The Family Tree Problem Solver: Tried-And-True Tactics for Tracing Elusive Ancestors (11 page)

Although many “missing persons” may be found by using the methods described in this chapter, there undoubtedly are cases in which the census taker clearly did not enumerate the family you seek. Following are some of the reasons for such failures that I have encountered in my own experience. It is important to see whether any of these situations apply to your circumstances before you abandon your search.

1.
Jurisdictional or boundary confusion or lost records in a part of the state left a “hole” in the census enumeration.

Figure 3-1
Map of the Douglas-Christian, Benton-Camden-Hickory county boundaries, Missouri.

2.
Geographic isolation of the family may result in omission from the census. Learn the trail of the census taker by matching contemporary roads and neighbors. Once you determine his route, you will know if he omitted one family, several families, or an entire area.

3.
Life events such as births, funerals, marriages, unexpected trips, and summer vacations may have taken families away from their usual place of residence at the time the census taker was in the area.

4.
The family may have been migrating during the census year and thus may have been in an unexpected place, or they may have been so new to a location that the enumerator simply didn't know they were there. Although the winter months were the preferred times for travel because roads were frozen and passable, if the family was moving livestock, they may have waited until grass was available in the spring or summer. Some may have told a census taker they were “just passing through” when he asked about their residence and thus were not counted; others may have been unknown to members of the community because they had not yet settled.

Consult other documents to determine how long the family remained in the old location and by what date they must have left. Check additional records to establish at what point they had definitely arrived in the new community. If you cannot produce such evidence, you may still be able to locate the family later in an unexpected place. Unless a family was making the big jump to California or Oregon, many migrants seemed to go back and forth between their old homes and their new ones. Often they would clear the land and begin establishing a homestead, then return for other family members — or to settle old business, such as a parent's estate. They might be out of the neighborhood temporarily just at the time the census taker was passing through. They
should
have been listed, but weren't.

Perhaps the family moved into a new territory. The area may not yet have been surveyed, or officially organized or attached. Perhaps it was too distant from the seat of government for newcomers to be noticed. In essence, anyone living in unorganized territory was squatting, and the census taker may not have been aware of them. The territory may not have been organized well enough to conduct a careful and comprehensive census. Oregon and California, for example, experienced such floods of new settlers in the mid-nineteenth century that census takers simply could not keep up with the constant flux. We know there are huge gaps in the censuses of both these areas.

5.
The family was new to the area, so the enumerator was unaware of them even though the community was organized and functional.
Newcomers were more likely to be among the missing in a census, because neither the census taker nor the neighbors may have become acquainted with them.
This would be true especially if the terrain were mountainous or hilly and the family had settled in a remote “holler.”

6.
The family was enumerated, but not in the expected place. Perhaps they moved for a short time to a location unknown to you. As new territories opened, people often moved into them for short periods of time to determine whether the area was suitable for permanent settlement. Sometimes they stayed; sometimes they became “go-backers” who returned to prior residences. If such moves occurred during the year the census was taken, you may think that the family was missed, when actually they are listed in a different location.

7.
Sometimes a family moved but did not follow normal migration patterns, or did not move with the expected neighbors and friends.

8.
Death and the remarriage of the spouse may obscure the individual for whom you are searching. Of the 1,000 pioneers of Southwest Missouri that I have been studying, 180 had died before the 1850 census. I wonder how many of the 95 I have not been able to locate had also died by this time, but have been “lost” because their spouses had either died or remarried. When a frontier woman was widowed, the likelihood that she would remarry within ten years was very high. Yet, unless marriage records for the time were complete, the woman you are looking for may be listed under a name she no longer carried. Her first husband is absent from the census because he was no longer alive, while she is hidden within it because she had changed her name.

The importance of studying communities is emphasized over and over in methodology and problem-solving lectures. Knowledge of your ancestor's neighborhood as well as the collateral family can often prove valuable when looking for a “missing” name on the census. As a final lesson on the importance of community when working with the census, let's examine the case of William R. Devin. In a local Missouri history, he was said to be from Lincoln County, Tennessee. However, he is not listed in the printed 1830 Lincoln County census, which was compiled by a reputable publisher. When I checked deeds in Lincoln County, I learned that he purchased land there in 1829 and 1832. Family records stated that his son was born there in 1830 — but I still couldn't find him in the census. I studied records of his land purchases and sales, and because they were surveyed on the metes and bounds system, I learned the names of his neighbors. I then located those neighbors on the printed census and found William's brother Clayton listed under the surname “Divins.” I then went to the microfilm copy and started two pages ahead of where Clayton and the neighbors were listed and examined each name. In the process, I learned how that census taker fashioned his Ds. Once I detected that pattern, I was able to locate William — whose name appeared as “Owen” rather than as Devin. Unfortunately, the name
Owen
is a common one that appears at least once in nearly every county. It was by knowing both William's relative and his neighborhood that I could be sure that this census listing was the correct one for William Devin.

To provide a complete family record, it is necessary to locate the family in every census in which they should have appeared during their lifetimes.
When we cannot locate an individual or family in an expected place or in a readily available census index, we may erroneously assume that they were missed by the census taker. However, the individual may appear on the census in myriad ways that you may not immediately recognize. When you review census records and find that some of your ancestors are among the “missing,” be sure to check all the above possibilities before assuming that they just aren't there.

T
his chapter will explain and discuss cluster genealogy, and I must warn you, it sounds easier than it is. Cluster genealogy requires learning how to create people from just names, getting to know the people within families both as individuals and as part of the human community, and considering both predictable and unpredictable behavior from your ancestors and their friends and neighbors. It requires working with a large number of records, being able to recognize almost by instinct what is important in the record, and what can be noted or even forgotten. Cluster genealogy is not required in solving all genealogical problems — only the most difficult.

This concept was first introduced into genealogical education by Elizabeth Shown Mills in the Advanced Methodology class at the Institute for Genealogical Historical Research at Samford University in Birmingham, Alabama. She advised her students to get to know the neighbors of the ancestors they were researching. By the 1990s, the idea had started to acquire names: “cluster genealogy,” “associate analysis,” “the neighborhood concept,” and most likely other terms as well.
Cluster genealogy requires looking at a particular family from a broader view than as a single family whose pedigree moves back in a straight line to one progenitor.
Studying ancestors in the full family context has evolved from looking not only for the brothers and sisters of an ancestor, but for other important companions in your ancestor's life as well. Not only are in-laws, collateral family, and associates identified, but these people are then anchored within their own cultural, geographic, and sociological elements. Placing your ancestor and his associates in their historical context not only fleshes them out as individuals, but restores life to their community from the dry pages of unread history books. Undoubtedly, broad family and community research is essential when it becomes necessary to solve the most difficult genealogical problems.

Studying a family within its context probably goes against what may be our very first instinct, and perhaps even the first lesson in genealogy: looking for the family surname. Surely you have encountered people at the library, conferences, or workshops who report, “I have ten thousand names in my computer database” and then ask, “What surnames are you searching?” The more advanced researchers, who have moved beyond the searching of surnames, are always stumped by this question. We are more likely to ask, “What areas are you working in?” or “For what time period?” Narrowing research to a specific locality, to established migration routes, or within a defined time bracket is more likely to aid in finding people with whom to share information.

When we begin genealogical research outside the family's own sources, we usually start with the federal census. Our first job is to find the family household on the most recent census available. Perhaps whoever helped you initially — a teacher, friend, or maybe a librarian — told you, “Don't just look for the ancestral family, but write down every person of that surname living in the county.” Those of us searching families named Johnson, Davis, or Miller, as well as the ubiquitous Smith and Jones, probably groaned audibly. When I began searching my maiden name, Hoffman, in western Pennsylvania, I found myself writing down the names of several dozen Hoffman families — many of whom turned out to be not even slightly related. This is usually the first lesson in searching surnames.

You will also find that printed genealogies devoted to families of one surname are sometimes comprehensive, but more often they follow one line for several generations before beginning to cover sisters, brothers, aunts, uncles, and cousins in the late nineteenth or early twentieth century. Indeed, it was common in the late nineteenth century to believe that most people of a certain surname descended from one individual, such as in the case of James Rising of Suffield, Connecticut, or the proverbial “three brothers who came over together.” In-depth research has found that rarely to be true. An even less likely scenario is that of a family who came to America together and then separated, with one brother who went south, one brother who went west, and one brother who stayed put. The one thing a new immigrant didn't want to happen in his new world was to lose contact with the few people he might know from the old country.

As we learn more about genealogy, we also find that family organizations, newsletters, and reunions usually are devoted to people searching a particular surname or descending from an individual, usually an early colonist. My mother's family always held the Molzen family reunion on May 2. None shared my amusement when I learned that May 2 commemorated the birthday of my great-grandmother — a woman who had been born a Jensen, not a Molzen.

Most genealogists, when they begin their search, are interested primarily in the direct line. On the other hand, there are those who begin by compiling a family history for their grandchildren and include the spouses, in-laws, and female lines (sometimes referred to as “indirect lines”), and they are far ahead of those of us who start by trying to see how far back we can go. The goal of tracing one line backward as far as possible narrows your research to gathering data on certain surnames. Before long, you will find yourself with drawers and filing cabinets full of information on families that are not even slightly related to you. Often, tracing just a surname will lead you on a wild goose chase, or to claim ancestors that later prove to be unrelated to you. Then we have to admit we've been chasing what the well known genealogist Milton Rubincam called “former ancestors.” And then there are those dead ends. Every genealogist encounters dead ends: ancestral lines that stymied people who had been searching for years before we were ever born, and that now stymie us.

More and more of those genealogical puzzles have been unraveled and solved in the last twenty years. Almost every time you pick up a good genealogical journal, you will find an article about a newly discovered relationship, ancestral line, or place of origin. What has changed in our research to make these discoveries possible? New sources show up, of course. Computerized indexes and documents on the Internet have made some material easier to search, and no doubt more people are searching. But research methods have changed as well.
More genealogists are researching families as people connected through relationships, not just through a common name.
We investigate our ancestral families as people who have emotional bonds as well as blood ties, people who have a common history, common traditions, and a commitment to one another. These bonds, relationships, and commitments — and the records that document them — are the factors that can lead to a genealogical breakthrough. Relationships — be they among neighbors, collateral kin, friends, or significant others — are critical to producing the records that make the connections we seek.

To illustrate, let's look at a theoretical example that shows the complexity of names within an extended family. The local newspaper,
The Possum-Trot Postings
, reported a birthday party given for a seventy-year-old resident, Mrs. Jacob Mitchell. Among the children and relatives who attended were Susan Ackason, Lydia Masters, Allen Boyer, Alice Goodman, James Marquis, Fred Short, Hattie McCormick, James McFarland, and Mary Jane Powell. It is difficult not to notice that all these individuals have a different surname. Yet the newspaper said they were all related. Could all of them have been born to Mrs. Mitchell? If so, under what name were they born? What surname is the one of interest? How could you possibly tell from just the information given?

Extensive research could show that Mrs. Sarah Mitchell, whose maiden name was Boyer, married Jacob Mitchell as her third husband. Her first husband was Peter Marquis, so James is her child by her first marriage. So is Hattie, who married: (1) Edward Short (thus Fred is her son and Mrs. Mitchell's grandson), and then (2) Alfred McCormick. Mrs. Mitchell's second husband was Martin Powell, and children by him include Susan, who then married an Ackason; Lydia, who married Charles Masters; Alice, who married Thomas Goodman; and Mary Jane, who has remained single. James McFarland is Mrs. Mitchell's son-in-law by her deceased daughter, Barbara. Although James McFarland is not Mrs. Mitchell's descendant, his children would be. Allen Boyer is Mrs. Mitchell's brother. Thus, it's not at all farfetched to have ten surnames within a single nuclear family.

It is fascinating to see how this network of family relationships can develop when studying real people. To illustrate this situation, I examined the relationships of ten people who purchased land from the federal land office in Springfield, Missouri:

At first this appears to be a list of unrelated surnames, yet Figure 4-1 below shows that each one was connected to another on the list. In this case, the names with stars next to them are the people who actually purchased land. The circles denote brothers and sisters, the solid lines show parents and children, and the infinity symbol (∞) indicates a marriage. Ten different surnames, and yet all are connected by a family relationship. These surnames appear over and over in the myriad documents these people generated. A study of any whole community will reveal the same pattern.

Before recent times, relationships through marriage were not distinguished greatly from relations by blood.
A woman may think of herself as belonging to the family of her birth name (usually called a maiden name), but that is not necessarily the name by which others recognize her or the one by which she is identified in records. It is, however, the people who bear or once bore this name with whom this woman shares a commitment and an emotional relationship. Therefore, it is those people — not those of her husband's surname — with whom she is most likely to have personal or business dealings that will reveal genealogical connections, especially when she is young. Considering one surname will reveal only a small portion of the people in the family you are researching.

Figure 4-1
Collateral relative chart of William Polk.

Studying the collateral family will bring many benefits to your genealogical research. First, the more people under investigation, the more records you are likely to find that have been created and survived. Rarely does just one record provide us with a solid genealogical connection. In most cases, it is many records woven together like strands in a web that weave a solid conclusion. More people simply produce more records for you to study.

Second, studying the entire family helps us to learn about migration patterns, places of origin, and destinations. The same pattern of names will emerge both in the community the group came from and in the community where they later settle. For example, from a well-documented published genealogy, I knew that Matthew Boswell married Edith Rogers and moved to St. Clair County, Missouri, from Henderson County, Tennessee. Rogers is a common surname. How might I find Edith's parents? I could begin searching for families named Rogers in Henderson County, Tennessee. However, I decided to follow a better clue gleaned from the published genealogy: Edith and Matthew Boswell were buried in the Robinson Cemetery in Hickory County, Missouri.

Whenever possible, try to visit cemeteries to see how the graves lie, as this can give marvelous clues to family relationships. The Robinson Cemetery did not disappoint me.

At the bottom of Figure 4-2 are the gravestones for Matthew Boswell and his wife, Edith. Now look at the people buried in that same row:

Matthew Boswell d. 1852, age 60

Edith Boswell, wife of Matthew d. 1854, age 45

Lydia Rogers, wife of D.R., 1770–1859

Daniel Rogers 1760–1838

John P. Rogers 1812–1876

Isaac Rogers 1814–1883