Shaun Hobson

October 19, 2020October 19, 2020

The Unravelling of Secrets and Lies

1985 found us moving to a new neighbourhood in Winnipeg and the first neighbours we met, Sandra and Dennis, became good friends. Over the years we learned more about their family and background. Dennis’ history is one that some, who are searching for their biological past, might relate to.

Dennis’ story begins in the spring of 1947 in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada where he was born to Stella Stec. Stella was a 33-year-old single lady who lived in Fort William, Ontario (now known as Thunder Bay). She was pregnant and couldn’t tell anyone, therefore, she arranged to quit work and travel for a six-month holiday to visit her good friend, Lil, who lived in Victoria, British Columbia. Nearing the end of her visit, which was also near the end of her pregnancy, she confessed her situation to Lil. Stella, with Lil accompanying her, travelled to Vancouver to give birth.

Stella wanted this child, but knew she couldn’t raise him at this time. She named him Nestor Stec and had him baptized as Nestor James Stec. Stella contacted the Vancouver Children’s Aid Society to have them help her find a family in Kenora, Ontario who would board Nestor for her until her situation changed. Stella picked Kenora because it was within driving distance from Thunder Bay and she would be able to visit.

25 June 1947 Stella and Nestor arrived in Kenora and Nestor is placed with a foster family, in the adjacent town of Keewatin on June 28th. Stella agreed to pay the monthly costs to foster Nestor. February 1948, Nestor moved to a new foster family in Norman and they started calling him Dennis instead of Nestor. When Dennis was about three he was introduced to the Peloquin family who became his long-term foster family and the only family he would know in his youth.

Dennis talked about the awkward situations he experienced growing up in the small town of Kenora. One of these was not sharing the same last name as his foster family, Donat and Katie Peloquin and siblings Ron and Maryanne. He was Dennis Stec, not Dennis Peloquin.

Stella would come to visit Dennis and most times she was accompanied by a man named ‘Jack’. Dennis recalls them coming for a visit and taking him out for the day to visit sites and eat in restaurants, which was definitely out of the norm for the Peloquin family. Dennis compares this experience to Stella taking him “down from a shelf, like a toy, and playing with him for the day”. This pattern of life continued as Dennis grew and Dennis adjusted to it, as best he could, all the while feeling disconnected from both his birth mom and his foster family.

As years went by Stella realized her hopes of bringing Dennis to live with her in Thunder Bay could not be realized. She also realized that as Dennis joined the sports teams in Junior High and High School there would be a chance he would play against teams from Thunder Bay. She was fearful her secret would come out so she asked Dennis to change his last name from ‘Stec’ so questions would not be asked. Dennis refused and this was another situation where he would have to lie to keep the secrets hidden.

In 1965, four days after Dennis turned 18, Stella’s friend, Jack, died. Stella relayed the news of his death to Katie, Dennis’ foster mom. Katie, for the first time, asked if Jack was Dennis’ dad and Stella confirmed to her that Jack was Dennis’ father. The story of Stella and Jack was finally told.

In 1932, when Stella was 18 she was crossing the Jackknife Bridge to Mission Island in Fort William when a man, in a car, stopped and offered her a ride. His name was Jack. He was married with children and was 23 years older than Stella. This meeting was the start of a 33-year love affair between Stella and Jack.

Stella was born in 1914 in Fort William to immigrant parents, Nicholas Stec and Mary Baranoska. She was the fifth of six children born to this couple. Stella grew up and lived her life in Fort William.

Jack was born in 1891 in Sioux City, Iowa to Thomas William McDonald and Mary Victoria Ryan. He was named Charles Christopher McDonald and was the eldest of five children. In 1912 Charles moved to Saskatoon, Saskatchewan and worked for the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool. It was here he met and married Marion Thomson Curror. They moved to Port Arthur, Ontario (now part of Thunder Bay) about 1929. Charles and Marion had three sons: John P, Charles Alexander and Thomas William. Charles remained married to Marion until his death 18 May 1965.

Fast forward to the early 1990’s, we were informed the Stec household was receiving phone calls from a female looking for Dennis. She did not leave a name or contact information for a call back. It took quite a while before she found Dennis at home when she called. Her name was Debbie and we soon found out she was Dennis’ full-blood sister. Debbie was born 15 months after Dennis. Stella named her Loretta Grace and knew she wouldn’t be able to keep her so she arranged for Debbie to be adopted to a Protestant family in Sarnia, Ontario, a community far from Kenora. Through Debbie’s search for her biological family she connected with family members in Thunder Bay who told her about Dennis. Debbie and Dennis met and embraced each other as siblings. They have many similarities in looks and personalities.

2001 arrived and Dennis asked for my help in tracking down his half-brothers. The only information he had on them was from their father’s obituary. The obituary read, “… three sons: Charles A. of Palos Heights, Ill., John P. of Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, Thomas W. of Saskatoon, Sask; seven grandchildren; one brother, Thomas, and one sister, Mrs. William Phelan, both of New Westminster, one brother, James, in Detroit”. I started building Dennis’ family tree and within a short period of time it grew to almost 200 people. As much as I was able to build his tree back and down a few branches I could not locate any current information about his three half-brothers. I had found some public trees that contained information on many members of Dennis’ paternal family. I reached out to them but received no response. DNA testing for genealogy was new at this time and this was not an option we explored. My searching for Dennis’ family consisted of the tedious reading of documents and exploring and verifying the connections to suggested relatives. I was writing letters to former employers of Jack (Charles), John P, Charles Alexander and Thomas William requesting information and asking them to forward my letters to the individual or their surviving family. These letters provided no information. I stalled.

Meanwhile, Dennis’ son, Ryan, took his father on a journey to relive his past and explore the many facets of secrets and lies that created a tangled web. Ryan filmed this difficult and emotional voyage and produced “Bastard”.

In 2012 I asked for Dennis’ permission to share personal information about his life, and possibly the movie, with Robert, the owner of a public tree, who I felt would have information that would lead us to Dennis’ half-brothers. Dennis gave me permission and I sent an email to Robert providing information about Dennis’ story and why the request for information was made. Robert called me and we talked. He was interested, but I felt he was not willing to commit to sending me the information. I told him about the movie and asked if he would like to see it. He said yes and I immediately sent it. Robert called me first thing the next morning and told me he watched the movie shortly after receiving it. He said he found himself crying and immediately after it finished he went up to his attic to look for all the information he had that would lead Dennis to his half-brothers. Robert sent me this information and I forwarded it to Dennis.

08 October 2012, Dennis nervously dialed the number and spoke to Anne, the widow, of his half-brother, Tom McDonald. According to Dennis they “started a rather clumsy conversation about family searches and genealogy which evolved into a very comfortable, fact filled chat”. In correspondence I received from Dennis he noted “that Anne did not appear overly surprised when I identified myself as Charles’ son but she was vague about any details of my existence. She had heard of Stella through a sympathy card to the family when Charles/Jack died. She had very few details of Stella and was unaware that she lived in Fort William let alone Mission Island. When I mentioned that there were 2 of us, referring to Deb, Ann responded ‘We didn’t know about her’. So I am not clear as to who knew what when but the silence was apparently deafening in both the Stec and the McDonald circles!”.

Dennis relives the secrets as he helps Ryan understand their impact.

In Dennis’ words, “I’ve put my story on the big Screen which I didn’t think was that interesting and which I hid for a long time. Through stories and their telling we give other folks opportunity to listen and license to tell their story which as you know is incredibly important.”

October 13, 2020

Genealogy and the Importance of Research

As I find a new normalcy from the events over the past year I have decided to revive my genealogy blog. As a genealogist I have learned many important Do’s and Don’tsover the years from a wide range of genealogists. These lessons have caused me to ‘Start Over’ and re-create my tree.

I started my journey (my husband will say my addiction) as a genealogist at the beginning of 1999 when my sister, Sharon, reached out to me and asked if I would like to work with her and continue the genealogy our parents started. Sharon chose my mother’s side and this left my father’s side for me. The work my parents had accumulated, on their respective family lines, was done prior to the internet when they had to contact individuals or government offices by mail or phone to request information. This search could be very time-consuming as the correspondence went back and forth a few times before the requested information was received.

I, excitedly, took the information my father had accumulated and looked at how I could build on it. The first thing I did was to purchase the desktop version of Family Tree Maker from Broderbund and started inputting the information I knew. Through Family Tree Maker I was led to the internet pages of Genealogy.com which I readily started to use, including MyGenealogy, My Home Pages, Family Tree Maker homepages and GenForum message boards. I created the Shaun and Doug Hobson Family homepage which provided a short synopsis of my family and the information and names I was searching in hopes other genealogists would reach out with information.

On 20 February 1999 I created four posts on the Iceland GenForum message board. The four posts documented the information I knew about the four couples who were my eight paternal 2x great-grandparents that immigrated from Iceland to Canada. Within a week of these postings I had received information on three of the four couples allowing me to take my ancestral lines back many generations.

I started entering the names of these people in my family tree and it was expanding quickly. I soon uploaded my tree to the Internet to increase the chance that I could connect to relatives and find new individuals and obtain more information about branches of my tree. I searched for records and merged them to the people in my tree. Some of the records and material I found came from the public trees of others and I merged them. My tree grew and soon I had over 8,000 individuals.

Some of the individuals I added to my tree were participants in historical events, legendary Viking kings, mythical gods, and even minor King of Ireland, that has an associated record, that took me back to Adam and Eve.

My first thought was this is easy, my research is done! Was it done? No, not by a long shot!

I wish my learning and understanding of the standards of genealogy equaled the growth of my family tree. However, that was not the case and by the time I recognized I had not properly researched every individual I added to my tree and supported these individuals with accurate source records I had too many people in my tree to try and correct. This led me to starting over in 2016.

I created a new tree starting with me and adding people one by one. As I add a person I attach records to support their existence and connection to my tree. As the public trees of others provides me with records and/or information about a shared individual or new members to add to my tree I take that information with caution. Before I will add the records of others to my tree I need to first confirm the records identify the correct information for the person I have in my tree — there can be more than one individual in the same area with the same name and about the same age.

I, sadly, am no longer surprised with the number of public trees that suggest we share an individual only to look at their tree and find obvious errors in their tree. Sometime they wrongly connected their family to my relative or they connected our shared relative to the wrong family. How can this happen! It can happen easily as I found out myself when I wasn’t following the standards of genealogy.

As I have uploaded my public tree to Ancestry.com this is where I will find suggested hints. I have found that I can frequently get hints to records that are not connected to my relative, but are connected to the wrong individual in the public trees of others. This results in me taking more time to slowly check the records until I find the correct one for my individual. How can this happen! It happens, I believe, because the algorithm Ancestry.com uses to create these suggested hints is based on the number of times a specific hint is attached to an individual. As people believe the hint and attach it to their tree without verifying its accuracy and this is done over and over by many people then it won’t take long for the Ancestry.com algorithm to suggest this inaccurate record matches my individual.

Since I started my ‘Do-Over’ tree I have built it out to about 2400 individuals. My search for records includes internet genealogy sites, such as, Ancestry.com and FamilySearch.org, but it also includes cemeteries, census records, church records, immigration records, land records, newspapers, obituaries, passenger records, vital statistics, war records, and personal documents held by family members, to name a few. Yes, proper research does slow down the building of a family tree, but I believe it is more important to have a correct family tree than a large tree with many inaccuracies. As my profile on Ancestry.com says, “Genealogy without sources is Mythology”.Now to find out if I actually have individuals in my tree who were participants in historical events, legendary Viking kings or mythical gods, and if my line can be correctly documented back to Adam and Eve.

July 31, 2019

The Palmers

Recently my husband and I had the opportunity to walk in the steps of his ancestors. A business trip took us to London, England and we added a few extra days to drop in on some of the places my husband’s ancestors attended. His Palmer ancestors arrived in Canada about 1831 from London.

Samuel Palmer married Sarah Ann Money and they had seven children. The children are:

Sarah Ann Palmer, born 09 November 1818 in London, England
John William Palmer, born 10 November 1821 in London, England
Samuel Palmer, born 28 August 1824 in London, England (my husband’s 2x great-grandfather)
Mary Ann Palmer, born 28 October 1826 in London, England
William Palmer, born 27 September 1828 in London, England
Shackel Benjamin Palmer, born 04 November 1832 in Upper Canada (Ontario, Canada)
George Arthur Palmer, born 26 September 1841 in Upper Canada (Ontario, Canada)

Samuel was listed as a carpenter and undertaker. I have not been able to find any reliable source documents to identify the date and place of Samuel’s birthdate, birth place or parents, but I haven’t stopped looking.

I have found documents to identify Sarah Ann Money’s birthdate, birth place and parents. This is a line that I still need to explore and add to.

I researched available records to find where the Palmers lived and where they were baptized or married and plotted the most efficient route on a map.

Genealogy Walk Planned — Map of the Planned Genealogy Route

We had only one day in London to take us on the Palmer genealogy tour. The first stop was the Church of St. Mary the Virgin in Islington (commonly known as St Mary’s Church). In this church my husband’s 3x great-grandparents, Samuel Palmer and Sarah Ann Money were married by Jerome Alley, Curate, on 15 February 1818, after the publication of their Banns on Sundays, January 25^thand February 1^stby Rev. Wm. Alley and Sunday, February 8^thby Rev. Straban. The witnesses were William Money and Thezia Crop.

Records - Marriage Banns - Samuel Palmer & Sarah Ann Money — Samuel Palmer and Sarah Ann Money’s Marriage Banns

Records - Marriage - Samuel Palmer & Sarah Ann Money — Samuel Palmer and Sarah Ann Money’s Marriage Record

According to Wikipedia, The Church of St Mary the Virgin is the historic parish church of Islington and is listed as a Grade II building. The first church at this location was built in the twelfth century and replaced in the fifteenth. By 1750, St. Mary’s was in “very ruinous condition” and a new church was built. The new church, designed by Lancelot Dowbiggin, was consecrated on 26 May 1754. On the third night of the London Blitz, at 10:20pm on 09 September 1940, a bomb destroyed the majority of the church, leaving only the tower and spire intact. The church, designed by John Seely and Paul Paget, was rebuilt and dedicated in 1956. The lectern, baptismal font and Royal Arms all survived the bombing and were re-located in the new church.

People of notoriety from this church are:

Edward Vaughan served as vicar before his consecration as Bishop of St. David’s in 1509;
Robert Browne, who authored the founding principles of Congregationalism, served as lecturer at St Mary’s until around 1758;
John Webster, the Elizabethan dramatist, married Sara Peniall in Lent 1606, by special licence;
William Cave became vicar in 1662, at the age of twenty-five, and held the office until 1689;
Charles Wesley was invited to “take charge of the parish” on 24 July 1738 by the Vicar of St Mary’s, George Stonehouse. Wesley’s preaching proved unpopular and within a year he was expelled from the pulpit at St. Mary’s;
In 1759, Philip Quaque, son of the Fante king Birempong Cudjo, was baptised at St. Mary’s. He became the first black African to be ordained as a priest in the Church of England and returned to Ghana to minister as a missionary;
Samuel Ajayi Crowther arrived from Sierra Leone in 1826 to study at the church’s school and attend services. He later was ordained as a minister by the Bishop of London and served in West Africa. He later became the first African Bishop in Nigeria;
Donald Coggan, later Archbishop of Canterbury, served as curate from 1934-1937;
George Carey became curate in 1962 and continued on to become Bishop of Bath and Wells in 1987 and Archbishop of Canterbury in 1987

While we were at St Mary’s Church we were directed to the Church office to discover where the best place to find church records would be (I hoped to determine more ancestral lines of ascent). The secretary directed us to the Metropolitan Archives, located at 40 Northampton Road, so we headed there which took us in almost the opposite direction from our next mapped destination, St Leonard’s Church, Shoreditch High Street, where Samuel Palmer, was baptized 07 January 1829 along with four of his siblings: Sarah Ann, John William, Mary Ann and William. With awareness of the limited time we had to spend at the Archives, if we wanted to reach the other destinations on the map, we arrived and filled out a requisition to see the church records on microfilm. After waiting half an hour, we delved into the research only to find the records at the Archive were the same ones I had already obtained online from Ancestry. We could not spend any extra time trying to locate further information regarding the ancestral line, but I was satisfied that I should be able to find the documents on Ancestry when I was back home.

We proceeded on our way, with a slight detour to a nice little pub, The Crown Tavern, for our lunch. We sat outside eating while enjoying the lovely, warm sunny day. After we finished eating we realized we were running out of time and could only go to one of the two sites left to visit and we chose to go the church Sarah Ann Money was baptized in. We set out for St. Botolph Without Aldgate which I had located on the internet – I had starting typing and the information popped up when I had only inputted “St. Botolph Without” — it was the first three results and so I looked no further. This location was a mistake (I will talk about it later).

Enroute to St. Botolph Without Aldgate we had the opportunity to walk by St. Paul’s Cathedral – we did not take the time to join the long queue to see the inside (we will do that on a future visit).

St Paul Cathedral_1 — St Paul’s Cathedral

A short 20 minutes later we arrived at St. Botolph Without Aldgate which is located east of the former position of Aldgate, a defensive barbican in London’s wall. According to Wikipedia, the earliest known written record of the church dates from 1115, when it was received by the Holy Trinity Priory (recently founded by Matilda, wife of Henry I) but the parochial foundations may very well date from before 1066. The church was rebuilt in the 16th century at the cost of the priors of the Holy Trinity, and renovated in 1621. It escaped the Great Fire of London, and was described at the beginning of the 18th century as “an old church, built of Brick, Rubble and Stone, rendered over, and … of the Gothick order”. The building, as it stood at that time, was 78-foot long (24 m) and 53-foot wide (16 m). There was a tower, about 100-foot tall (30 m), with six bells. The current church was built between 1741 and 1744. It was designed by George Dance the Elder. The interior was redecorated by John Francis Bentley, the architect of Westminster Cathedral in the late 19th century. The church was bombed during the Blitz in the World War II and was designated a Grade I listed building on 04 January 1950. The church was restored by Rodney Tatchell, and then damaged further by a fire in 1965 which required further restoration. St Botolph’s was rehallowed on 8 November 1966 by the Bishop of London, in the presence of Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother and Sir Robert Bellinger, the Lord Mayor of London, who attended in state. During an archaeological investigation of the crypt in 1990, a preserved head, reputed to be that of Henry Grey, 1st Duke of Suffolk, who had been executed for treason by Queen Mary I in 1554, was rediscovered and buried in the churchyard. St. Botolph’s houses the oldest church organ in the United Kingdom — it was donated by Thomas Whiting in 1676 and built between 1702 and 1704 by Renatus Harris.

People of notoriety from this church are:

Daniel Defoe was married in the church in 1683
Thomas Bray, founder of SPCK, was rector from 1706 to 1730

We did not make it to St. Leonard’s Church, Shoreditch where the five children of Samuel Palmer and Sarah Ann Money were baptized 07 January 1829, as mentioned above. Their baptismal records indicate the family was living on Robert Street (changed to Fanshaw Street in 1912) in the Shoreditch area.

Interesting note, Samuel and Sarah Ann Palmer were baptized 04 January 1825 at The Tabernacle, City Road an Independent Church. The description/titles of the records of this baptism, held by Ancestry, documented ‘Piece Title: City Road, The Tabernacle (Independent), 1768-1840’ and ‘Baptism Place: Tabernacle Ind St Luke, Finsbury, London, England’. The scanned image of these baptisms stated they were of the Parish of St. Leonards Shoreditch. My internet searches suggested St Leonards Church Shoreditch, located on Shoreditch High Street and St Luke located on Old Street. I was not successful in finding The Tabernacle on City Road. I presume it is no longer in existence since I have not been successful in finding any further information about it. I have sent queries out to organizations in the hope I will one day find where it was located or might still be located.

Sarah Ann & Samuel Palmer’s Baptismal Record – 04 January 1825

Palmer Children’s Baptismal Record – 07 January 1829

The re-baptism of Sarah Ann and Samuel, along with their siblings: John William, Mary Ann and William on 07 January 1829 leaves me wondering why. Why did they re-baptize Saran Ann and Samuel in a Church of England after they were baptized in an Independent Church? Why wasn’t John William baptized in 1825 with Sarah Ann and Samuel? Why were all five children baptized on the same date? Was this in preparation for their journey to Canada? Were they worried they may not survive the travels? — at that time it appears it took about five to six weeks to travel across the Atlantic Ocean. As a family of seven, I am assuming they travelled in steerage (I have not found their passenger records). The conditions in steerage were crowded, dark and damp. There was limited sanitation which lead to dirty and foul-smelling accommodations and they were infested with rats and insects. These conditions allowed for easy transmission of diseases that often led to death. What lead this family to risk travel to British North America?

——————————

Now to talk about my mistake.

While writing this blog and reviewing my information I realized London has a St. Botolph’s Without Aldgate and a St. Botolph’s Without Aldersgate (about a 20-minute walk from one to the other). A new genealogy lesson for me — do not jump to conclusions when searching internet maps. If I had typed in the complete name of the church I was interested in instead of letting the internet search mislead me with its assumptions then we would have travelled to the correct church. St. Botolph’s Without Aldersgate is where Sarah Ann Money was baptized 01 November 1795 along with her brother, John Peter. Sarah was born 02 July 1792 to William and Frances Geater Money.

Records - Baptism - Sarah Ann Money — Sarah Ann Money’s Baptismal Record

Our genealogy day ended with us at the wrong church, but that is not terrible. St. Botolph’s Without Aldgate is a beautiful old church and one worth seeing. The day of tracing the steps of my husband’s ancestors lead us through many streets of London – 20.4 km, 27,308 steps and 10 floors. There were many interesting places along the walk that caught our attention and many sites worth photographing.

We will return to London and make it to the correct church — St. Botolph Without Aldersgate. We will, also, find St. Leonards Church Shoreditch, located on Shoreditch High Street and take a walk down Fanshaw Street. Hopefully, I will have found more records allowing me to go back through further ancestral lines and our map will have more locations to discover the steps the Palmer ancestors once walked.

——————————

Interesting Note:

My husband is a Movement Disorder Neurologist and the majority of his patients have Parkinsons. As noted above, his ancestors lived in the Shoreditch area, and specifically, on Robert Street in 1829. Robert Street (now known as Fanshaw Street) is four blocks from 1 Hoxton Square (about a six-minute walk) and 0.5 miles (about a 12-minute walk) from St Leonard’s Hospital (the former Shoreditch Workhouse).

The significance of this is James Parkinson lived at 1 Hoxton Square and started work as a parish surgeon, apothecary and man-midwife at the Shoreditch Workhouse in 1813. According to the website workhouses.org.uk James Parkinson made many improvements to the medical facilities. He also published an “Essay on the Shaking Palsy” in 1817 in which he describes his observations of six males between the age of 50 and 65 years with the shaking palsy that he goes on to describe as ‘a nervous disorder characterized by a trembling of the limbs at rest, lessened muscular power and a stooped posture associated with a propulsive, festination gait’. He believed he had identified a new ‘medical species’ that had ‘not yet obtained a place in the classification of nosologists’. This condition we now call Parkinson’s Disease.

Were my husband’s ancestors acquainted with James Parkinson? Remember, Samuel Palmer was an undertaker. Did they perhaps socialize? Could this be six degrees of separation between my husband and James Parkinson? If nothing else, this is an interesting coincidence.

Palmer Neighbourhood (1830) — Map of the Palmer Neighbourhood c. 1830

May 3, 2019

Guðríður, the ‘far traveller’.

This video, by Profilm, is about my 24th great grandmother, Guðríður. She was not only a viking explorer who may have been the most travelled female in the Middle Ages, but she was also the first European to give birth to the first Eurpean child born in North America. Check out my post from 04 January 2018, Snorri Þorfinnsson, to learn more.

THE FAR TRAVELLER – trailer #2 4K from Profilm on Vimeo.

February 2, 2019

DNA Testing: Is it Accurate?

52 Ancestors in 52 Weeks became a bit onerous for me to keep active for a variety of reasons and it has been a few months since my last blog. One of the primary reasons was my decision to only write about people who are no longer living and to also write about topics that would not affect family and friends who are living. I soon realized I did not have enough stories that would fulfil these criteria.

A new year has begun and I am starting over. My new goal will be a little more fluid and my expectations are to write a blog about a topic of my current genealogical interest and may not necessarily be a weekly entry.

Over the last few years I have seen many advertisements by genealogical DNA testing companies that market they can build your ethnicity report and you will find out where your ancestors came from. I have also seen postings on social media stating ‘DNA is a scam’. Some media outlets have written articles or aired documentaries stating similar findings.

These statements and/or reports are only partially true and they lead to misinformation and misunderstanding of genealogical DNA tests. These tests provide two reports to the consumers; an ethnicity report, as documented by scientists, the media and others as inaccurate, and DNA matches to relatives, which genealogists and researchers find fairly accurate.

This tree shows how a set of chromosomes from one couple is recombined and passed down to their descendants. Here, Bob would share some DNA (dark blue strip) with a male third cousin but not with a female cousin. https://www.sciencenews.org/sites/default/files/2018/06/062318_genetics3_family-tree_730.png

As a result of the advertisements, DNA testing is no longer just an interest for genealogists to further their family tree research or for adoptees to search for their biological families. It has become a mass consumer market with a large number of participants wanting only to find out where they came from. It is estimated that more than 12 million people have their DNA samples in the database of the five major genetic testing companies: Ancestry DNA, 23andMe, Family Tree DNA, Living DNA and My Heritage DNA.

We all have DNA we have inherited from our ancestors as it is passed on from generation to generation. The passing on of DNA from a parent to a child is somewhat by chance as siblings will not inherit the exact DNA from their parents unless they are identical twins/triplets/etc.

Each parent provides 23 chromosomes to their child; 22 autosomal chromosomes and 1 sex chromosome. These chromosomes are not passed on intact to their children because a parent only passes on half of their DNA and it is a mixture or recombination of the DNA they inherited from both of their parents. DNA recombination is the exchange of DNA strands from the parents’ chromosomes by breaking and rejoining DNA segments. This creates a new genetic combination which allows for genetic diversity and only half of this is passed on from each parent to a child.

Siblings share about 50% of their DNA. As a result of the recombination siblings don’t inherit the exact same DNA mix from their parents (unless they are identical twins, triplets, etc.). This DNA recombination occurs with every generation and leads to distant cousins inheriting completely different DNA from their ancestors and the more distant the relative is the more likely there is no DNA shared between them. It is estimated that about 10% of third cousins (share the same great-great-grandparents) and 45% of fourth cousins (share the same great-great-great-grandparents) do not have any matching DNA.

https://isogg.org/w/images/thumb/3/32/Cousin_relationships.jpg/500px-Cousin_relationships.jpg

DNA apparently doesn’t replicate perfectly. It is estimated that every generation creates about 100 new mutations (SNPs). Most of these are harmless and about half of them get passed from the parent to the child in each generation. This means that you may have about 100 SNPs that are unique to you, as well as, about 50 that are unique to each of your parents, about 25 that are unique to each of your grandparents, about 12 that are unique to each of your great-grandparents and so on. The last four generations of your family have provided you with about 400 SNPs in your DNA that are unique to your family. Your siblings share some of these SNPs, but because of your DNA recombination they will not share all of them; they will have their own unique SNPs and a different combination of them from your parents.

As every generation passes only 50% of their inherited DNA then it doesn’t take many generations before descendants have inherited only a little. A simple diagram to describe this is shown below.As a result of culture, ethnicity, geography, religion, socio-economics, or tribal groups some people have a limited group to marry within resulting in an endogamous population (everyone descends from the same small gene pool). Children born of these unions will inherit some identical SNPs from both parents resulting in them having two copies of the same SNPs. This would guarantee their children would also carry these SNPs. This practice leads to these SNPs becoming fixed in that population which means every member of that population would have these SNPs. This combination of SNPs would be unique to that lineage. The interpretation of autosomal DNA matches within this population would be deceiving because people will be related to each other on multiple ancestral pathways and the same ancestor will appear in many different places on the pedigree chart resulting in the fact the relationship will be more distant than the DNA match suggests.

When a population is confined in the same geographic location for a long time SNPs become fixed; this is called genetic drift. Some of these fixed SNPs might alter hair colour, eye colour, skin tone or bone structure as the result of particular genes that disappear when individuals who carry them die or do not reproduce. It will take the combined effort of many hundreds of SNPs to produce the characteristics of individuals we label a “race” because all the members would share some SNPs that are considered unique to that genetic race (genotype). The interaction of genotypes within their environment leads to observable characteristics of an individual and the social construction of race (phenotype).

The phenotype is also tied to culture (Scottish being different than Irish), while the genotype is tied to geography (SNPs that are unique within a population from a certain area, such as, Scottish and Irish ancestry tend to be called Scotch-Irish, as it’s hard to distinguish the two, genetically).

Scientist have sequenced the DNA of many cultures and geographic locations around the world. One of the ways scientists confirm their pool of DNA has adequately represented the place they are testing is they require the pool (the reference population), to have four grandparents born in that location. Some scientists feel they have enough information from these various reference populations to identify which unique SNPs are associated with a geographical region. These scientists also feel by calculating the percentage of unique SNPs that you share with the current population of a geographic location, they can determine whether you inherited those SNPs from a parent, grandparent, great-grandparent, etc. When scientists take the sum total of all your SNPs and compare them to genetic databases they believe they are able to compute your overall racial composition.

There are different types of DNA used during analysis for genetic testing; Y chromosome DNA, mitochondrial DNA or autosomal DNA. Y chromosome DNA (Y-DNA) traces a man’s paternal line. Mitochondrial DNA (MtDNA) traces the maternal line as people inherit mitochondria only from their mothers. Neither of these DNA types change very much over time and, as a result, do not provide much information about recent ancestors. Autosomal DNA (AtDNA) is inherited from autosomal chromosomes of which we have 22 pairs. AtDNA testing looks for genetic differences on all of the chromosomes except the X and Y sex chromosomes and is the type most used for genealogical purposes as it is a mix of both your parents.

To produce a report, companies use equipment to sequence the DNA to determine the order of nucleotides which more specifically means the order of four amino acid bases: adenine, guanine, cytosine and thymine which in doubled stranded DNA are linked in a paired configuration. The equipment used contains chips that determine which SNP location is tested and different chip versions are used by different testing companies. Once the base pair identification has been completed on your DNA sample the testing company will check it against the samples they have in their database.

The ‘DNA match to relatives’ report one receives from the various testing companies will compare your overall SNP pattern with those of others in their database and will show who you are related to, but it does not show you which side of your family the match comes from. AtDNA tests can confirm matches to relatives with a high level of accuracy in the last 5 – 6 generations. The distance a match relates to you is based on the percentage of shared DNA.

Most companies use an algorithm that looks for shared consecutive SNPs (called a segment match). A segment match of at least 7 – 10 centimorgans is considered notable. Centimorgans (cMs) are the units used to measure genetic distance. There are about 1 million base pairs in a centimorgan. Most testing companies will show you the number of cMs you share and across how many segments. The higher the number of shared cMs the closer the relative the match is.

https://isogg.org/w/images/0/02/Shared-cM-Project-Image-2.png

Some testing companies provide chromosome browsers which allow a tester to view which chromosome they match with another, as well as, the number and length of matching segments on the chromosome. When comparing multiple matches, you may notice these segments overlap with more than one person at the same spot. This is called triangulation and suggests you share the same ancestor. You can also download your ‘raw data’ from your testing company and upload it to GEDmatch, an open data personal genomics database and genealogy website, and use their chromosome browser or other genealogical analysis tools.

The ethnicity report one receives from the various testing companies is only an estimate. To produce the ‘ethnic makeup report’, a company will compare your overall SNP pattern to those of people from particular geographic locations. Some of the companies draw their reference population DNA samples from public databases compiled by the 1000 Genomes Project, a catalog of human genetic variation of people around the world, as well as, from other studies. Many of these companies broaden their databases by increasing information from particular parts of the world by testing more people. Each testing company uses its own proprietary database of DNA samples called ancestry informative markers (AIMs). This means the testing companies do not use the same reference populations and this leads to the difference in the reports you receive from one company to the next.

The companies use common genetic variations as the basis for estimating the probability of your ethnicity. One company may report that you have 50% of your DNA from North Europe, 30% from Asia, 10% from Eastern Europe and Russia and 10% from Greece and the Balkans, based on their method used to compare to the information in its database. Another company has their own database and they may report the probability is that you have 40% of your DNA from North Europe, 40% from Asia and 20% from Eastern Europe and Russia. The ethnicity report is based on who they do and do not have in their database.

For companies to be able to provide information on which country, or more specifically, which part of a country your ancestors came from, they will require sampling many people in those countries, along with a more complicated math or algorithm to detect the slight differences in the patterns.

Direct-to-consumer DNA testing for genealogical purposes has been a controversial subject since it first became available in about 1998 from the now defunct company, GeneTree.

In January 2018, Sheldon Krimsky, the Lenore Stern Professor of Humanities and Social Sciences and an adjunct professor in public health and community medicine at Tufts, stated “Companies selling these services don’t share their data, and their methods are not validated by an independent group of scientists.” He goes on to say, “Studies that have compared ancestry databases have found poorer concordance with Hispanic, East Asian and South Asian descent. There’s a big chunk of data — actually the majority — that these genetics-testing services don’t use. Your DNA contains millions of SNPs, but these tests are selectively looking at certain genetic variations and use between 100 to 300 AIMs, which account for a small part of the SNPs that differentiate the human family. So even if a test says you are 50% European, really it can only report that half of those SNPs of your DNA looks to be European. The results are further skewed by the fact that certain ancestry information markers used by any particular test may come from only your paternal line (Y chromosome) or your maternal line (mitochondrial DNA). Tests using these markers are less accurate. Finally, these testing services use DNA from modern populations in these regions to draw conclusions about people who lived in those areas hundreds or thousands of years ago. It’s a big leap to assume that the particular SNPs used by the tests have remained constant for all that time.”

Companies that sell genealogical DNA tests advertise they can provide your ethnicity report and you will find out where your ancestors came from. Many scientists say these results are beyond the capabilities of the test, such as, Deborah Bolnick of the University of Texas in Austin in October 2007 when she stated “But they’re not going to tell you every place or every group in the world where people share your DNA. Nor will they necessarily be able to tell you exactly where your ancestors lived or [what race or social group] they identified with.” Deborah went on to say “Present-day patterns of residence are rarely identical to what existed in the past, and social groups have changed over time, in name and composition.

In June 2018, Deborah Bolnick stated, “They [DNA testing companies] present these very specific, precise numbers down to the decimal point. But it’s false precisions. In reality, what the companies can say with certainty is that you share common DNA patterns with people living in those places today. But your ancestors may not always have lived where their descendants do now. People move around which muddies the waters. Take a stretch of DNA containing a particular SNP pattern. Today it may be found in the US and in relatives in England and Germany, but it could be that 500 years ago your shared ancestor lived in Italy. Going further back in time, that stretch of DNA may look like it came from Romania, Mongolia and Siberia. As people move and the genes they have moved with them, it’s going to change what those geographic ancestries look like. Further complicating matters, most people think of their ancestry as coming from particular countries, but genetics cuts across and transcends national borders. In reality those categories are not genetic, they’re sociopolitical and historic.”

Drew Smith, a genealogical librarian at the University of South Florida in Tampa agrees and in June 2018 stated, “From a DNA perspective, it’s hard to tell a French person from a German person.”

Another area of concern of many scientists is the poor DNA representations of various groups in these reference population databases. In April 2018, Krystal Tsosie, a geneticist at Vanderbilt University in Nashville stated, “And some groups, including aboriginal populations in Australia and big parts of Africa and Asia, are mostly absent from companies’ databases. The same goes for Native Americans, whose samples in public databases are small, and in some cases, were collected by questionable means.” Krystal goes on to say, “As a result of mistrust of genetic research, there are not enough people from the 566 federally recognized tribes in the genetic databases to enable customers to learn about their tribal heritage from DNA tests. And even if a DNA test could establish that a person carries DNA inherited from a Native American ancestor, that doesn’t make that person a member of the tribe.Tribal memberships are based on family and community ties, not DNA”

In an article written by Nicholas Anthony in April 2018 he states, “It’s going to get a lot harder with future generations now that airplanes exist. Most of the SNPs in today’s races became fixed due to long periods of geographical stability. People didn’t move around all that much, and when they did, it was usually only a handful of families that moved to a new location, bringing with them a set of unique SNPs that soon became fixed in that new location due to the founder effect. But now that travel is easy and mass migrations are occurring due to war, famine, and the promise of a better life, future geneticists are going to have a hard time placing your lineage geographically. They might be able to say whether a great, great, great grandparent was an Ashkenazi Jew, but the more recent generations will be difficult to pin down.”

Genealogical DNA tests analyze less than 1% of a person’s DNA and this may result in missing most of one’s relatives. As the cost of DNA testing decreases the prospect of whole gene sequencing may arrive soon. DNA testing is both inaccurate and accurate depending on which report you are looking at.

Some of the testing companies are using advertisements to promote the sale of the testing kits. Recently, there appears to be more of an emphasis in these ads to use the ethnicity reports as the reason one might want to buy a kit. One such ad is from Ancestry DNA and it features Kyle Merker, who says he grew up thinking his ancestors came from Germany. In the ad he states he danced in German folk groups and wore lederhosen. He goes on to say his DNA results showed 52% of his DNA came from Scotland and Ireland and that he swapped his lederhosen for a kilt. This ad leads you to believe it was because of the DNA results that caused Kyle to change his culture. This, apparently, was not the case as an article about Kyle was published in the Parade, April 29, 2016 and documents he researched his family through newspaper articles and government records. It was these traditional genealogical resources that really told Kyle about his family’s stories and this was only supported by his DNA results.

As stated earlier some media outlets have reported on the lack of accuracy of DNA testing. One such report wasa recent CBC Marketplace aired episode titled “DNA Ancestry Tests: Can You Trust The Results” with the description ‘Marketplace investigates the science and marketing behind popular DNA Ancestry kits. Just how accurate are they? Are ancestry DNA tests 100% accurate? Charlsie Agro tests 5 top brands…and we’re sending in the saliva of her identical twin sister too.’ The report leads you to believe DNA testing is not accurate. However, this report focused solely on the ethnicity report and did not provide any information about the DNA matches to relatives that you also receive. As a result, this investigative report was misleading in its conclusions.

Ethnicity is based on more than just DNA. The border of countries has changed many times in the history of humans, as well as the mixing of what we call “races”. Ethnicity is a concept and it is fluid. DNA tests cannot account for the recent migrations of peoples from their ancient homelands. For these reasons, the ethnicity reports you receive have a greater confidence level when they provide a more general report on a broad continental scale. When companies start focusing at a county level the confidence of these reports drop.

DNA match to relativesis used more and more by genealogists in their research. The accuracy of these matches is determined by the number of shared centimorgans. According to Blaine Bettinger, The Genetic Genealogist, a 15 cM or higher match will have a 99.3% probability that it matches one of your parents and it drops to a 94% probability with a 10 cM match. These matches can help breakdown brickwalls in your paper research, support the genealogy discoveries you have made and help find biological family for individuals looking for their birth parents.

DNA is part of everyone and if you feel this is an important part of you, then start working on your own genealogy. Take a DNA test, create a tree and enter the information you have on your relatives, both living and dead. Look at how you can fit the DNA matches into your tree or connect with them to expand a branch of your tree.

Most importantly, start researching for documents (birth, death, marriage, military, and census records, etc.). This will allow you to capture accurate information and the stories about individuals; where they were born, married or died, where they lived and worked, who their parents and siblings were, etc. It will also allow you to expand your tree further back to older generations and down the lines of descent of the other branches of relatives. To really confirm your heritage, you need to follow the paper trails. DNA is just another type of record that can add and support your information.

As stated by Krystal Tsosie, a geneticist at Vanderbilt University in Nashville. ‘Our character, who we are, who we come from is a complex story of a variety of nonbiological factors. To reduce that to a test kit is actually going to ignore the beauty and complexity that is us.”

Citations

N. Anthony. How is a DNA test able to determine ethnic background? Quora. Pub. 23 April 2017.

G. Rajewski. Pulling Back the Curtain on DNA Ancestry Tests. TuftsNow. Pub. 26 January 2018.

T.H. Saey. DNA testing can bring families together, but gives mixed answers on ethnicity. Science News. Pub. Vol. 193, No. 11, June 23, 2018, p. 14.

T.H. Saey. Consumer DNA testing promises more than it delivers. Science News. Pub. Vol. 193, No. 9, May 26, 2018, p. 20.

K. Than. Genetic Ancestry Tests Mostly Hype. Live Science. Online pub. 18 October 2007 10:00am ET.

July 8, 2018July 9, 2018

The Search

I have been remiss in posting weekly writings about the people in my family tree, but spring arrived and the outside beckoned. I hope to get back to these people and their stories in the near future. For now, I will write about my current weekend and how I have spent it.

It is a beautiful, warm Manitoba weekend and I am at home by myself while my husband is on his annual fishing trip with our sons. My plan for the weekend was to clean the house and enjoy the cleanliness lasting the whole weekend. I also planned to start on a sewing project I have wanted to work on for the last couple of weeks. All my plans have been sidelined.

Yesterday, I received a phone call and an email inviting me to help two people search for the bio father for the grandmother of someone they know (I will call her LP). LP was born in Canada in the first part of the last century. She was raised by her bio mother and her mother told her the surname of her bio father. LP has submitted her DNA sample to Ancestry and there are two close matches that are interesting because they do not match her mother’s family tree. The interesting matches are #1 at 844 centimorgans (a unit for measuring genetic linkage) and #2 at 297 centimorgans. This means #1 is a close relative and possibly a first cousin and #2 is also a close relative and possibly a second cousin. #2 has the same surname in their tree that LP was told was her bio father’s surname.

This is all it takes to get me on board to start searching and put my weekend plans aside. Some may say I have wasted the weekend, but to me, this is an amazing way to spend a weekend. I love the search and I love to find people and documents to support they belong to the family so the family tree can be expanded. This is one of the best puzzles there is to work on.

For the purpose of looking for a biological parent, one must first determine the closest DNA matches that are possibly related to that parent. If the DNA match has attached a family tree to their DNA results then a Mirror Tree needs to be completed. A Mirror Tree is exactly as it sounds; you copy all the information from your DNA match’s tree to one you will now work on and you add the DNA results to a person in that tree. The Mirror Tree should be made private and not searchable because it is considered a theory and should not be made public until you can prove the theory. The Mirror Tree needs to be researched and you need to attach new members to the tree as you find documents to support they belong to the family. As you add new people to the tree you are looking for “shaky” tree hints which inform you that another person’s DNA matches to someone in your expanding tree. This information can help narrow done the tree branch that you need to work on because if the new DNA match only belongs to one branch of the family then that is the branch you will now focus on. An example of this; if you have a tree with 16 great-great-grandparents and you are focusing on finding information about all their descendants than you will end up with a very large tree that will be hard to determine possible bio fathers. As you expand the tree out by adding descendants and ancestors and a hint arrives that matches with someone that has married into only one branch of the 16 great-great-grandparents then you have narrowed down your search from eight branches of these couples to one and that is the branch you will focus on expanding in hopes to narrow it to one of four couples of great-grandparents and then one branch of two grandparent couples and so on.

Back to LP – match #1 did not have a tree associated with their results and match #2 had a tree with only five people. One of the collaborators I am working with had already found people to confidently add to this Mirror Tree so that it had grown from five people to 49 by the time I was invited. In just over a day the three of us have grown the tree to 170 people. As we grow this tree we are eagerly waiting for “shaky” tree hints to appear so that we can narrow our search to fewer and fewer branches until we have narrowed it down to just a few possible males that may be the bio father. At that point we will hope to reach out to descendants of those males in hopes they will do a DNA test to help confirm one of the males is the bio father and/or to rule out which males are not the bio father.

This can be a very slow process and is determined by the quality and quantity of documents available to allow us to expand the tree and also by the number of DNA samples that are matching to this Mirror Tree with family trees available to review. I previously used DNA matches and a Mirror Tree to search for a bio father and it took 16 months to reach a conclusion. I worked on it with my daughter and got her hooked on genealogy. We started with a 79-person tree from a close match (second cousin) and grew it to 1,238 people. We were able to narrow our search to one of four brothers. We determined brother #1 was the most likely bio father because he lived in the same place as the bio mother. This fact alone was not enough evidence to support our findings so we had to reach out to family and ask for DNA samples. Brother #1 was not known to have ever married and did not appear to have any children. Brothers #2, #3 and #4 did marry and had descendants. We reached out to an owner of an Ancestry public tree that had these four people in their tree. She was very helpful in contacting descendants of brothers #2, #3 and #4 and getting them to submit their DNA. The matches came back and due to the amount of the centimorgan match we were able to rule out brothers #2, #3 and #4 leaving brother #1 as the bio father. This provided us with a confident conclusion to our theory.

If you love puzzles, you may want to try genealogy. It is never ending, can be frustrating when you hit roadblocks, but also exhilarating when you find an obscure document that fills in blanks that no one else appears to have found. You will find the people you are working on come to life and you will wish you could meet some of them to ask them questions about their lives and decisions. Our forefathers and foremothers brought us to where we are and our decisions will help blaze the trail for our descendants.

Now time to return to searching for LP’s bio father.

March 24, 2018March 24, 2018

Lucky and Misfortune

The 52 Ancestors in 52 Weeks prompt for last week is ‘Lucky’ and for this week is ‘Misfortune’. I have decided to combine these two prompts for one blog and talk about five ancestors on my paternal side and how they relate to some historic battles.

The ancestors I have chosen are King Edward the Confessor, King Harold Godwinson, Tostig Godwinson, Harald Hardrada, and William the Conqueror. With the help of Wikipedia, I hope to provide a condensed version of these ancestors and how they relate to the Battle of Fulford, the Battle of Stamford Bridge and the Battle of Hastings.

King Edward the Confessor
c. 1004 – 05 January 1066

King Edward the Confessor is my 2^nd cousin 29x removed and the husband of my 26^th Great- Grand Aunt. He was born between about 1004 in Islip, Oxfordshire to Æthelred the Unready and Emma of Normandy (Normandy is a region of northern France). He had two full siblings: a brother, Alfred, and a sister, Godgifu. Through his father’s first marriage to Ælfgifu, he had half-siblings: Æthelstan Ætheling, Ecgberht Ætheling, Edmund Ironside, Eadred Ætheling, Eadwig Ætheling, Edgar Ætheling, Eadgyth or Edith, Ælfgifu, Wulfhild and Abbess of Wherwell Abbey. Through his mother’s second marriage to Cnut the Great he had half-siblings: Harthacnut and Gunhilda, Holy Roman Empress and step-siblings: Svein Knutsson and Harold Harefoot. Edward succeeded his half-brother, Harthacnut, to the English throne and was recognized as restoring the rule to the House of Wessex. Edward was crowned at the cathedral of Winchester, the royal seat of the West Saxons, on 3 April 1043. He reigned from 1042 to 1066 and was considered the last king of the House of Wessex. Edward was also known as Saint Edward the Confessor after Pope Alexander III canonised him in 1161. Saint Edward’s feast day is celebrated October 13th, both by the Church of England and the Catholic Church in England and Wales.

Edward married Edith of Wessex, daughter of Godwin, Earl of Wessex, on 23 January 1045. Edward died on 5 January 1066 and was buried in Westminster Abbey on 6 January 1066. Edward and Edith did not have any children and, it is unclear if Edward had appointed anyone to succeed him. This led to the battles involving my ancestors.

King Harold Godwinson
c. 1021 – 14 October 1066

King Harold Godwinson is my 26th Great Grand Uncle. He was born about 1021 in Wessex, England to Godwin, Earl of Wessex and Gytha Thorkelsdóttir. He had ten full siblings: Sweyn, Earl of Herefordshire, Tostig, Earl of Northumbria, Edith, Queen of England, Gyrth, Earl of East Anglia, Leofwine, Earl of Kent, Wulfnoth, Alfgar, Edgiva, Elgiva and Gunhilda. Harold’s maternal uncle, Ulf the Earl, was married to Estrith, the daughter of King Sweyn Forkbeard and sister to King Cnut the Great of England and Denmark. After the marriage of his sister, Edith, to King Edward the Confessor, Harold became Earl of East Anglia and then, after the death of his father in 1053, he became Earl of Wessex. This made him the second most powerful person in England, second to the King.

Edith the Fair was Harold’s first wife. Their children are Godwin, Edmund, Magnus, Gunhild and Gytha. Harold then began a relationship with Edith of Mercia, who appears to have been the heiress to lands in Cambridgeshire, Suffolk and Essex, lands in Harold’s new earldom. The relationship was a form of marriage that was not blessed or sanctioned by the Church, known as more Danico, or “in the Danish manner”, and was accepted by most laypeople in England at the time. Their children, Harold and Ulf were considered legitimate. Harold probably entered the relationship in part to secure support in his new earldom. Edith’s two brothers were Morca, Earl of Northumbria and Edwin, Earl of Mercia. Alliances with these two brother-in-laws were helpful in Harold’s ambitions.

In 1064, Harold was apparently shipwrecked at Ponthieu, in northern France. The reasons for Harold’s voyage are unknown, however, he was captured by Guy I, Count of Ponthieu, and was then taken as a hostage to the count’s castle at Beaurain. Duke William arrived and ordered Guy to turn Harold over to him. Harold then apparently accompanied William to battle against William’s enemy, Conan II, Duke of Brittany. While crossing into Brittany, past the fortified abbey of Mont Saint-Michel, Harold is recorded as rescuing two of William’s soldiers from quicksand. They pursued Conan from Dol-de-Bretagne to Rennes, and finally to Dinan, where he surrendered the fortress’s keys at the point of a lance. William presented Harold with weapons and arms and knighted him. The Bayeux Tapestry, and other Norman sources, record that Harold swore an oath on sacred relics that he would not accept the English crown but would support William of Normandy’s claim.

In 1065, Tostig, Harold’s brother, doubled taxation and this threatened to plunge England into civil war. This resulted in Harold supporting Northumbrian rebels against Tostig and replacing him with Morcar. This strengthened his acceptability as Edward’s successor, but fatally split his own family, driving Tostig into alliance with King Harald Hardrada (“Hard Ruler”) of Norway.

After the death of King Edward the Confessor, the Witenagemot convened and chose Harold to succeed and he was crowned in Westminster Abbey on 6 January 1066, the same day King Edward was buried there.

Tostig Godwinson is my 26^th Great-Grandfather. He was born about 1026 to Godwin, Earl of Wessex and Gytha Thorkelsdóttir. He is a brother to Edith of Mercia, Queen Consort of King Edward the Confessor and King Harold Godwinson, who succeeded King Edward on the throne. In 1051, he married Judith of Flanders, the only child of Baldwin IV, Count of Flanders by his second wife, Eleanor of Normandy. The Domesday Book recorded twenty-six townships held by Earl Tostig forming the Manor of Hougun which now forms part of the county of Cumbria in north-west England.

In 1055, Tostig became the Earl of Northumbria upon the death of Earl Siward. He appeared to have governed with some difficulty and was considered heavy-handed with those who resisted his rule, including the murder of several members of leading Northumbrian families. On 3 October 1065, the thegns (aristocratic retainers of the king) of York and the rest of Yorkshire descended on York and occupied the city. They killed Tostig’s officials and supporters, then declared Tostig outlawed for his unlawful actions and sent for Morcar, the younger brother of Edwin, Earl of Mercia. The northern rebels marched south to press their case with King Edward. They were joined at Northampton by Earl Edwin and his forces. There, they were met by Earl Harold, who was the king’s right-hand man and was sent by King Edward to negotiate with them. After Harold had spoken with the rebels at Northampton he returned to Oxford, where the royal council met on October 28^th. Earl Harold supported the arguments of the northern rebels and Tostig was outlawed early in November, because he refused to accept his deposition as commanded by Edward. This led to the fatal confrontation and enmity between the two Godwinsons, Tostig and Harold.

At a meeting of the king and his council, Tostig publicly accused Harold of provoking the rebellion. Harold was keen to unify England in the face of the grave threat from William of Normandy, who had openly declared his intention to take the English throne. It was likely that Harold had exiled his brother to ensure peace and loyalty in the north. Tostig, however, remained unconvinced and plotted vengeance.

Tostig left with his family and some loyal thegns and took refuge with his brother-in-law, Baldwin V, Count of Flanders. He even attempted to form an alliance with William of Normandy. Baldwin provided him with a fleet and he landed in the Isle of Wight in May 1066, where he collected money and provisions. He raided the coast as far as Sandwich but was forced to retreat when King Harold called out land and naval forces. He moved north and after an unsuccessful attempt to get his brother Gyrth to join him, he raided Norfolk and Lincolnshire. The Earls Edwin and Morcar defeated him decisively. Deserted by his men, he fled to his sworn brother, King Malcolm III of Scotland. Tostig spent the summer of 1066 in Scotland.

Tostig then made contact with King Harald Hardrada of Norway and persuaded him to invade England. One of the sagas claims that he sailed for Norway, and greatly impressed the Norwegian king and his court, managing to sway a decidedly unenthusiastic Harald, who had just concluded a long and inconclusive war with Denmark, into raising a levy to take the throne of England.

King Harold III of Norway
c. 1015 – 25 September 1066

Harald Hardrada, also known as Haraldur “harðráði” Sigurðsson and King Harold III of Norway, is my 25^th Great-Grandfather. He was born about 1015 in Ringerike, Norway to Sigurd Syr and Åsta Gudbrandsdatter. Through his mother’s first marriage to Harald Grenske he had a half-brother, Olaf II of Norway. Harald married Elisiv of Kiev around 1044/45 and they are known to have had two daughters: Ingegerd and Maria. According to the sagas, Harald married Tora Torbergsdatter around 1048 they had at least two children: Magnus II and Olaf III.

When he was fifteen years old, in 1030, Harald fought in the Battle of Stiklestad with his half-brother, Olaf Haraldsson (later Saint Olaf). Olaf sought to reclaim the Norwegian throne, which he had lost to the Danish king Cnut the Great two years prior. In the battle, Olaf and Harald were defeated by forces loyal to Cnut, and Harald was forced into exile to Kievan Rus’ (the sagas’ Garðaríki). He spent some time in the army of Grand Prince Yaroslav the Wise, eventually obtaining rank as a captain, until he moved on to Constantinople with his companions around 1034. In Constantinople, he soon rose to become the commander of the Byzantine Varangian Guard, and saw action on the Mediterranean Sea, in Asia Minor, Sicily, possibly in the Holy Land, Bulgaria and in Constantinople itself. Harald amassed considerable wealth during his time in the Byzantine Empire. He finally left the Byzantines in 1042 and arrived back in Kievan Rus’ in order to prepare his campaign of reclaiming the Norwegian throne. In his absence the Norwegian throne had been restored from the Danes to Olaf’s illegitimate son Magnus the Good.

In 1046, Harald joined forces with Magnus’s rival in Denmark (Magnus had also become king of Denmark), Sweyn II of Denmark, and started raiding the Danish coast. Magnus, unwilling to fight his uncle, agreed to share the kingship with Harald, since Harald in turn would share his wealth with him. The co-rule ended abruptly the next year as Magnus died, and Harald thus became the sole ruler of Norway. Domestically, Harald crushed all local and regional opposition, and outlined the territorial unification of Norway under a national governance. Harald also claimed the Danish throne and spent nearly every year until 1064 raiding the Danish coast and fighting his former ally, Sweyn. Although the campaigns were successful, he was never able to conquer Denmark.

Not long after Harald had renounced his claim to Denmark, Tostig Godwinson, the former Earl of Northumbria and the brother of the newly chosen English king, Harold Godwinson, pledged his allegiance to Harald and invited him to claim the English throne. Harald also had a claim to the throne as the uncle and heir of King Magnus I. Accounts indicate that Magnus made a pact with Harthacnut in 1038 that stated if either Magnus or Harthacnut died without heirs, the other would inherit the throne and lands of the deceased. Harthacnut was King of England from 1040 to 1042 when he died without heirs. Magnus considered himself the lawful heir to Harthacnut and the next King of England. However, Edward the Confessor had himself crowned King of England as the half-brother to Harthacnut. Harald assumed he would inherit the throne on Edward’s death.

William the Conqueror, also known as William the Bastard and William I, is my 1^st cousin 28 times removed and my 26^th Great-Grand Uncle. William was born about 1028 in Falaise, Duchy of Normandy to Robert I, Duke of Normandy and Robert’s mistress, Herleva. Through his father, William had a half-sister, Adelaide of Normandy.

William was about seven years old when his father died leaving him a child duke. His illegitimacy and youth caused some difficulties with his succession as Duke of Normandy and members of the Norman aristocracy battled each other for control of him. At age 19, in 1047, William was able to quash a rebellion and began to establish his authority over the duchy, a process that was not complete until about 1060. His marriage in the 1050s to Matilda of Flanders provided him with a powerful ally in the neighbouring county of Flanders. By the time of his marriage, William was able to arrange the appointments of his supporters as bishops and abbots in the Norman church. His consolidation of power allowed him to expand his horizons, and by 1062 William was able to secure control of the neighbouring county of Maine.

In the 1050s and early 1060s William became a contender for the throne of England, then held by the childless Edward the Confessor, his first cousin once removed. Some historic accounts suggest King Edward of England chose William as his successor to the English throne.

With four powerful challengers of the English throne, King Harold Godwinson, Tostig Godwinson, King Harald I of Norway and William, Duke of Normandy, the scene was set for battles to begin.

The first of these was the Battle of Fulford. It was fought on the outskirts of the village of Fulford near York in England, and started on 20 September 1066, when King Harald III of Norway and Tostig Godwinson fought and defeated the Northern Earls, Edwin and Morcar. York surrendered to the forces on September 24^th.

Tostig and Harald met at Tynemouth on September 8^th. Harald arrived with a total force of around 10-15,000 men on 240-300 longships and Tostig brought 12 ships of soldiers. Tostig was a useful ally for Hardrada, not only because he was the brother of his adversary but also because he knew the terrain. The battle was a decisive victory for the Viking army. The earls of York could have hidden behind the walls of their city but instead they met the Viking army across a river. All day the English desperately tried to break the Viking shield wall but to no avail.

The second was the Battle of Stamford Bridge. It took place at the village of Stamford Bridge, East Riding of Yorkshire, England on 25 September 1066.

After hearing of the defeat at Fulford, King Harold raced northward with an English army from London. The same day as York surrendered to Harald and Tostig, Harold Godwinson arrived with his army in Tadcaster, just seven miles from the anchored Norwegian fleet at Riccall. As Harald had left no forces in York, Harold Godwinson marched right through the town to Stamford Bridge.

On 25 September 1066, King Harold surprised Tostig and Harald and about 6,000 of their men. The army of Harald and Tostig were largely without armour and carried only personal weapons as they expected to meet the citizens of York to decide who should manage the town under Harald. This meeting had been agreed upon at Stamford Bridge the day before and no resistance was expected. The remainder of the 11,000-man force remained guarding the Norse ships, beached miles away at Riccall. Tostig and Harald and most of the men were killed. Harald was struck in the throat by an arrow and killed early in the battle in a state of berserkergang (fighting in a trance-like fury), having worn no body armour and fought aggressively with both hands around his sword.

When the battle was almost over, some reserve forces from Riccall led by Eystein Orre finally appeared, but they were exhausted as they had run all the way. Eystein picked up Harald’s fallen banner, the “Landwaster” (Landøyðan), and initiated a final counter-attack. They appeared, for a moment, to almost breach the English line, but Eystein was suddenly killed and the rest of the men fled the battlefield.

It is believed, Tostig’s body was taken to France and then buried at York Minster. A year after Harald’s death at Stamford Bridge, his body was moved to Norway and buried at the Mary Church in Nidaros (Trondheim). About a hundred years after his burial, his body was reinterred at the Helgeseter Priory, which was demolished in the 17th century. Modern historians have considered Harald’s death as the end of the Viking Age. Harald is, also, commonly held to have been the last great Viking king, or even the last great Viking.

Battle of Hastings (Scene from the Bayeaux Tapestry)
The Normans seem to be getting the upper hand as the battle continues. Many more soldiers die, one appears to be having his head cut off. On the right is the best known scene in the Tapestry: the Normans killing King Harold. But how is Harold killed? He seems to be shown twice: first plucking an arrow from his eye, and then being hacked down by a Norman knight. The tapestry is difficult to interpret here, but the second figure is probably Harold being killed.

The third and final battle is known as the Battle of Hastings. In early January 1066, hearing of Harold’s coronation, Duke William II of Normandy began plans to invade England, building 700 warships and transports at Dives-sur-Mer on the Normandy coast. Some accounts suggest William had sent an embassy to King Harold Godwinson to remind Harold of his oath to support William’s claim to the throne. Harold assembled an army and a fleet to repel William’s anticipated invasion, deploying troops and ships along the English Channel for most of the summer.

While King Harold was defending England at the Battle of Stamford Bridge, William of Normandy was assembling his forces at the mouth of the Somme and as soon as the wind was favourable he crossed the Channel and landed at Pevensey on the September 28^th. Harold’s force marched south and reached Battle near Hastings on the October 13^th. The following day, Saturday 14th October 1066, is probably the most memorable in English history. Each army consisted of about 7,000 men but the Normans had the advantage of bow-men and cavalry while the English relied on axe and spear-men. The battle raged fiercely all day and, in the evening, William ordered his archers to shoot high so that the arrows would drop vertically. Harold was struck in the right eye and mortally wounded. Some historians have suggested that King Harold and his troops were still exhausted by their previous fight with Tostig and Hardrada nineteen days earlier and this aided in their defeat.

After further military efforts William was crowned king on Christmas Day 1066, in London. He made arrangements for the governance of England in early 1067 before returning to Normandy. Several unsuccessful rebellions followed, but by 1075 William’s hold on England was mostly secure, allowing him to spend the majority of the rest of his reign on the continent.

William’s final years were marked by difficulties in his continental domains, troubles with his eldest son, and threatened invasions of England by the Danes. In 1086 William ordered the compilation of the Domesday Book, a survey listing all the landholdings in England along with their pre-Conquest and current holders. William died in September 1087 while leading a campaign in northern France and was buried in Caen. His reign in England was marked by the construction of castles, the settling of a new Norman nobility on the land and change in the composition of the English clergy. He did not try to integrate his various domains into one empire, but instead continued to administer each part separately. William’s lands were divided after his death: Normandy went to his eldest son, Robert Curthose, and his second surviving son, William Rufus, received England.

With the conquests hailed and defeats mourned my ancestors had their moments of feeling ‘lucky’ and those of ‘misfortune’.

March 8, 2018

Strong Woman

This week’s prompt for 52 Ancestors in 52 Weeks is ‘Strong Woman’.

I believe there are many strong women in my family, but I only know the story of a few of them. This week I will write about my great-grandmother, Sarah Elizabeth Wiseman.

Jane Wiseman with Sarah on her lap, c. 1863

Sarah was born February 7^th, 1861 in Hinxton, a sub-district of Duxford, in the county of Cambridge, England. Her parents were William Wiseman and Jane Halstead. Sarah was the youngest of four children and the only girl. Sarah was lucky to receive an education at a Suffolk boarding school, for this was a luxury at that time. According to British History Online, Hinxton was a small village located between Cambridge and Saffron Walden. It was known as having good arable land for agriculture. In the 19^th century Hinxton was also known as good sporting county; having one of the best partridge manors in the eastern counties.

Sarah met William Goodchild and they married April 30^th, 1879 in the Parish Church of Withersfield, Suffolk, England. William was born February 9^th, 1857 in Hundon, Suffolk to Thomas Henry Goodchild and Sarah Harriett Savage. William was the eldest of six children. According to Wikipedia, Hundon was a village located between Clare and Haverhill. It, too, was an agricultural community.

Sarah and William had nine children: John Thomas Henry, George Frederick, Mabel Jane, Margaret Dudley, Katy, Grace Elizabeth, Stanley Walter, Ernest James and Gladys Maud. Three of these children died as infants; John Thomas Henry, Katy and Gladys Maud.

Early in Sarah and William’s married life they lived in Withersfield, Suffolk. Withersfield was a small village surrounded by farmland and the predominant occupation of its residents had been in the agriculture industry. According to Wikipedia, the name Withersfield translates from Old English to ‘Wether open land’ which means an area where rams roam. According to the 1881 Census of England William and his wife, Sarah, were living at Hanchet Hall. William was a farmer of 175 acres and employed three farm boys. William also had two live in servants: George Decks was a 29-year-old indoor farm servant and his wife Julia was a 27-year-old domestic. They lived at Hanchet Hall with their five-year-old son, Harry. Sarah’s widowed mother lived nearby at Hanchet End.

According to the 1891 Census of England, William and his family were living at 6 Station Road, Wood Green, Tottenham, Middlesex. Recorded in the house with him were Sarah, his 30-year-old wife, George, his 9-year-old son, Maggie, his 5-year-old daughter, Gracy, his 2-year-old daughter, and Jane Wiseman, his 70-year-old widowed mother-in-law. William was working as a pork butcher. William and Sarah’s 7-year-old daughter, Mabel, was listed as staying at her paternal grandmother’s in Hundon, Suffolk. Wood Green was a growing urban district with a population about 23,000 by the time William and his family moved there. According to Hidden London, Wood Green, by 1891, had a pleasure ground opened in Alexandra Park (180 acres of parkland that had a swimming pool, athletics ground, horse-racing track and dancing and banqueting facilities), an entertainment palace (an exhibition hall with an emphasis on cultural and educational facilities) and Noel Park (a 100 acres of former farmland replaced by an estate with turret-like gables surmounting many corner houses and some of them seemed to have been designed to resemble dovecotes in honour of the farm they replaced).

William passed away October 17^th, 1895 in Yoxford, Suffolk from influenza and exhaustion. He was 38 years old and left Sarah a widow at the age of 34. They had only been married 16 ½ years. Sarah was five months pregnant at the time and she had six children ranging in age from 18 months to 13 years to take care of. Yoxford was a small village located in the east of Suffolk and was surrounded on all sides by beautiful parklands. The name means a ford where oxen can pass and is derived by the River Yox, which runs nearby.

I believe, after William’s death, Sarah moved back to Hundon with her children to be close to family support. During the short 16 years of their marriage they appear to have moved around. Whether this was to improve their financial situation or because of a lack of finances, I do not know. There have been unsubstantiated comments that William lost their fortune.

The records found in the England Census are the only documentation I have of where this family lived prior to William’s death and this was for only the years 1881 and 1891. I have records indicating where the birth of their children were registered, but I do not know if they were living there at the time or only visiting. The children were born as follows:

John Thomas Henry Goodchild was born July 5, 1880 in Hundon, Suffolk and died March 15, 1881 in Hundon. This is where William was born and raised so the newlyweds could have lived there for a short time or they were visiting.
George Frederick Goodchild was born April 5, 1882 in Withersfield, Suffolk. This is consistent with the 1881 census record.
Mabel Jane Goodchild was born December 5, 1883 in Withersfield, Suffolk. This, too, is consistent with the 1881 census record.
Margaret Dudley Goodchild was born October 11, 1885 in Ipswich, Suffolk. I am unsure if they were living here at the time.
Katy Goodchild was born 28 December 1887 and died January 28, 1888 at the age of one month. I am not sure where she was born or died as I have not found a record.
Grace Elizabeth Goodchild was born February 20, 1889 in Colney Hatch, Middlesex. I am unsure if they were living here at the time. They were living in Tottenham by 1891 and that is only about six miles away.
Stanley Walter Goodchild was born March 24, 1891 in Hundon, Suffolk. Again, this is where William was born and raised and I do not know if they were living there at the time or only visiting. The 1891 census records them living in Tottenham and the enumeration for the census was to occur April 1^st.
Ernest James Goodchild was born April 11, 1894 in Ipswich, Suffolk. I am unsure if they were living here at the time.
Gladys Maud Goodchild was born February 26 1896 in Hundon, Suffolk and died May 28, 1896 in Hundon at the age of three months.

According to the 1901 Census of England, Sarah and her family were living on Clare Road, Hundon, Suffolk in a home with four rooms. Recorded in the house with her are George, her 17-old son, Mabel, her 17-year-old daughter, Grace, her 12-year-old daughter, Stanley, her 9-year-old son and Ernest, her 6-year-old son. Sarah is not recorded as working or living on her own account. George is recorded as working as a shephard and Mable is listed as a teacher.

According to the 1911 Census of England, Sarah and her family were still living on Clare Road, Hundon, Suffolk. Recorded in the house with her are Stanley, her 19-year-old son and Ernest, her 16-year-old son. Sarah is listed as living on her own account and Stanley and Ernest are recorded as working at a shop.

Goodchild Family, c. 1915
Back Row: Ernest and Stanley
Front Row: Mabel, Grace, Sarah and Margaret

Sarah moved to Shafton, Yorkshire in 1915 with her son, Ernest. She lived there until she died January 23^rd, 1958, a couple of weeks short of her 97^th birthday.

Sarah had many heartaches; the death of three of her children, as infants, and the death of her husband. I would assume the fact she was widowed at a young age with a young family and pregnant with her last child would have been a difficult struggle. If William did lose their fortune, it would have caused more hardship for Sarah.

I do know my grandfather, Sarah’s oldest child, George Frederick, immigrated to Canada from England in 1905 at the age of 23. At the time the West was opened and Canada was advertised as a ‘land of plenty’. My grandfather was expected to take advantage of the riches promised in Canada and send money back to his mother to help her financially. This did not happen. George arrived in Canada and lived in the Boissevain, Manitoba area for a few years before moving to the Oxbow area of Saskatchewan in 1910. He met my grandmother, Leila Ida Moore, and they were married January 30^th, 1917 in Oxbow. They had nine children over a 16-year span. Eight of these children survived and became adults. George farmed in the Saskatchewan area for most of his working life, but he never owned a farm. George rented the various farms they lived on. When the last farm they rented, the Sair farm, was no longer available for rent he stopped farming and decided to board with some farm neighbours. Ida moved into the town of Oxbow to work. After a few year Ida saved enough money to buy a 2-storey house on Prospect Avenue and George moved into the house to live with Ida again. George never had a surplus of money to send home to his family. He worked hard as a farmer but only made enough to sustain his own family. According to a newspaper article about Sarah, George’s mother, turning 90, Sarah told the reporter she was happy, although she often wished she could see her eldest son, 69-year-old Mr George Goodchild, who went to Canada 44 years ago, “but,” she laughs “I’m afraid of all that water.”

My mother with her grandmother, Sarah Goodchild, c. 1954

My mother was able to meet her grandmother, Sarah, in 1954. My mother, at age 28, had worked and saved money to go on a six-month trip to Europe. While she was there she visited her father’s family and met her aunts, uncle and grandmother for the first time. Sarah was living in the home of her son, Ernest, and his wife in Shafton, Yorkshire. My mother’s recollections of Sarah are that she was a very quiet, petite woman. She noted that even in 1954 Sarah cooked over an open fire hearth in her kitchen. She remembers her grandmother hanging a kettle or pot from an iron hook that she would swing back over the fire to heat the contents. My mother remembers Uncle Ernest telling a story about when his mother, Sarah, was hit by a car and knocked over. Ernest said when he heard about it and went to check on his mother he mentioned how she got hit by a car and she replied, ‘I did not get hit by a car, I hit the car’. I surmise from this story that my great-grandmother, Sarah, was also a bit feisty and maybe stubborn, as well.

I don’t know all the heartache and struggles Sarah encountered, but I believe it was her strength and fortitude that helped her through the hard times.

Newspaper article about Sarah Goodchild turning 90.

February 26, 2018March 3, 2018

Where There’s a Will

This week’s prompt for 52 Ancestors in 52 Weeks is ‘Where There’s a Will’.

With the help of a will I was able to breakdown a brick wall. That brick wall belonged to Anne Grierson, the wife of William Bell, whose brick wall I wrote about in a previous blog, published January 24^th, 2018.

Anne Grierson and William Bell are my husband’s 2x great-grandparents. They were born in Dumfriesshire, Scotland and immigrated to Canada in 1851. They settled in the Pickering area of Ontario. Anne died on 15 February 1874 in Green River, Pickering and is buried at the St. John’s Presbyterian Cemetery in Pickering. William died on 13 December 1887 in Blaris, Manitoba, Canada and is buried in the Arrow River Cemetery in Arrow River, Manitoba.

Headstone for Anne Bell (photo taken by Ivy Wideman, 21 Sep 2009)

I started my search for Scottish records for Anne Grierson and William Bell using the National Records of Scotland website https://www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk. I was able to find their banns of marriage which are the public announcements of an intended marriage between two specified persons. The banns are read in the parish church of the individuals and allow others to raise concerns as to why the marriage should not occur. The banns are to be read aloud on three Sundays before the wedding ceremony. The first banns I was able to find were posted in William’s parish on 11 May 1851 and 18 May 1851 in Dryfesdale, Dumfriesshire and it states “William Bell in this parish and Ann Grierson in the parish of Applegarth”. The second record I found was the posting in Anne’s parish, Applegarth, Dumfriesshire, on 18 May 1851. It states “William Bell in Dryfesdale, and Ann Grierson in this Parish, Proclaimed two days – married elsewhere”.

Marriage Bann record for William Bell and Ann Grierson – Parish of Applegarth

I then searched for their birth and census records. I could not find any records that I was confident belonged to the William Bell I was searching for. However, I was able to find records in the 1851 Scotland Census and 1841 Scotland Census that I was confident belonged to Anne Grierson. The national census record for Scotland started in 1841. Prior to this date there are some census records that are held at their respective county archives or the ScotlandsPeople Centre. The records held at these places are only available for people who are able to travel to these centres to perform the search and this is not an option for me at this time.

The 1851 census record indicates Anne is an 18-year-old female General Servant at Netherhall in the parish of Applegarth and that she was born in Johnstone, Dumfriesshire. The 1841 census record indicates she is a 10-year-old female living with her family in the Templand Village located in the Parish of Lochmaben, Dumfriesshire and that she was born in this County. The family consists of her parents, William and Janet Grierson, and her siblings; Agnes, William, Mary and Jean. I could not find any further Scottish records for Annie so I turned to her family members to continue my search. They all have their place of birth recorded as the County of Dumfriesshire in the 1841 Scotland Census. In this same census William, Anne’s father, is noted to be 45 years old and his occupation is recorded as a Mason. The ages of the rest of the family are recorded as Janet (Anne’s mother) – 45 years old, Agnes – 25, Anne – 10, William – 7, Mary – 4 and Jean – 2.

1841 Scotland Census record for William Grierson and family

I was able to find the marriage record for Anne’s parents, William Grierson and Janet Ewart. They were married in Broomhills in the Parish of Applegarth and Sibbaldbie on December 13, 1811. I also found the will for William Grierson. William died 12 May 1850 in Templand, Dumfriesshire and is buried in the Applegarth Church Cemetery.

In William Grierson’s will I found his occupation recorded as Mason in Templand Village and the date and place of his death. The inventory of his cash, bank savings and household furniture and other effects total £32 16s 3d.

I also found a record of his children. The will was written the 25^th day of February 1850 and read on the 27^th day of May 1850. It records his children as:

John Grierson, eldest son;
Frances Grierson, Joiner, residing in Templand;
Agnes Grierson or Sharp, wife of Joseph Sharp, Tailor at Hopefield, Parish of Keir;
Margaret Greirson or Graham, wife of William Graham, Collier at High Harrington in Cumberland in England;
Elizabeth Grierson or Bryden, residing at Templand Village;
Janet Greirson, residing at Newfield, Parish of Hoddam;
Ann Grierson, residing at Hall, Parish of Applegarth;
William Grierson, residing at Stobahill, Parish of Hutton;
Mary Grierson, residing at Kirkbank, Parish of Johnstone; and
Jean Grierson, residing at Templand Village.

All his children, except John, are appointed as his Executors and are recorded as present for the deposing of the Will on the 27^th day of May 1850. This leads me to speculate that John’s whereabouts are unknown or he lives abroad and unable to return to Scotland for the reading of the will. It is also noted that William’s wife, Janet, is not mentioned in the will. This leads me to believe she died prior to the date the will was written.

With the help of a professional genealogist in Scotland I was able to find the following information regarding Anne’s mother, Janet Ewart. She was born to William Ewart and Margaret Linton about 1788. Her parents were married in Dryfesdale Parish on 10 November 1783. Their marriage record shows that William was from Applegarth Parish and Margaret was from Dryfesdale Parish. William was born about 1744 in Applegarth and died 28 July 1821 at Broomhills, Applegarth. Margaret died 14 January 1822, also at Broomhills. They are both buried in the Applegarth Cemetery. The children of William and Margaret Ewart are:

John Ewart was born about 1786. John was a schoolmaster. He married Jane (Jean) Crichton on 18 July 1809 at Broomhills, Applegarth. John died on 08 June 1811 at Sandyholm, Applegarth and is buried in the Applegarth Cemetery. John and Jean had a daughter named, Margaret Ewart. Margaret was born on 13 May 1810 at Applegarth and died at Corswaymoor on 28 January 1830 and is buried in the Applegarth Cemetery.
Francis Ewart was born about 1787. Francis married Jane (Jean) Carruthers in Hutton Parish on 21 February 1823. Jean died at Outer Mains, Jardinehall, Applegarth on 17 June 1826 and Francis died at Templand, Lochmaben Parish on 21 April 1840. They are both buried in the Applegarth Church Cemetery. Francis and Jean had a daughter, Mary Ann Ewart. Mary Ann was born on 18 October 1825 at Applegarth. According to the 1851 census, Mary Ann is living in the home of her maternal aunt, Janet Henry.
Janet Ewart, referred to above, was born about 1788. Jane married William Grierson on 13 December 1811 in Broomhills, Applegarth. Janet died 03 April 1845 in Lochmaben and William died 12 May 1850 in Templand. They are both buried in the Applegarth Church Cemetery. They had 13 children: John, Agnes, Margaret, Elizabeth, Janet, Jean, Francis, James, Anne, William, Mary and Jane.
William Ewart was born about 1795. William died on 22 December 1817 and is buried in the Applegarth Church Cemetery.

Upon further online research and record finding in ScotlandsPeople I was able to expand William and Janet Grierson’s family and follow a few of their children forward a couple of generations. William and Janet Greirson had 13 children and they are:

Agnes Grierson was born 17 September 1812 in Comcockle Quarry, Lochmaben. She married Joseph Sharpe on 19 November 1841 in Lochmaben. Agnes and Joseph lived in the Parish of Keir. Agnes is listed as a widow in the 1871 census suggesting Joseph died between 1861 and 1871. I cannot find a census record for Agnes after 1871 which suggests she died between 1871 and 1881. Agnes and Joseph Sharpe had five children: Mary, Jean, Thomas, William and James.
John Grierson is recorded as the eldest son which would suggest he was born between 1811 and 1817. I have not been able to find records to describe John’s life.
Margaret Grierson was born between 1813 and 1817. She married William Graham and they lived in Cumberland England. They had seven children: William, John, Mary Ann, Eliza, James, Robert and Joseph.
William Grierson was born about 1817 in Lochmaben. He died 19 January 1831 in Lochmaben and is buried in the Applegarth Church Cemetery.
Elizabeth Grierson was born about 1819 in Lochmaben. She married John Bryden on 16 January 1846 in Lochmaben. Elizabeth and John lived in the Parish of Lochmaben and had two children: William and Janet Ewart.
Janet Grierson was born about 1823 in Lochmaben. According to her father’s Will and the 1851 census she lived in the Parish of Hoddom. I have not been able to find any further records for her.
Jean Grierson was born about 1826 in Lochmaben and died 16 February 1829 in Lochmaben. She is buried in the Applegarth Church Cemetery.
Francis Grierson was born 16 August 1828 in Lochmaben. He married Nicholas Brown on 17 January 1855 in Dundrennan, Kirkcudbrightshire. Francis and Nicholas lived in the Dundrennan Village until, at least, 1891 which is the last census record I have found. Francis died 01 February 1907 in Toxteth, Liverpool, England. Nicholas died 24 September 1895, also, at Toxteth. They are both buried in the Toxteth Park Cemetery. Francis and Nicholas had 11 children: William, Agnes, John Brown, Francis, Janet, James, William, David, Robert, Elizabeth and Robert.
James Grierson was born about January 1830 in Lochmaben and died 12 May 1830 in Lochmaben. He is buried in the Applegarth Church Cemetery.
Anne Grierson, referred to above, was born 23 April 1830 in Johnstone. She married William Bell in Dumfriesshire, Scotland in May 1851. She died 15 February 1874 in Green River, Pickering, Ontario from complications during childbirth and was buried in the St. John’s Presbyterian Cemetery in Pickering. Anne and William had eight children: Janet, William, Margaret Grierson, Annie, Francis, Jeannie Agnes, Robert and John.
William Grierson was born about 1833 in Lochmaben. He married Elizabeth Laing on 24 August 1855 in Falkirk, Stirlingshire, Scotland. They continued to live in Falkirk. William died 12 June 1874 in Falkirk and Elizabeth died 23 July 1918 in Falkirk. They had six children: Helen Wade, Janet, William, Alexander, Amelia and John.
Mary Grierson was born on 18 October 1835 in Lochmaben. She married William Anderson 08 June 1855 in Templing, Lochmaben. This is the last record I have found for this couple.
Jane Grierson was born on 29 September 1839 and lived in the Templand Village until she immigrated to Canada about 1855 settling in Cobourg, Northumberland, Ontario. Here she met Andrew McCreight and they were married on 28 December 1865 in Cobourg. The family lived in Scarborough, York, Ontario until Andrew died on 12 September 1903. He is buried at the Elmwood Cemetery in Markham. Jane and Andrew had five children: Minnie Mary, Francis Grierson, Jessie Elizabeth, James Andrew and Margaret Jane. In 1904 Jane moved to Grandview, Manitoba to live with her daughter, Minnie, and to be near her other two daughters who lived in Dauphin, Manitoba; Jessie and Margaret. The boys, Francis and James, continued to live in Ontario. Minnie married Duncan Pearson on 28 September 1892 in Brandon, Manitoba and they moved to Grandview. Jessie married Dr. William James Harrington on 14 October 1903 in Scarborough, Ontario and they moved to Dauphin. Dr. Harrington was one of the first doctors in Dauphin and became the head of surgery there. Jane McCreight travelled from Grandview to Dauphin in the spring of 1906 for an extended visit with her daughters. She had been staying with her daughter and husband, Dr. and Mrs. William Harrington, for a few weeks when she became ill and passed away at their home. She was buried in the Riverside Cemetery at Dauphin on 18 April 1906. In the fall of 1906 the weather turned cool enough for her body to be exhumed on October 18^th and transported to Markham, Ontario to be buried beside her husband at the Elmwood Cemetery.
Obituary for Jane McCreight

Entry record at Riverside Cemetery, Dauphin, Manitoba for Jane McCreight

The information gleaned from the will of William Grierson helped me expand this family. If, not for the will, I may not have found the other siblings of Anne, nor might I have found the married surnames of her sisters. As I mentioned earlier, there are no census records available for me to search prior to 1841 and in the 1841 Scotland Census this family only has five of their 13 children recorded. This added information allowed me to research the family further. While I tried to search for records for every sibling of Anne’s, I was not successful for all of them. I did have an ‘eureka’ moment when I found the record of marriage for Jane Grierson and Andrew McCreight — I have not found another public tree that records this Jane Grierson, wife of Andrew McCreight, to be the same Jane Greirson, daughter of William Grierson and Janet Ewart. Another moment of excitement was to find the record of death for Jane Grierson McCreight and the fact that she died and was buried in Dauphin — Dauphin is my home town.

In my opinion, wills can contain far more information than who died and who did they bequeath their belongings to. As a genealogist I like to capture all the information from any document or record I find. You never know what may be hiding in them.

February 19, 2018February 19, 2018

Heirloom

This week’s prompt for 52 Ancestors in 52 Weeks is ‘Heirloom’. I have an heirloom from three of my grandparents: a thimble from my maternal grandmother, who was a beautiful quilter; a fishing net shuttle from my paternal grandfather, who was a fisherman and would use it to mend his nets; and a brooch from my paternal grandmother, made for her by her grandfather.

For the purpose of this blog I will write about the brooch. It was made for my grandmother, Margaret Einarson, who I wrote about in a previous blog, published January 8^th, 2018. Margaret was born September 18, 1897 in Arnes, Manitoba, Canada at the farm called Búastaði. Her parents were Jón Einarsson and Sigriður Jónsdóttir, both emigrated from Iceland in the early 1890’s settling in the Arnes area where they met and were later married December 21^st, 1895.

Back Row: Einar Eiríksson
Seated: Jón Einarsson and Sigriður Jónsdóttir holding their twins, Einar Malvin and Jón Sigurthor
Front: Margaret Einarson

Margaret’s paternal grandfather was Einar Eiríksson, Jón Einarsson’s father. Einar was born in Svalbarðsseli, Þistilsfirði, Iceland on August 3rd, 1835. He left Iceland for Canada in 1894 and settled in the Arnes area. In the 1901 Census of Canada, Einar is listed as living in the Selkirk district in the area of Township 21, Range 4, Meridian E1 with his son, Jón Einarsson, and his family. At this time the family was said to be living at the Búastaði farm in the Arnes area which is consistent with the location recorded in the census. He moved with them to Kettle Bay on Red Deer Point in 1903. In the 1911 Census of Canada, Einar is listed as living in the Dauphin district in the area of Salt Springs with his son, Jón Einarsson, and his family. According to the Manitoba Historical Society publication Number 51 in February 2006, Virginia Petch wrote an article titled Salt-Making in Manitoba and Red Deer Point on Lake Winnipegosis was known as one of the Salt Springs in Manitoba. The Salt Springs of Manitoba were known to have water that contained enough salt that the salt could be harvested. According to Petch’s article, the salt was harvested by putting the brine into large kettles and using an evaporating furnace. Thirty gallons of brine would produce one bushel of salt and two bushels of salt could be produced daily from a kettle. The Einarsson family farmed in Kettle bay for nine years and then moved to George Street in Winnipegosis in 1912. In both the 1901 and 1911 Census of Canada records Einar is listed as “blind”. Einar passed away September 7^th, 1914 in Winnipegosis and is buried in the Winnipegosis Cemetery.

Einar was a goldsmith by trade. As a celebration of Margrét’s birth Einar designed and crafted a brooch. He was considered blind but by combining two pair of glasses he was able to see well enough to create the delicate work in this brooch. Einar engraved the initials ‘MJ’ in the gold plate in the middle of the brooch to represent Margrét’s initials as they would be if she were living in Iceland. The use of the patronymic naming pattern of Iceland would register her name as Margrét Jónsdóttir. However, as a Canadian Margrét’s last name was registered using the patrilineal naming pattern and she received the same last name as her father, Einarsson. Eventually her name was anglicized and she was known as Margaret Einarson. I am not sure of the exact age of this brooch but recognize it was made between the birth of my grandmother and the death of Einar, 1897 – 1914.

My grandmother gave this brooch to me and when I was married I affixed this brooch to my wedding hat and it represented ‘something old’. When my older sister was married she also wore it attached to her wedding hat and my younger sister attached it to the handkerchief she was carrying. This started the tradition to have the brides in my family wear this brooch for their weddings. My daughter-in-law and two of my nieces have worn this brooch and it is safely stored waiting for the next bride. This is such a beautiful heirloom to have in the family and to have it cherished by brides of each successive generation as they wear it proudly during their wedding.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: