Persistence strikes again

Since my last entry, I have managed to add on another three generations to the Bertsche line. The cause was a little persistence and the fact that I was trying to update the family history report I'd created for the Walker line when I added another generations to that branch as well. It happened completely by accident and I can thank the FamilySearch 'pilot' site once again. I used that site as well as www.familysearch.org, which is the one that started my genealogy research in 1998. Even though the sites are linked and basically contain the same information more or less, going back and forth between the two I have now traced the Walkers back to my 6th great grandparents and the Bertsche line back to my TENTH great grandparents, for which I'm still gob-smacked over

I just wish I could have this kind of luck with the Wilhelm, or Gentzen lines, but because of progress I've made this week, it gives me a little more hope for those branches, especially the Wilhelm line. I never expected to get those branches back as far as I did and believe it or not there is still the tiniest bit of doubt sitting in the back of my mind, because if any of the research and progress I've done lately turns out to be wrong I will be completely devastated. But even IF that does happen, I will press on and continue my research. And that is all any genealogist can do.

Taking a genealogy plunge

After a lot of thought and some opinions from other researchers, I've decided to add the information I found on Johann Georg Walker and Maria Anna Bertsche (aka George Walker and Mary Ann Bertseh) to my family tree. But before I actually jump in and do that I'm going to gather as much information about their siblings and parents, grandparents etc. as I possibly can. Why you might ask, especially if it turns out to be wrong and I end up removing it. Because IF it does turn out to be the wrong family (which it still might down the road) I want to be able to post the information on the genealogy message boards so that the right family can find it.

The one place that stands out in the research I've done so far has been Schlaitdorf, Germany. That doesn't seem to change except for the occasional marriage record where the couple is married where the bride was born. The FamilySearch pilot site is about the only place I've found information, I haven't found the right trees at Rootsweb, but then again I have never come across another tree there with Gentzen in it either.

I feel reasonably confident that Johann Georg Walker is my George Walker and I feel equally as confident that Maria Anna Bertsche is Mary Ann Bertseh (or Pearce if you like). So if you come across information in your research that is similar to what you know but not EXACT, don't write it off as wrong. Look between the lines and see if it is possible that you could actually be on the right track, because in the end you might be.

Another Clue for George Walker

Did you ever come to a point where your brain is telling you one thing and your heart is telling you something else and your instincts are trying to mediate between the two? That's what I am going through right now and believe it or not I really want to go with my instincts on this one.

I went to the library to use Ancestry to see if I could find any immigration/emigration information on George Walker (or Johann Georg Walcker). Believe it or not you can do the particular search I did for free and at home if you don't have a subscription. Anyway, I put Johann Georg Walker in the search boxes and clicked 'search'. Much to my surprise, the very first hit that came up was for a Johann Georg Walker that was born in SCHLAITDORF, Germany and his destination was OHIO. His application date was 1831, all which pretty much coincide with my George's obituary and I STILL think that Schlaitdorf was shortened to Slidor and its even entirely possible that whoever provided that piece of information for the obituary SPELLED it that way because maybe that's how its pronounced.

I honestly don't know but seeing not just the name but Ohio in the listing made me smile and told me (or at least my instincts) that the parents and siblings I'd found were the right ones. I also tracked Johann George's siblings in Germany and they ALL stayed there, George was the ONLY one to make the trip to America. Unfortunately, the Wuerttemberg Germany Emigration Index at Ancestry doesn't give any other information AND I couldn't find anything on a ship or when specifically in 1831 he arrived. But the word 'Ohio' was the biggest clue for me because that's where my George ended up.

What are my instincts telling me? They are saying that it is very possible that you may have found the key to George Walker's ancestry. I tracked the siblings to see if maybe one of their children went to America and possibly found George or something. With genealogy anything is possible. As for his wife Mary Ann Bertsche (or Bertseh or Pearce) I haven't found anything concrete yet, but the Bertsche family I DID find is the most likely candidate, at least that's what my genealogical instincts are telling me.

More later.

Genealogical instincts

Tracing ancestors back across the pond is sometimes a lot harder than tracing them as they moved from one city or even one state to another here in the US. But the funny thing about tracing them in countries and eventually cities across the pond is that if you go with your instincts, much like detectives sometimes do, you can actually come out on the other side with more than just a clue.

Here's what I mean. Earlier this year I happened across a listing for an obituary for what I had hoped was my 3rd great grandfather, George Walker. At first I didn't know that much about him or when specifically he died, at least until I found a probate listing for his wife and then the obituary for him. Obituaries can hold crucial clues as to not only who someone was but where they came from. George's did just that. He wasn't referred to as George Walker but rather 'Father' Walker. According to the obituary, he was born in 1805 in SLIDOR, Wittenberg, Germany. I looked that city up and couldn't find ANY listing for it, even though I found Wittenberg (or Wittenburg). He died 18 Sep 1895 at the age of 89 years, 11 months and 11 days, which when calculated makes his date of birth 7 October 1805.

I used the FamilySearchLabs beta site and put George Walker, 1805 and Germany in the search boxes and I wanted an 'exact' match. The closest I came to getting an exact match was a Joann (Johann) Georg WALCKER born 12 October 1805.

Now at first I thought, 'well this can't be him because the place of birth is completely different.' It was Schlaitdorf, Wurttemberg, Germany. But now that I can't find a 'Slidor' in Wittenberg, I'm wondering if perhaps his place of birth actually IS Schlaitdorf and not Slidor. I know what you're thinking 'It can't be the right guy because the birthdate doesn't match.' And yes I thought the same thing but Slidor MIGHT HAVE existed back then and then again, that COULD have been the fault of the person writing up the obituary, after all, the headline reads 'SAW NAPOLEON' and it claims that George when a lad of only seven years saw Napoleon as he passed through the town WHERE HE WAS LIVING. Now that may or may not have been the same town where he was born. More research is needed to see just what towns Napoleon passed through in 1812.

But the big question is, do I put this and all the other information I found through Johann George Walcker in my tree right now? The answer is no, simply because I just don't have enough evidence to say with absolute certainty that Johann George and MY George Walker are one in the same. As much as I hope they are. I have this same problem with George's wife but that's another story for another entry.

Facebook and genealogy

I haven't posted anything in a couple of months, but I thought I would post today about the positive benefits of signing up for a Facebook account. The social networking site isn't just about playing games (like Farm Town or Mafia Wars), it can also benefit genealogists when they are looking for cousins to connect with.

The simplest way to find possible cousins would be to put a surname in the Friend search box and see what comes up. I did that about a year ago and believe it or not had moderate success. I found familiar names that I already had in my tree (when I talked to an aunt, uncle or cousin) and through simple deduction and matching of birthdays (also which I got when talking to family) I sent friend requests. Some accepted right away without asking who I was and others asked who I was, which I didn't mind because it gave me a chance to let them know how we were related. Most I'm happy to report were interested in their own family histories happy to provide information.

Yesterday I took it one step further especially with those that I had just sent friend requests to and also to those that I hadn't introduced myself to. That's exactly what I did and explained that I was the 'resident' family genealogist. I asked for basic information on their spouses, marriage, children and the like. I also let them know that they could e-mail me 'off' Facebook and that I understood if they didn't want to provide any info at all. Two asked about family histories and I plan on tweaking two of those histories and sending them so that they can not only get a better idea of how we are related to one another but also who else they are related to.

Unfortunately, a couple of cousins haven't accepted my friend requests and one even confirmed that I had the right person because she posted a comment to her nephew's page. I wouldn't say I'm sad about that, just disappointed that she could chat with her nephew and not me or even just accept the friend request and have that be it. I'm certainly not looking to have long conversations with every cousin I find on Facebook, heck some aren't actually related to me but they happened to marry a cousin.

So the next time you are on Facebook (which I like more than Twitter by the way), try a cousin's surname that you know about, you never know who might pop up on Facebook. You'd be surprised how many cousins and other relatives are out there playing Farm Town.

:-)

Another generation added

I finally broke down and added the information I found on John Robinson and his family to my genealogy program. I was hesitant about doing this because once you add information it becomes a pain (you know where) to remove it. Even though my instincts were telling me I had the right family, I'm still not sure. I think the hesitation comes from the fact that for John's place of birth all it says for each census record is 'England' which could me just about anywhere in the country. Much like for Edmund 'Canada' for his place of birth could also mean just about anywhere, although I've narrowed it down to Ontario simply because that's where his parents lived in all the Canadian census records I found them in.

The kicker for me anyway is the fact that John's wife is always referred to by initials M.E. except for one census where she's 'Eliza M.' I also solved the mystery of 'St.' George. Upon finding a death record for him in Silver City, Grant County, New Mexico it seems that the 'St.' is actually 'S.T.' initials, which makes more sense than his being a 'saint'. It also seems that each of the children including my great-great grandfather had at least 3 initials not counting their last name, which also fits what I already knew about him. According to Edmund's death certificate he's listed as 'Edmund Lowell C. Robinson'.

I found two more possibles for Mary (Eliza) Robinson's death in Canada, but again I'm not sure about them because the records don't give a whole lot of information. The last one I found is the most promising, May Robinson, died 26 Oct 1880 (which fits the timeline), born in England, married and the informant was John Robinson. Its entirely possible that the 'r' was left out of her name and that's why its listed as 'May' and not Mary, but who knows.

I also found a possible in the 1841 England census for Mary and her maiden name which has yet to be consistent since I've only seen it twice and spelled differently both times. So I'm going to do some digging on that particular family to see if I can gain any other clues about Mary.

Paydirt, but still not sure.

Well, someone from the genealogy group was nice enough to send me the census page and with a little tweaking (and printing, scanning and saving so I could crop it) I now have the 1871 Canadian census that has Edmund L. C. Robinson and his parents and siblings. Its still a little hard to read but I feel very confident that its the right family.

Yesterday I went to the library and used Ancestry Library Edition and found some interesting information. I found John Robinson (Edmund's assumed father) in the 1881 Canadian census as a 'widower', living with three of his children, St. George (that's how he's listed), Herold B., and Hattie A.; his occupation is 'Tinsmith', which is the same as it was for 1871. I then started with the other children, since I already knew about Edmund, being that he's my direct ancestor.

This is where collateral genealogy research comes in, but I have to be honest in that I'm still not COMPLETELY sure I found the right ones, but since I usually listen to my genealogical instincts, I'll go with what my gut says. That doesn't mean that I'll be right but well, if you read this tell me what you think.

I started with 'St.' George since I thought that maybe, just maybe he would be listed just like that more than once. Believe it or not he was. I found a 'St.' George in the 1900 census in New Mexico of all places, but the kicker was who was living with him. His FATHER John. Upon doing this research I was going on the fact that all the children of John and Eliza (or Mary) Robinson were born in Canada and that both John and his wife were born in England. It stands to reason that any hits with that criteria would stand out.

According to the 1900 US Census, John was born July 1819 in England, he was 80 years old, widowed and was a 'retired' Tinsmith. It also said that John came to the US in 1891 and had been there 9 years. This made some sense because I hadn't found him in the 1891 Canadian census, but I had assumed that IF they had come to the US from Canada that they would go to Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota or somewhere just over the border. New Mexico kind of threw me for a loop. Living next door to John and George was Hattie McCullough who was also born in Canada and had a 'niece' living with her Nannie who was born in Illinois. In later census records she was listed has Hattie's daughter.

I traced the second oldest child, William to Iowa and with him I also found his death certificate at the FS site which provided another clue, but again, its ONLY a clue. The death certificate was from the District of Columbia where he died. William Hamilton Robinson, born 13 Jan 1849 in Bethel, Ontario and died 1 May 1928 in DC. He was buried in Iowa. His parents were listed as John Robinson and Mary SHIMPTON. I got excited about this because I had now found her listed with the same two initials that were in the book inscribed to Edmund 'M' and 'E'. Her name could be Mary Eliza or Mary Elizabeth or vice versa. I immediately started trying to find any other references to those two names but didn't.

All in all I traced all the children through the US census records 1900-1920 and even one in 1880. The places ranged from New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado, Iowa and Michigan and even some Ohio. I also even managed to find a child of one that had lived in Cook County, but haven't done a more thorough search on him. I'm going back to the library tomorrow for more research and have an e-mail contact that had a bit of info and I want to see if he has more or if what he posted on Rootsweb was all he had.

Sometimes your instincts are all you have when it comes to genealogy research, just like famous detectives sometimes you have to go with what your gut says or that hunch you've been thinking about because every once in a while, that hunch could snowball into a lot of information especially for a genealogist.