Friday, May 29, 2020

AncestryDNA has won me over

If you've seen my other posts, I am not, in general, a fan of Ancestry.com . It's complicated. But recently I submitted DNA to Ancestry and currently am thrilled with some of its features.

 Like Don't Like Same as other matching services
 Lots of potential matches Specific chromosome information hidden Many matches don't respond to queries
 5 generation trees (for those who have created them)
List of surnames through 10 generations
Difficult to export match information for analysis or tracking in third party software
 Common Ancestors (if you have submitted a tree, may show relationship between you and match, possibly passing through several other trees) Lots of hooks to get me to subscribe to their (I think) expensive records service
Many shareable family trees Must be a subscriber to easily view trees, pictures, documents, etc.
 Easy to set me up to manage DNA kits submitted by others


I do recognize that the items I "Don't Like" are features that make sense from Ancestry's point of view, usually protecting privacy of members' data, and allowing Ancestry to build a "gated community" that requires paid access, and to generate the revenue they need for their enormous infrastructure and stores of genealogy records. As a long time genealogy researcher who has seen the disappearance of public, collaborative research, I can still "Don't Like" them.

Thursday, May 28, 2020

A New LaBrune!

I've recently been in touch with a DNA match, seemingly through my LaBrune ancestors. I quickly was convinced that she is a descendant of one of my immigrant LaBrune family who disappeared. Here's why:

My Rationale for Adding Margaret to My LaBrune Family
My LaBrune family New LaBrune Explanation
?nne M. LaBrune (partially readable name on ship's passenger list)Margaret LaBruneM. could stand for Margaret
?nne M. was 14 years old when ship arrived in 1833Margaret was born in ca. 1820Ages are within a year of each other
LaBrunes were living in Clermont county, Ohio in 1840, but without ?nne M.Married Margaret LaBrune Chauvet and her husband were living in Clermont county, Ohio in 1840They lived near each other in 1840
LaBrunes moved to Dubuque in 1840sChauvets moved to Dubuque in 1840sBoth families moved to Dubuque in 1840s
Shared DNA with ten 4th cousin once removed descendants of George LaBrune ranges from 10cM to 29cM, with a median of 17cM (Ancestry can identify about 1/2 of DNA matches for this relationship, and my DNA tools may not be capturing all data below 10cM, so my median will be higher than the theoretical average of 7cM)Shared DNA with 4th cousin once removed descendant of Margaret LaBrune is 11cMShared DNA is within range of my similar cousins

Here's my preliminary Family Group Sheet for Margaret's family. I'm still looking for information and some of this information may change. But here's what I have so far:

Family Group Record for Adolph Baptiste Chauvet

================================================================================
Husband: Adolph Baptiste Chauvet
================================================================================
           AKA: Cauvett, Schauvett
          Born: 16 Oct 1816 - Montpellier, Departement de l'Hérault,
                 Languedoc-Roussillon, France
          Died: 19 Jul 1895 - Dakota City, Humboldt co., Iowa
        Buried:  - Humboldt, Humboldt co., Iowa
      Marriage: bet 1837 and ca 1845            Place: Cincinatti, , Ohio
================================================================================
   Wife: Jeanne? M. "Margaret" LaBrune
================================================================================
          Born: 1820 - , , , France
          Died: 4 May 1864 - North Buena Vista, Clayton co., Iowa
        Buried:  - Holy Cross [Dubuque], IA
        Father: Philippe LaBrune (1794-Bet 1880/1887)
        Mother: Ann Rayne (1793-1868)
================================================================================
Children
================================================================================
1  F  Mary L. Chauvet
          Born: 23 Oct 1840 - Cincinatti, Hamilton, Ohio
          Died: 6 Nov 1918 - Kansas City, Jackson co., Missouri
        Buried:  - Kansas City, Jackson co., Missouri
        Spouse: Christopher Kalen (1838-1905)
    Marr. Date:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2  F  Margaret L. Chauvet
          Born: 24 Dec 1843 - Dubuque, Dubuque co., Iowa
          Died: 2 Jun 1909 - Dakota City, Humboldt co., Iowa
Cause of Death: nervous prostration and heart failure
        Buried:  - Humboldt, Humboldt co., Iowa
        Spouse: Albert M. Adams (          -          )
    Marr. Date: 9 Dec 1876
        Spouse: Absalom Little (          -Abt 1863)
    Marr. Date: Abt 1859
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3  M  Adolphus B. Chauvet
          Born: 1852 - , Dubuque co., Iowa
          Died: 17 Jan 1890 - Fort Dodge, , Iowa
Cause of Death: inflamation of the bowels
        Buried: 18 Jan 1890 - Fort Dodge, , Iowa
        Spouse: Sarah J. [Chauvet] (1856-          )
    Marr. Date:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4  M  William Louis Chauvet
          Born: 15 Jan 1857 - , Clayton co., Iowa
          Died: 5 Jun 1940 - Los Angeles, Los Angeles co., California
        Buried: 7 Jun 1940
        Spouse: Millie [Chauvet] (          -          )
    Marr. Date:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wednesday, May 27, 2020

Hawes Family History

A DNA link led to some genealogy research and a connection to the well-researched Hawes family history book, The Edward Hawes Heirs: Edward Hawes, ca. 1616-1687, of Dedham, Massachusetts, and his wife, Eliony Lumber, and some of their descendants through eleven generations, compiled by Raymond Gordon Hawes and published in 1996, and a supplement published in 2002. An excellent genealogy work. I've posted a family history of our Hawes family on my web site: go to http://cushings.com/roots/ , and select Hawes from the list on the left.

Tuesday, May 5, 2020

To GEDMATCH or Not to GEDMATCH

Although I have ventured into Genetic DNA analysis, still very much concerned about genetic privacy, I have not yet explored GEDMATCH. This link to an article about the purchase of the popular DNA matching service is food for thought as I consider, some day, whether or not to try it.

https://slate.com/technology/2019/12/gedmatch-verogen-genetic-genealogy-law-enforcement.html

Saturday, November 9, 2019

Rootsweb's New World Connect

After more than twenty years of maintaining my family tree at Rootsweb, I asked today that it be removed. Rootsweb has always been, in my genealogy life, a free web site that facilitated collaboration in researching our family histories. They hosted message boards dedicated to any name or locale or genealogy subject you could request, they hosted e-mailing lists dedicated to these subjects (at some point these were tied together), they provided free web space to individuals and groups, and they allowed users to post their GEDCOM family trees so they could be searched and viewed by other genealogists. It grew rapidly and overwhelmed the volunteers who created the site, so it was turned over to Ancestry.com, a fairly new company that sold access to databases of genealogy records, and was starting to create Rootsweb like features to enhance their service, under the agreement that it would always remain free. I used to use Rootsweb all the time.

So it was a little sad to have my tree removed. For about two years Ancestry has been updating WorldConnect, nominally to make an old site secure in today's internet environment. But I just got a look at the new WorldConnect. It was very hard for me to find my own tree. The search function doesn't find people in my tree, or finds so many people in so many trees, apparently ignoring middle names and birth dates and places etc, that I don't find it useful. And once I did find my tree, there is no mention of me (who collected this data over the past 25 years), nor any way for people to contact me. On the plus side for some, I guess, it does suggest records that might help that are available with a subscription to Ancestry ?

I will probably try to upload a new GEDCOM there to see if it will allow people to contact me, etc. It could be that they just loaded all the old GEDCOM files and the researcher contact information is not part of those files, so is not available. I'll also keep looking for an alternative. I'd rather it be free. It must be findable to the whole genealogy community, not just paid subscribers of a particular service. It must have protections against wholesale downloading of information. And protections against other people just adding things on to my tree. (Many people have a lower standard on what constitutes proof of relationship and I've seen lots of people added on to my family that I know to be false. So I suppose I'm protecting my "brand"; if it's in my tree, you know I can explain why, and the why is pretty solid.) It must allow attribution and contact information. I would prefer to be part of a greater community that will attract researchers who might then find a connection to our tree. (But I may also just host a tree on my own web site and rely on Google to lead genealogists to me.)

Sunday, September 1, 2019

Caseys in Galbally, Limerick, Ireland; Research resources

I recently made a DNA connection to a Casey family, and now am fairly certain that what I had suspected from census records, that Patrick Casey (b. ca 1801 in Ireland, married Hanora Norris in Galbally, where most/all of their kids were baptized) was a brother of Catherine Casey Cussen. This is just a note about some resources.

I've spent a lot of time going through church register images for the parish of Galbally, on the National Library of Ireland site ( https://registers.nli.ie/parishes/0264 ). The images are not indexed, so searching is like what we used to do when searching through census and newspaper films at local libraries. Except I can do this on my computer at home. I thought this would be a fairly quick job, but it turns out to be enormous. I'm looking for all Cushing and Casey entries to get a pool of candidates for the family in Ireland. It turns out there are about 500 images, most containing two pages from a register. I'm finding about two or three of interest per image. A baptismal record is typically a date, the child, two parents, two godparents, a page number, sometimes a note about the father's profession or town of residence, or that the child was "illegitimate", so typically about nine fields of information, often difficult to read. A marriage record is the married couple, two witnesses, a date (three fields), with occasional notes and a page number. At the end I add a film numbers, too, so that I can easily find the record again, so the whole is typically eight fields of information. That comes out to an estimate of about of about 2500 records and 20,000 recorded fields of information. So I should have expected a lot of work. I think I'm about halfway done.

The interesting part of this near drudgery is seeing all the names, something of a directory of neighbors of my Casey & Cushing ancestors. Many of the names are familiar as spouses of marriages that took place after immigration to the US, so I wonder if many of the Cushing & Casey kids and grandkids married into families the parents knew from "the old country". I've also seen some of these names in DNA matches to my dad, which opens some paths of searching for common ancestors. Some of the names that were very common in the Galbally register were Barry, Blackburn, Bourke, Brien, Butler, Byrrane, Carty, Casey, Clancy, Condon, Connor, Cronin, Cummings, Cunningham, Cussen/Cushen/Quishian, Dalton, Dawson, Dea, Donohoe, Dunn, Dwyer, Fitzgerald, Fogarty, Fraher, Fruin, Gorman, Grafton, Halloway, Hanrahan, Hayes, Heffernan, Henebry, Hennesy, Ivory, Kiely, Kirby, Landers, Lynch, Mahoney, Mara, Martin, Megrath, Moloney, Mullins, Murphy, Neil, Noonan, Picket, Power, Quain, Ryan, Sampson, Sheehan, Slattery, Sullivan, Walsh. And many of these added an O (O'Brien, O'Neal, O'Sullivan ...) or a Mc (McCarthy, McGrath, ...).

Another site I found interesting is the Irish Placenames Database at https://www.logainm.ie/en/s?txt=galbally&str=on . My browser identifies this as Dublin City University, but I don't know what exactly the project is. Often a register record would have a place name associated with a groom or a father, and the strange name and difficult-to-read writing made it difficult to record a meaningful place name. I didn't have a lot of success, but I found the resource interesting for locating on a map Irish place names more generally. This seems to be related to a project to preserve Irish culture by identifying and officially recognized places.

At the top of web page are links to what seem to be (a brief glance) other Irish collections. Above and to the left of the map is a link to "Meitheal Logainm.ie", which seems to be a place for people to submit local place names that may not be officially recognized, yet. But it's also searchable. I don't see any descriptions, but there are lots of places identified if you zoom in close. Some of the site are in the Irish language. ainm.ie seems to be a collection of biographies, but only in Irish. https://www.duchas.ie/en/ is a site collecting items to preserve Irish culture, through stories and photos. For example, I found this in their schools collection: https://www.duchas.ie/en/cbes/4922055/4848074/5009531 giving a local explanation of Galbally, which apparently means "town of the strangers".

A last resource, not new but perhaps you haven't seen it, is built around Matheson's statistics (published in a book that people have found very useful) about the Surnames of Ireland. I don't want to go look up the book right now, but from memory he summarized an enumeration of the births that took place in about 1890 throughout Ireland, and it is widely used to find to find families to help focus genealogy research to more likely areas of the country. The country had been decimated by famine related emigration, so the numbers and distributions of names aren't the same as they were in the 1830s and pre-famine 1840s, when most of my Irish ancestors lived there, but it is a valuable resource. Many of us bought the book to look through the tables of names, but now it is searchable online at https://www.ancestryireland.com/family-records/distribution-of-surnames-in-ireland-1890-mathesons-special-report/ . I had to try several spelling variants for Cushen to find the entry in their table, so you might not find your name on a first try. The book will show you all the variants that made up the head count. The book also has some explanation of origins of some names.

I'll post other resources as I come across them. Please post your own in the comments.

Enjoy!

Saturday, August 24, 2019

My Genetic Genealogy: Pros and Cons of Too Many Matches

I've been working with DNA kits on 23andMe, MyHeritage, and AncestryDNA. One of my first observations was, after beginning with 23andMe and seeing about 1000 DNA matches, that MyHeritage's 3,ooo matches was ridiculous. Who will ever have time to go through and try to link 3,000 matches! 23andMe is now providing about 1200 matches and MyHeritage is now about 8000. Really? But now I've crunched some numbers and am having second thoughts.

The Beginning


Browsing through matches on 23andMe, I started exploring a not-too-distant match for my father, 0.95% shared DNA, about 70cM, somewhere near average for a 3rd cousin. Except that Dad is in his early nineties and the match was middle-aged, so the relationship is more likely to be a 2nd cousin twice removed. This indicates a common ancestor of Dad's great-grandparents who immigrated to the United States.

The Genealogies


Dad's match was able to provide me with his family genealogy back to the early 1800s in Ireland. There was no intersection with my tree, which also geos back this far. Knowing that there is a connection, through the DNA match, the genealogies indicated that the family connection would have to be one or more generations earlier than the 0.8%  shared DNA suggested. Something's not right.

Different Relatives in Common


Comparing notes, we realized that Dennis's list of Relatives in Common (persons that were DNA matches to both him and to Dad) was different from Dad's list. I've noticed this with others, but hadn't delved into the explanation. So, FYI. Both lists were about 35 persons long, but only about 5 persons were the same on both lists. I asked 23andMe for an explanation.

The Relatives in Common list is created by taking your list of DNA matches - about 1200 at 23andMe - and selecting from them those that also share at least 5cM of DNA with the match you are comparing to. To make this less abstract. Suppose Dad's match is Dennis. [In what follows, Dennis and Keith are made-up names.] Dennis has a list of 1200 DNA matches, one of which is Dad. When he clicks on Dad, he is presented with a list of about 35 Relatives in Common. This list is created by taking Dennis's 1200 matches and selecting those who share at least 5cM (this is a VERY small piece of DNA) with Dad. If I look at Dad's list of all DNA matches, the very last one shares 0.27% (about 20cM). Dad's list of Relatives in Common must be from his list of matches, all of which share at least 20cM of DNA with him. The only persons who who show up on both Dennis's and Dad's lists share at least 20cM of DNA with both of them (though I don't know exactly Dennis's threshold), only about 5 persons. Note that both lists are valid, but this explains why they are different.

Cousin Keith


Dennis mentioned that his first cousin, Keith, was on his Relatives in Common, though it was not on Dad's. It turns out that Keith shares about 0.15% DNA with Dad, so doesn't make Dad's list of 1200 matches, so doesn't show up on Dad's version of the Relatives in Common. The second thing to note is that two first cousins should share about the same amount of DNA with Dad, while Dennis and Keith share 0.95% and 0.15%, respectively. This is a reminder that there can be large variations in inherited DNA. One possibility is that Dennis and Keith are related to Dad through different relatives, but further research showed this to be nearly impossible. Comparing to the genealogy research we were studying earlier, though, Keith's shared DNA indicates a common ancestor one or two generations further back than our immigrant ancestor, which could fit our observations better. My current hypothesis is that cousin Keith shares a more normal amount of DNA for the relationship with Dad, while Dennis inherited an unusually long strand of DNA.

What Does This Mean?


In this case, I seem to have gotten lucky that Dennis had an unusually long inherited strand of DNA that moved him above Dad's match threshold of about 0.27%. If not, I would not have seen this connection to investigate. This is disappointing. Much of my known genealogy ends with immigrant ancestors who are great-grandparents to my parents (whose DNA I am working with). My findings with cousins Dennis and Keith leads me to believe it is unlikely I will find connections to earlier ancestors in their countries of origin through 23andMe. Remember that my initial thought had been 1200 DNA matches is more than enough to work with. Now I see that it is not enough for the pre-immigration connections I eventually hope to make.

Not Quite That Bad


So far, in two of my ancestral lines, I was able to connect with many matches through 23andMe whose common ancestor was a pre-immigration family. Fortunately, there are older participants from these "clans" whose relationship to Mom/Dad were 3rd cousin once removed. The average shared DNA for 3rd cousins once removed is about 0.4%, so above the 0.27% threshold for 23andMe matches. But it is important to seek connections with older matches (say, 60 and up). It remains to be seen whether this population will decrease, from natural causes, or increase as more people get their family elders tested.

What About Other DNA Services?


AncestryDNA: I don't know the numbers for Ancestry. I haven't found a way to harvest their matches, Ancestry does allow downloads of this information, and I ran out of patience scrolling endlessly through who knows how many matches to find the end.

MyHeritage identifies about 8,000 DNA matches, down to about 8cM. Perhaps overwhelming. Perhaps absurd. But it does seem to allow the possibility of connecting back further in time. Identifying the ancestral line going so far back from smaller DNA segments will, however, require lots of luck and lots of work.

[I've assumed a very simple relationship between shared DNA and relationship, while in reality, it is not simple. A simple relationship is easier to understand, and I think allows me to make my point.]