forums are any indication, you want to have your cake and eat it too. They can't impede your tree, but you want to change theirs. Sorry, but you get one or the other.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Here's my solution, take it how you feel:</span><br />
<ol>
<li><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">We change all coupling identifiers to "spouse" accepting and perpetuating the Latin definition of "one who has pledged".</span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">You already can indicate preferred parents, so no changes needed there.</span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Pets can be added to a tree, but we need to either do it in a story format or make a separate page option to keep the tree standard for everyone. I also like the idea of a website PetAncestry.com or something to trace pet breeding and the like.</span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">NO NEW FONTS</span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">NO CLUTTERING ICONS, PICTURES, LINKS, OR ANIMATIONS</span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">We each grow a little bit thicker on our skin and get over ourselves. Each of us needs to accept that the world doesn't revolve around us.</span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">We must accept that other people have different experiences and that what works for us may not work for others. In a global community like genealogy, there are no wrong ways to compile our history. Even so, we can't impose our needs/beliefs on others.</span></li>
</ol>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">OR we all get over ourselves and stop trying to reinvent the wheel. I don't know about you, but all this getting lost in the "thick of thin things" is distracting me from what's really important: connecting my family to history and myself to the world as a whole.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">-Ana</span>
Rhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4691552322695070495.post-11684128797530387352013-01-07T14:29:00.002-06:002013-01-07T14:29:44.263-06:00I'm Good, You?Finally the holidays are over!!!!! After all the rigmarole of the last few months, I'm ready to kick back and find my old groove again. Oh, Dear Reader, how I've missed you...... what shall we talk about today? Well, how are you? Good. Good. And the living family? Oh really? Did you get it on video? Adorable. How's the research going? You did? That sounds fantastic..... what? What's that? Sick? Do you think it was the Flu? We had a terrible outbreak of norovirus in Chicago..... just about everyone I know has been down and out for a few days in the last couple of weeks. Hm? Oh, no. There's no treatment except to rest. Apparently really bad to get that one. Makes you think about how our ancestors handled diseases, doesn't it?<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;">History's Big Epidemics</span><br />
<br />
I got bored typing out a list of epidemics, so here's the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_epidemics" target="_blank">wikipedia article</a> that lists the biggest ones. Visually this is the best way to see how disease has circled the globe and travelled with colonists and explorers since the beginning of time. I'm going to present here a clear timeline of first discoveries of some diseases (they may have been around longer, but undocumented) and when the first treatment or vaccine was available for them. It's important to consider epidemics in our genealogy research because it can hold clues as to why a family member is missing or why an entire family group died suddenly. I can point to a cholera outbreak in recent local history that wiped out several family members when my grandparents were young. And there is probably no family that wasn't touched by the 1918 Influenza pandemic.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">4000 BC- Skeletal remains of humans from this era have signs of TB</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">1930 BC- First written account of Rabies</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">900 BC- Smallpox and Measles differentiated</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">430 BC- First account of possible Typhoid fever epidemic</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">ca. 400 BC- Pneumonia described by Hippocrates</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">541 AD- First account of Bubonic Plague (would ravage the world and kill 1/3 of the European population during the Late Middle Ages)</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">1489 AD- First reliable account of Typhus</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">1553 AD- while Scarlet fever may have been around as early as 400 BC, this is the first clear account of the disease</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">1580 AD- While earlier accounts of Influenza are available, this is the first clear outbreak</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">ca. 1600-1700 AD- no clear initial Chicken pox description. Several books attribute different doctors with the discovery.</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">1613 AD- Diphtheria breaks out in Spain</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">1647 AD- First clear outbreak of Yellow Fever</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">1740 AD- Rubella first described medically</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">1764- First description of Lyme disease (some claim this disease is known in prehistoric men, others that it's an engineered disease in it's latest form from the 1960's- I don't know).</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">1768 AD- Meningitis is described (as "dropsy") although it may have been known as early as 400 BC</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">1789 AD- This is the first written account of Polio, though there are drawings in Egyptian Hieroglyphs that suggests withered limbs on otherwise healthy individuals</span><br />
1796 AD- First vaccine, Smallpox<br />
<span style="color: red;">1817 AD- First Cholera pandemic</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">1876 AD- First account of Anthrax</span><br />
1879 AD- Vaccine for Cholera<br />
1885 AD- Vaccine for Rabies<br />
1896 AD- Vaccine for Typhoid fever<br />
1897 AD- Vaccine for Bubonic Plague<br />
1921 AD- Vaccines for Diphtheria, Tuberculosis<br />
1924 AD- Vaccine for Scarlet fever<br />
1926 AD- Vaccine for Whooping cough<br />
1932 AD- Vaccine for Yellow fever<br />
<span style="color: red;">1934 AD- Mumps "discovered"</span><br />
1937 AD- Vaccine for Typhus<br />
1945 AD- Vaccine for Influenza<br />
<span style="color: red;">1950s AD- HPV discovered</span><br />
1952 AD- Vaccine for Polio<br />
1954 AD- Vaccine for Anthrax<br />
1963 AD- Vaccine for Measles<br />
1967 AD- Vaccine for Mumps<br />
1970 AD- Vaccine for Rubella<br />
<span style="color: red;">1972 AD- HPV linked to increased cancer risks</span><br />
1974 AD- Vaccine for Chicken pox<br />
1977 AD- Vaccine for Pneumonia<br />
1978 AD- Vaccine for Meningitis<br />
1998 AD- Vaccine for Lyme disease<br />
2006 AD- Vaccine for HPV (Human papillomavirus linked to cervical cancer)<br />
<br />
Note how fast vaccines became available once we knew how to do it! And how we've become much more quick in our responses to vaccinating diseases once "discovered". Now imagine not having these vaccines and having to suffer these diseases. Imagine all those relatives in your tree that could've been saved if science had been a little quicker on it's draw. Lucky us, no?<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;">History's Big Medical Advancements</span><br />
<br />
In the beginning of human history, it was seen as a taboo to touch a dead body. This probably arose from the number of diseases that would ferment in a corpse and transfer to a living person. Hey, even a kid knows that if a flame burns you when you touch it, you don't touch it again. So it would take little observation for our primitive ancestors to notice that dead body + close contact = sickness. While some would flaunt the common conceptions (and sometimes laws) to bring us anatomy books as early as 300 BC, there would be many misconceptions and assumptions in these first attempts. Because humans as a whole truly do change slowly and reluctantly, it would take centuries for real advances to be made in early medicine. Here's a brief outline of some important steps that changed the game in human mortality.<br />
<br />
500 BC- Alcmaeon of Croton distinguishes veins from arteries<br />
460 BC- Hippocrates, the father of medicine, is born. He will use observation and deductive reasoning to treat illnesses, but will still hold with the popular belief that four humors (blood, phlegm, yellow bile, black bile) must be kept in balance for good health.<br />
1249 AD- Roger Bacon invents spectacles<br />
1590 AD- The microscope is invented<br />
1628 AD- William Harvey publishes his work "An Anatomical Study of Motion of the Heart and of the Blood in Animals" describing how the heart pumps blood through the body.<br />
1656 AD- Sir Christopher Wren invents the first method for intravenous administration of medicine.<br />
1747 AD- The common sailor ailment of scurvy is finally prevented with citrus fruit thanks to the work of James Lind. (It won't become a requirement to provide lemon juice on British naval ships until almost 1800).<br />
1763 AD- First successful appendectomy.<br />
1796 AD- Edward Jenner develops a smallpox vaccine (as well as the method of "vaccination" itself) by exposing people to cowpox.<br />
1816 AD- The stethoscope is invented by Rene Laennec<br />
1818 AD- The first successful human blood transfusion is performed by James Blundell<br />
1842-1846 AD- While anesthetics had been discovered in Sir Humphrey Davy's work with nitrous oxide, it wasn't until now that surgeons and dentists applied his discoveries (and other's work with ether).<br />
1853 AD- The invention of the syringe by Pravaz and Wood.<br />
1867 AD- Joseph Lister publishes "Antiseptic Principle of the Practice of Surgery", revolutionising cleanliness in operating rooms. He pioneers cleaning of wounds and equipment to reduce infection.<br />
1870 AD- Robert Koch and Louis Pasteur develop the germ theory of disease.<br />
1887 AD- The first contact lenses.<br />
1899 AD- Aspirin is invented by Felix Hoffman<br />
1901 AD- The ABO blood typing system is made and safe human blood transfusions are finally possible.<br />
1906 AD- Sir Frederick Gowland Hopkins "discovers" vitamins and suggests their necessity for healthy living.<br />
1913 AD- Dr. Paul Dudley White pioneers the use of the electrocardiograph as a diagnostic tool.<br />
1921 AD- The Band-Aid is invented.<br />
1922 AD- Insulin is used to treat diabetes.<br />
1928 AD- Penicillin is discovered by Sir Alexander Fleming.<br />
1935 AD- The heart-lung machine that allows for circulation of blood to be performed outside the body (think open-heart surgery) is invented by Dr. John H. Gibbon Jr. It will be 1953 before it's successfully used on a human.<br />
1942 AD- Ultrasound is developed by Dr. Karl Dussik<br />
1954 AD- Gertrude Elion patents drug for fighting leukemia.<br />
1967 AD- First human heart transplant.<br />
1985 AD- First kidney dialysis machine.<br />
<br />
<br />
It's hard to consider how far we've come in the field of medicine, but it wasn't that long ago (your parents or grandparents can attest) that people died from simple infections at the drop of a hat. I have a book called "The Works of Aristotle" that actually wasn't written by Aristotle. It's attributed to an anonymous author (and sometimes a William Salmon) in the 17th century. The book tries to cover many medical areas in anatomy, disease, treatments and the like. The theories and assertions are insane! My favorite is the chapter on pregnancy. It states that if a woman is thinking of anything but her husband, her child will show the signs of her wandering mind. Really. If she's thinking of the milkman, the kid will look like the milkman. If she's thinking of goats, the child will be born with hair that has a woolen quality. Seriously, did people really believe this??? Well, there was the belief at one time that germs travelled in clouds about the city. Supposedly, the city of New Orleans actually fired cannons into the air to break up the clouds. Even today, I was sent an email from a relative that claims that onions can absorb the germs in the air and keep me from getting sick (it claims a doctor proved this, but doesn't mention his name). It's crazy to think about the "facts" as they were then and as they are now.<br />
<br />
I suppose it's no surprise that we're told every day that something will kill us only to hear it saves our life tomorrow.<br />
-AnaRhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4691552322695070495.post-92130960541996868792012-12-14T08:39:00.001-06:002012-12-14T08:39:15.125-06:00Time to Talk of Other ThingsThis winter season is beating the hell out of my friends and family. Disease, disaster and debt have come to a head for so many. If you are in the same boat, or know someone that is, my heart goes out to you. It's probably not more prevelant in the holiday season, just more acutely felt.... at least that's what I try to tell myself as yet another friend's relative dies or they themselves are ravaged by illness. I'd like to think that it's only because of the pressure of buying gifts that we feel the financial pinch at this time. What I really truly hope isn't just the season is your belief in and ability to be a caring and integral part of humanity. Today I'd like to share some short stories of my favorite childhood Christmas moments and a call to be the great memory for someone this year.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #cc0000; font-size: large;">No Lips.</span></strong><br />
<br />
I was a small child of maybe 3 or 4. My dad had purchased a mechanical dog with a leash that had a remote to make the dog move, flip and bark. He thought I'd really get a kick out of this little marvel. Instead what he got was a child in tears because the dog had no lips! He had a tongue glued to the end of his muzzle, but the manufacturer had inexplicably decided to not draw or sew lines on his mouth. My grandfather had called to wish me a Merry Christmas and all I could do was cry and tell him how the dog couldn't really bark if he didn't have lips, so why did he bark? My dad took the toy back to the store. When asked for the reason of return, he shrugged and said, "He doesn't have any lips."<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #cc0000; font-size: large;">Santa IS Real...</span></strong><br />
<br />
Kindergarten is the year of burgeoning independence. It can also make or break the reputation of teachers for years to come. So this is probably the worst time to take it upon yourself to tell children Santa doesn't exist. But that's what my teacher decided was in my best interest. The problem was that my dad dressed as Santa every year for the Children's Hospital (complete with his boss as "Head Elf"). As far as this little 5 year old knew, he WAS Santa. I was angry at my teacher and ran straight home after school to tell my dad that she didn't believe in him. He was naturally upset that she was making a choice on how to handle Santa Claus that's ideally up to the parents. Other parents were also upset to find their kids crying and unwilling to participate in Christmas if there was really no Santa. So dad did what any parent would do. He dressed up as Santa and came to my school to hand out candy canes to all the kids. The teacher was upset that he was "filling the children's heads with lies", but a conversation with the principal after the visit changed her tune. Meanwhile, I was able to strut about the play yard for a week before our winter break with the reputation of being the kid with the direct line to Santa's Naughty and Nice List. As for my teachers, well....... let's just say my critical eye was developed quickly and I never accepted their assertions without proof.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #cc0000; font-size: large;">But the Tree Is Not.</span></strong><br />
<br />
I was a sickly child. I was small for my age, ate like a bird and had the pale and hollow-eyed look of a kid with acute anemia. I forget at what age it happened, I was still very young, but I clearly remember finding out I was allergic to pine trees. We had just pulled a beautiful green pine into the house and mom had vacuumed the needles up from the move. Dad set down the skirt and wound out the lights. I was given my box of ornaments to put up on the tree. I went up and stroked the delicate branches in wonder at how big a tree dad was able to get this year..... and pulled back an already red and swelling hand. Soon enough my eyes were swollen and teary and I was wheezing. Mom freaked. Dad had to unwind the lights, take out the tree (I think he ended up giving it to a relative to use), vacuum the house twice and clean the ornaments. He went out and bought us an equally big and green artificial tree, but I was very distraught. It didn't smell like a real tree. It just didn't seem like a real Christmas without a real tree. So mom went out and bought pine smell fragrance and sprayed down the tree. Thankfully, I outgrew that particular allergy and was soon able to have the real smell back again.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #cc0000; font-size: large;">Boys Are Disgusting.</span></strong><br />
<br />
My brother was 6 or 7 when there was this cartoon that had army men that fought mutant giants. I think there were good mutants and bad, but what he wanted for Christmas was the toy version of one of the bad guys. It was a Digestor or Destructor or something. What the character did was take the army men and place them in his ribcage and digest them. The toy had a chest with the exposed ribcage that opened when you pressed a button. He came with one army man and you could place the man in the chest, close the ribs and press a second button that released goo (a jar of slime that you poured into the doll and could replace at $10 a jar) to "digest" the army guy. Dad went to Toys R Us without exactly knowing what he was looking for. He asked the nearest clerk who screwed up her face and pointed down an aisle. Down that aisle were several empty shelves where the mutant dolls had been....... and several still filled with this Digestor. Apparently, he wasn't selling to well. Dad says he looked at it and said, "Good Lord...... ugh. No way......." Mom said, "It's all he asked for." With that they knew it had to get in the cart. Dad thought it a win to refuse to buy him extra goo. So he gets up to the register after shopping and is placing this thing on the belt when the woman behind him exclaims in disgust, "What the hell is that?!?" Sighing, he said, "It's a Destructor. It locks army men in it's open chest and pours slime on them to 'eat' them. My son said if I didn't get this for him, he didn't want anything at all..... you know how kids are." She took a long look at the doll and asked, "What aisle is it in?"<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #cc0000; font-size: large;">Beware the Tree Troll.</span></strong><br />
<br />
Because of a number of out of town relatives who would mail us our gifts early, as soon as the tree was up there was usually a present underneath it. But how to keep children from poking and prodding the boxes? Well, you tell them the Tree Troll will eat their presents if they try to touch them! I know what you're thinking, "The what?" My dad had a gargoyle that sat underneath the tree. He told us that was the Tree Troll and that he was the watchdog of Santa Claus. If we tried to mess with the presents before it was time, or fooled around with the tree, then the Tree Troll would eat our presents (and possibly us). He was also responsible for reporting our actions to Santa for the Naughty List, the little narc. On Christmas eve, we'd set out milk and cookies for Santa (ideally for mom as dad was not a huge milk drinker) and the Troll got a beer (what dad really wanted after a near month's worth of holiday shopping and hooplah). In the morning, the milk and cookies were gone, the beer was drank and the Tree Troll was asleep under the tree. It was now safe to get our presents. Years later, my dad would get a new gargoyle and deck it out with lights in the eyes that would be turned off Christmas morning (to indicate the Troll was asleep). Now dad hopes to sell copies of his Troll next Christmas (after many many many requests) so that children around the world can experience the joy and wonder of the Tree Troll who protects your presents, tells on you, and then snores drunkenly through Christmas dinner. I never said my childhood was normal.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #cc0000; font-size: large;">What? This Is a Christmas Movie!</span></strong><br />
<br />
We all have the list of Must See Christmas Movies. Dad watches "It's a Wonderful Life", but mainly because he takes joy knowing it was a hot and miserable shoot and it wasn't a well received movie when it debuted (he has issues). And in our house there is no "Christmas Carol" other than the 1950's version with Alistair Sim. Bill Murray's "Scrooged" is also topping our list of favorites. But the big tradition in our house is the Christmas Eve Action Fest. We watch "Dirty Harry", "Leathal Weapon", "Die Hard" and "Die Hard 2". Honestly, after all the sugary fair we are subjected to around Thanksgiving and leading up to Christmas, don't we all want to watch someone get beat up and die?<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #cc0000; font-size: large;">White Castles Make the Holiday Glow... Just Don't Light A Match.</span></strong><br />
<br />
The tradition of Christmas Eve dinner being White Castle started when my father was a small boy. His family would go to pick out the Christmas tree at a lot across the street from the White Castle restaurant. His mother would drag the younger kids around the lot looking for just the right tree. Since my dad was the oldest, he had to help load whatever tree they picked. My grandfather would take him, and only him, over to the White Castle where they would have a couple of burgers and talk. This became a yearly bonding moment for a father and son that often felt like the other came from a different planet and certainly couldn't be blood related. Of course, grandpa believed in fairness and, while he relished the quiet moment alone with his eldest boy, he didn't feel right about not getting the other kids a treat. So he'd buy a case of burgers for Christmas Eve dinner. It was a good plan. There's so much baking going into the Christmas Day meals and snacks that the last thing you want to do is halt progress to make something for dinner the night before. Soon the neighborhood had heard of this tradition and was on board. They'd see Grandpa getting ready to go to White Castle and ask if he'd bring them back some if they paid. He had no problem doing so (and sometimes didn't accept payment from a neighbor that didn't really have it to give). The neighbors would come to the house to pick up their cases and usually just bring the family to eat there. They'd trade small gifts, tell stories and admire the decorations before shuffling their brood to their beds and finishing their own Christmas preparations. While it has been a long time since the whole neighborhood was involved, and dad's health no longer allows him to eat those delicious devils, we still get a case of White Castles for Christmas Eve dinner and listen to the story of how it all got started. I may not let my own future children indulge as much as I have in those little belly bombs, and my fiance will probably never love them as I do, but I will carry this tradition on as long as there is a White Castle in existence.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: #cc0000; font-size: large;">Family Is Who You Say It Is.</span></strong><br />
<br />
One of the truest things about my family is that if we know you, you are family. Especially during the holidays. The door is open, the hearth is warm and the fridge is stocked. No one asks if they can have a drink, they just grab what works for them. Want an ice cream? Freezer downstairs. Hungry? Christmas dinner is finished at 10 a.m. and replenished throughout the day. Laid out buffet style, you just grab a plate and load up. Stay 10 minutes or all day, we don't care. And for God's sake, don't forget your take home package of food. My uncle Bert isn't my uncle by blood or marriage. He was a neighborhood kid that my grandparents unofficially adopted as one of their own. I have always known him as my uncle. I couldn't consider him in any other way. And he doesn't consider himself in any other way, which I think is fantastic. I love when I invite a friend to my house for the first time and they stare in wonder at the nonchalance of the guests who just open the fridge and grab a soda or bottle of water (and maybe a bit of the crab dip kept cool). I laugh out loud as my uncle Bert pokes at them and says, " You're family here! Stop standing on ceremony and grab a plate!" It is such a joy to watch as they relax, kick off their shoes and fight over the "good seat" with my brother as if they'd grown up with us in this house and had all the rights to comfort that we have. And they do.<br />
<br />
A year or so ago, a car broke down on the road outside my dad's house. He lives on the highway, so when the man came up to the first house he saw and asked to use the phone, he was pleasantly surprised by my dad's smiling face. Dad let him use the phone, asked my cousin the mechanic if he'd take a look and then asked the man to bring his wife and kids up to the house to stay warm while all was taken care of. The children were small and, as small children do, were quick to make themselves at home. The mother tried to calm them and tell them not to touch that and ask for things and to say "thank you" and "please." Dad was sneaking them cookies and candies for every piece of broccoli they ate. The husband eventually had a beer or two and shot the breeze with dad. Mom and the wife were exchanging baking tips. The kids were playing a board game with the other children. Thankfully the problem with their car was minor and my cousin was able to fix it relatively quickly. While we never saw those folks again, they both thanked us for making them feel so welcome. Dad assured them that the door was always open should they be back our way again. The youngest child looked sternly at my dad, an elderly fat man with a snowy white beard, and beckoned him closer. Dad knelt down and the child said, "Are you Santa?" Dad winked and said, "What do you think?"<br />
<br />
Family is who you say it is. And this is the time of year when we are most reminded of the care that our family deserves and often needs. Cherish and love all that you have known this year and show them in any small way that you are thinking of them. But I ask you to go farther than that and make someone your family. Help a veteran too proud to ask for help by insisting they come for dinner. Offer a cup of hot coffee or chocolate to a volunteer ringing a bell outside of your shopping mall. Talk more to the neighbor across the street. Ask after the family of the teller who cashes your paycheck. Invite your kids' best friend to participate in a family tradition. Do it now, but continue it on where ever and when ever you can. Remember these people on more than this one occassion. Make them feel like part of the family. Make them truly part of your family. Weave the bonds of life tighter among those you see most often.<br />
<br />
Become their Santa,<br />
-AnaRhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4691552322695070495.post-80346224176573384912012-11-22T16:53:00.001-06:002012-11-22T16:53:25.048-06:00You Have Two Ears And One MouthSo the post before last was about how to get your family to open up to you about events in their lives. I cautioned you against pushing an issue too far and running rough shod over their feelings. The emotions of others can be overly sensitive and extremely hard to predict. Trying to build the trust that gets you into their innermost confidences doesn't happen overnight. And it is so easy to lose their trust with a misplaced word or action. One of the best ways to guarantee no one will ever want to confide in you is to blab the family gossip at every turn. The most likely time any person is likely to slip up is during a family get together like the holiday season.<br />
<br />
Personally, I see no point in many of the secrets people try to keep. Yes, there are good reasons. Everyone can think up a legitimate reason why something needs to be hidden. But as a genealogist, many of those secrets become stumbling blocks to the truth. They aren't walls, really. They are annoyances that may obscure the facts for years, decades..... maybe a lifetime or two if you're lucky. However, genealogy is a persistent science that is ever evolving and becoming more efficient. What would've required months of snail-mail and guesswork can now be figured out in a few hours if not a few days with a greater chance of accuracy on initial attempts. With the help of the internet and my widespread friends worldwide, from the comfort of my home and local repositories, I can now follow my ancestors over hill, over dale, across the waters where genealogical bloodhounds of old would lose the scent. As I mentioned in the other post, that which my family thought was hidden was relatively easy to find in plain sight. Not that the waste of time taking the long route doesn't annoy. Like watching a suspenseful crime drama, I often wonder why innocent witnesses don't just come out with all their information in the first interview. They are belligerent and obstructive to the investigation. But the detectives always get it out of them in the end of the hour. For me, it has become wearisome to sit across from a relative who knows more than they are telling when you both know that that's what they are doing. But their are no escalators to Heaven. One must use the stairs.<br />
<br />
Over the last year of my blog (happy first anniversary!), I have tried to instill a sense of procedure in you, my dear Reader. Start with yourself. Start with what you know. Move to the living relatives and what they know. Use maiden names for women. Source your tree and cite your sources. Make this obsession your own and savor it... At every turn on this journey, I have given you license to do this as you please, as long as the basic framework of genealogy is there. You can live your life as you please, as long as you allow for the basic niceties of life. I have reminded you about saying "Please" and "Thank You". I have asked you to meditate on the fact that you aren't the lone descendant and that the opinions of others must be taken into account. I hope that you have taken my advice to heart. You need to walk that mile in your ancestor's shoes to get a better idea of the how's and why's of their life. You need to see through the eyes of another before you can ever get them to see through yours.<br />
<br />
If you can't accept the difference of opinion (or at least respect it), then the basic framework of a working relationship is not there. You will not develop the closeness of a familial bond so very necessary for open and honest communication. And as the old saying goes, "you have two ears and one mouth, so you should listen twice as much as you speak." You need to become an active listener. Anyone can hear what is going on around them, but it takes a real effort to listen. To absorb the information presented verbally and nonverbally. To process it and have a real conversation between equals. You're not an attorney grilling a witness. You're their relative and friend. What would you want your friend to do for you? Listen to what you say and respond accordingly perhaps? Maybe not glaze over and formulate their response for when you finish speaking? I'm sure you'd like them to let you finish your own sentences. And you certainly wouldn't want them to go trotting off with that story and tell all and sundry if you just got done telling them you wanted it to be between the two of you.<br />
<br />
It's hard for a genealogist to keep mum. We spend so much time digging in the dirt, that sometimes we can't help but crow when we find that precious gem of information. But it isn't about us, is it? Family is a living, breathing, growing organism made up of a multitude. You are one cell in that organism. And while I am a bit of an egoist, even I have to admit that I may not be anything more than an epithelial. I told you about my 100 year box. I have found it a very effective visual tool for those who are reticent to part with vital information. But what truly speaks volumes about my worth as a co-conspirator is the volumes I don't speak. The stories that family know I know that aren't brought up (vs. the hundreds of truly entertaining stories that I share freely) are evidence of my ability to respect the feelings of others. The "truths" I will publicly accept are the price I pay for the private confessions.<br />
<br />
So the holiday season is upon us and we find ourselves visiting family a bit more (hopefully). We take the time to remember more than just our parents, siblings, nieces and nephews. We reach out to the 3rd cousin once removed and the great uncle in the nursing home that can't remember if we are the one he liked or if it was our brother. We take this opportunity to meet in person the relations our research has discovered. A genealogist always has a sense of family, but no more so than during this time of the year. My last post was about making the visits fun and informative to spark more sharing. Making games is always a good way to get the less than enthused involved in telling their tales. And finding an exciting way to present your new finds keeps family from considering your research as dry and boring. Sometimes, however, you will have a truly juicy story or notorious relative that you simply musn't talk about. The only way to know if the information will be well received is to have that close personal relationship with each family member. You must put in as much time with each living relative as you put into your research of the dead ones (if not more). And if you have any reason to believe that Auntie will be upset to hear that her great grandfather was the most prolific slave trader in all of Georgia, maybe you should let it be.<br />
<br />
If you go around raking the muck, all you get is dirty,<br />
-AnaRhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4691552322695070495.post-26930837154926208302012-11-18T16:52:00.002-06:002012-11-18T16:53:08.150-06:00Is It Thanksgiving Already???Hello Dear Readers!<br />
<br />
My apologies for the hiatus, it was most unexpected. Truth is, while I would love to make genealogy and blogging my full-time endeavor, the rather inconvenient need to eat requires another avenue for steady funds.<br />
<br />
Lord, I need to stop watching BBC television for about a month. Truth is, I have another more physical occupation that has a regular paycheck. Sadly, a few weeks ago, I injured my hand on the job. I injured my thumb and forearm. I was unable to type for some time. When I finally started to sit down to my computer work again, I had terrible bouts of tingles and stiffness. I had to face the harsh reality: my hand was sprained and it needed rest.<br />
<br />
Well, I'm on the mend now and hope to have some great posts for the holidays to get your genealogy juices flowing! Thanksgiving is this Thursday, so it's a perfect time to pump the living relatives for what they know. But don't be a black hole of information. Prepare a poster or book or something showing your family tree. Take photos to share. Make games! Have photos printed out card style and print or write facts about the relative on the back. Who wouldn't want to trade their Uncle Silas' second wife for a Great Grandma rookie card? Or play family trivial pursuit! Make cards for the game with the categories of, say, "Smith family history" or "Family milestones" or "Regional recognition." Complete your game piece (and crown yourself in gloating glory) by winning with the wedge for "what family member ran for political office twice and failed to win before becoming an optometrist"! Take out the baby photos and play a "Guess who". The ideas are endless as long as you are willing to get creative!<br />
<br />
Well, I hope to entertain you with a new post this Friday. Until then, it's traditional Sunday dinner time with the parents. It doesn't have to be a holiday to get you together with your family.<br />
<br />
But it helps,<br />
AnaRhihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472224845627418585noreply@blogger.com2