AI in Genealogy: There Are No Shortcuts

As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes more commonplace, it's important to remember—there are no shortcuts in genealogy. Let me repeat this: There are no shortcuts in genealogy! As a family historian, it is your responsibility—your duty—to review records thoroughly and carefully before deeming them accurate. Certainly, AI may be able to assist in locating publicly available records, but it is your job to confirm the validity of them.

This past weekend, I read an article titled "How AI Is Changing Genealogy and Bringing Old Family Records to Life" on Popular Archaeology. In the opening paragraph, it highlighted a site called Vestigee. This is an AI-based website, and I was curious to see the offerings. The features of the site are listed as:

• Family Tree Builder
• Colorization
• Enhance family pictures
• Translate document
• Resolution Enhancement
• Photo Restoration
• AI Animated Portraits
• OCR Text Extraction
• AI Family Portrait
• Facial feature origins
• Family video
• Animate family picture
• Import GEDCOM
• DNA Test Kits

At the bottom of the main page, there are also comparisons between this site and Ancestry, MyHeritage, Geneanet, Filae, FindMyPast, WikiTree, Archion and Heredis. It certainly gives the impression this site has a lot to offer. But not so fast! As I scanned the comparison for Ancestry, where Vestigee claims to be the #1 alternative to Ancestry, I noticed some of the photo tools I currently see available on Ancestry weren't reflected in the comparison. It also claims to be the #1 alternative to MyHeritage...and FindMyPast...and this is where I stopped looking at the comparisons.

It also shouts "Discover your ancestors in 2 minutes" when you reach the main page. Sounds amazing, doesn't it? But what exactly does "discover your ancestors in 2 minutes" mean? Can it return records for you to review in 2 minutes? Absolutely! But can it do all the hard work for you? Not a chance! In fact, the article says "This doesn’t eliminate the need for human verification. Family historians still need to examine original records and determine whether a suggested connection is genuinely relevant." It's a good warning, but how many of the people drawn in by a promise of locating an ancestor in 2 minutes are going to truly heed said warning?

I was going to try the 5-day free trial just to give it a fair shot, but after reading user reviews on Trustpilot, no way am I completing the sign-up process. At the time I checked, more than 25% of the reviews gave it one star, and the overall rating was 3.7 stars. Among the Trustpilot reviews I read, one recurring complaint came from users who said they did not realize their card would be charged automatically after 5 days. Some reviewers also reported being charged after they believed they had cancelled. The individual plan is advertised at $16.99 per month, billed annually. The cost comes to $203.88 per year. It could be worse, but it's a hefty price to pay for wanting to try a site out. And if you want a family subscription to share with up to 10 family members? The family plan is advertised at $83.94 per month, billed annually at $1,007.29. I'm shaking my head here (can you hear my brain rattling around?) 

Since I chose not to complete the free trial, I haven't personally tested Vestigee's family tree, record search, photo or AI tools. My observations are based on the information available on its website and the outside reviews I read.

I've shared previously, I have a lot of subscriptions. I have the All-Access Family plan with Ancestry and the Omni Plan with MyHeritage (among several others...but I won't bore you with the whole list). The cost for BOTH of these top-tier subscriptions—which include Newspapers.com Publishers Extra, Fold3, sharing Ancestry with 4 additional family members, all the wonderful photo editing tools on MyHeritage along with Scribe AI for transcription, access to OldNews, Geni.com Pro and full access to Legacy Family Tree Webinars—is still less than the cost of a family subscription at Vestigee. I can even toss in my American Ancestors digital subscription (with a nice long list of extra research resources included with it), and the total is still less than the cost of a family subscription at Vestigee. And let's be real...are you really going to share with 10 people and try to manage getting part of your money back from each of them? 

Getting back on topic, Vestigee claims to offer 40 billion records from 159 archives in 45 countries, along with 850 million photos. "We search over 40 billion records including birth certificates, marriage records, death certificates, census data, military records, immigration documents, and historical newspapers. Our database includes records from the US, Canada, Europe, and other regions worldwide." Clicking the "see all" button returns this list of data sources, but if you try to "explore" any of these, you need to sign up. I found myself wondering how many of these data sources consist of freely available record sets. Since I didn't sign up, I wasn't able to explore the collections further and can't answer this question. If many of the underlying collections are freely available elsewhere, I'd question how much additional value the service provides compared with searching those collections yourself or using AI to help locate potential online sources.

If it's photo tools you're after, you can use ChatGPT, Canva or the AI tools on the major subscription sites to help with photo cleanup and colorization. Ancestry has decent (but fairly basic) editing and enhancement tools, but if you have a MyHeritage subscription, you can already easily do animations and photo enhancements with their wide range of photo tools. Of the big subscription sites, MyHeritage has been at the front of the pack for several years when it comes to photo tools and use of AI.

Vestigee also offers a DNA kit for $68 (and it includes the first year of individual site access). After this, it renews at the individual subscription price. There's nothing about their DNA offering I personally find compelling. As with many other consumer DNA tests, you get your origins and DNA matches. While Vestigee says it has 2 million users, I couldn't find information indicating how many of those users have taken its DNA test. I also couldn't find information identifying the lab used to analyze the test. On the pages I reviewed, it's simply referred to as their "partner lab." With Ancestry, MyHeritage, FTDNA, LivingDNA and 23andMe, we're dealing with established names in consumer DNA testing. Vestigee was created in early 2025. I don't know about you, but I'd personally like to know just who's getting my DNA. Would you trust your DNA analysis to a 1 year old? Oops! I mean a 1-year-old company? I know I wouldn't!

So after all this rambling, I can only say "I won't do it!" I'd encourage anyone considering the site to carefully review the pricing, renewal terms, available collections and DNA information before signing up. I often add useful websites and tools to my Genealogy Toolbox, but Vestigee doesn't even come close to making the cut. When it comes to genealogy, AI has many wonderful uses. I embrace it and use it virtually every day. I know many others who use it as a part of their research and writing. But no matter how I slice and dice it, based on what I've seen, I just can't find enough value in Vestigee to justify the cost for my research. If you want to use AI for your research, use it carefully, verify its results and never treat it as a substitute for doing the research yourself. And now, I'm jumping down off my little soapbox, tucking it under my arm and scurrying off to jump into a pile of little green leaves on Ancestry.

Note: Prices, ratings and features referenced in this post were current when I reviewed the sites in August 2026.

Image by Lindsay_Jayne from Pixabay

Disclosure: I use ChatGPT to assist with a title and search description. I also used ChatGPT to review this post for clarity and to help distinguish my observations and opinions from claims I could not independently verify without signing up for the service. The content and all opinions are my own.

Getting the Most Value From Genealogy Subscriptions

Note: I do not receive any compensation (affiliate or otherwise) from any of these sites. This post is simply my observations on the value of various genealogy subscriptions and ways to save money accessing subscription resources.

Subscriptions come and subscriptions go. For several years, I maintained a lot of genealogy subscriptions. Truth be told, I still have more than I need. But I get really excited when one of the sites I subscribe to rolls in a new membership benefit providing access to another site I'd otherwise have to pay to access. Each site below offers many on-site features, but this post focuses on the additional website access provided with each subscription. Prices shown are regular price. Many sites have sales throughout the year to help make subscriptions more affordable. (All prices are shown in US dollars).

Let's start with the big sites:

Most everyone knows, Ancestry.com offers several membership levels. Personally, I stick with the All Access Family Plan ($269.00 every 6 months). Not only have I been able to share the subscription with 4 others (encouraging new family historians) but I also get full access to Fold3 military records and Newspapers.com including Publishers Extra. You can find out more about the All Access Family Plan here. The value of having Fold3 and Newspapers works out to about $30 every 6 months (based on the current pricing I've found). The biggest value in this plan is the ability to share it with 4 others (and they don't need to be related to you). You can ask the others to contribute to the cost if you need to bring your price down, but this is something you coordinate yourself. You cannot split the price between members directly on the Ancestry site. 

At MyHeritage, the Omni Plan comes with access to OldNews (newspaper archive). The cost is currently $399 per year. Additionally, you receive access to GeniPro and Legacy Family Tree Webinars. On the MyHeritage site, you'll also have access to some outstanding photo and AI features at your disposal. More information on all the benefits of the Omni Plan can be found here. If you subscribed separately to all the features it would cost over $600 per year!

FindMyPast offers an Everything subscription. This includes not only all their record collections, but all the newspapers you'd have access to with a British Newspaper Archive subscription (a value of $133 per year). They also offer a 15% discount on continued subscriptions (no playing games, cancelling and resubscribing necessary). The current price is $299 per year. The 15% discount works out to about $45 per year off the annual price (so $254 as of this post). For more information on their subscriptions please click here.

And now for a few of the lesser known sites offering a good value:

A few years ago, the National Genealogical Society (NGS) added access to Newspaperarchive.com and Storied. My $85 membership to NGS (already providing many nice benefits and access to their Family Papers Collection) was expanded to save me $95 on a separate NewspaperArchive and Storied membership (based on the current pricing shown on their website). It's worth noting, while Storied does have the option for a standalone membership at $99.99 per year (for Unlimited), all the features are included in a regular NewspaperArchive subscription. The subscription to NGS literally pays for itself! For the complete list of member benefits visit this page.

One super value is AmericanAncestors. A regular price Individual Membership is $99.95 per year. In addition to their databases, you also get access to an impressive list of partner databases. For a full price membership, you can also get discounts with partner sites, including a $10 discount on a GEDmatch Tier 1 membership. But let's circle back to the partner databases for a moment. While they don't disclose the full value of all the partner databases, NewspaperArchive is $95.00/year, a New York Times subscription can run in excess of $150 per year, Genealogical Publishing Company (GPC) eBook Collection (a subscription I used to maintain) is worth $135 per year. And there are many more partner databases. Even if you only use one, you've paid for your membership. You can find out more about a membership here. While the full membership is already a great value, I don't use any of the on-site benefits or discounts on services. Last year, I considered letting this membership lapse. I received a couple of discount emails (as most sites tend to offer) but was still on the fence —until I received an email for a truly amazing deal...digital access for just $49.95 per year! This still includes all the partner databases! While they don't seem to advertise this level on their site, here's a link to the digital membership page from the email I received. If it doesn't work for you, I'd suggest reaching out to them to inquire about this membership. 

And finally, there's the Conococheague Institute. This is a "hands on regional learning center" in Mercersburg, Pennsylvania. A membership is only $25 per year for an individual. The added value is in the History Commons (formerly Accessible Archives) access they provide as a membership perk, a $90 value per year. From the website, "History Commons presents a curated universe of landmark primary-source collections presented on Coherent Digital’s award-winning, next-generation platform." This is not a one-size fits all site. I needed it for some specific Pennsylvania newspapers, so it was useful to me. But if you're considering it, I'd suggest checking the site out first. For more information on joining the Conococheague Institute, visit this page.

One other resource worth noting is libraries! If you don't often access the brick and mortar building for your local library, you may be able to register for a digital card. Many libraries offer in-branch access to library editions of the big genealogy sites for free. They may also offer digital access to a wide variety of various databases and newspaper resources. And it's worth noting, if the resources at a given library outside your local area are valuable enough, you may even be able to obtain access even if you aren't a resident of the area. The cost and availability vary considerably, but depending on the materials you need, it could be an option. (If you can't find the information for out of state residents online, I'd suggest emailing or calling for more information.) Many libraries now offer some genealogy resources free on their websites. And several offer amazing on-site research areas with collections, manuscripts and other resources not available elsewhere. You can't go wrong checking out library websites for areas you're researching. Family Tree Magazine has a wonderful list of the best libraries for genealogy research. 

I've added all the links in this post to my Genealogy Toolbox (including a new section for both Books and Libraries, and expanding Articles, Tips/Tricks, Guides, to include Webinars and Videos). The cost of doing genealogy can vary greatly. If you're willing to put in the time, many records can be found for free. But sometimes we need a subscription. Finding the ones with the most bang for your buck is always a great feeling.  If you've discovered any other genealogy subscriptions with great bundled perks and membership benefits please share them!

Image by Foundry Co from Pixabay

Disclosure: I used ChatGPT to assist in titling this post, and for the search description. All content is my own.

Your Next Breakthrough Might Be Hiding on Linkpendium

I site I don't see mentioned often enough is Linkpendium. For those who've been researching for some time, you're likely already familiar with the site....but when was the last time you gave it a spin? With the monumental goal to "...index every genealogy, geneology, :) family history, family tree, surname, vital records, biography, or otherwise genealogically-related site on the Internet", you can imagine they have a massive amount of links! According to Google, more than 10 million of them. And it's totally FREE to search!

Linkpendium is an extensive resource directory with multiple ways to search. Results encompass both free and subscription sites. On the home page, there are 2 distinct search options. Prominently located on the home page is the Family Discoverer search. It looks like this:

It's a little hard to tell in the image, but it says this searches "30,491,448 FREE genealogy sources." These cover 2,800,000 pages they index. In addition to a name, you can select a location of Worldwide, or a specific state.

On the right hand sidebar, you'll find additional ways to search. 

While you can reach localities and surnames from links by scrolling farther down on the home page, the city, county or family surname searches take you right to a Linkpendium resource page. It's a bit faster than navigating through links. They also note, these pages may contain resources not included in the search engine. If you're researching, be sure to try all the various search options to get the best results.

Since I've been searching for Abijah LeRoy (or LeCroy, or Lewy or....you get the idea) for more than a decade, I typed in the name of someone who may be his father, and conveniently also the name of his brother -Thomas LeCroy. I filtered to Georgia as my location. In just 46 milliseconds, Linkpendium returned 55 results for me to check out.

 Since limiting by date range isn't a search option, it may take a little patience to review results. As with any browser page, you can still use Ctrl+F and search for specific words on the page if it's easier for you. The results did correctly identify the brother, Thomas LeCroy's marriage to Lydia McCracken, but I already had this piece of information. So, nothing new today. 

Then, I decided to take a stab using one of Abijah's known children, Benjamin Franklin LeRoy. I found information on his marriage (already know to me) but it was from a page I'd never seen before for Murray County Museum (with many links to all kinds of useful information on Murray county, Georgia), Unfortunately, the home page indicates the site founder passed away and there will be no further updates to this newly discovered site. But I'm happy it's still being hosted for researchers to find. A quick search shows there's more information for me to examine for another surname (Luffman) in my tree! While I didn't find any new breadcrumbs for the search I started with....I'm pleasantly surprised to have this new Murray County Museum page to delve into further. Were it not for Linkpendium, I'd likely never have found this page. 

First created in 2003, Linkpendium is still being actively updated (as recently as March 26, 2026). Not every search will return results. And not every result will be the one you're looking for. But if you're hunting for a great resource perhaps offering some suggestions you've not yet investigated, Linkpendium is well worth a look from time to time. With ongoing updates, you never know when a surprise result might show up! (As always, I've linked this in my Genealogy Toolbox under Link Lists/Search Tools). 

American Ancestors: Perks Well Worth the Cost

Disclaimer: All thoughts & opinions are my own. I do not receive compensation or consideration for posts. 

I've subscribed to AmericanAncestors for several years. I've found there are some great benefits to being a member. I do all of my research online, so having extra resources beyond those found on the big 4 websites (Ancestry, FamilySearch, MyHeritage, FindMyPast) always interests me. 

Ho-hum perks of being a member: They offer the ability to build your tree on the site, But, I didn't find the interface to be anything special - certainly not as good as Ancestry. They also offer a quarterly magazine, but I'm not a big fan of magazines (digital or otherwise) so this wasn't a big factor for me. They also feature additional publications and tools you might be interested in checking out. I haven't used these myself, but they are on the site.

The perks I DO really like are:

• Access to 10 billion searchable names and records in the AmericanAncestors database
• Free access to partner databases

Let's break it down a little. As far as the searchable records on the site, they offer access to hundreds of databases. The search screen shows they currently have 507 databases. Some of these are not necessarily different from databases you may already have access to via the big 4 sites. But 224 are touted as being unique to AmericanAncestors. They also have a Digital Library & Archives containing digitized materials from three repositories: the Wyner Family Jewish Heritage Center (highlighting records for New England's Jewish community) R. Stanton Avery Special Collections (including family bibles and genealogies among other select records), and the Brim-DeForest Library (a book collection including family and local histories as well as other books). Not all of these collections will be of interest to every family researcher, but certainly these additional repositories could be beneficial to some.

And then there's the magic of partner databases! 

Let's start with a site currently experiencing some issues. NewspaperArchive is normally about $140 per year (I used to subscribe, but stopped when the National Genealogical Society offered it as a free perk of their membership.) I noticed today AmericanAncestors also offers access with their membership. Currently the site is recovering from a service disruption, but hopefully it will be back online soon. Is this newspaper site better than Newspapers.com, OldNews or GenealogyBank? It's hard to give a solid answer. Your research needs may be different than mine, and newspaper coverage can vary widely by site and area. I haven't had the best luck with NewspaperArchive, but I like having the option to search at no additional cost! 

In the past, I also subscribed to Genealogical to access their eBooks in the Genealogical Publishing Company (GPC) eBook Collection. Their current subscription rate is $135 per year. Their digital collection is fully searchable, both within titles and text. You can now access this collection for free with an AmericanAncestors subscription! This is an absolutely awesome perk! I had been waiting to renew until I needed to use the collection, so this was a fantastic surprise.

Additional third party partner databases include:

• Archives Unbound
• Gale OneFile: Diversity Studies 
• The Gale OneFile: Fine Arts & Music Collection 
• Foundation for Medieval Genealogy
• Informe Academico
• Irish Newspaper Archives
• HistoryGeo.com
• The HistoryMakerss
• 19th Century U.S. Newspapers
• Early American Newspapers Series 1
• The New York Times
• Parchemin Notarial Database
• Genealogy Quebec

I haven't added up the value of having all these databases available, but certainly, the value far exceeds the cost of membership to AmericanAncestors.

I used to pay for an individual membership at AmericanAncestors at a cost of $99.95 per year. This level also includes (in addition to the features listed above) free admission to American Ancestors in Boston, discounts on programs and services, and exclusive offers - including 10% off a Tier 1 membership to GEDmatch (the value of this is about $12). If you live in the area and want to access in person, it's still a very good deal. But I don't live nearby and am not planning on visiting - so I didn't really need the bells and whistles. When it came time to renew this year, I was on the fence. I was cutting back a little on my subscriptions and I was just going to let this one lapse until I needed it. And then I received the email there was a subscription level I didn't see displayed anywhere when browsing the site...

It's a digital subscription only. For only $49.95 per year, I replaced 2 subscriptions - NewspaperArchive AND GPC library (worth $275 if I subscribed direct) AND I still have access to all the other partner databases. It was a no brainer for me. I did lose the free in person access (though passes are available at $20 per day if needed), the discounts on programs and services and the exclusive offers (but the GEDmatch discount wasn't terribly substantial anyway).

So, if you like to have a lot of other database options, for $49.95 per year AmericanAncestors is truly a fantastic value. If you aren't yet convinced, you can sign up for a free guest membership to access a limited number of databases, and get a feel for whether you'd like to upgrade to a digital or individual membership. I believe the digital membership is by far the best value if you do the majority of your research online.

Image by klimkin from Pixabay

Dead or Alive? Divorced or Widowed?

As shown in 1911 and 1912 directories 

It's tempting to assume a spouse is dead when we wee someone listed as widow or widower. Such was the case when I found my 1st cousin 3x removed listed as a widow in the "St Joseph, Missouri, City Directory" in both 1911 and 1912. Though the addresses were different (but near one another), the message was the same. Amanda was, sadly, a widow.

Amanda Hortense James (1844-1932) married Fred Smith Lathrop March 29th, 1882, when she was 38 years old. It was her first marriage. Due to her age, it wasn't surprising they had no children. I felt a bit sad for her. She finally married, only to lose her husband. But this wasn't really the full picture!

When I got around to adding the 1910 census for Amanda, imagine my surprise to see her listed not as a widow - but divorced (and living with her sister).

Year: 1910; Census Place: St Joseph Ward 8, Buchanan, Missouri

But, in the 1920 census, she was once again listed again as a widow.

Year: 1920; Census Place: Chicago Ward 23, Cook (Chicago), Illinois

There were clearly two versions of the story. It wasn't unusual at the time for a divorced woman to say she was widowed, or perhaps even still married. Divorce still had quite a lot of stigma attached to it at the time. I tended to lean towards divorced since the 1910 census was the earliest mention of it, but with conflicting information, I had to set out in search of more records.

Fred Smith Lathrop (1852-1927) wasn't really high on my research priorities list. But this glaring difference in the records made me go back and give him a second look. Turns out, I found another marriage record for him from August of 1905, when he married a woman by the name of Josefa. I also found him in the 1910 and the 1920 census (though he was misrepresented as Ted instead of Fred in 1920). But, in both cases, the unusual name of Josefa made it clear I was looking at the same couple. Fred and Josefa remained married until Fred's true death in December 16tn, 1927.

Amanda never remarried. She continued to use the Lathrop surname until she passed away in April 1932. I'll never know if she claimed to be widowed to avoid social stigma, she was embarrassed, or because the divorce had been so painful she preferred to say Fred was dead. I still haven't located a divorce record to shed light on the reason for the split, or exactly when it happened. But it was clearly between the 1900 census, when Amanda and Fred were still together, and his next marriage in 1905.

This really reminded me not to make assumptions, and not to take everything at face value. Whenever possible, it's always best to have more than one source for the most important facts of birth, marriage, divorce, and death. Granted, there are time periods when finding even one record can be challenging. And it may not always be possible to verify every date. In some cases, we just have to make an educated guess. In these cases, I try to use "about" "before" or "after" to help remind me to watch for more information, and to indicate to others I'm not 100% sure - so they will hopefully be equally cautious and perhaps locate a record I've not yet found.

Turning the Unknown into the Known

I wasn't feeling particularly motivated to work on records yesterday evening, so I decided to set off in search of....well....the unknown! I had 3 people in my tree I knew were married into the family, but absolutely no clue at all as to their names. Since using 5 underscores doesn't mess up the algorithms, all 3 were listed as "_____ _____" in my tree. Those underscores peered back at me every time I opened my tree. I wanted....no...I needed to know their names. After quite a bit of searching, I've managed to identify all 3!

For the first, it was the husband of one of my 1st cousins 1x removed, who's living so I won't include names. I know she's married because her aunt (my cousin) filled me in on some family information a couple of years ago. My normal jump to FamilyTreeNow only provided some historical data. No clue as to her husband, married surname or where she may be living now. Ancestry wasn't giving up any secrets either. I know I could have just asked my cousin, but sometimes it feels a little awkward when it's not someone I talk to on any kind of regular basis. Not everyone understands just how much we family genealogists have a burning need to place everyone in our tree! I was hopeful I could find the information on my own. I tried Newspapers with no success. Since newspapers (in general) can be goldmines, I have subscriptions to several other sites. I'll be honest, my hopes weren't high. But as it turns out, I was able to find a marriage record in a newspaper from 2017 on GenealogyBank. While it didn't contain anything more than the names and ages, it was enough! Thanks to an uncommon spelling of her given name, I was confident I had the right couple.1 down, 2 to go!

The second was for the 2nd great-grandfather of my ex-husband, William Berendes (1835-1913). I've long known he had more than one wife. His oldest 2 daughters were born 10+ years before his other children, and the age of his 2nd wife eliminated her as a potential mother of these 2 daughters. Further, his will mentioned 2 deceased wives. Many trees show the first wife as Theresa Rawtermundt. The problem was, I wasn't finding any records for a marriage with this name. In fact, searches were only brining up his 2nd wife. William was born in Germany, but he arrived here in the US in 1852. His daughters were born 1861 and 1863. Based on his age at the time of arrival, it was likely the first marriage took place somewhere in the US. I decided to widen my search a little. Using wildcards in William's name did the trick. Instead of using William Berendes, I used Wil*m Ber*des. Using the * allows the algorithm to look for other potential spellings. I was actually expecting to find him listed as Wilhelm, but I turned up a record for William Berandes (with an a not an e) and a Thureza Rodermond. Now to be fair, the indexes may have been transcribed from records where the names were inadvertently spelled incorrectly. But I'm comfortable this is the right couple, and it's a starting point. I'm on the right trail! 2 down, 1 to go!

The final push was for a cousin, also still living so he shall remain nameless in this post, who was married previously, as per the record of his 2nd marriage. Of course I started with his name and year of birth (not helpful on its own), then narrowed only to marriage/divorce records from the US, and then further narrowed to the state of Ohio. The number of results returned wasn't 5 or 10, but I was in the zone and I went through quite a few pages. Finally, I was able to find both the marriage and divorce (even though they stubbornly wouldn't come up on their own when searching by name only). It was by sheer determination I was able to find the 3rd out of 3!

With these 3 names identified, I have no more "_____ ______" staring at me from my tree. I do still have plenty of first or last names still unidentified, but those will wait for another time. So, no matter how many times you've searched before, you never know when one more search will turn up the record you're looking for. Don't assume using the correct name is going to bring up all the records. Be creative! If you don't already, learn to use wildcards. Ancestry has a very helpful page of Search Tips. I've added this link to my Genealogy Toolbox so it's easy to find if you ever need it. How have you managed to find completely unknown names? Do you have any tricks you can share?

Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

Mennonite Resources

On my paternal line, I descend from those of the Mennonite faith. My family on this line hails from the Lancaster, Pennsylvania area - the heart of Amish country! On the surface, Mennonites and Amish appear very much the same. The Mennonites are a bit more relaxed and a little more tolerant. But they do indeed have many similarities, and both are certainly very devout.

I've documented my family being Mennonite here in the US from at least the 1790's (potentially earlier) through to the early 1900's. A portion of the family moved away from Lancaster, heading west, to Wayne County, Ohio - another of the largest Amish and Mennonite communities. Based on research by other family members (though I've not worked quite far enough back to confirm with my own research), some of my ancestors may have been part of the Swiss Anabaptist movement in the late 1700's, arriving in the US as they fled religious persecution.

From the Mennonite Church USA site:

"Mennonites are Anabaptists...Anabaptism grew out of the 16th-century Radical Reformation (which followed the Protestant Reformation). Technically, Anabaptists are neither Catholic nor Protestant, although they do share some beliefs of both.

The first Anabaptists separated from the state church when they began re-baptizing adults and refusing to baptize infants until they could make an adult decision to follow Christ. Anabaptism literally means to re-baptize."

If you ever find yourself researching someone who was Mennonite, here are some of the resources I've used. As with many churches, they have a wealth of genealogical material available. I've also added these to my Genealogy Toolbox for easy reference:

• Mennonite Church USA Archives: MennObits - worth checking out their related links page as well
• Mennonite Heritage Center
• Mennonite Life Online Research Databases
• Family Search Wiki - Mennonite Church in the United States

One thing I can say for sure, my 2nd great-grandfather (shown above on the left), Tobias Swinehart (1833-1911), had a pretty impressive beard! His sister-in-law, Esther (Homsher) Brown (1834-1927), my 2nd great-grand-aunt (shown to the right) was a member of the Mennonite Church until she passed away. You could look at either of these images and know in a heartbeat they were either Amish or Mennonite. As I move forward to more recent generations, I've not found anyone still in the Mennonite community. But I'm not ruling it out as a possibility! I still have much more research to do in this branch of my tree. 

Image by Sophia Martin from Pixabay

Seeing Double

I previously wrote about James Miles LeRoy, my 1st cousin 2x removed, who seemed to have 2 distinct social security numbers. I realize it was an unusual anomaly, but there may have been a legitimate reason it happened. I just accepted it's one of those things I'll never quite figure out, and moved on. It's not important enough (at least right now) for me to send off for official copies of the records. Now I'm seeing double again - on marriage records!

I'd like to start by saying, I thought I had 3 cases of this. But in writing this post, and going back to double and triple check all my facts, I actually resolved 2 of them! One appears to be a marriage-divorce-remarriage situation (only discernable by the fact both the parties were listed with the same surname and both were shown as previously divorced - by a mark in a teeny-tiny checkbox). Though it doesn't appear either married anyone else in between the divorce and remarriage. The 2nd one, was an odd indexing issue. Ancestry showed nothing but 2 names in a state I didn't think made sense. I went to FamilySearch and looked up the wife (she had a somewhat unusual given name), and found complete indexing of the record (not just 2 names as presented by Ancestry). Turns out, it's just parents being named on their daughter's marriage record. No clue why Ancestry didn't mention at least the daughter's name. Still, mystery #2 solved. 

Mystery #3 is a different story. Hal Kenney-Inez Howe: They were initially married January 12, 1909 in St Louis, Missouri, by a Baptist minister. I viewed the document on FamilySearch to be sure I had my facts straight. The date is line with the birth of their 1st child in November 1909. Together, they had 3 children, the last being born in 1919.

Then, on March 28, 1930 they were married by a Reverend in Malden, Dunklin, Missouri. I was also able to view this document on FamilySearch. The only odd thing was it references Hal Kenney and Inez Kenney and the record was from a location a few hours drive from their known residence at the time...almost as if it was being kept under the radar. In fact, I have no other known records for Malden other than this. There was nothing on the document to indicate they were previously divorced, and searches (including a full text search) produced no evidence their initial marriage was ever dissolved. It doesn't mean they weren't divorced. All I can say is I haven't been able to locate a divorce record.

Another family member enlisted the help of a local FamilySearch Center, but they were equally flummoxed and could find no documented explanation. Inez was married to someone else, but the earliest record I can find with her 2nd husband, Karl Bosmyer, is a 1934 veterans document showing her as a dependent. Since Hal Kenney didn't pass away until 1949, it certainly seems clear they must have divorced at some point, even if I can't find a record of it. But why the 2 marriages??

I decided to do a little research on why a couple might be legally married more than once. Here's a synopsis of the findings:

• Multiple ceremonies, such as civil and then religious. Separate certificates might be required to prove the validity of each event. And if the events were in different locations, it could explain having more than one record.
• Unrecognized marriages. A first wedding may not have been legally recognized. Perhaps it was done in a rush and they never got the required paperwork, but had a ceremony anyway. To legalize the union, they might have to have another marriage with correct documentation.
• Religious/family reasons: May have had more than one ceremony to satisfy all parties. I know a couple who were married once in a Christian church, and then again in a Hindu ceremony in another state. 
• Specific to genealogical research, it could be incorrect indexing, name twins, or changes in how legal marriages were recognized. Not sure how often the last one would actually be an issue, but I suppose it could happen.

I do know the Kenney family were Catholic. It's possible they didn't "approve" or "recognize" the Baptist minister's marriage. Maybe, just maybe, it was a 2nd ceremony and required another document because it was a different location? It's the only logical reason (absent any divorce record) I can come up with.

My biggest takeaway is: sometimes giving the problem a little time will clear the cobwebs and help you see something new. I'm thrilled to have worked out 2 of the 3 mysteries! And it's a very good reminder not to take indexed records at face value. Always try to find the original record if possible. Have you encountered two marriage records in your family tree? If so, how did you work out the reason? Or does it remain a mystery? 

Image by Tom from Pixabay

My ChatGPT Obituary Experiment

Disclosure: This post contains results from ChatGPT 5, The content is clearly identified and presented without edit.

I'm well aware AI is best used as a supplement to regular research. It can certainly do some nice things. I use it extensively for formatting, transcriptions, and even providing a list of the important genealogical facts from newspaper articles, wills, and obituaries (though I still double check it hasn't missed anything). I do not use AI for actual research. The vast majority of records are simply not available to AI. Many data sets require logins and quite often, subscriptions. But even if AI can't answer a question directly, it doesn't mean it can't be helpful in pointing me in a useful direction.

Just for fun, I recently decided to see if ChatGPT could help me locate an obituary. It had been some time since I requested this type of information and I was eager to see the improvements in results. FindAGrave contained the text of an obit for my granduncle, John Burton Leroy. As shown on FindAGrave:

Mr. Leroy was a son of John Leroy and his first wife, Cynthia Cunningham Leroy. John Burton Leroy was survived by his stepmother, Mrs. Addie Leroy, Dalton, Georgia; and his siblings, Ben Leroy, George Leroy, Bertha Henry and Eliza Fowler. 

I previously found and verified everything contained in this snippet, with the exception of one piece of data....his mother's maiden name being Cynthia Cunningham. I know her name was Cynthia from a census record, but I haven't found any other proof of her maiden name. If I could put eyes on the obit, and not just a transcription, I'd happily add this fact to my tree.

So I asked ChatGPT 5, "Can you find any public newspaper articles containing this exact wording 'John Burton Leroy died at his residence on Gadsden Route 4'" the phrase at the beginning of the transcribed obituary. I actually did this search two different times, a couple weeks apart just to see the differences.

For the first response, AI thought for 19 seconds, then replied:

Doris — I searched for that exact string and didn’t find any public newspaper page that matches it verbatim.

What I found

No hits for the quoted phrase “John Burton Leroy died at his residence on Gadsden Route 4” in open web results.

There are near-matches showing the style you’re expecting (Gadsden Times obits often read “Gadsden Route 4, died … at his residence”), e.g.:

“J.A. Pankey, 69, Gadsden Route 4, died … at his residence …” (Find A Grave transcription of a Gadsden Times obituary). (Find A Grave)

Similar phrasing appears in other Etowah County obit transcriptions noting “Gadsden Rt. 4 … died … at the residence.” (Find A Grave, Geni)

You likely have the right person/place: there’s a FamilySearch profile for John Burton LeRoy (1878–1949) tied to Gadsden/Etowah research, but it doesn’t quote an obituary. (FamilySearch)

Why you may not see an exact match

Obituary lines commonly read “at his residence, Gadsden Route 4” (comma, not “on”) or “Rt. 4 / “Rte. 4,” and the surname appears both as LeRoy and Leroy in indexes. Any of those small differences will prevent an exact-phrase hit.

 
Next steps I recommend

Try these exact-phrase variants (including punctuation/casing):

"John Burton LeRoy" "Gadsden Route 4"
"John Burton Leroy" "Gadsden Rt. 4"
"at his residence, Gadsden Route 4" Leroy
"LeRoy" "at his residence" "Gadsden"

Check the Gadsden Times around his death year (likely 1949). Most images are behind paywalls:

Newspapers.com (Gadsden Times) — strongest coverage.

Google News Archive sometimes has scattered issues.

Alabama Dept. of Archives & History and the Alabama Digital Archives indexes occasionally include Etowah items. Wikipedia

Local help: Etowah Historical Society or the Gadsden Public Library microfilm desk can do a lookup if you provide name + month/year of death.

If you want, tell me the exact death date you have for LeRoy and I’ll target the Gadsden Times issues for that week and craft precise queries (and, if you have access to Newspapers.com, I can give you copy-paste search strings to run there)

For my second attempt, AI thought a bit longer at 37 seconds, then replied:

Hi Doris — I searched for that **exact** wording and couldn’t find a publicly viewable newspaper page that contains the phrase “**John Burton Leroy died at his residence on Gadsden Route 4**”. Nothing matching that string (including the trailing double-apostrophes) turns up on the open web or in free Alabama newspaper repositories.

However, context strongly suggests the obituary you’re after would be in **The Gadsden Times** around **December 14–16, 1949**, which aligns with FamilySearch listing **John Burton LeRoy**’s death as **December 13, 1949** (Etowah Co./East Gadsden). ([FamilySearch][1])

### Where it’s most likely hiding (paywalled/onsite)

* **The Gadsden Times** archive (hosted on Newspapers.com / Gannett) for mid-December **1949**. The Times is the local daily that routinely printed “Route 4” addresses and “died at his residence…” language in that era. The paper’s history and coverage area are documented here. ([Wikipedia][2])

* **Northeast Alabama Genealogical Society (NEAGS)** at the Howard Gardner Nichols Memorial Library in Gadsden — they maintain obituary clippings and local indexes; staff/volunteers can usually pull a specific death notice by date. ([Wikipedia][3])

### How to zero in on the exact string

OCR in newspaper databases often renders **Route 4** as *Rt. 4*, *Rte. 4*, or “Route 4’’” (double quotes from inch marks). I recommend trying these exact-phrase variations in the 1949 Gadsden Times:

* `"John Burton LeRoy"`, `"John B. LeRoy"`, and `"John LeRoy"`
* `"died at his residence"` and `"died at his home"`
* `"Gadsden Route 4"`, `"Rt. 4, Gadsden"`, `"Rte. 4, Gadsden"` (with/without comma)
* Search the **issue dates 12/14/1949 through 12/16/1949**; if no hit, expand a week either side.

If you’d like, give me any subscription screenshots/clippings you have (or a narrowed date window), and I’ll transcribe/verify whether the line appears verbatim. Or, if you prefer a librarian route, I can draft a concise request email to NEAGS specifying the date range and phrasing you want confirmed.

[1]: https://ancestors.familysearch.org/en/LHDR-BP9/john-burton-leroy-1878-1949?utm_source=chatgpt.com "John Burton LeRoy (1878–1949)"

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gadsden_Times?utm_source=chatgpt.com "The Gadsden Times"

[3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Gardner_Nichols_Memorial_Library?utm_source=chatgpt.com "Howard Gardner Nichols Memorial Library"

I was actually pleasantly surprised with the results. It had been a year or so since I last asked ChatGPT any questions like this. Previous attempts did not provide citations or links. This time, ChatGPT acknowledged it could not find the exact search phrase I entered (and did not appear to make anything up.) But it provided reasonable and solid direction I could take to attempt to locate the information on my own. And most important to me, it provides references, links and citations so I can double check the data presented, and to assist me in trying to find the information I'm after. Both results were helpful, and the slight differences highlight the importance of trying again when you're still staring at a seemingly impenetrable wall. 

While AI is still imperfect, it's starting to become significantly more useful. Over the coming months and years, I fully expect we'll see incredible progress in how it can aid us as researchers, and its integration into websites and programs we already use. I fully realize not everyone is on board with AI. And yes, there are definitely environmental concerns to be considered as larger and larger data centers are required to handle the intense computing demands of AI. But the reality is - AI is here to stay. And in my very limited experiment, it provided useful research direction. In addition to the ways I already us it, I'll continue to check from time to time to discover new advancements in this powerful technology. 

Behind the Name

Do you have a favorite name you've encountered in your family research? Mine is my 1st cousin 3x removed - Zytilla Gertrude James (1853-1910). I started wondering where in the world the name Zytilla came from? It certainly hasn't popped up anywhere else in my research. 

I was surfing around and came upon Behind the Name. I really like all the information you can find on both given and surnames. When you first land on the site, you're on the given name page. If you scroll all the way to the bottom of the homepage, there's an option for surnames as well. You can browse various names, search, find meanings and related/equivalent/diminutive names, see the popularity change over time in various areas of the world, and even find namesakes and various other bits of information. You can browse names not only by first letter, but by region, mythology, religion and other various categories. There are additional interactive features and message boards if you want to sign up. The site is FREE!

I had fun looking up my name. Doris, seemed to be most popular in the US in the late 1920's and early 1930's. By the time I was born, it was not just falling out of favor, it was plummeting! In fact, the only country where it currently shows any real use (albeit not much) is the Netherlands with 0.080%. I happened to be named after 3 different friends of my mother. Clearly, they were all born when the name was far more common. I was surprised to see all the usages: English, German, Swedish, Danish, Croatian, Ancient Greek, Greek Mythology. I won't bore you with the other facts about my name, but suffice it to say, I thoroughly enjoyed poking around the site as I was writing this post.

Back to Zytille Gertrude! Gertrude probably hasn't been a favorite in a long time. Between 1880-1900 it accounted for about 1% of the female names per this site. Since then, it's fallen sharply and stopped registering on their graph in the mid-1960's. But how about Zytilla? Well, there's absolutely nothing on the site. So, like all good sleuths, I Googled. Again, nothing! I opened up ChatGPT and asked AI if it knew anything, and it responded:

The name "Zytilla" is quite unique and doesn't have a widely recognized origin or meaning in common name dictionaries or linguistic sources. It may be a modern creation or a rare name that is specific to a particular family or cultural group.

So there we have it. I can fairly confidently say, Zytilla's mother probably either had 2 other names she morphed together (possibly the Polish Zyta and the German Ottilla), or she made it up and simply liked the way it sounded. It certainly was unique! I wish I knew if Zytilla (also known as Tilla in some records) liked her name? I don't much care for Gertrude, but I do actually really like Zytilla. I wonder about her character. I imagine her as a little blond girl, who looked much like Alice in Wonderland. All I know for certain are these basic facts: she was born in Ohio, died in Illinois, was married, had two children, was a housewife and could read and write. She was a "unicorn", an individual with a unique name and perhaps a unique personality to go with it.

All Those Addresses

Do you take the time to record all the addresses from public record hints on Ancestry? I'm sure a lot of people probably just ignore them. After all, the dates can be suspect, often overlapping. And unless the person lived in the same house for a long time, possibly as far back as the 1950 census, or for whom voter records are available, there's no easy way to verify some of the data. And let's be honest, recording all those addresses from the various iterations of the Ancestry record sets can be time consuming. There might be from one, to as many as four, addresses in a single record. But I've noticed over the years, recording these addresses can be really beneficial.

How can they be so helpful? Well, have you ever had a couple you're pretty sure was married (perhaps from family knowledge or maybe from names mentioned in an obituary), but you've yet to find a record prove it? Not only do public record hints often show maiden and married names for women, but by having all addresses recorded, you can easily see when two people may have lived at the same address. Is it a smoking gun proving they were married? No, of course it's not! But it's better than nothing. And if you do an exact search for a street address in Ancestry, you may find the name of an unknown spouse (or a spouse for whom you only had a surname). Specifically with regard to the public record databases on Ancestry, I hesitate to say they're significantly helpful for finding children or other family members (other sites are better suited to this). There may be times when they could assist, but the vast majority of where I find they're helpful is for spouses.

They can also be useful when you're running into couples where both parties have similar names to couples in your tree, or someone with the same name but you've already found it's not the person in your tree. By making notes when you ignore a public records hint, you can save considerable effort the next time you run into records about people or addresses you've already researched and disproven. 

So, how do I handle all this data? I choose to record the dates and location as a Residence Fact. This allows me a quick visual if other types of records happen to be from the same place. I can expand the dates as necessary when other records surface, without needing to add a bunch of identical residence facts. Then I create an Address fact (also with the dates and location) and put the street address and zip code in the detail. Since I never let Ancestry create any facts, and I enter them all by hand, this allows me to be consistent in how the data is recorded. This method also enables me to use Ctrl+F on the person's profile to quickly check for a street address. There are any number of ways to record the information, this just happens to work well for me.

I've seen many times when there are addresses for a location where there are no other apparent records of the person being there, or with overlapping dates. This could indicate a 2nd residence (vacation home anyone?) or maybe the person was a cosigner for someone (parents helping a child perhaps). Maybe they made a short term move, like going to college out of state or a temporary job relocation. Perhaps they have/had a thriving Airbnb or rental situation going. Just because we can't find supporting records doesn't mean it's not a viable address. It simply means we don't know the nature of the record from where the address was taken to know how it relates to our person, or where we might possibly look for validation. Per Ancestry, the Public Records Indexes contain information culled from:

• Telephone Directories
• Marketing Lists
• Postal Change-of-Address Forms
• Public Record Filings
• Directory Assistance Records
• Property and Land Records

I've also noticed some of the dates in these records may stretch beyond a death date. This could be because there was no change to the property ownership and family continued to live in the home. Or, perhaps the family simply never stopped mail delivery for the deceased, so it continued to show up as a viable address on mailing lists. In this specific case, I use the date of death in my facts. If I were to run into an address only shown after the date of death, I would likely not record it, as it might be the result of a change of address submitted to facilitate the execution of a will. Such an address might help identify who the executor of a will was though! I can't say I recall actually running into this with regard to public record hints, but it could happen. 

For me, the time and effort recording this data has value. Indexed pubic data isn't perfect, and it's not a substitute for proper records. But it can help solidify a hypothesis, provide a tangible link, or open up a new potential research avenue.

Image by G.C. from Pixabay

Facts Don't Always Fit

I've was recently researching a relative (by marriage) who passed away in just the last few years. He had a rather uncommon surname. Since he still has living children, for the sake of anonymity, I'm going to call him Jon Luke Long (not an uncommon name I know, but you get the idea). A quick Google search showed me in 2010, there were only an estimated 2,307 people with his actual surname in the entire United States...less than one in 100,000 people. One would think this would make working on hints easier....how likely would it be to have 2 people with the same name n the same area? Sure, there could be a father and son living in close proximity, but birth dates should help identify the proper person to attach hints to right? 

It's not a problem of having enough hints either. I had several, from various collections. The problem was them fitting into the narrative of known facts. My Jon Long was from northeastern Ohio. Initially, I found several hints appearing to be for a Jon Thomas Long (when I compared them with other records for the person). Clearly, with a middle name so distinctly different, I could easily ignore these hints as being the wrong name. 

But then there were the school yearbook hints. Sometimes, those are the only way to find a picture of someone in my tree, especially for more recent relatives. But they can also be hard to verify as being the right person. I know many people skip these records entirely, but I choose to use them where I can. I ignore those I'm confident are wrong, and I "maybe" any I'm not sure of. I had 7 different yearbook hints, from 2 different schools. And to make it harder, the schools were located several hours apart, and neither was in an already known location for this person. It's not unusual to have someone live in a different city than they attended school. As I've shared in the past, this applied to me personally 

With only a name of Jon Long shown in the yearbook hints, I had to figure out if they were my Jon Long, or not. In this case, the person in question had a more recent obituary. Thankfully, the family included some important genealogical information, including the high school he graduated from. Should make the search easier right? Not in this case. None of the hints were from the school listed in the obituary, and none were for a person who was graduating. The school mentioned in the obit was located in northeastern Ohio (fitting with other known facts). The hints I had were from central and western Ohio. But people move, and just because they didn't fit my currently known facts, didn't necessarily make them wrong. The challenge is not having much information on where this person lived during his earlier years. I know where he was born, died, and in this case graduated high school. But I don't have information for locations between birth and high school.

The photos of the persons from the 2 schools were also very different. It was clear, if (and it was a big if) either of the locations was correct, it was going to be one school or the other. In a few hints the name was simply shown as J Long. Jon? James? Jerry? Initials weren't going to help me. I started by looking at the locations for Jon Thomas Long, the person I knew was not my Jon Luke Long. I started checking the distances between cities this person lived in. Finally, I was able to identify one of the schools was only 40 minutes away from a known location for the "wrong" Jon. While not proof positive, it was enough for me to mark those yearbook hints as not likely being my Jon Long. The school in the remaining hint was more of a challenge, but ultimately, based on the photo of Jon in his obituary and comparison to the photo in the yearbook, I determined it was also unlikely to be my Jon Long. While I never found any yearbook photos from the known school listed in the obituary, I'm glad I could fairly reliably rule out the incorrect hints. 

Not every hint fits known facts and narratives. Sometimes, we can fairly easily rule hints out. Other times, we can't. But my personal feeling is it's better to leave something as an undecided "maybe" than trying to force it to fit. Eventually, another hint may come along to prove or disprove a previously undecided hint. And when I've nothing at all to compare a hint to? I do my best to skim all the available hints looking for any patterns. If I just don't have anything tangible, I'll usually skip working on the hint entirely until I find some new information. Just like a jigsaw puzzle, putting the wrong piece in a place it doesn't belong can make it harder to figure out the puzzle.

Image free for use under the Pixabay Content License. https://pixabay.com/photos/puzzle-last-particle-piece-654956/

Palatines to America German Genealogical Society

Recently, I discovered when my 5th great-grandfather, Freiderich Zearfoss arrived in Pennsylvania! Even with an unusual name, researching this ancestor isn't as easy as you might think. His surname isn't one you see all the time, but I'm finding it spelled almost a dozen different ways. Born around 1724 in the Palatinate region of Germany (a historical region in south-western Germany), he arrived on the ship Edinburgh on September 15, 1749 at the age of 25. The ship sailed from Rotterdam in the Netherlands, and since I don't see any others with the same surname in the record of immigrants, it's quite possible he may have come alone on the voyage. He married after he arrived in America. His information is a springboard for another quest I've been on.

I've been looking for where my Shelly line came to America. There have been some confusing (uncited) details in many trees claiming the Shelly's were of English descent but moved to Holland, ultimately coming to America to avoid religious persecution. But once here, the Shelly's settled and lived in the German communities in Pennsylvania. My Ancestry ethnicity results show I have 21% Germanic Europe from my paternal side, likely an area of French & German Switzerland. Switzerland was directly adjacent to the historical Palatinate area of Germany. It seems possible the Shelly's may have originated in much the same area.

I'm hopeful finding where Freiderich was from will help me find more details on the Shelly family origins. While I was doing some preliminary research, I stumbled on a website called Palatines to America German Genealogical Society. While full access to the site does require membership, there are plenty of resources available for free. I've already been able to find Zerfass (one of the many surname spellings), Shelly and Snavely (another branch of my tree from Pennsylvania) surnames in the Ancestor Chart Project. It remains to be seen if any of the ancestors listed are my ancestors. They also have a robust list of links to external resources, but be prepared, some of them will require translation to English (your browser should prompt you to translate). Membership is $40 per year for US members, and their membership year starts in October. If you're interested in joining, it may be wise to take this into account to maximize your membership (especially if you're only interested in a one time membership.) 

For now, I'm going to take advantage of the free resources the site offers and do additional research on sites where I already have subscriptions. I haven't yet started pursing this Palatinate angle on Ancestry, and MyHeritage certainly has a wealth of European records. But I've added Palatines to America German Genealogical Society to my Genealogy Toolbox under Historical Societies so I'll have it handy when I need it. If you have ancestors from the Palatinate region, I'd be interested to hear if this site helps you in your own research.

Edna James, Female Pilot WWII: Remembering the Unrelated

As you sift through your numerous hints, trying to discern the bits and pieces of your ancestor's lives, do you take time to really read the details you know are not related to your family? Do you truly notice the unrelated? Or do you just ignore and move on? Occasionally, a hint for someone not in your tree may offer an interesting glimpse into a part of history you might otherwise overlook.

I admit, I'm usually focused on the person I'm working on. Does the hint seem to match? Yes or no. Sometimes, it takes a little digging...ok, sometimes a lot...but other times it's a simple no. Regardless of why I ignore a hint, I add a brief note how/why I came to the conclusion, just in case I need to re-evaluate in the future. But occasionally, as I'm reviewing, something will pique my interest and I'll read on, even thought I know it's not about someone in my family tree.

Today, I was researching Edna Varnes (1898-1973). She had 3 husbands, one of whom was my 2nd cousin 2x removed (David Reuben James). They were married in 1935. I stumbled on an indexed hint from the U.S., World War II Army Enlistment Records, 1938-1946, for an Edna James who enlisted in the Women's Army Corps, Inactive Reserves, as an Aviation Cadet on October 24, 1942. It's slightly unusual to find a woman enlisting for flight training and I was intrigued. I really wanted her to be my Edna James! Alas, she was single and had completed 4 years of college, ruling her out.

But the Edna James in the hint seemed interesting. At 63" (5'3") tall and just 118 lbs, she was just a little slip of a thing. Imagine her learning to fly an airplane! In WWII, women served an important role in aviation. They were part of the Women's Air Force (WAF), Women's Air Corp (WAC) and Women's Airforce Service Pilots (WASPs) While they weren't involved in active combat, they did fly missions here at home. They moved planes from one area to another, transported cargo, assisted with training flights and most importantly at the time, freed up male pilots for combat missions. Wikipedia has a nice synopsis on these brave, adventurous and important women who flew in WWII. 

I wasn't able to find much about Edna James. I know she was born around 1898. She completed 4 years of college and had a "professional occupation". In 1942, at the age of 44, she was single and felt the calling to both support her country and embark on an interesting future. She hailed from Ohio, and enlisted there. Her service number was A-501308. A quick Google ties this service number back to the Women's Air Corp (WAC). While I wasn't able to pinpoint who her parents were, or anything else about her life, I feel compelled to say "Thank you for your service Edna James.  You helped pave the way for women of the future."

Image by Vlad Min from Pixabay

The Curious Case of the Disappearing Hints

 

No, it's not magic! And no, I haven't worked through thousands of hints recently. The algorithms at Ancestry have been doing their thing and the number of hints on my All Hints page have been fluctuating wildly over the last few months. At one point, I had over 12,000. A few weeks ago, I was down in the 6000's. Today, I have about 8,500. It can be disconcerting to see the numbers change so drastically, but it's important to realize it's temporary! Ancestry hints come and go, an ebb and flow, as the algorithms search tirelessly for new hints and suggestions.

I've had readers ask, "How do you manage all those hints?" The truth is, I don't! I know many people completely ignore the All Hints page, preferring to focus solely on one person (or branch) at a time. Being a little neurospicy, I tend to like variety. I usually alternate working on a single person, then follow up by hopping around like the Easter Bunny on Easter morning. Finishing a person (even if it's just until more hints show up) is a very rewarding feeling. But hopping gives me a sense of satisfaction no branch is being ignored. There's no right or wrong, you have to determine the strategy best suited for you and your research goals.

Over the past several months, I've noticed the oldest hints (those over 90 days old) seem to be disappearing at a pretty good clip. I shouldn't really say disappearing. They're simply being removed from the current view. Unless a record collection is actually removed, hints are still there waiting to be discovered. Not only have I seen my All Hints fluctuating, but the number of hints on a specific person may go from 20 to 2, or even 0, overnight. Typically, focusing research on a person will regenerate many hints with the click of a refresh button. Adding several new people to a branch is like pulling a rabbit out of a hat. As hints are generated for these new additions, there's a cascading effect. You might add one person and you're rewarded with 10 hints for them. And then you notice you sudenly have nany new hints for someone (or several someones) in the same branch, even if you've not researched them recently.

I've seen a few posts in the forums lately where people are alarmed as hints disappear. They're afraid they'll never know if any really good hints are suddenly gone. Some go so far as to take screenshots or copy all the links as soon as they see them, just in case. I totally understand! I've felt the same way. If I find a really good hint I'm not ready to work on just yet, I do copy and save it. (Trying to relocate an elusive hint you just know yow saw in the past can be absolutely maddening!)  But saving every link can quickly become overwhelming. The longer I research, the more I realize, trust in the algorithms, they will provide. It's like nurturing a garden. Put in the effort and you will be rewarded. Even if the hint numbers dwindle for a time, be it All Hints or on a person profile, they will eventually repopulate. If they don't show up fast enough, you always have the option to go search yourself rather than relying on the algorithms. 

I actually consider disappearing and reappearing hints a good thing! It keeps things fresh. Regardless of whether you're a hopper or prefer focus, so long as you're researching, you're going to have ups and downs as the algorithms do their magic. And remember, the algorithms aren't going to present you with every possible hint. Hints are generally from the most utilized collections or those others have saved in their trees. If you're not making time to do at least a few cursory searches of your own, you may be missing out on valuable and insteresting information. 

Finally, please be sure to evaluate every hint for yourself. Just because the algoritm serves it up doesn't make it true. Just because someone else saved it doesn't make it right. Just because the name matches doesn't make it the person in your tree. And just because the OCR or AI thinks it found a name in a newspaper article does not make it so. OCR and AI are both imperfect technology (helpful, and useful, but imperfect none the less). Humans are fallible. No matter how hard we try, trees will sometimes contain accidental errors. Hints are nothing more than suggestions. Careful evaluation of each hint can save hours of time trying to unwind mistakes down the road.

Image by HANSUAN FABREGAS from Pixabay