Errors

[mikejee]

A link to a message on another site. I'm sure many here will not be surprised

TV genealogy

One of those we find your ancestors TV shows that airs (in Dutch) here in the sunny Netherlands has just admitted that they have twice linked the wrong families.. Theres not a lot of detail in the news site report at the moment, but hopefully more information about what went wrong will appear...

www.british-genealogy.com

 

[Stokkie]

No surprise at all. It is difficult when different generations use the same name, fathers name their sons after themselves, sometimes sons they fathered with different mothers.

In Ancestry you are offered hints to copy material from other people's trees. This seems a short cut, but can be a means of copying someone's errors. Illegitimacy was common and for the Victorians and Edwardians was stigmatised. My father destroyed photographs of his parents. I've not been able to find a photograph of his mother. Or much about the first man she married, he was a traveller and she completed the census.

Further back many are illiterate, some working on narrow boats or as chainmakers. Their names are written different ways and the places they say they were born and dates of birth can vary. The electronic databases are informative but not always reliable. Go slow and check everything.

 

[Stokkie]

I have not used the DNA databases myself as I am not keen for my DNA to be sold. Personally I don't know much about the methodology used. Only living people who donated DNA will be in the dataset. Ancestry only includes the dead in family history, the living are excluded for privacy reasons. I know of people in my family who had children (I met them when I was young), but it appears that their parents had no children. Hopefully they are still alive!

 

[Astoness]

totally agree with your post 2 stokkie...its so easy to take what we see on any records for granted...we need to think outside of the box in many cases..many porkies were told to save face back in the day...i am a stickler for trying to obtain the right info and try to back it up by ordering birth..marr and death certs if needed...never really been a fan of looking at family trees on ancestry...many are correct but as i have found out with my family many are wrong...so many people are that desperate to trace their family back as far as they can and very often will latch onto the wrong family...

i was trying to find my gt grandparents on the 1901 some years back but no sign of either of them married or single so i put that to one side....however i found them on the 1911 telling a great porkie...they had put down married for 10 years but their marriage cert showed they married in 1910 so only married 1 year..so then i looked at the baptisms which showed they had had 4 children before marriage..

another one for me was trying to find my nan (dads mom) on the 1911) no luck there so i mentioned this to dad who told me that his mom and 3 sisters we taken in by various family and friends... the doyle family who were friends of nans parents took in nan..dad gave me their first names and lo and behold there was my nan aged 4 on the 1911 under the name of doyle and daughter to head of house..nans parents both died 1 day apart age 34 and 27 leaving 4 orphan girls which thankfully were all taken in by friends or family when they could easily have all ended up in the workhouse..so if it was not for dad giving me this info its doubtful i would have been able to trace the orphans girls back and find out the names of the very kind people who took them all in...

lyn

 

[MWS]

You expect errors from ordinary researchers who may not really know what they're doing - not long ago I came across the same person on a number of family trees with wildly different birthplaces and you wonder how that can happen. If you're inexperienced it's easy to assume that the information on the records are correct, when we know for many reasons (some mentioned) that they may not be.

However, you'd expect, I assume, experienced researchers would be aware of these things and make sure. I have gone off tv ancestry shows a bit.

Sometimes, when finding things out for other people I can get the impression that they just don't believe what I'm saying no matter how much corroboration there is.

 

[pjmburns]

Sometimes, when finding things out for other people I can get the impression that they just don't believe what I'm saying no matter how much corroboration there is.

Like you I get frustrated by this but feel that, at the end of the day, all we can do is present the evidence and leave it to them.

I use Ancestry and tend to ignore hints from other trees. Occasionally if I am stuck I look but only include if there is convincing evidence.

 

[Tinpot]

I am always grateful for the help I receive on BHF . Tinpot

 

[Astoness]

I am always grateful for the help I receive on BHF . Tinpot

so am i tinpot....i have received a lot of help from our kind members over the years

lyn

 

[Stokkie]

You expect errors from ordinary researchers who may not really know what they're doing - not long ago I came across the same person on a number of family trees with wildly different birthplaces and you wonder how that can happen. If you're inexperienced it's easy to assume that the information on the records are correct, when we know for many reasons (some mentioned) that they may not be.

However, you'd expect, I assume, experienced researchers would be aware of these things and make sure. I have gone off tv ancestry shows a bit.

Sometimes, when finding things out for other people I can get the impression that they just don't believe what I'm saying no matter how much corroboration there is.

I've no experience of doing family history for other people, except for exploring the history of people with older gravestones in the local churchyard. But there is always the possibility of finding out things which we might not welcome. TV genealogy has the primary purpose of entertainment. The TV programme probably is under time constraints and working with original documents and cross-checking sources takes time. I don't know the Dutch situation. Here's an interesting situation from the USA - Henry Louis Gates is an acclaimed academic who explored his own family roots as an African American. But he was just the host here. Ben Affleck was apparently uncomfortable with what researchers discovered:
https://www.rollingstone.com/tv-mov...ts-after-ben-affleck-slave-controversy-43610/ I imagine that a variety of stories might be told about anyone's ancestry.

 

[mikejee]

I'm not sure how thorough the programs are . I was involved in research for a "who do you think they are " program some years ago. The iniitial contact, I discovered afterwards, was some young guy on a short term contract {who was asked to investigate various people. He asked me for information on the ancestors of the person concerned, and I sent him a lot. Then a more senior person contactedbut me . Presumably he had told her some of the info I had given him (he was no longer working for them), but I had to provide much again that he seemed not to have provided to her. I di not get the impression that very rigorous checks were made, though it was some years ago and things might be different now

 

[Stokkie]

I'm not sure how thorough the programs are . I was involved in research for a "who do you think they are " program some years ago. The iniitial contact, I discovered afterwards, was some young guy on a short term contract {who was asked to investigate various people. He asked me for information on the ancestors of the person concerned, and I sent him a lot. Then a more senior person contactedbut me . Presumably he had told her some of the info I had given him (he was no longer working for them), but I had to provide much again that he seemed not to have provided to her. I di not get the impression that very rigorous checks were made, though it was some years ago and things might be different now

TV makes lots of use of young researchers on short term contracts in all areas. We watched DNA Family Secrets BBC 2 which attempts to explain some of the science and the moral issues that may be raised. I like that it does not use celebrities, but obviously the production company want people with an interesting story. Overall, I was impressed, speaking as a viewer. Anyone applying would need to do so with open eyes though.

 

[Richard Dye]

TV makes lots of use of young researchers on short term contracts in all areas. We watched DNA Family Secrets BBC 2 which attempts to explain some of the science and the moral issues that may be raised. I like that it does not use celebrities, but obviously the production company want people with an interesting story. Overall, I was impressed, speaking as a viewer. Anyone applying would need to do so with open eyes though.

While I enjoy watching similar programs. I am concerned that the production companies tend to cross the line (not all but many) to make the story (people) too interesting rather than fully factual.

 

[Alberta]

The worst problem in some cases is the ages on different census especially 1841 who often round the age up to an even number.
As has been said before , Fibs, and my goodness our ancestors were really good at them, from children before marriage to bigamy and ages.
They sometimes even changed their surnames when they changed their address so as to escape their former landlord.

It pays to check and double check any information about your family tree, and if possible obtain certificates of births and marriages.

As far as Ancestry family trees are concerned they often have to be taken with a pinch of salt.
My husbands grandfather was born in Birmingham and his brother in Kent, they were taken by their mother to USA to join their father when he was working in Johnstown PA, they landed in New York.they returned to Birmingham a few years later.
Ancestry public trees will show one born in Johnstown one in New York. I have their birth certificates and have messaged all the people with Public family trees but none have changed the info.

 

[Richard Dye]

The worst problem in some cases is the ages on different census especially 1841 who often round the age up to an even number.
As has been said before , Fibs, and my goodness our ancestors were really good at them, from children before marriage to bigamy and ages.
They sometimes even changed their surnames when they changed their address so as to escape their former landlord.

It pays to check and double check any information about your family tree, and if possible obtain certificates of births and marriages.

As far as Ancestry family trees are concerned they often have to be taken with a pinch of salt.
My husbands grandfather was born in Birmingham and his brother in Kent, they were taken by their mother to USA to join their father when he was working in Johnstown PA, they landed in New York.they returned to Birmingham a few years later.
Ancestry public trees will show one born in Johnstown one in New York. I have their birth certificates and have messaged all the people with Public family trees but none have changed the info.

Absolutely Alberta! My wife and I took a genealogy class (actually two) at our local library by a history/genealogy expert on the use of programs like Ancestry. How we can/should check and double check the authenticity and accuracy on the information. Where records in the 1900’s were not very accurate except maybe in the elite classes. As far as a family tree from Ancestor, no thanks. Lyn (Astoness) found something for me on 16 Alfred St that while excited to get, I knew my aunts and uncles, from the census I would say say was 60% accurate and a number of missing pieces of information.

 

[Grea]

totally agree with your post 2 stokkie...its so easy to take what we see on any records for granted...we need to think outside of the box in many cases..many porkies were told to save face back in the day...i am a stickler for trying to obtain the right info and try to back it up by ordering birth..marr and death certs if needed...never really been a fan of looking at family trees on ancestry...many are correct but as i have found out with my family many are wrong...so many people are that desperate to trace their family back as far as they can and very often will latch onto the wrong family...

i was trying to find my gt grandparents on the 1901 some years back but no sign of either of them married or single so i put that to one side....however i found them on the 1911 telling a great porkie...they had put down married for 10 years but their marriage cert showed they married in 1910 so only married 1 year..so then i looked at the baptisms which showed they had had 4 children before marriage..

another one for me was trying to find my nan (dads mom) on the 1911) no luck there so i mentioned this to dad who told me that his mom and 3 sisters we taken in by various family and friends... the doyle family who were friends of nans parents took in nan..dad gave me their first names and lo and behold there was my nan aged 4 on the 1911 under the name of doyle and daughter to head of house..nans parents both died 1 day apart age 34 and 27 leaving 4 orphan girls which thankfully were all taken in by friends or family when they could easily have all ended up in the workhouse..so if it was not for dad giving me this info its doubtful i would have been able to trace the orphans girls back and find out the names of the very kind people who took them all in...

lyn

Even certificates can throw you off track. My mother in laws birth certificate shows the name of father, this name was made up and threw me for quite some time until an elderly relative told me the true story. Her mother was a widow and it appears her father was her moms lodger. Mom and lodger stayed together till death but never married

 

[MWS]

That's one of the more difficult fibs to convince someone that it is such.

And throw up a lot more questions.

 

[Stokkie]

My father has three surnames on his birth certificate and knew he had five sisters. But he discovered his mother and father were unmarried, each was married to another partner. His father had another family of seven children. Some of this family were twenty years older than my father. This discovery caused a rift between father and his own father and mother. Dad's mother had a daughter with her husband, naming the girl after herself. My paternal grandfather seems to have commuted between his families using the rail network. The names on birth certificates and censuses vary as my grandmother supplied officials with names. Her real husband was a traveller.

Grandfather was a businessman and seems to have supported both families, but I recently discovered his bankruptcy, he had taken out a loan for his son (same name) and his wife was the petitioner. They seem to have reconciled though as towards the end of her life she moved round the corner to his second family. On the death of his first wife and after the death of my grandmother's first husband, they married. After all the children had been born. Naturally she called herself 'Mrs Stokie' when she was living with grandfather. The surnames on Dad's birth certificate are Grandfather's, the man's she was married to and her maiden name. Dad's sisters' birth certificates show various versions of these names, they sometimes called themselves 'Stokie' and sometimes gave their mother's married name. Those that married gave their name as 'Stokie'.

I suspect that before modern times officials simply wrote down the names they were told. I consider tracing my ancestors a work in progress... What was traumatic for Dad is a source of fascination for me. Grandfather was a Victorian / Edwardian rogue and chancer. In those days divorce was not possible for ordinary people. He appears in a family wedding photograph of a child of his first marriage as a couple with his first wife next to him. Everyone is smiling.

 

[Richard Dye]

My father has three surnames on his birth certificate and knew he had five sisters. But he discovered his mother and father were unmarried, each was married to another partner. His father had another family of seven children. Some of this family were twenty years older than my father. This discovery caused a rift between father and his own father and mother. Dad's mother had a daughter with her husband, naming the girl after herself. My paternal grandfather seems to have commuted between his families using the rail network. The names on birth certificates and censuses vary as my grandmother supplied officials with names. Her real husband was a traveller.

Grandfather was a businessman and seems to have supported both families, but I recently discovered his bankruptcy, he had taken out a loan for his son (same name) and his wife was the petitioner. They seem to have reconciled though as towards the end of her life she moved round the corner to his second family. On the death of his first wife and after the death of my grandmother's first husband, they married. After all the children had been born. Naturally she called herself 'Mrs Stokie' when she was living with grandfather. The surnames on Dad's birth certificate are Grandfather's, the man's she was married to and her maiden name. Dad's sisters' birth certificates show various versions of these names, they sometimes called themselves 'Stokie' and sometimes gave their mother's married name. Those that married gave their name as 'Stokie'.

I suspect that before modern times officials simply wrote down the names they were told. I consider tracing my ancestors a work in progress... What was traumatic for Dad is a source of fascination for me. Grandfather was a Victorian / Edwardian rogue and chancer. In those days divorce was not possible for ordinary people. He appears in a family wedding photograph of a child of his first marriage as a couple with his first wife next to him. Everyone is smiling.

Good luck getting very little of that from a search site!

 

[mikejee]

I suspect that before modern times officials simply wrote down the names they were told. I consider tracing my ancestors a work in progress..

I think that in more modern times they also accept what is told them. I was involved, of necessity, in providing evidence for a young person who was born in the 1970s. When applying for a national insurance number for work he discovered that the surname he was always known as was not the name on his birth certificate. It was not , in fact even the name of his biological father, but that of a close friend of his mother who wished to have the name on the certificate. His mother was severely ill at this time, and died shortly after. Coincidentally, when she died her mother listed the middle Christian name on the certificate incorrectly.

 

[Stokkie]

Good luck getting very little of that from a search site!

I've tried to compare family stories I was told when young, (always explore these) mere outlines that Grandfather had a works in Birmingham, bred Bulldogs and had a farm in Kinver (allegedly) oh, and there's the bankruptcy and the other family, comparing this with the paper trail, newspapers and judicious use of Ancestry. Ancestry was invaluable in finding the name of his first wife and the only photograph I've seen of him and his first wife. It might be a way of finding a photo of my grandmother. But when I use it, I'm aware that it is partial. Still hoping for the Kinver farm! People don't put stories of bankruptcy on Ancestry or still these days illegitimate children. My own generation may well differ as to what we would put on an accessible site. There's still a different standard applied to women in many people's eyes. Mistakes and omissions are common.

 

[MWS]

Good luck getting very little of that from a search site!

The tricky ones are the best to research though, who wants things easy. Finally working something is very satisfying.

Recently I've been tracing someone whose name swings between two variations, neither (as far as I can tell) being their name. However, I think I find it a bit more interesting than the people whose ancestor he is.

Also, my great nan was a tricky one. Her birth was mostly listed as the place she grew up except once. She was born after her mother was widowed and before she married again. Father on her marriages was made up (neither her mom's first or second husband) and couldn't find her birth anywhere. Eventually found it under Smith with mmn listed as her mother's mother's name, corroborated by 2 brothers listed the same. No idea if the Smith listed was her actual father.

 

[Stokkie]

The tricky ones are the best to research though, who wants things easy. Finally working something is very satisfying.

Recently I've been tracing someone whose name swings between two variations, neither (as far as I can tell) being their name. However, I think I find it a bit more interesting than the people whose ancestor he is.

Also, my great nan was a tricky one. Her birth was mostly listed as the place she grew up except once. She was born after her mother was widowed and before she married again. Father on her marriages was made up (neither her mom's first or second husband) and couldn't find her birth anywhere. Eventually found it under Smith with mmn listed as her mother's mother's name, corroborated by 2 brothers listed the same. No idea if the Smith listed was her actual father.

Yes, it has the same satisfaction of solving a detective story (except that 'what really happened' may have to remain unknown. Or partially revealed years later.

 

[Richard Dye]

I've tried to compare family stories I was told when young, (always explore these) mere outlines that Grandfather had a works in Birmingham, bred Bulldogs and had a farm in Kinver (allegedly) oh, and there's the bankruptcy and the other family, comparing this with the paper trail, newspapers and judicious use of Ancestry. Ancestry was invaluable in finding the name of his first wife and the only photograph I've seen of him and his first wife. It might be a way of finding a photo of my grandmother. But when I use it, I'm aware that it is partial. Still hoping for the Kinver farm! People don't put stories of bankruptcy on Ancestry or still these days illegitimate children. My own generation may well differ as to what we would put on an accessible site. There's still a different standard applied to women in many people's eyes. Mistakes and omissions are common.

Unfortunately, miss information is alive and well! If you have ever been involved in the hiring process, reviewing resumes/CVs its amazing what people think they can say or hide! Regarding different standards for women, people should get over themselves! Two of my best bosses were women, tough, fair and firm.

 

[Richard Dye]

The tricky ones are the best to research though, who wants things easy. Finally working something is very satisfying.

Recently I've been tracing someone whose name swings between two variations, neither (as far as I can tell) being their name. However, I think I find it a bit more interesting than the people whose ancestor he is.

Also, my great nan was a tricky one. Her birth was mostly listed as the place she grew up except once. She was born after her mother was widowed and before she married again. Father on her marriages was made up (neither her mom's first or second husband) and couldn't find her birth anywhere. Eventually found it under Smith with mmn listed as her mother's mother's name, corroborated by 2 brothers listed the same. No idea if the Smith listed was her actual father.

I concur with the who wants things easy and the satisfaction part. For me it has always been about the chase and capture not the benefit. My concern with some/many sits is that there is little or no accountability for what is stated. Enough said!