Newsletter – 4th
March 2021
Major update to the National Burial Index
Black sheep flocking to Ancestry
Mother's Day sale at Ancestry UK SAVE 25%
Free DNA uploads ENDS
SUNDAY
Masterclass: How to make the most of
your DNA test
Could you fit into Winston Churchill's shoes?
Save on Who Do You Think You Are? magazine
EXCLUSIVE
The LostCousins
newsletter is usually published 2 or 3 times a month. To access the previous issue
(dated 25th February) click here; to find earlier articles use the customised Google search between
this paragraph and the next (it searches ALL of the newsletters since February
2009, so you don't need to keep copies):
To go to the main
LostCousins website click the logo at the top of this newsletter. If you're not already a member, do join - it's FREE, and you'll
get an email to alert you whenever there's a new edition of this newsletter available!
Free
websites can be a lifeline for those family historians who can't
afford to purchase subscriptions to the big genealogy sites, but just because
something's free doesn’t necessarily make it worthwhile – for example, a lot of
free sites have been created by software developers whose primary interest is
in persuading you to click on their links.
Tip:
I'm always very sceptical when I come across a free
family genealogy site which gives little or no information about who is behind
it – there's usually a reason for this, and it's unlikely to be a good one!
On
the other hand, you shouldn’t ignore free sites just
because you've splashed out on an expensive subscription elsewhere. Even if
they have the same information, it is likely to have been transcribed
independently, giving you an opportunity to find elusive records; furthermore, the
site is likely to offer different search features, and this may enable you to
pick up entries that you would otherwise have missed.
The
key free sites that I use are:
FamilySearch, which has billions of
transcribed records from around the world, and whilst you need to visit a
Family History Centre or affiliated library to view some of the images, there
are far more images online than most people realise. FamilySearch is a great
place to search for elusive baptisms, and to find information from parts of the
world that aren't well-served by subscription
websites. It's essential to register at FamilySearch,
but it's free, and they won’t pester you to join their church.
FreeBMD, the first
site to offer online access to the GRO birth, marriage, and death indexes for
England & Wales, though for many years the indexes were incomplete (even
now the coverage is patchy for years after 1983, which was their original
target end-point). FreeBMD makes
it particularly easy to see which indexed entries are on the same register page,
and this makes it easier to spot errors and omissions.
FreeReg has
transcribed entries from parish registers across Britain, though the collection
is much stronger in some counties than others. There's
inevitably some overlap with other sites, but the FreeReg
transcripts often include information that hasn’t been noted by other transcribers,
such as maiden names.
General Register Office – the GRO
is the not only the cheapest place to order birth, marriage, and death
certificates, they have free online indexes of births and deaths which were
compiled in the early years of this century using the registers. By contrast
the indexes at other sites are based on the original quarterly indexes, also
compiled by the GRO, but using different protocols.
Other
sites that I recommend include:
Online Parish
Clerks are volunteers who collect and make available online information
about individual parishes; the coverage varies enormously across the country,
but Lancashire and Cornwall stand out.
The
National Archives has an excellent collection of more than 350 research
guides which cover topics as varied as Aliens, Bankrupts, Coastguard officers, Wills,
and the Women's Land army. It's the ideal place to
start whenever you're researching a topic that's new to you. TNA also hosts Discovery, which holds
more than 32 million descriptions of records held by The National Archives and
more than 2,500 other archives across the country.
This
is just a very small selection of the free sites that
can help family historians, one that's based on my own research routine – but there
are tens of thousands of other sites.
An
excellent place to find out about other free resources is the LostCousins forum, which is itself free,
and you don’t need to be a member to view the advice posted by others (though
if you want to post questions or advice of your own you'll need to meet the modest
qualification for membership, ie your Match
Potential – shown on your My Summary page – needs to be 1 or more).
Finally,
a reminder that local libraries often offer free access to subscription sites,
and that during lockdown some sites that are normally only accessible from within
the library can be used at home. I haven’t borrowed a
book from a library since I was at university almost half a century ago, but my
membership of Essex Libraries has been incredibly useful since I began
researching my family history!
Major
update to the National Burial Index
Findmypast
have added more than 3.4 million records to the National Burial Index, which now includes
over 16.8 million burials from England & Wales. You can see a list of the parishes
included here (warning – it’s a very long list, so will take a while to load).
Black sheep flocking to Ancestry
Do
you have criminals in your tree? Four record sets added to Ancestry in January
could help you hunt them down:
UK, Calendar of Prisoners, 1868-1929
UK, Registers of Habitual Criminals and Police
Gazettes, 1834-1934
UK, After-Trial Calendar of Prisoners,
1855-1931
UK, Prison Commission Records, 1770-1951
We
tend to think of bigamy as a purely historical crime, one that dates back to the days before divorce became easier and more
affordable – to the best of my knowledge the only bigamist in my tree was the wife
of my 4th cousin once removed, who was sentenced to 6 months imprisonment in
1945. But who could hope to get away with bigamy in the age of Facebook?
Who
indeed? One optimist was Maurice Gibney, who had agreed to part with his wife,
Yvonne, but didn't bother with the paperwork before
marrying again – perhaps he thought that by marrying in Oman he would be 'under
the radar'. According to this Daily Mail article
Yvonne spotted the second wedding on Facebook
and the outcome was a 6 month suspended sentence for Maurice.
Mother's Day sale at Ancestry UK SAVE 25%
Ancestry
DNA tests work for everyone, whatever their gender or orientation – so the fact
that Ancestry UK's latest offer is associated with Mother's Day is purely a
marketing opportunity for them, and a moneysaving opportunity for you.
By
now most people reading this newsletter will have taken a DNA test, but if –
like me – you tested several years ago you probably tested with another company
(Ancestry didn't begin selling their test in the UK
until 2016). Ancestry don’t accept uploads of DNA results
from other companies, so the only way to compare your DNA against Ancestry's
vast database (approaching 20 million) is to test with them, as I did in 2017.
Alternatively,
invite your brother or sister to test, as I did in 2016 – they share your ancestors so their DNA is just as good as yours.
Of
course, if you're fortunate enough to have one or both
parents still living, they're the ones who should test. For example, my
mother-in-law has more matches (15,353) than my wife (12,937) even though my
wife's matches are from both sides of her tree. But if your parents are no
longer living, perhaps there are siblings who could test? Their DNA is just as
relevant, because your aunts and uncles share the same ancestors as one of your
parents.
Ancestry.co.uk
(UK only) REDUCED FROM £79 TO £59 (plus shipping) - ENDS 31ST MARCH
Free DNA uploads ENDS SUNDAY
Until
Sunday you can transfer your DNA to MyHeritage and "get all advanced DNA
features free". Whilst I don’t find their system as
user-friendly as Ancestry, it's a great way to get more matches with genetic cousins.
To take advantage of the offer just follow this link.
Note:
in case you're wondering, I have tried the MyHeritage tool that animates a
still photograph of an long-dead ancestor – spooky!
Masterclass: How to make the most of your DNA
test
Note: I've updated
this Masterclass since it was published in March 2020
We
all have 'brick walls' in our trees - in some cases because our ancestors were
illegitimate, in others because of deficiencies in the records. Fortunately, because
our DNA is inherited from our ancestors it's also a
record of our ancestry – one that can not only overcome gaps in the archives but
also provide us with a way of checking that our research is correct.
You
probably don’t have samples of your ancestors' DNA to
compare yours against - though it's technically possible to extract DNA from hair
or a postage stamp, it's not a service that mainstream companies offer. But there
are lots of other people who do have samples for comparison – your cousins. They
inherited their DNA from their ancestors, and whilst most of their ancestors will
be different from yours, any segments of DNA that you share were almost
certainly inherited from your common ancestor(s).
Note:
anyone who shares some of your ancestors is a cousin of yours, no matter how
distant the relationship; in fact, distant cousins are particularly useful when
it comes to knocking down 'brick walls', though close cousins can also play a
part.
We
can’t all be DNA experts – and the good news is that
provided you follow the advice in this Masterclass, you'll be able to get amazing
results even if you don’t understand the first thing about the science behind DNA.
Indeed there are plenty of people who do know quite a
lot about DNA who would probably achieve more if only they stuck to the simple strategies
in this Masterclass!
Here's all you really need to know:
· Most of the DNA tests
on offer to family historians, and the only ones you should be seriously considering,
are autosomal DNA tests; they can taken by both males and
females, and they have the potential to solve puzzles anywhere in your family
tree within the last 6 or 7 generations (around 250 years).
· All
of
your DNA comes from your ancestors, but you inherit only half of your parents' autosomal
DNA, they only inherited half of their parents' DNA, and so on
· Unlike personal traits
and some hereditary diseases, DNA doesn’t skip a generation - you can't possibly
inherit a segment of DNA from a grandparent unless your parent inherited it first
· Just because you and
your cousins share ancestors this doesn't necessarily mean that you'll share
DNA - you could have inherited different bits of DNA from the ancestors you
share; the closer the cousin, the more DNA you're likely to share, but despite this distant cousins are often more useful (partly because there
are so many more of them!)
Which test should you
choose?
Don’t make your decision based on price; although
all of the main DNA tests on offer are technically similar, what you're looking
for is to get as many matches with genetic cousins as possible. Ancestry have by far the biggest database, with approaching 20 million
users, and the only way to get access to that database is to buy the Ancestry
test.
Most
other test providers allow transfers – but Ancestry don't,
and that's why it’s crucial to test with them. You can always upload your data
to other sites later, but you can't go the other way. Another
reason to choose the Ancestry test is the way they integrate DNA with family
trees – it works really well.
The
reason I tested my DNA, and persuaded some of my cousins to join in, was to
knock down 'brick walls' that conventional research couldn't
breach. The sad reality is that if our 'brick walls' have resisted our efforts
for years (or even decades), it’s unlikely that
they're ever going to come crashing down if all we have to go on are the
records that have survived down the centuries.
DNA
can help by bridging gaps in the records and compensating for errors, but it means
adopting new and unfamiliar strategies, and utilising somewhat different
techniques to the ones that we're used to. But if you
follow the steps in this Masterclass you won’t have to
go through the steep learning curve that I did, nor will you make the mistakes
that I did in the early days, before Ancestry started selling their test in the
UK.
Before
you even get your results.....
DNA
isn't a substitute for researching the records – you
need both. So make sure that you do all the conventional,
records-based, research you reasonably can while you’re waiting for your
DNA results, so that when they come through you're ready to go. Don’t leave it until the last moment, because in my
experience the results invariably arrive well ahead of schedule, typically 4
weeks or less rather than the 6-8 weeks that Ancestry quote.
There
are two types of cousins
Genetic
cousins
are the cousins you find by testing your DNA – but usually you won't know exactly
how you're related to them, indeed you might not have a
clue what the connection is! And that's where documented cousins come in
– they're the cousins you can fit onto your family
tree because you know precisely how they're related to you.
The
most valuable documented cousins are the ones who are also researching their
family tree, because they're more likely to be prepared to take a DNA test –
indeed, if they’re LostCousins members it's quite likely that they've tested already,
in which case connecting with them will not only make your DNA test more
valuable to you, it will make their DNA test more
valuable to them – in other words, it's in both of your interests to
collaborate.
So
that leads us to a key step in the process…..
Connect
with your cousins
Complete
your My Ancestors page at the LostCousins
site, ensuring that you have entered ALL of the
cousins (no matter how distant) that you can find on the 1881 Census. Yes, it
might take you an hour or two, but skipping this important step could be
expensive – if you don't find some 'lost cousins' who
have already tested you're likely to end up paying for known cousins to test.
But
it’s not just about money – connecting with documented
cousins who have already tested could save you hundreds of hours in time spent
fruitlessly analysing your DNA matches. DNA is like a jigsaw puzzle – the more
pieces you can fit in place the easier it is to figure out how everything else
fits in.
Tip: start with all
the relatives you can identify in 1841, whether or not
you can actually find them on that census, then trace each of your branches (sometimes
referred to as collateral lines) through to 1881. Remember, ALL of your living
cousins are descended from the branches of your tree, so every branch and every
twig is a potential link to a 'lost cousin'.
On
my own My Cousins page there are 17 cousins who have tested (indicated
by 'Y' in the DNA column), and 2 who are considering it (shown by an 'M'). If
there is no entry in the column it's worth checking with your cousin in case they forgot to update their My Details page when
they tested.
How
your cousins can best help
Shared
matches are the key – if you and a documented cousin match the same genetic
cousin then it’s overwhelmingly likely that the
genetic cousin is descended from one of the ancestral lines that you and your
documented cousin share. When you view a DNA match with any cousin at Ancestry you
can click Shared Matches to find out which other cousins you both
match.
Note:
Ancestry only show shared matches where both matches exceed 20cM.
If
your cousins also tested with Ancestry ask if they would be prepared to make
you a Viewer of their DNA results – this allows you to see ALL of their matches, whether they share them with you or
not. Of course, you should offer to make then a Viewer of your own
results, especially if they're actively researching
(many people who take DNA tests aren't, of course).
Note:
as a Viewer or Collaborator you can see another user's matches and their
ethnicity results, but you don’t have access to their raw
DNA results.
Being
able to see ALL of a documented cousin's matches
enables you to benefit from the matches they've made with genetic cousins who
share your ancestors but who don’t appear in your own list. Remember what I
said earlier: just because you and a cousin share ancestors doesn’t
mean that you'll share DNA. For example, the chance of two 5th cousins sharing detectable
DNA is only around one-third, so most of your 5th cousins who have tested won't appear in your list of matches – but they might appear
in your cousins' lists, so the more documented cousins you collaborate with,
the greater your chances of knocking down your 'brick walls'.
Everything
I've written about so far can be done before
you get your DNA results, so that you can be ready to "hit the ground
running" when they arrive. But if you've already
had your DNA results it's not too late to go back and fill in the gaps – indeed,
it would be foolish not to.
How to
process your DNA matches
I'm going to assume for the purpose of this
article that you tested with Ancestry - but don't stop reading if you tested
elsewhere because I'll be writing about some strategies you can use, albeit not
as effectively, at other sites.
At
Ancestry you'll typically have over 10000 matches with genetic cousins, and of
those all but about 3% will be with 'distant' cousins, ie where the estimated relationship is 5th cousin or
more distant. So you might think that the best
strategy might be to focus on the top 3%, on the basis that if you can't make
head or tail of those matches, your chance of resolving the more distant
matches is negligible.
But
you couldn't be more wrong – your 'brick walls' are most
likely to be solved by matches that Ancestry regards as distant matches, and
this is partly because nobody, not even Ancestry, can accurately determine precisely
how close a DNA match is once you get beyond 1st cousins. Simply working your
way through the list from the top will lead to wasted time and frustration, not
least because many of your cousins won't have trees,
and many of them won't reply to your messages.
Fortunately 5 years of using Ancestry DNA, and almost a
decade of using DNA have taught me a few things. Here's how to get the best results
and avoid all the wasted time and frustration…..
Upload
a tree and connect it to your DNA results
I
have a public tree connected to my DNA results, but it only includes my direct
ancestors – this makes it useful for my cousins, but of little interest to name
collectors and the like. It also protects the privacy of my living cousins, since their branches aren't included. You don’t need to have a public tree, but you do need to have a
tree connected to your DNA to make use of the advanced features which I'm going
to tell you about next.
Common
Ancestors (no Ancestry subscription required)
The Common Ancestors feature, which utilises online trees to figure
out how you and some of your matches are connected. It's something you could do
yourself if you had unlimited time and a brain like a computer,
but having Ancestry do it for you will provide a real boost.
About
1.4% of my DNA matches are flagged as having common ancestors: but what really stands
out is that more than half of them are distant matches, and some of them have very small trees, some with under 10 relatives. You might be
wondering how Ancestry can identify one of my matches as a 4th cousin once
removed when he has only 5 people in his tree – it’s because
they're looking at ALL the tens of millions of online trees in their database,
not just the ones that belong to my DNA matches. (That's why you'd
need unlimited time and a brain like a computer to do it yourself!)
To
find out how you're connected click to reveal
the common ancestor(s); click the name of the ancestor to see how the two of
you are descended from that person. (The information in the first column will
be based on the tree you've connected to your DNA
results.)
Always
bear in mind that online trees often include errors – just because you have a
DNA match with someone doesn't mean that their tree is
correct, although it certainly improves the odds! However
the information for each generation will usually be supported by multiple trees
uploaded by different users, which is another encouraging factor.
When
I've verified my connection I first include a brief
note against the DNA match at Ancestry, then add the cousin to the tree on my own
computer, which often entails adding a new branch. At this point it may be apparent
that there are relatives I can add to the My
Ancestors page at the LostCousins site (to find further cousins), and doing it there and then makes it sure that it isn’t forgotten.
ThruLines™ (no subscription
necessary)
Ancestry's
ThruLines™ feature uses Ancestry trees in an attempt to knock down 'brick walls'. It was introduced
before Common Ancestors, which it overlaps to an extent, but importantly
ThruLines™ doesn't
require an Ancestry subscription.
When
you access ThruLines™ it displays the
direct ancestors on your tree, generation by generation, and as you move the
mouse over each box it indicates matches with genetic cousins who share that
ancestor. Even if you don’t have an Ancestry
subscription you can see how you’re connected to those cousins, and as with Common
Ancestors the algorithm utilises all Ancestry trees, public and private searchable,
not just those that belong ot your DNA matches.
However,
if you don’t have an Ancestry subscription you can't view the trees of people
who aren't DNA matches, and even for those who are matches, you can only see 4
generations of their direct ancestors (ie
back to their great-great grandparents). Nevertheless, ThruLines™
is a very useful feature that will provide many clues.
Tip:
you don’t need an Ancestry subscription to view a tree
if you have been invited by the tree owner.
Where
ThruLines™ really pays off is when it knocks
down 'brick walls', by suggesting possible ancestors who don't
appear on your tree. These are highlighted in green (rather than pink or blue),
or with a DNA symbol (indicating that the information has been taken from the
tree of one of your DNA matches – which increases the chance that it’s correct, though doesn’t make it certain). The
screenshot below shows an example – not from my tree, by the way, so please don’t contact me if the names seem familiar!
Even
if ThruLines™ doesn't
break down any of your 'brick walls' immediately, bear in mind that it will be
updated as other users test, and as those who have already tested add to their
trees. Furthermore, it will almost certainly help you to identify branches of
your tree that you didn’t know about previously –
allowing you to add branches to your tree, and entries to your My Ancestors
page (to find even more cousins).
As
you've worked your way through your Common Ancestors
matches, and your ThruLines™ you'll have
been able to make notes against many of your matches to indicate how you're
connected to them. But still the vast majority of your
matches, even your close matches, will have nothing against them. The next step
is to fill in some of the gaps by making use of Shared Matches.
Shared
Matches (no subscription necessary)
There
are two distinct ways to use Ancestry's Shared Matches feature, and they
won't necessarily produce the same results – this is
because Ancestry only shows shared matches of 20cM or more.
The
first way is to work through your close matches (the ones who share 20cM or
more with you); this will reveal which of your other close matches they also
share, even if they don’t have trees of their own, or
have minimal trees. Don’t jump to unjustified
conclusions – for example, just because cousin A is a shared match with cousin
B, who shares your Smith and Jones lines, doesn't mean that cousin A also shares
those lines, because their connection could be further back in time.
The
second way to make use of Shared Matches is to start with the cousins
whose connection you already know, thanks to Common Ancestors and ThruLines™. Many of them will be distant
cousins of yours, ie they
share less than 20cM with you, but that doesn’t stop them sharing more than
20cM with some of your close cousins.
The
latter approach has the potential to pick up more shared matches, so it’s worth considering.
What
to do next…..
Making
use of the simple tools that Ancestry provides is a great way to make some headway,
but you're really only scratching the surface - it's
likely that your connection to over 95% of your DNA matches is still a complete
mystery.
What
you need now are some simple, straightforward strategies that will lead you to
the matches most likely to help you knock down your 'brick walls':
Strategy
1: search by surname
Ancestry
allow you to search the trees of your matches by surname,
so that you can identify cousins who have the same ancestral surname in their
tree as one of your ancestors.
There
are two factors that make this a particularly useful strategy: one is that the
search only looks at ancestral surnames, so ignores names that only appear in
branches of your match's tree; the other is that the search looks at private
trees as well as public trees (provided those private trees are designated as
searchable, which almost all are).
Here's how to go about it:
Strategy
2: search by birthplace
As
you will have discovered when working through your list of surnames, most of
the time the surname of the ancestors you share with a DNA cousin doesn't appear in both trees - indeed, it's quite possible
that the surname of your common ancestor doesn't appear in either tree!
The
problem is, when your female ancestors married they generally
took their husband's surname. This makes it more difficult to research female
ancestors whose children were born before the commencement of civil registration,
since baptism registers don't usually give the
mother's maiden surname - usually the only solution is to find the marriage. By
contrast you can continue researching your male ancestors even if you can't find their marriage.
Of
course, this problem doesn't simply affect you and your
research - it affects your cousins too; most researchers' trees become increasingly
sparse with each generation. If you've only identified
10% of your 256 6G grandparents and your cousins have only identified 10% of theirs,
the odds of finding out how you're related to a 7th cousin simply by comparing
the names in your trees are pretty remote (a little more than 1% in this
example, not great odds).
Another
way to figure out the connections to your DNA cousins is to look for
geographical overlaps - and here's how to go about it:
Strategy
3: look for overlaps with the more unusual components of your ethnicity
Most
readers of this newsletter have mostly British, Irish, or western European
ancestry. But some of you will have Jewish ancestors, or ancestors from outside
Europe, and whilst ethnicity estimates can be quite misleading, they do provide
another way of analysing your matches.
Here's what Ancestry show for one of my DNA
cousins:
If
Ancestry had detected a Jewish component of my own ethnicity this would be one
of the matches I'd be looking at very closely.
Strategy
4: look for the 'elephant in the room'
Because
we all have 'brick walls' in our trees there are parts of our ancestry that are
a closed book - yet there will inevitably be clues amongst our matches, if only
we look for them. For example, if - like me - you don't
know of any Irish ancestors, but have lots of matches with cousins who do, you
might begin to wonder whether one of your 'brick walls' is concealing a
connection to Ireland. I can't provide you with a
step-by-step guide - it's all about awareness (Louis Pasteur said that "chance
favours the prepared mind").
But
beware of the common situation in which you share a single DNA segment with
lots of people who all match each other. This suggests that the people you’re matched with come from an endogamous population, one
in which people generally marry within the same community - in this case you
would probably do well to ignore the matches altogether as any connection is
likely to be a long way back.
More
tips
.
Technical
information
Most
of the matches we make with DNA cousins will be many generations back, since we
have many more distant cousins than we do close cousins. The final column of
the table below indicates roughly how many cousins you might expect to find if
you and they all took the Ancestry DNA test:
Based
on Table 2 from: Henn BM, Hon L, Macpherson JM, Eriksson N, Saxonov
S, Pe'er I, et al. (2012) Cryptic Distant Relatives Are Common in Both Isolated and Cosmopolitan
Genetic Samples. PLoS ONE 7(4): e34267. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0034267
Revised
using Ancestry DNA estimates for the chances of detecting cousins and the
expected number of 1st to 6th cousins for those of British
ancestry; the numbers for 7th to 10th cousins are my own guesstimates
Of
course, in practice only a small fraction of your cousins will have tested - even
Ancestry, by far the biggest providers of autosomal tests, have sold fewer than
20 million tests - but you can nevertheless reckon that the cousins you're matched with will be distributed roughly in
proportion to the figures shown above. In other words, over 98% of your matches
will be with relatives who are at best 5th cousins, and
could well be 8th cousins or even more distant. This won't
necessarily be apparent when you look at your list of matches because there's a
tendency for matches to appear closer or more distant than they really are.
Tip: Ancestry won't show any of your DNA matches as more distant than '5th
to 8th cousin', but it's very likely that amongst them there are many who are
more distant. Once you get beyond 3rd cousins the length of the shared
segment(s) is only a very rough guide to how closely you are related - you could
share a 20cM segment with a 10th cousin, but no detectable DNA with a 3rd
cousin. The same limitations apply at other sites too, of course.
This
amazing chart from Blaine Bettinger's blog shows how variable the
amounts can be, and how this affects the amount of DNA shared by more distant
relatives:
In
each box there are three figures: the lowest and highest amounts shared between
relatives of each order, together with the average. However
the average only takes into account matches - if there was no detectable shared
DNA it isn’t taken into account in the averages (but does show in the range).
What
you will notice is that the average stabilises at around 12 or 13cM even for
the most distant relationships in the chart. For example, you can see from the first
table that the average DNA shared between 8th cousins is just 0.055cM, but the
average in this chart is over 200 times greater. How can this happen? It's because unless there's a matching segment of at least 6
to 10cM most companies won't report a match at all - and because the chart only
includes matches which were actually detected, it bumps up the average quite
considerably.
Very interesting, you might think - but what does it
actually mean in practice? What it tells us is that neither you, nor I, nor any
of the DNA companies can reliably predict how closely we are related to our
more distant cousins. So don’t rely on the testing
company's estimate of how closely you’re related to a cousin, look at the chart
and figure out what's possible, then consider what's likely (this means, for example,
taking into account your age and that of your cousin).
Even
if your DNA match is with a 5th cousin, someone who shares your great-great-great-great
grandparents, it probably won’t be obvious how the two
of you are related. I don't know about you, but I certainly
can't say who all of my 4G grandparents were - indeed, I don't even know for
sure who all my 3G grandparents were. I've got several
'brick walls' in the last 6 generations (though fewer than before I tested my
DNA) - and most researchers, including my DNA cousins, are probably in the same
situation. Go back another generation and there are even more gaps - and it
just gets worse from then on.
In
practice most of the ancestors that link us to our DNA cousins are on the other
side of a 'brick wall' - and this could be a 'brick wall' in your own tree, in
your cousin's tree, or both trees. What a fascinating challenge!
Could you fit into Winston Churchill's shoes?
Winston Churchill would
be on most people's list of Great Britons – in 2002 he came top of a poll in
which over a million people took part, whilst in a 2015 survey only Florence
Nightingale got more votes. So perhaps fitting into Winston Churchill's shoes
would be a tall order….. but how about his slippers?
Next
week a pair of Winston Churchill's slippers are coming up for auction – no shoe
size is quoted, but they're said to be 29cm long, so too
small for me, but possibly a snug fit for somebody reading this article.
Monogrammed
and leather-soled, these are no ordinary slippers. They were made by the
long-established firm of Nikolaus Tuczek, a bootmaker
whose first London shop opened in 1853, and continued trading at different
London premises until 1970 when the business was acquired by the bespoke
shoemaker John Lobb (whose own history dates back to
1866). The records of Nikolaus Tuczek Ltd are held in
the City of Westminster Archives, on permanent loan.
The
advert below is one of many which appeared in The Sporting Gazette during
1869.
Image
© THE BRITISH LIBRARY BOARD. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Used by kind permission of
Findmypast.
In
the 1869 advertisement above, the reference to 'H.R.H. the Prince of Wales' isn’t
to Princes Charles, but to his great-great grandfather, who became Edward VII; similarly the reference to 'H.R.H. the Duke of Edinburgh' isn’t
to Prince Philip (he's not quite that old), but to Prince Alfred, 2nd son of
Queen Victoria.
It's a reminder that whilst the phrase 'The Prince
of Denmark' generally refers to the title character of Shakespeare's Hamlet
there have been other Princes of Denmark. Nevertheless, it might surprise you
to know that Prince Philip, the husband of Queen Elizabeth II and current Duke
of Edinburgh, was once a Prince of Denmark (as well as a Prince of Greece). He
gave up both titles in July 1947 before the announcement of his engagement to
the Queen, and would have been plain Philip
Mountbatten when they married in November 1947 had his future father-in-law,
King George VI, not bestowed on him the titles of Duke of Edinburgh, Earl of Merioneth and Baron Greenwich as well as allowing him to
style himself His Royal Highness.
The
Royal families of Europe were notorious for marrying their cousins, and the Queen
and Prince Philip are 3rd cousins - they are both great-great grandchildren of Queen
Victoria.
History
records that Queen Victoria had a headache on her wedding night, nevertheless children
arrived quickly enough – Princess Victoria was born just 40 weeks and 5 days
after the marriage, and there was only a gap of 50 weeks after that before Prince
Albert Edward (later Edward VII) arrived.
According
to the advice
on the National Health Service website a mother who exclusively breastfeeds her
baby is unlikely to become pregnant again during the 6 months after the child's
birth. However, according to this article
on the Brunel University website, Queen Victoria didn’t believe that upper class
mothers should breastfeed their children, advocating instead the employment of
wet nurses:
"A child can never be as well nursed by
a lady of rank and nervous and refined temperament – for the less feeling and
more like an animal the wet nurse is, the better for the child."
Victoria
was apparently not amused when two of her own daughters chose to breastfeed
their own children, mocking one by naming a cow after her. In my family tree intervals
of 18-24 months between births were typical prior to WW1, which suggests that for
the working class breastfeeding was the rule, rather
than the exception. You might get some insight into the practices in your own
family by calculating the gaps between successive children.
Note:
this article
from the Journal of Perinatal Education discusses issues relating to breastfeeding,
wet nursing, and feeding bottles in earlier times.
Save on Who Do You Think You Are? magazine EXCLUSIVE
I've been a reader of Who Do You Think You Are?
magazine ever since it launched. Even though I have many sources of information
there are always a few things in the magazine that I didn’t
already know, plus a few that I'd forgotten, so I always read it as soon as
possible after it arrives through my letterbox (after disinfecting it, of
course!).
I'm delighted that I've once again been able to
persuade Who Do You Think You Are? to offer a special deal for LostCousins
members - in the UK you can get 6 issues of the magazine for just £9.99 (less
than you'd pay at the newsagents for 2 issues), whilst for overseas members there
are big discounts on 13 issue subscriptions.
To
take advantage of this offer and support LostCousins please follow this link.
Note:
if you are in Canada or New Zealand the prices quoted are in US dollars and Australian
dollars respectively.
In
the last issue I wrote
about the pen-friends who began corresponding as the result of a message in a bottle,
and continued the correspondence for over half a century. As so often happens a
LostCousins member came forward with an even more impressive story. I'll hand you over to Dorothy:
"I was very interested in the item in
the latest newsletter about a 50-year pen-friendship
as I also am in a long pen-friendship.
"My friend Dorothy (yes, another one)
and I began our correspondence when we were still at school in 1944. She lived
in Melbourne, Australia, and I lived in Leytonstone, east London. We are now
both 90 years old so we have been writing to each
other for over 76 years. That's got to be a record,
don't you think? We started writing using the old blue air-letters where you
could only write one sheet and then you folded it and stuck down the edges. We
were rationed here in the UK for several more years and from time
to time Dorothy's parents sent us wonderful parcels, carefully packed
and stitched with a canvas cover.
"Dorothy now lives in Sydney, she is a
widow with three children, all living quite far from her in Perth, Canberra and
western Victoria, whereas I am lucky in that my daughter lives only 10 minutes walk from me.
"My friend and I have met many times
although I've only been to Australia once, in 1991,
but my husband, who did a lot of travelling in his working life, used to manage
a weekend with Dorothy and her husband whenever he got as far as Sydney.
"She first visited Europe when she was
about 20. It was then quite the thing
for young Australians, New Zealanders, and Canadians to 'do' Europe and she
travelled both ways by ship, which must have been a wonderful experience: going
through the Suez Canal and stopping off to see the Pyramids etc.
"In the early 1970s, married with three
young children, she came to live for a year on the Essex/Suffolk border, as her
husband, Peter, was on a year's sabbatical from his lectureship in French at
Sydney University and was studying for a post-graduate degree at Essex
University. We also lived in Essex at the time so managed to see a fair bit of
them.
"In the 1980s Peter came again and had
been recording French dialects in Canada and France. He persuaded us to change from writing
letters to recording on tapes which we did for a long while, but I hated it.
"Over the years other visits have
followed. In 1998 they came with us to France where we took a Holiday Property
Bond cottage in Brittany as Peter wanted to 'blend in' and not be labelled a
'tourist'.
"In 2002 Dorothy came over again with
the Sydney Philharmonic Choir to sing with the Birmingham Philharmonic at the Proms (Mahler's 8th Symphony for
a Thousand Voices), and Peter came with her.
"When emails became the easiest method
of communication we were happy to change to these and
so it has continued, apart from the odd phone call, when we can remember to get
the timing right. At one time Dorothy had an interest in tracing her family
history and I did some research for her, as her father, who I had the pleasure
of meeting twice, was born in Folkestone and was taken by his family to
Australia about 1909.
"I hope I haven't bored you with this
long tale but reading about the message in the bottle made me think of all the
different ways Dorothy and I have kept in touch."
I
certainly wasn't bored by this wonderful tale of a pen-friendship
between two Dorothy's that has already lasted more than three-quarters of a
century – long may it continue!
Another
tale of pen-friends came from John:
"In 1966 I was hitching around Europe. I
had had a French penfriend from school which had fizzled out. But in Dusseldorf,
Germany, as I was looking for the next lift, a couple of adults approached me
in a side street and asked if their son Josef could be my penfriend. I agreed
but that too fizzled out after a few years, even though I'd
studied German at school.
"But roll on 2019 and the wonders of
Facebook (plus my extra-terrestrial powers of locating people from family
history) and I found him...after FIFTY years. Happy and, like me, now with his
own family."
Full
marks to John for tracking down Josef – I can’t even
remember the name of the French girl I corresponded with in the early 1960s.
The experiences of John and Dorothy reminded me that we don’t always keep in
touch with the cousins we discover during our family history researches,
which is a shame, because even those who aren’t actively researching are likely
to be interested in hearing about our discoveries.
I
keep in touch with my distant cousins by including them on my Christmas card
list, which means they get a 'round robin' from me once a year. What do you do,
I wonder?
My
wife received her first COVID-19 vaccination this week, and it's
now nearly 4 weeks since my jab, so I'm pretty well protected. Nevertheless we've no plans to change our habits in the foreseeable
future – if we need outdoor exercise there's plenty that needs doing in the
garden at this time of year!
Rates
of infection are continuing to fall in the UK, and I've
updated my chart so that you can see how effective lockdown and the vaccination
rollout have been:
Daily cases numbers: 7-day average |
|||
|
|
|
|
Week to |
Cases |
Change |
|
11-Jan-21 |
57851 |
|
|
18-Jan-21 |
44997 |
-22% |
|
25-Jan-21 |
33738 |
-25% |
|
01-Feb-21 |
23732 |
-30% |
|
08-Feb-21 |
17714 |
-25% |
|
15-Feb-21 |
12580 |
-29% |
|
22-Feb-21 |
11186 |
-11% |
|
01-Mar-21 |
7980 |
-29% |
|
But
even if cases fall at 30% a week from now on, there will still be almost 2000 a
day at the end of March, between 3 and 4 times the level of last July – and we were
still being very cautious even then. Now that nearly 40%
of the adult population in the UK have had their first dose the opportunities
for the virus to mutate are greatly reduced, but I'm
still expecting that we'll be offered a booster in the autumn, and I don’t think
anyone will be surprised if it becomes an annual ritual, like the flu jab.
The WDYTYA offer link was inadvertently truncated, so didn't work, but it has
been corrected. The Masterclass has also been updated to show that Ancestry no longer require a
subscription for Common Ancestors.
I hope you've picked up some useful tips
from this issue – but please remember that the primary reason that LostCousins
exists is to connect members who are researching the same ancestors, so that we
can ALL get back further on the lines where 'brick walls' are barring our way. An
hour of your time spent adding to your My Ancestors page could make a
world of difference – is it really so much to ask?
Peter Calver
Founder, LostCousins
© Copyright 2021 Peter Calver
Please do NOT copy or republish any part of this newsletter without
permission - which is only granted in the most exceptional circumstances. However, you MAY link to this newsletter or
any article in it without asking for permission - though why not invite other
family historians to join LostCousins instead, since standard membership (which
includes the newsletter), is FREE? To link to a specific article right-click on
the article name in the contents list at the top of the newsletter.