They let me in!

A few years ago, I learned that I have ancestors among the Filles du Roi, kind of Quebec's version of the Mayflower immigrants. I was fascinated by the story of these brave women leaving France to help colonize Quebec, some maybe seeking a better life or more opportunities in the new world (though given its underpopulated state, I'm not sure what opportunities they were expecting). As I began researching my French-Canadian ancestry, I found several of these Filles du Roi in my family tree. I thought this was really cool, and wanted a way to commemorate these ancestors. 

After a few minutes of searching on Google, I found a lineage society called "La Société des Filles du roi et soldats du Carignan," based out of Virginia interestingly enough, not Quebec like I would have imagined. I asked them if I would be able to join, given that my link to my French-Canadian ancestors was discovered through DNA research and not via paper trail genealogy. Surprisingly, they hadn't seen genetic genealogy used to prove a relationship to a specific individual. They knew about ethnicity results, and how that could show a general relationship to an ethnic group, but they hadn't seen it applied to a specific individual and family. I wrote back, and sent them a proof argument I'd written a few years ago, where I showed how I came to the conclusion that I was a descendant of William Vadnais. They wrote back and said the argument was very interesting, and I should apply for membership!

It took me a while to get my documentation together. Part of the delay was the amount of documentation I felt I needed to prove the connection between my chosen ancestor, Marie Boisleau (born about 1651 in Dercé, Vienne, France) and me, her ninth-great-grandson. That's 12 generations covering over 300 years, and I wanted to prove every birth, marriage, and death in the chain that I could. Then I realized that some of my documents were pretty poor quality images, so I needed to go dig up better images of them. Then came the task of filling out the application with all these names, dates, and places. But I kept at it, and eventually I had everything together. I sent it off, and didn't hear anything for a while. Then just yesterday, I got an email back welcoming me to the society! 

The society seems to have some cool benefits, chief of which is access to the society's newsletter. As I don't have a ton of personal research time, this is a great way to get access to information (hopefully a lot of historical context too) on this branch of my family tree without having to spend a ton of time learning it all on my own. They also have a really cool medallion you can buy, which would be neat to have. Most of all, I'm just excited that I was able to apply for this organization in a way they hadn't seen before, and was able to prove my ancestry well enough to be accepted. It makes me feel like I really do know what I'm doing, and it gives me a way to honor and celebrate another branch of my family history. I have a few other lineage societies I'm interested in joining - there's one for descendants of War of 1812 soldiers (my ancestor Elisaph Sanford was one), descendants of Civil War Union Veterans (I have at least two of those), and one I just learned about for descendants of American Farmers. At first I thought that was a joke, because who doesn't have ancestors in the US that were farmers? But then, don't all of our ancestors deserve to be celebrated and remembered, even (perhaps especially) those that don't seem to have the glamorous or noteworthy story or background? So yeah, lots still to do. Which is why I love this work!

Sally's Sisters

A few years ago, I discovered that my maternal great-grandfather was not James Harris, but William "Frenchy" Vadnais, a French-Canadian from Alberta. It was a big surprise, and since then I've learned a lot about William's ancestry. One thing I haven't looked into too much yet is William's immediate family. I knew he was married to Charlotte Harris, and they were the parents of Bill Vadnais, but that was pretty much it. Once we learned about our relationship to William, my grandma talked to Bill Vadnais, and got some really interesting info - William had been married previously to a lady named Gladys, and they had had two daughters, Cherie and Yolanda. He even had some pictures of them!

Yolanda  Vadnais and her husband Bud.

Cherie Vadnais

I did a little searching on them to see what I could find, but didn't see much right away that seemed relevant, so I put them on the back burner.

For six years.

In my defense, it's been a VERY busy six years! But I felt inspired to go looking for them again, and found some really interesting details.

First up, Cherie. I had more info about her to go on. I had her death date and info - she died 11 April 2011 in Kansas, and at the time was married to Elliott Stanton. She'd been married a few times before, to Claude Ball and Robert Richardson. One thing I forgot I knew was that she wasn't raised by her parents - her mother died when she was 3, and she apparently grew up with the last name Skelton, as she was fostered out to Peter and Agnes Skelton. I can't find her in the 1930 census, and she wasn't listed with her father and his second wife, Charlotte Harris, so I don't know where she was between 1927 and 1940.

Her obituary names a number of kids and step-kids, so it sounds like she had a life full of family, which is what everyone wants right? The obit also said she was predeceased by a sister, but did not give her name (I hate when they do that).

Speaking of her sister, she was a lot harder to find info on. My grandma said her name was Yolanda, but I couldn't find anyone with that name in my searches on Ancestry and other sites. I looked at the public trees on Ancestry (which are notorious for being terribly incorrect sometimes, but can sometimes have absolute gold), and they actually had her name as Yvonne Vadnais. I tried looking for her, but the closest I can find is a 1930 census for Yvonne Vadnais, born about 1925 in Idaho, living in California as a "lodger" with Calvin and Pearl Cleveland. I doubt a 4-year-old girl chose to live as a lodger, but I don't know if that's even the same person I'm looking for.

Thinking that maybe some info on Cherie and Yolanda/Yvonne's mother would lead me in the right direction, I went looking for and found her death certificate. Gladys died on 25 January 1927 of double labor pneumonia, meaning she had it in both lungs, with acute follicular tonsilitis contributing to her death. She'd had the pneumonia a week when she died, meaning her decline in health and subsequent death must have come on rapidly. I found her obituary, along with a couple funeral and death notices, which all referred to Gladys as William's "beloved wife," making her passing even more heartbreaking to read about. The obit mentioned her daughters, and gave their names as Cherie and...Fritzie Jane! Not Yolanda, not Yvonne, nothing with a Y at all. Now I'm really stumped. I'm still looking for anything else on Fritzie Jane, but haven't found anything so far. I've reached out to the lady behind one of those online trees, to see if she knows anything about daughter #2. I checked with my cousin, the granddaughter of Bill Vadnais, and her side barely knew of Cherie and her sister's existence. Bill Vadnais apparently knew something of them, as he had photos, but he passed away last year, so he's not here to ask. I'm worried I waited too long. :( But perhaps this blog post will strike a chord with someone out there. If so, please drop me a line! I'd love to know more about Cherie and her sister.

Genes Day Friday - What I have learned so far through DNA testing

I thought it would be fun to recap some of the things I have learned genetic genealogy and DNA testing. Let me begin by saying THANK YOU! to the dozen or so relatives that have spit and swabbed for me. None of these breakthroughs would have been possible without your help.

1. Genetic genealogy and paper genealogy are in some ways very opposite. In paper genealogy, you start with a known person, and work outward from there, painstakingly creating family groups and pedigrees by searching through the records left behind by ancestors, friends, associates, and neighbors. You connect to people through chance and happenstance as often as known connections. In genetic genealogy, you are connected to other testees by the scientific confirmation of shared DNA, proving a blood link to that person. Sometimes (hopefully often) you can use paper genealogy to determine where and how that link was made. Sometimes you can't, and you're just stuck knowing that somehow you are related to that person.

2. Sometimes genetic genealogy helps you break through brick walls that would otherwise be impossible to penetrate. This was the case in my Grandma Blossom's maternal line. DNA testing led me to a relative who not only lives in Europe, but was intimately familiar with the area, history, and people. Within a few short weeks, he helped me put together nearly 300 years of family history for my great-great-grandmother Maria (Zitzmann) Hoffman, when I had long assumed I'd never get beyond her.

3. Sometimes you uncover things you never expected were there. Such was the case when I found out one of my ancestors was not James Harris, but in fact was William Vadnais. This discovery changed a significant portion of my genetic family tree, and has taught me to never assume that everyone listed in the paper trail is actually my ancestor by blood.

4. Everyone has two family trees - one that's genetic, and one that's genealogical. CeCe Moore taught me this. Not all of your paper ancestors will appear in your DNA - you only get half of each parent, who only got half of their parents, who only got half of their parents, etc. Within a few generations, ancestors will drop out of your genetic family tree because their DNA was simply not passed on to the next generation. That doesn't mean they aren't your ancestors though, just that they aren't represented in your DNA. Likewise, my paper family tree still includes Jim Harris because he raised that ancestor of mine and put his name on her birth certificate, even if he wasn't her biological father. His life and his family history influenced the way he raised my ancestor, so knowing about his family tree is just as important as knowing about the biological tree of William Vadnais.

5. You learn funky new words and acronyms like SNP, haplogroup, STR, endogamy, and centiMorgan. It's like learning a new language, but in learning it you learn how to discuss your family history in a whole new way. Not only do you think in terms of shared ancestors, you come to think of how much DNA you likely share with that 1C1R, or where your paternal ancestry comes from not just 3 or 4 generations ago, but hundreds of years before records were kept. It's fascinating and difficult, and I love it.

6. And the most particular thing I've learned over the last couple weeks - just because you share a certain percentage of DNA, that doesn't mean you can tell right off how closely you're related to them. If you trace your lines back far enough, you'll start to see some ancestors popping up in multiple places on your family tree. That's called ancestor collapse - being descended from the same person or couple through multiple lines of descent. This affects how much DNA you share with someone, because if you and your match have the same ancestor, but if one or both of you have multiple lines of descent from that someone, their DNA will be over-represented in your genome. You'll share more DNA than you would if you only had one line of descent from that individual, so it'll look like you're more closely related than you actually are. For example, if you're doing genetic genealogy on your French-Canadian lines, you really do need to push the lines back as far as you can because there was a lot intermarrying of families, which leads to having some ancestors pop up more than once in your family tree. That's something you need to know if you're going to try and pin down common ancestors with your DNA matches.

Have you thought about taking a DNA test to help you in your research? Or have you taken one already? What have you learned from it? Leave me a comment!

An unexpected treasure trove - Probate Case Files

Earlier this week, Ancestry.com announced the release of a huge group of digitized, indexed records - U.S. Wills and Probate Records for all 50 states. I've only dealt with wills a little in my genealogy research, so this was an exciting prospect for me, and I hoped to find records of my ancestors in these files. I went through and quickly searched for the more unusual names in my tree - Bergstad, Craddock, Vadnais, Waechter, Beilstein, Groff, and a couple others. I found one hit in Groff, with the probate case file for Cynthia P. (McMullins) Groff, wife of my 3rd-great-granduncle, George Groff. I still need to look through that one (it's 38 pages!) but what I did see in my cursory scan through it has me very excited - married names for all her children (both those with George and those from her first marriage to Milton Smith)! But I wanted to find something for a direct ancestor if possible, maybe even something to break through a brick wall. So I kept searching, and soon found something - a probate case file for J.E. Craddock of Montana!

I scanned through it and found that J.E. Craddock's probate case was being handled by four of his children - G. A. Craddock, J. B. Craddock, W. L. Craddock, and E. L. Craddock. That fit nicely with what I knew of my James E. Craddock's children - George, Jessie, William, and Ernest. I knew that in addition to those four, he had three additional children - Moses, Otis, and Edna. I kept looking and found mention of them as well. This was my guy! And the file was 64 pages!!

I downloaded all 64 pages of the file, and began going through them. After the initial mention of the four sons requesting letters of administration, the bulk of the file was taken up with paperwork that didn't tell me much (letters to and from court the trying to name the administrator mostly). Then came some more interesting details. E. C. Kurtz was eventually named administrator of the estate, and there were notices posted in the paper for several weeks inviting creditors to come forward and claim any money owed them by James. The funeral home that took care of the funeral was paid $15 for furnishing the hearse (this was in 1917; I wonder what that would cost today). James' daughter Edna Morton was paid $101.70 for funeral expenses and for caring for James through his final illness. Mr. Kurtz was paid $75 for his role as administrator.

I also learned that James had two lots in Victor, Ravalli county, Montana that were, according to the case file, split so each child received an "undivided one seventh of all the real property." It doesn't go into any more detail than that. I'd have to look up the original plat of the survey to see where exactly the property was, since there is no map attached. The remaining cash in James' account was also split evenly, so each child received $69.87 as their part of the inheritance.

Reverse side of Ernest Craddock's voucher

But the most interesting part of the whole file wasn't any of the forms or receipts. It was a note written (presumably) by my 2nd-great-grandfather, Ernest Craddock, on the back of the voucher he received for his $69.87. His was the only one with this information, and since he was the 3rd youngest of the children, it's interesting that the information came from him. On his voucher, Ernest wrote the following (spelling and grammar are original): "We don't know where Otis, is he is in the Army somewhere that all we know about him he never writes. Yours truly E L Craddock". That short little note brought a whole different aspect to this file. At first I'd imagined all the kids coming together to deal with the loss of their father, and to divvy up his property evenly. But now, according to that note, there had been some estrangement between Otis (the youngest of James' children) and his older siblings, to the point where there was no written communication and no one knew where he was, at least for a time. I know they eventually found him, as his voucher is in the file and signed by him. But it made me sad to think that the family went through a loss like this without one of their own to help deal with the situation, to talk to, and comfort and be comforted by. I hope they overcame the estrangement and stayed in communication as time went on. But it just goes to show that you really never know what you'll find when you research your family history, or where you'll find it. Sometimes the most powerful little nuggets are tucked away in the margin or on the back of what looks to be something boring and inconsequential.