What's in a name?

As I continue to clean out my working genealogy folder and enter the information into my family tree, I come to my last six Sponable obituaries. At first glance they seem pretty straight forward, two sons of Nathan Sponable, one son’s wife and their daughter, Nathan’s obituary along with another daughter.

However, nothing is ever straight forward when it comes to genealogy or my family. The first two who I believe are two sons of Nathan are Clarence and Clark.

Clarence’s obituary states Clarence B Sponable, 72 was born in the town of Oppenheim April 17, 1878 the son of Nathan and Mary Ellen Dempster Sponable. He is survived by his widow, Mrs. Ida Sponable and one son Elton Sponable.

Morning Herald	Leader Republican

Clark’s obituary states Clark B Sponable, 72 was born in the town of Oppenheim April 17, 1878 the son of Nathan and Mary Ellen Dempster Sponable. He is surved by his wife, Mrs. Ida Sponable and one son Elton Sponable.

Gazette	Leader Republican

So at first glance what I thought was two sons are in fact one son. What I like about these two obituaries is the fact that it clearly documents that Clarence and Clark are in fact the same person, or perhaps Clarence really wasn’t the correct name and the Clark’s obituary is clearing up the fact. I find Clark listed as Clark in all Census records that I can find for him. I haven’t clearly identified him in the 1905 New York State census. Even his World War I and II draft registration cards list him as Clark.

In addition, Clarence’s obituaries, he had two were published in Gloversville, New York newspapers; The Morning Herald and the Leader Republican both on Monday, May 15, 1950 while Clark’s two were both published on Tuesday, May 16, 1950; one in the Leader Republican of Gloversville, New York and the other in the Gazette of Schenectady, New York. So it does appear, that the Clark obituaries are corrections to the Clarence’s obituaries however neither one states the error.

Also, please note that I did not find these obituaries personally, they were posted on Public trees shared via Ancestry.com, therefore there could be more obituaries and/or something that states one is the correction of the other.

This example has taught me a valuable lesson, which one should not stop when finding one obituary or record. I am also glad that I did save these obituaries into my Working Folder to be analysis at a later time. Had I been rushed to add this information into my genealogy database, I might have added two sons, whom at first glanced looked like twins. I might not have realized that they died on the same day and add the same wife and son.

Christina, wife of Abram Sponable 1850-1918

Sometimes as I research to figure out the maiden name of women, I may find it easier to prove who they are not.

On the Ancestry website, hints for my Christina come up with a maiden name of Nellis. When I follow the link to the 1860 Census in St Johnsville, Montgomery, New York another problem arises. Who are Christina Nellis parents? Are they Edward Nellis and his wife Margaret or John H Nellis and his wife Christina.

To make a long story short, I found from the 1850 US Census both Nellis couples above where living with Jacob J Klock (1779-1851) and per Jacob’s will from 1851, both Margaret and Christina were his daughters.

Going forward, I found Christina Klock Nellis Find A Grave Index which listed Christina Vedder (1851-1915) as her daughter. When I clicked on the daughter’s name, I found Christina Vedder’s will. Here she identified that her father was John Henry Nellis and her husband was Johnathan Vedder.

Now I found a 1900 US census for my Christina Sponable who was born in Mar 1852 in New York State and has been married for 24 years and she had one child who is still living. In fact, the son Seeber Sponable is listed several households above Christina and her husband Abram.

I also found a 1900 US Census for Christina Vedder who was born in Oct 1851 in New York State and has been married for 30 years and she also had one child who is not still living. Her child, Edward K Vedder (1871-1876) was linked to her Find A Grave Index.

In spite of finding a tree, with Abram Sponable’s wife listed as Christina Nellis with parents of Edward Nellis and Margaret Klock, I am more than confident to say, my Christina, wife of Abram Sponable is not Christina Nellis and in fact Christina Nellis parents are not Edward Nellis and Margaret Klock but are John Henry Nellis and Christina Klock.

Moral of the story and something I remind to all my fellow researchers, take other people’s trees with a grain of salt and do your own research and see if you can come to the same conclusions. Also, I still haven't figured out what was my Christina's maiden name.

Trimming your Family Tree, Good or Bad?

I try not to go too far off the beaten path where my Family Tree is concerned. For example, I do add the parents of people who married into my family. I don’t necessarily research the parents any further than their names, however if their names were given on a marriage record, then I will add them to my tree. It is through these names, that I might find siblings that marry into various branches of my tree.

Anyway, while researching a first cousin 3 times removed, I found that she died quite young. Then her husband remarried. I decided to add the second spouse, since there were several census records, where this 2^nd wife is living in the home with her stepson, my 2^nd cousin 2 times removed. When I added her, I ask myself, should I add the 2^nd wives’ parents? Or is this going too far off the beaten path? 

When I do my family research, I want to make sure I actually have the correct records that go with my family before I key in any new information. I find it is easier than to just accept every hint that comes my way and sort things out later. Therefore I open multiple documents (tabs) on my browser. I also try to put these documents into chronological order by dragging the tab to its proper placement, with oldest event on the left and more current on the right.

As I was going through documents after my first cousin 3 times removed died, I found one census record where the the niece of the 2nd wife was living in the household. Then I found that this same niece married her stepson, my 2^nd cousin 2 times removed. As per my normal routine, from the marriage record I added the niece’s parents where the father is the brother of this 2nd wife. However, without their parents’ names, I would not know of the relationship between the 2nd wife of husband of my first cousin 3 times removed and the wife of my 2nd cousin 2 times removed.

Therefore I now have the Father-in-law of husband of 1^st cousin 3x removed and Mother-in-law of husband of 1^st cousin 3x removed. Plus my 2^nd cousin 2 times removed father-in-law shows up as Brother-in-law of husband of 1^st cousin 3x removed instead of what I would like to see of Father-in-law of 2^nd Cousin 2x removed. The program knows the relationship, for whatever reason, has decided to show the other relationship.

So each of you will have to decide how far is too far off the beaten path with adding people to your family tree.

Who is Elizabeth Sponable Chapman?

My current summer project is to clean up and deal with all the documents I have stored in my “Working” Genealogy subfolder. This folder is where I gather documents as I am trying to verify who may fit somewhere into my family tree.

Anyway, I came to an Obituary Clipping from an Unknown newspaper as follows:

I must admit, I am unsure where I found it which doesn’t surprise me since I saved the file on Dec 23, 2013. What I am sure of, it was not found on Newspapers.com because I have looked and I cannot find it there.

Therefore: Who is Elizabeth Sponable Chapman, sister of Abram and Nathan Sponable and Mrs. Frank Williams and aunt of Mrs. George Weaver?

Doing a quick search in my files, I do find only one Nathan Sponable and no Abram Sponable and no Frank Williams. However my Nathan has only one sibling listed and that is Catherine.

I do an Ancestry search for Nathan with a brother Abram and find that they may be the children of Harman Sponable and his wife Elizabeth. The 1860 Census in Oppenheim, Fulton County, New York also listed my Catherine, along with a Lydia and Mary. The Nathan from my files is the son of Harman and Elizabeth and thus I feel like I am successful in placing Nathan and Abram in the correct family.

The above obituary states that Elizabeth has a sister Mrs. Frank Williams of Gloversville. After digging around in other people’s trees on Ancestry, I find a 1929 obituary attached to Deila Sponable as Mrs. Frank V Williams. Deila's obituary states that her brother Nathan survives her. 

I find several trees with Nathan’s obituary attached that states that he is the last of a family of nine children being the son of Elizabeth Kring and Harmon Sponable. It states that one of his daughters is Jeannie D Weaver and since Elizabeth’s obituary also states that her niece is Mrs. George Weaver, I feel confident I have found the correct family for Elizabeth Sponable Chapman. However, I am not finding an Elizabeth in the family and to be honest, I am not finding nine children either.

Going forward to the 1870 Census for Harmon Sponable, I find he has seven children, Catherine, Nathan, Abram, Lydia, Mary, Delia and Walter. Based on the ages, there are gaps for other children between Lydia and Mary and Delia and Walter. So perhaps the other two children died between census years. The New York State Census of 1855, 1865 and 1875 do no list any additional children and thus no additional clues were found.

Back to my question, who is Elizabeth Sponable Chapman. This leads me to start looking at the daughters of Harmon and Elizabeth, perhaps the process of elimination will work.

I already had Catherine Sponable married to Henry Bettinger in my file. I find Mary's 1899 obituary where she is listed as May Sponable and is married to Alfred C Bame. May’s obituary states she is survived by three sisters, Mrs. Henry Bettinger, Mrs. Friend Chapman and Mrs. Frank Williams. As previously mentioned above, Deila Sponable’s obituary has her married to Frank V Williams and I already had Catherine married to Henry Bettinger. This leaves Lydia. 

One tree I explored even added Elizabeth as an extra child to her tree in this family and had a copy of the obituary attached. Perhaps this is where I found the obituary, and since I knew there wasn't an Elizabeth listed as a child of Harmon and Elizabeth Sponable, I saved the file for future research. It states her death as 1913. If the death date is correct, it makes her birth year about 1858 because the obituary states she was 55 years old.

I find a 1905 New York State Census for Friend Chapman and Elizabeth Chapman, which list her estimated birth year as 1856. However, neither name brings up any more Ancestry Suggestions. 

I do a little more digging and find tons of City directories, and finally find a 1900 Census in Gloversville, Fulton County, New York that list Lizzie Chapman’s birth date as Nov 1854 in New York. This date is the closest to Lydia Sponable whose estimated birth year is 1853 based on various censuses. It states that her and her husband have been married for 19 years and they never had any children. That puts her marriage date to about 1881 and the 1880 US Census is the last I find Lydia. Could Lydia and Elizabeth be the same person?

Is Elizabeth the middle name for Lydia? By 1910, Elizabeth is a widow still living in Gloversville. I don’t find her after 1910 and thus the death date of 1913 could possibly be correct.

In Conclusion, Harmon and Elizabeth Sponable had seven children that lived to adult hood. Of their four daughters, only Lydia is unaccounted for as an adult and this is when Elizabeth starts to appear as a married woman. Harmon and Elizabeth’s child May also known as Mary, obituary listed a sister as Mrs. Friend Chapman of Gloversville. The 1900 US Census from Gloversville, has Friend Chapman and his wife, Lizzie as being married for 19 years with no children and Lizzie’s birth is listed as Nov 1854 which is in line with various early census records for Lydia Sponable. In 1881, there is a City directory from Gloversville that list Della Sponable and Lydia Sponable as glove makers at the same address. The 1910 US Census from Gloversville Ward 1, Fulton, New York gives Lizzie Chapman’s occupation as Glove handwork. Therefore, Elizabeth Sponable Chapman, wife of Friend Chapman and Lydia Sponable daughter of Harmon and Elizabeth Kring Sponable most likely are the same person.

What kind of Genealogy Researcher are you?

I realized that it appears I am a gatherer. I go around researching my family and gather information and documents. What I am not doing, is taking the time to update my genealogy software database with the information that I have been gathering.

So if I don’t add the new facts and people into my tree, are they really related to me? Well of course they are, however, how would I know? 

Plus, I have found that I am gathering the same information that I gathered two or more years ago.

Why? Well, back in 2000 when I realized that I should be citing all my sources, I also developed a rule that I would not put any new fact or person in my tree that I wasn’t willing to cite the source at the same time. I didn’t want to add anymore non-sourced facts into my tree. My other goal was to source the facts that have no sources as I was researching that person or branch of the family.

This method does work well, until about 2015 when I was elected to be my local DAR (Daughters of the American Revolution) Registrar. I found myself spending so much time on my perspectives’ applications that I didn’t have time to do my own research. Or should I say, inputting my own research. I was researching my family as a break from doing applications. I gather information and copied it into a “Working” directory, so I could find it again. There it would sit.

This summer, my big goal is to go and clean out my “Working” directory. To make matter’s worst; I have several “Working” Directories. I have some on various cloud services, along with my laptop. I am travelling, thus I am unsure if I have any on my desktop. I would be surprise if I didn’t.

So now as I go through my laptop "Working" directory (the smallest folder), I am bringing up my genealogy software. I check to see if this information has already been cited in my database. Then I check my well organized “Genealogy” folder where I store a copy of my documents and see if I have a copy of the information there. Also, I am fixing my naming conventions in the folder where I am checking for the document. I am making sure they are all named consistently. It is so much easier to find items when I use the same format. Plus I am checking my source citation for the fact too. Are they consistent with others, I am fixing those earlier ones, where information wasn't quite complete. I am also, making sure that every citation has a document in my “Genealogy” folder.

If you are curious about my “Genealogy” folder, check out my old blog post “Organize your Computer Files” http://simplygenealogy.blogspot.com/2013/01/.

This process might seem boring, however I am doing a little new research on the one person that I am revisiting based on my “Working” folder. I also check the working folder for all items that pertain to this same person. I am pretty good on my names, thus I usually have all the documents for one person sorted by their name, since this is what I usually name them in my “Working” folder.

So back to work I go, heigh ho! What kind of Genealogy Researcher are you?

AncestryDNA new Sorting Tools

The saying goes… “You won’t please all the people all the time”, and Ancestry has learned this too. Even if you are not totally happy with the changes with your AncestryDNA, doesn’t mean you can’t make them work for you.

Many people have put their two cents about the tools and how they are using them. This is my two cents and even if you don’t like the way I do them, perhaps it will start your creative juices flowing.

There is a new refresh screen to viewing one’s matches. In the First column you will find your matches names/usernames then the next column has the predicted relationship along with how much shared DNA you have with your match. The third column shows the status of their trees: No Trees; Unlinked Tree, or the Size of their tree, plus if you see a lock this means their tree is private. Right below the tree status, you may see a green leaf along with “Common Ancestor”. This means that based on your trees, and other’s trees (not just the matches tree), Ancestry has found a probable common ancestor. Even if it is based solely on your tree and your matches’ tree, you will want to research and verify that the match does descend from this ancestor. Also keep in mind that the match might have more than one set of Common Ancestors with you. The final column is where you can place your match into one or more groups and below that you will find any notes you added to the match.

When you click the down arrow next to the box that is labeled “All Matches” you will see categories such as create a custom group, Starred Matches (NEW is the number matches in each category). Starred matches is something you can turn on or off, thus a toggle switch. The default view for your matches is All Matches and you will see a check mark next to this to signal this is what is being displayed. All matches is the sum of your Close matches-4^th cousin or closer plus your Distant Matches. New matches are just that, matches that are new and haven’t been viewed. Plus hidden matches, these are matches that you can flag to be hidden for whatever reason you choose.

How I am sorting my matches;I created four groups, Paternal Grandfather, Paternal Grandmother, Maternal Grandfather and Maternal Grandmother. You can leave these labels or actually add the surname into the group. I have also put a label before each #A through #D for the four groups. Thus if you are looking at a pedigree chart, Paternal Grandfather would be #A and maternal Grandmother would be #D.

NOTE: Because I have added a color heart into my Custom Group label, the groups are not sorting correctly. If you don't use the color heart, the #A will sort first, then #B and so on.

I also created three yellow shade groups; Confirmed – Not Entered, Confirmed DNA Match – entered into Tree and NEED TO ENTER – RESEARCH.

The first group is where I have a confirmed person that I know almost how they are related, however because of a vague username, or initials that are common for more than one sibling I can't exactly place them in my tree. I use this group because I don’t entered them into my genealogy software since I only have the general family group they belong to.

Confirmed DNA Match – entered into Tree is just that. I like to put everyone who I have figured out into my genealogy database. I did a previous post about Tracking My DNA Matches which I find interesting to see which Ancestor’s I have shared DNA matches with.

Finally, Need to Enter – Research; these are my matches that I need to spend a little more time with to figure out how they are related and then enter them into my genealogy database.

I also Star my matches in the “Need to Enter – Research” group plus those matches that I have no idea who they are. I might have it figured to one or more of the #A through #D buckets, however I just don’t have enough information currently to figure out these people or how they fit exactly into my tree. By having them Starred, I can review them and see if perhaps they now have a tree, build out their tree or perhaps Ancestry has a Common Ancestor hint for me.

As I was putting my matches into various groups, I realized that the little color dots are nice, however I needed more visual, and since I already had colored stars in my notes, I kept them. Thus the notes fields are a very important addition to my sorting method; this is where I can leave myself reminders about this match. When a match is determined to fit into my tree, my note is something like this: 

I have been doing my genealogy for 35 plus years and thus I know that McDonald is my Paternal Grandmother’s surname, MRCA is the acronym for Most Recent Common Ancestor and the numbers before the ancestor’s names are their Ahnentafel numbers from the pedigree chart. Finally in the parenthesis, is my actual relationship to the match thus 2^nd Cousin, and for removed relationships I would use an X such as 1X for once removed.

Another challenge I had is as the match moves up my pedigree chart, having just #A through #D was not enough to remind me where our common ancestor sits on my pedigree chart. Yes the numbers from the Ahnentafel chart helps, however I wanted more. Thus I add P for Paternal and M for Maternal as the common ancestor moves up the pedigree chart.

Warning: My brain doesn’t always work the same as others. So if this chart is too confusing, don’t worry about it, just ignore it.

However, where this method works for me is that I change the Surname in my note to equal my male MRCA surname. 

Remember, #C is my Maternal Grandfather’s line and his surname is Tyler, however this match goes up to my Maternal Grandfather’s Mother’s line, thus the MPP added to the #C. This couple’s number is 52 and 53 and based on 52, and referencing my chart, it is labeled with #CMPP and thus matches. Again, it works for me and if it doesn’t for you, that is okay, develop a system that works for you.

Why I like this method, is when I look at our shared matches to each other, I have figured out some of the shared matches MRCA and they are within the PEDELTY surname either at 52 or his son 26. Thus the unknown matches I have labeled at the 26 level because this is the first male MRCA with the Pedelty name. When I am ready to further research these people, it has helped me limit within my huge tree, where these people fit into the picture.

Keep in mind that my sorting method or any sorting method doesn’t work very well when you share more than one set of common ancestors. For example, my 2^nd great grandfather, James Crinion and his two female siblings married siblings of the McMahon family. Thus there are three branches of the Crinion-McMahon descendants that go back to the same two sets of Ancestors, James Crinion’s parents and his wife, Mary Ann McMahon’s parents. 

This does get messy however; no one said genealogy was easy.