"Heraldry & The Spearing Coat of Arms"

The Spearing Coat of Arms

“Spearinff. Ar. three pellets in fess betw. two bars dancett^e gu. Crest — On a globe a ship under sail ppr.”

The General Armory of England, Scotland, Ireland, and Wales (Sir Bernard Burke, first published in 1842) is an immense collection of descriptions of surname crests, containing details on thousands of persons who were granted arms. The majority of its content is in the above format, with surnames listed alphabetically, each name followed by its crest’s specifications in beautiful heraldic language. The translation of the above would read:

“Spearing. Silver; three black circles, placed horizontally between two narrow red horizontal bands, dancetty. Crest – On a globe, a ship under sail, natural coloured.”

Not only did the fighting men of the Middle Ages require a surname, but they also needed to take it a step further. Because they wore a suit of armour including a helmet which completely covered their head, a knight fully adorned for battle was indistinguishable from other knights. To prevent knights of the same side from attacking one another, some form of visible identification was necessary. Therefore many knights painted unique patterns on their shields and had them woven into the cloth coats that were worn over their armour. Hence the term, “coat of arms”. As this method became more widely used, it became necessary to make sure that no two knights should use the same decoration. Records began being kept that granted each knight and his family the right to use their own unique symbol.

In addition to the family coat of arms, family “mottos” are believed to have originated in the Middle Ages as battle cries. Burke’s General Armory lists known mottos alongside each family coat of arms. There was no motto recorded with the Spearing surname. Perhaps it is time to create one?

Heraldry (the study of coats of arms) is a fascinating subject of research and much information can easily be found on the world-wide-web. The Royal Heraldry Society of Canada website is www.heraldry.ca.

 

"The Quest For Accuracy (Part 2)"

The dashingly handsome
Charles Edward Spearing
(1881-1952)

My first connection with another Spearing family history researcher came via the popular genealogy web site mentioned in my previous post. After engaging in a flurry of activity attaching dozens of names and documents to my tree, I came across a photograph of a first cousin three generations removed by the name of Charles Edward Spearing (handsome chap as you can see). Charles Edward’s paternal grandfather was the fertile Joseph Henry Spearing, father of 11 children and my 3rd great grandpa.

I attached a copy of this wonderful photograph of Charles Edward to my own tree, shortly after which I received this message from a gentleman from Leicestershire, England:

“Hi, glad you like my photos of Spearings, Charles Edward was my grandfather, you say his parents William and Harriett married in 1876 ? did they, please show me the proof and I will be eternally grateful, cheers”

It was a thrill to receive a note from an unknown relative! The thing was, I didn’t entirely say Charles’ parents were married in 1876, I only attached a reference to that date from someone else’s family tree, and there was no citation with it, meaning that there were no supporting documents – no proof. This date could have been an estimate based on other information, or taken from a scribbling on the back of a photo or from a Bible in someone’s attic – who knows. So, I responded in kind:

“Hi! Sorry I have no citation to prove that date is accurate, it was taken from someone else's tree and I have it in my notes as being unverified as of yet. So far it seems to be a reasonable approximation as they appear to have been married prior to 1881 but that's all I have. Charles Edward Spearing was my 1st cousin thrice removed. Good to hear from you!”

In this case it is reasonable to assume the date may be close, but without verification, we can’t say for sure, and there are no indications on the genealogy site as to where this date originated from. I quickly received a reply:

“Hi, thanks for speedy reply, I am still searching for proof, quick question, where was William Edward Spearing in 1901, any ideas, cheers”

On to the next problem. William Edward was Charles Edward’s father. I could see by the data we both collected relating to William Edward Spearing that this relative appears in the 1891 and 1911 England censuses but is mysteriously missing from the 1901 census. I could not offer a solution to this conundrum either:

“Hi cousin. I have not found any proof yet of W E Spearing's whereabouts in 1901. Odd... but still searching.”

To which my newly found kin from across the Atlantic offered this interesting tidbit:

“There is an entry in criminal and law suits naming another? William Spearing and friend in very naughty activities - they were found innocent - but no addresses except for Aston Birmingham which is relevant but certainly not proof of being same person, you can see it for yourself - keep well”

Sure enough, in the England & Wales Criminal Registers, William Spearing and Thomas Davis were on trial on July 2, 1878 but both were acquitted. Mr. Davis’ charge was “assault with intent to ravish”. Mr. Spearing’s charge was “the like”.

"The Quest For Accuracy (Part 1)"

A case for two different dates of death

I’m pretty new at this family history stuff, but already I’m noticing some criticisms cropping up here and there about a very popular genealogy web site, one that I have been using quite frequently in recent weeks to aid my research. It’s an extremely slick, professional site and contains a wealth of information, a lot of which is available elsewhere in other places but the idea is to save the researcher from having to travel the world in search of the original copies of all this paperwork.

American, Canadian and British census records and a vast number of birth, baptism, church, marriage, immigration and death related documents are there. It is genuinely amazing to me that so much family history information can be found in one place, and the collection is constantly growing. Once you enter in some of your own personal data and start your family tree, the site will find “hints” throughout their databases that will guide you to online documents and other users’ family trees, and these sources help you fill in missing information for your own tree. The beauty of the site is that it will direct you toward a mountain of data about your ancestors and relatives that has already been compiled by other researchers.

The down side of the site however, is that it will direct you toward a mountain of data about your ancestors and relatives that has already been compiled by other researchers. This is why the criticism exists – it is the Wikipedia of genealogy sites. What you find is not always necessarily accurate information. Even where there are supporting documents – when you have found a church register containing the name John Bertrand for example, you still have to make sure you have the correct John Bertrand. And when the site directs you to review John Bertrand on eleven other family trees all pieced together by different researchers, you may find that John Bertrand had six different birth dates.

The key problem is that it is so easy to retrieve the information, there is a bit of laziness when it comes to verifying it to be true. Sometimes you do have to use your best educated guesses because the supporting documentation just doesn’t exist, but unfortunately a lot of arm chair researchers use their first and only guess.

Amateur genealogists like myself must still strive for as much accuracy as possible. This is all part of the fun – digging and digging until you have irrefutable proof that the date you found is precise. But in some ways, the internet’s way of making everything instantly accessible to the masses seems to be making it more of a challenge to maintain a high level of accuracy in your research.

"Family Titles: Positions Of Birthright"

A restaurant run by one of our fake uncles.
Photo by Elaine Marschik
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/marschik/3904843993.jpg)

If someone who wasn’t my child said to me “you’re like a father to me”, I’d be honored. If someone who wasn’t my child called me “dad”, I’d be horrified.

When I had a son, there were some cousins in his mother’s extended family who decided it would be novel to take my son on as a nephew. Suddenly my little guy who once had numerous cousins had very few cousins but an unnatural number of aunts and uncles. Of course, the phenomenon was limited to the “older” cousins, the ones who somehow warranted a more respectful title because of their advanced age. Essentially the terms “cousin” and “uncle” ceased having a familial meaning and became rankings in a hierarchy, like the lords and barons of the feudal system in medieval England.

My father, like myself, always frowned on this artificial type of self-knighthood. He preferred titles to be accurate, reflecting the relationships between relatives as they really were, because he considered the terms “cousin”, “uncle”, “dad” and all others to be strictly positions of birthright – positions that blood had made for a purpose and that no man should put asunder. If anyone adopted a false title for themselves my father considered it a blasphemy – it was an insult to the real blood relation whose job it was, in my father’s eyes, to be that relation. That kin had certain duties that were to be performed, responsibilities reserved for only that kin, and ones that could not be taken away by an imposter. There was no doubt what approbations were associated with the titles of grandparent, parent, aunt or uncle. My father and I gently tried to tell my young impressionable son that in fact some of his “uncles” were really his cousins, but I’m not sure if he understood or if he even cared.

To many, the familial titles can be interchanged at no great consequence, for others it’s a big deal. For the genealogist unfortunately, it’s essential that we get it right. If you are so popular that the world calls you their uncle, then you were given no choice but to accept that honor and I salute you (shout out to the late great Milton Berle). But, sorry… you won’t be given that honor on the family tree unless it's been legitimately inherited.

"A Spearing By Any Other Name"

Peter Paul Rubens' grandparents, Bartholomeus Rubens
and Barbara Arents Spierinck
(Rubenshuis Museum, Antwerp, Belgium)

The Surname Database says that “Spearing” is an unusual name. It is said to be of Anglo-Saxon origin, and a patronymic (or a derivative) form of the surname “Spear”, which itself comes from the pre 7th century Olde English secondary name of “Spere”. This name originally could have meant a tall thin person, or someone who was experienced with using a hunting spear, or even someone whose occupation was making spears.

“Early recordings of the surname from this source include: Walter Speare (Somerset, 1185), and Henry Spere (Lancashire, 1246). Nicknames were given in the first instance with reference to a variety of personal characteristics, such as physical attributes or peculiarities, and also to habits of dress and occupation. The Olde English suffix "ing", when attached to a personal name, means "sons, descendants" or "dependent men of". In the modern idiom the patronymic forms of the name appear as: Spiring, Spering, Sperring and Spearing. On December 18th 1552, Richard Spering, an infant, was christened in Whittington, Gloucestershire, and on September 8th 1677, Mary, daughter of Thomas Spearing, was christened in Evenlode, Gloucestershire.” (source).

Surnames became a necessity in England with the introduction of poll taxes (or head taxes) in the mid-14th century which were instituted in conjunction with censuses (I wonder how many Spearings took part in the Peasants’ Revolt of 1381). What makes things even more interesting are the number of variations in the spelling of the name that exist. In addition to the variants noted above, there may be many others: Sperrin, Spearin, Speiring, Speryng, Sperengue, Spierinck, Spierinke and Spearink, just to name a few. Some of these are thought to have not actually originated in England, but in either Germany or Holland in the 12th century or before. On casual reading of other genealogists’ research on the Spearing name it is noted that the paternal grandmother of famous Flemish painter Peter Paul Rubens (1577-1640) was Barbara Arents Spierinck, and she is featured in a painting on display at the Rubenshuis Museum in Antwerp, Belgium (source).  There was also a lesser-known Flemish painter named Carel Philips Spierinck who was also active in the first half of the 17th century. Were they relatives of mine? Perhaps…

Many genealogists hit the wall when they go as far back as the middle ages in their research for obvious reasons. Lack of sufficient or accurate records from these eras make the tracing of one’s ancient roots a terribly difficult task. There are no clear indications as to how, when, or why spelling variations exist – we can assume that at least some of them are the result of census takers or record keepers spelling out names phonetically at the time they were recorded. All part of the utter bliss that is felt when an important discovery is made and verified to be correct.

"Genealogy & Privacy: Keeping It In The Family"

When doing research on your family history one of the most important things to consider right off the top, especially in this digital age that we’re all now helplessly immersed in, is the need for personal guidelines on the issue of privacy.
 
Never before in history has it been so easy to gain access to personal information. With the help of the internet, anyone can become a genealogist and post their family history on the web for all to see. However, publicly published family trees can become easy targets for identity thieves. For any living person in your family tree you may have data about them that they may not even be aware could be available to the general public – if any of this information is to be published on a web site, you have some special considerations to make. These may even involve some persons in your tree who are deceased.
 
The first thing I did when setting up my genealogy site was to find a way to keep it in the family. I did this by creating a “splash” page as my home page which requires the entry of a password to get into and be able to view anything on the site. I won’t get into the technical programming know-how of web site password protection here, but there are different ways of doing it – these methods can be Googled by the DIY web site designers out there. Once you get password protection in place, you can control which individuals can see the content on your web site by sending them the password upon request. It’s also a good idea to change the password periodically to be extra safe, just don’t forget to let anyone who has access know when you do.
 
The next thing to do was to figure out what my personal “privacy code” was going to be. This was to be my ethics statement and deal with how I would handle all of the private information I was going to be gathering. Common sense dictated that people in my tree who were still living would need special rules to protect their private information, even from other family members. Some information may be very sensitive in nature. Even data collected about some deceased relatives may be too sensitive to publish. If the web site was to be accessible by the public, it would be appropriate to remove all data associated with any living relatives, as well as to limit data associated with deceased relatives who have close connections to any living relatives. One could replace the name of each living relative with the word “Living” to protect their identities, and only publish the names of their immediate ancestors with no other vital information.
 
Because my site is private, I chose not to restrict information associated with deceased relatives unless the data is extremely sensitive, looking at each case individually. For living relatives, I chose to only publish their names with no other vital data, unless I was expressly granted permission by that person to publish more information about them. That said, I must be prepared to remove them completely from the published version of my tree if they so request it.
 
Once in a while a really juicy story is bound to surface about a long-lost ancestor, and I love to share a juicy story. However, even these may be inappropriate for a public site or blog as they may inadvertently divulge too much private information. It is best to keep these stories within the family as well – I have set up a separate password-protected page on my site for just such a purpose (I call mine “Family Jewels”).
 
It sounds all too obvious, but the genealogist must remember that everyone they collect data on is a real human being. Respect for privacy and the use of common sense must be the order of the day.

"The Spearing Numbering System (Part 3)"

The Canon or Common Law Relationship Chart showing
relationships between 2 members of a family tree

My final post regarding the numbering system is to show how the identification numbers can be modified in such a way as to accommodate moving forward in time from any blood relative so that we understand where every relative is on the tree while at the same time having no two identification numbers exactly alike.

To avoid duplication of identification numbers when the tree branches out and comes back toward the present day, we need to add a sub-level of numbering to the end of our identification numbers. If we use the same S number for a specific relative’s children we can assign them an additional digit to indicate that they are a generation removed. For example, if my father’s father had a younger brother, his identification number would be G02L001F0004S2 (2nd generation prior to my own, 1st line, sharing my grandfather’s F number of 4, sibling #2). If he had a son, that person’s identification number would be G01L001F0004S2.1 (1st generation prior to my own, 1st line, same family & sibling number but with a decimal 1 added to indicate 1st generation moving forward, 1st child). If he had a son, we would add another digit, so his identification number would be G00L001F0004S2.11, with the 2 digits representing the 2nd generation forward, 1st child. Additionally, if that person had a younger sibling, their identification number would be G00L001F0004S2.12 (only the final digit is changed, essentially this is a Sibling number within that particular family).

The system I am using for the S numbers is actually stolen from the Henry and D’Aboville descendant numbering systems already commonly used, with the small modification of using a decimal only once, between the original S number and all subsequent generations.

The only way to make real sense of all this is to illustrate it in a mock family tree. Starting with me, moving backwards a bit then coming forward again on a different branch will give an idea how it works:

Member (description) / Identification Number

Me / G00L001F0001S3
My father / G01L001F0002S6
My grandfather / G02L001F0004S1 (assuming he’s the oldest sibling)
My great-grandfather / G03L001F0008S1 (assuming he’s the oldest sibling)

Moving forward, since this is just an example, I’ll use hypothetical descendants of my great-grandfather for illustration purposes:

Great-grandfather’s sister #1 / G03L001F0008S2
Great-grandfather’s sister #2 / G03L001F0008S3
Sister #2’s husband / G03L001F0008S3M1
   (‘S3M1’ means 1st spouse of sibling #3)
Sister #2’s son #1 / G02L001F0008S3.1
   (takes mother’s S number, plus decimal 1)
Sister #2’s son #2 / G02L001F0008S3.2
Sister #2’s daughter #1 / G02L001F0008S3.3
Sister #2’s son #3 / G02L001F0008S3.4
Son #3’s 1st wife / G02L001F0008S3.4M1
Son #3’s daughter #1 / G01L001F0008S3.41
Son #3’s daughter #2 / G01L001F0008S3.42
Son #3’s 2nd wife / G02L001F0008S3.4M2
Son #3’s son #1 by 2nd wife / G01L001F0008S3.43
Son #1’s wife / G01L001F0008S3.43M1
Son #1’s child #7 / G00L001F0008S3.437
Child #7’s child #3 / G0AL001F0008S3.4373

Using the Canon Law Relationship Chart, I have determined this last relative would be my 3rd cousin once removed. According to the chart, the common progenitor at the top would be my 2nd great-grandfather, and following down the left side, I would be in box 4 (great-great-grandson). Following down the right side of the chart, from my great-grandfather’s sister in box 1 and moving down, the last relative shown above would be in box 5 (great-great-great granddaughter). Where the 2 meet in the middle of the chart is at 3rd cousins one generation removed.

Confirming this data can be done by analyzing this relative’s identification number:

G number = 0A (1 generation ahead of my own)
L number = 001 (1st bloodline – shares a common ancestor from my father’s paternal line)
F number = 0008 (a descendant of my great-grandfather’s family)
S number = 3.4373 (a direct descendant of the 3rd sibling in my great-grandfather’s family; this person is the 3rd child of the 7th child of the 3rd child of the 4th child of that ancestor)

Final Thoughts

It has been said that ancestor and descendant numbering systems should be kept separate, that they mix as well as oil and water. That may be true as the statement comes from much more experienced genealogists than me. However, in my humble opinion, anything is worth trying that will allow me to have one uniform catalogue of everyone I know of who is or has ever been related to me. The identification numbers I’m generating are lengthy by some standards perhaps, but they are meaningful and they work! Now comes the fun part - cataloguing my relatives and growing the family tree.

"The Spearing Numbering System (Part 2)"

The next problem was assigning numbers to individual “families” within family lines. To accomplish this I focused on finding a strict mathematical formula, worrying only about going backward in time and not coming forward again until later.

 

The Sosa-Stradonitz system, showing
numbering for direct ancestors

I gained inspiration from the binary number system, a system every computer geek knows and is something I learned while majoring in electronics at high school. It’s the system computers use to process data – the most basic number system there is, consisting of only ones and zeros (or back in the day, “ons” and “offs”). Considering there are only males and females in a family tree, the use of a base-2 numbering system made sense.

Family Numbers

Using myself as Family (or F) number 1, and alternating backwards between the males and females it works like this:

F Number / Represents / Binary Equivalent

0001 / Me / 000001
0002 / Dad / 000010
0003 / Mom / 000011
0004 / Dad’s Dad / 000100
0005 / Dad’s Mom / 000101
0006 / Mom’s Dad / 000110
0007 / Mom’s Mom / 000111
0008 / Dad’s Dad’s Dad / 001000
0009 / Dad’s Dad’s Mom / 001001
0010 / Dad’s Mom’s Dad / 001010
0011 / Dad’s Mom’s Mom / 001011
0012 / Mom’s Dad’s Dad / 001100
0013 / Mom’s Dad’s Mom / 001101
0014 / Mom’s Mom’s Dad / 001110
0015 / Mom’s Mom’s Mom / 001111
0016 / Dad’s Dad’s Dad’s Dad / 010000
0017 / Dad’s Dad’s Dad’s Mom / 010001
0018 / Dad’s Dad’s Mom’s Dad / 010010
0019 / Dad’s Dad’s Mom’s Mom / 010011
and so on…

There are obvious patterns with this system. First, each male is represented by an even number (“0”) while the females are odd (“1”) – nothing to do with temperament, it just worked out that way. A glance at any of the binary numbers can tell you who that person is – if the leading “1” is interpreted as the generation level minus 1, the remaining digits show the Dads and Moms. For example, F number 19 shows a 4th generation prior to my own (the leading “1” is in the 5th position from the right, minus 1), then “0011” which can be interpreted as “Dad Dad Mom Mom” or my Dad’s Dad’s Mom’s Mom.

Second, the following mathematical rules apply:

1.   Each generation going back paternally – multiply the F # by 2
2.   Each generation going back maternally – multiply the F # by 2 then add one

For example, my F number is 1, my father’s is 2 (mine x 2), and my father’s father’s is 4 (my father’s x 2) and so on. My mother’s F number is 3 (mine x 2 + 1), while her father’s is 6 (her’s x 2) and her mother’s is 7 (her’s x 2 + 1). Having such a pattern comes in quite handy for tracking purposes, and in fact this is the Sosa-Stradonitz (or Ahnentafel) system itself exactly as it is used in genealogical systems which do not include peripheral relatives. However, instead of using it to designate individuals, I am using it to designate the families to which each individual belongs. My system requires an additional (fourth) level of numbering to accommodate each individual on the tree, i.e. to include all siblings and spouses.

The purpose of the F number is to distinguish relatives who share the same G and L numbers but belong to different families. For the purpose of this numbering system, the definition of family will be “group of siblings”. And of course, the numbering is relative to my own family, therefore my brother, sister and I all have an F number of 1. My father and all six of his siblings share the same F number of 2. My mother and her siblings will have an F number of 3, and so on. Outside of my direct bloodline, spouses who have married into the family tree share the same F number as that of their partner, e.g. my mother’s sister’s husband (uncle) shares her F number of 3.

I have set aside up to 4 digits for F numbers as that many digits accommodates over 10 prior generations (going beyond the 1600’s). Unless I exceed my expectations, that should be plenty. If an additional digit is required in future, then I can just magically add one later.

Sibling Numbers

The final level of numbering in the system is the Sibling (or S) number. This is the simple way we distinguish between siblings within the same family. Known siblings are numbered according to the order of their birth, beginning at 1. Therefore in my own family, my brother has an S number of 1, my sister is 2, and I’m 3 since I am the 3rd and youngest child. Every family (or group of siblings) works this way. S numbers have only 1 digit – for families with more than 9 siblings, we use the letter ‘A’ for 10, ‘B’ for 11, ‘C’ for 12 and so on. In my grandmother’s family, one of my great-aunts has an S number of A, since she was the youngest of ten children.

The S number is at the end of the complete identification number (e.g. my own final identification number is G00L001F0001S3). Using four levels of numbering provides sufficient data to give every one of my direct blood ancestors their own unique and meaningful identification number, however we need to make slight modifications to handle my collateral relatives along with their spouses and offspring. My next blog post will explain this final piece of the puzzle…

"The Spearing Numbering System (Part 1)"

Line Number Chart, showing 'L' numbers
 with colour-coding by generation

When I began compiling genealogy data it occurred to me that it might be a prudent idea to incorporate a way of cataloguing my ancestors database-style as they come into re-existence. One quick internet search later and I had found that there are several “accepted” numbering systems out there, and it was a relief to know that at least my cataloguing method had already been figured out for me. Count that as my first mistake - all of the systems (save for one) are descendant-based, meaning that the numbering starts with the oldest ancestor and moves forward in time. This implies that your starting point has to be an ancestor that you have already determined to be the earliest entry in your historical database, which implies that my research will have to be somewhat complete before I can assign anyone a number at all. I was going backwards in time and how far back was still unknown, leaving only one option.

The “Sosa-Stradonitz” system (also known as the Ahnentafel system) is ancestor-based and it works by simply assigning each member a unique number, beginning with you as number 1. Then your father is assigned #2, your mother #3, your paternal grandfather #4, your paternal grandmother #5, etc. In this system, someone’s father’s number is always twice that person’s number, and that person’s mother’s number is twice plus one. It sounds simple and effective, and it is if you are only tracking your direct bloodline. My problem was that I wanted to include collateral relatives and for this, the widely popular Ahnentafel system alone wouldn’t cut it. It was suggested that a second system was needed to combine with it – a descendant-based one, to catch all of those stray uncles, aunts and cousins, but I just wasn’t comfortable with doing it that way. It sounded untidy, or to describe it with my own made-up word, “un-uniform”. So despite the fact that genealogical societies everywhere frown on the layman who creates his own numbering system, I decided to give it a shot.

About 13 seconds after I began laying out the framework for my numbering system I discovered that this was going to require a steady supply of eye drops and coffee. It looked like it was going to involve diagrams, flow-charts and something I had not familiarized myself with in a long time – mathematics. I envisioned the “family tree” to be like an erupting geyser – shooting out from a single point, spreading outward as it rises up as far as it can go, reaching its apex, then falling back down to the ground, spattering randomly all over the place while covering a wide radius. And I wanted a system that would give a meaningful number to every individual – one that would uniquely mark them as if it was part of their DNA. However, I did not expect that this was going to be neat and tidy… or any easier.

The idea was to build each person’s unique number from a collection of data according to where they placed themselves in the tree in relation to my position in it. My first two identifiers would be the ‘Generation’ and the ‘Family Line’ (or ‘Line’) numbers.

"Are You Your Own Cousin?"

We are one big happy family

Here’s an interesting problem – for every generation back you go, you should be able to double your number of ancestors; 2 parents, 4 grandparents, 8 great-grandparents, and so on. At 12 generations back, you should have 4,096 10th great-grandparents; at 20 generations back, over 1 million 18th great-grandparents. At 30 generations back, or roughly around the time of the “Black Death” in Europe in the middle of the 14th century, you should have 1,073,741,824 28th great-grandparents – that’s over 1 billion. The problem is that the world population just before the plague is estimated to be around only 450 million people. So what happened to a half-billion of my ancestors?

The answer is a phenomenon called pedigree collapse. It occurs when people from the same family tree procreate, and the result is a shrinking of the tree instead of the standard expansion. It has occurred in everyone’s family history – if you go back far enough (for some not so far back as others) you should find it common that 3rd, 2nd or even 1st cousins have married, thus pulling the branches of the family tree back inward, reducing the overall number of ancestors you have. British social theorist Robin Fox recently estimated that 80% of historical marriages have taken place between 1st or 2nd cousins, causing many people to take up more than one spot in their pedigree charts.

It actually had to be that way, if not more so. British genealogist Brian Pears figured out that "if every single marriage was between 2nd cousins, then 30 generations ago [residents of Britain] would all have needed exactly 4,356,616 ancestors - still more than the English population at the time" and concludes that each of Britain’s citizens around the year 1300 was an ancestor to almost every Briton currently living. Mr. Pears’ fascinating essays on “The Ancestor Paradox” can be read here.

Also, check out this article by Joelle Steele that attempts to uncover the truth about cousin marriages.

So the next time you meet up with someone of questionable character, and feel the need to fling the insult “that’s what happens when cousins marry”, just remember that somewhere in your past, it happened to you too.

"Father's Day"

L.W. Spearing, best Dad ever

The summer of 2012 was long and hot, and I was just beginning to piece together information on my relatives based on the filing systems of available brains, otherwise known as “common knowledge”. The working up of the web site since then has consisted only of designing the general layout and mapping out what web pages will be required and where I’ll place them. I am seeing the need for a great deal of paperwork, and I’ve resigned to the fact that every relative of mine is going to require their very own 8 ½ by 11 inch profile page in the family catalogue.

That summer was not without its memorable moments. On a sunny Saturday August 18th, my son Eldon and I drove down to my mother’s home in London to help tidy up the yard and to spend time with Mom, my sister Lisa and my brother Glenn in commemorating what would have been my father’s 78th birthday. Lisa and I shared a cigar for Dad and even persuaded Mom to pose for a photo with one (but she did not inhale), and the wine was flowing. I hope Dad was also there in spirit – I believe he was, because in life he was ALWAYS there, so why not after life as well?

Dad was a true patriarch in every way. When I launched a memorial web site for him almost two years ago, I wrote this tribute to him:

On December 7, 2010 we lost the greatest father, grandfather, uncle, husband & friend that we could ever have asked for. But he was more than that – to me he was a provider, protector, advisor, encourager, counselor, listener, and teacher. He was honest, kind, strong, gentle, and patient. He was consistent, reliable, and the wisest man I have ever known. He was a generous, compassionate caregiver. He was my role model; his qualities not only made him a great father but a great person – one who left a lasting impression on everyone who ever met him. I was lucky to know him for 41 years.

I remember so fondly the late-night talks we had when I lived at home. He would be standing at the back door with a cigarillo (blowing smoke out into the backyard to appease my mother and I) while I would be at the bottom of the stairs, standing in the entranceway to my basement “pad”. We would talk about everything from my love life to his post office memories; from people we ran into that day to “family business”. It wasn’t the subject matter itself I remember though, it was the wisdom and authority with which my father could speak on just about any topic. And he could always keep it light enough to show me no matter how serious the subject, we could still laugh about it (and he was side-splittingly hilarious).

I listened to him, I looked up to him, and as long as I can remember tried my best to make him proud of me because more than anyone else’s, his approval was important to me. I considered him very sage, so if he ever confided in me or showed trust in me it was the biggest compliment to me he could pay. I valued his advice and heeded it every chance I had because he was always in control, always knew just how to fix any problem or handle any situation. He was a great manager of people and I will always hugely miss his wisdom and guidance.

Everything I am today is because of who he was and his influence on my life. He was a true self-made man – raised through a depression and a world war, he started with nothing. He dropped out of school to support his family and worked hard all his life to provide my mother, siblings and me with all the comforts we could enjoy, and he never stopped providing for us and helping us even after we could support ourselves. He was successful in his career and earned the love, respect and admiration of his peers. I am so thankful that he was able to retire early and enjoy more than twenty years at home with my mother because he deserved that so much.

In recent years, my son and I would look forward to our Friday night dinners at Mom and Dad’s; it was my last “tradition” with my father before he passed away. But the final months of 2010 brought health issues to him that of course no one would have expected. Beginning with what seemed like an innocent sore tongue, it soon turned into a cancer that was too aggressive to be stopped. Being too sick to even hold up his head, it culminated on the night of December 6th, the worst night of my life. I stayed with him through the night, not even realizing then that before sunrise I would witness his final breath.

My father never wanted any tribute or memorial, not even a funeral. But I am hoping this small token of my appreciation for him will also help others express how my father impacted their lives and how much he meant to them. This will be a continuing testimonial in honour of him.

My father is not only the greatest influence in my life, he also inspired this project. His tediousness in jotting down bits of information and his attention to detail has made it possible for me to access a plethora of “common knowledge”, a large amount of which would be lost if Dad hadn’t recorded it in his notebooks, on the backs of old photographs, or on newspaper clippings and funeral cards that were saved throughout his lifetime. He even went to the trouble of drawing a family tree chart which goes back four generations, and I have used it as the project’s starting point.

And so, I dedicate this adventure to my dear Dad, Bill Spearing. Happy Father’s Day, Dad.

O, all the money e'er I had,
I spent it in good company.
And all the harm that ever I've done,
alas it was to none but me.
And all I've done for want of wit
to mem'ry now I can't recall;
So fill to me the parting glass,
Good night and joy be with you all.

O, all the comrades e'er I had,
They're sorry for my going away.
And all the sweethearts e'er I had,
They'd wished me one more day to stay.
But since it falls unto my lot,
That I should rise and you should not,
I gently rise and softly call,
Goodnight and joy be with you all.

from “The Parting Glass” (traditional folk song)

"A Box Of Photographs"

Grave site of Walter (great-grandfather), Annie
(great-grandmother) and William Alexander (great-uncle)
Walker located at St. Andrew Cemetery, Orillia Ontario

(Originally written April 1, 2012)

I’m perusing a stockpile of photographs - some recent, some now becoming shockingly advanced in years, and a few which are downright ancient that compel me to marvel at the rapid passage of time.  The horrifying reality, which begins to set like concrete that was poured when I was a child, is that I’m not going to live forever.

Each time I pull these photographs from their coffer, the number of souls captured in them who have since passed on increases, and I recognize that each one lost took with them a wealth of information of the past that can never be retrieved.  What remains of them is whatever physical or psychological impressions they have left behind for us, and we are lucky if we have some piece remaining – any piece – of their story.  I am blessed that my father gave me countless firsthand memories (forty-one years’ worth) and plenty of artifacts that regularly bring them to mind.  But I will never again be able to hear him tell tales of his childhood days in Amherstburg or anecdotes from his post office years.  I can’t take him on a road trip so he can guide me through his old neighbourhoods and describe to me in a way that only he can what his world was like while he lived in it many years before.  I would give up a lot just for the opportunity to sit with my father one more time and listen to his experiences.  But this time I would write down every syllable – recording it for posterity.  How true it is that we don’t fully realize what we have until it is gone.

It is that thought that plants a peculiar sense of obligation in my soul to capture as much of my history as possible, especially that part which predates my own existence.  But there is also utter curiosity.  Who wouldn’t want to know where they came from and how they got here?  And there is so much to be gained by delving into one’s own blood line besides attaining an enhanced knowledge of oneself – to learn of distant relatives and make new connections, to see how our ancestors related to their world that it might give us insight into how we relate to ours, to increase our knowledge of history, to keep our ancestors’ memories alive, to leave a legacy for our descendants, and… simply for entertainment.

Or… adventure.  I do not know where my research will take me or who I will rub eyeballs with along the way.  I don’t know how far back in time I will be able to travel.  And I don’t know, of the numerous skeletons I will undoubtedly find, how many will turn up in the ancestral closet (hopefully a myriad – those stories make for a great read).  I do however, know that I have a good base on which to start building my history, and that I still have an abundant supply of domestic resources.  Much legwork can be eliminated with finger work, as I am fortunate enough to have the internet at my disposal.  But the real legwork will produce the real experience.  Nothing would match the sensation of standing at the grave site of a great-great-great-grandfather whom I had never known and realizing the same genes he owned are in me; or the wonder of shaking hands with a complete stranger who could tell me, “you’re great-great-great-grandfather… was also mine”.

And so a lifelong project begins although I know it will never be finished.  Time will continue to turn long after I’m gone, and many more stories will be told.  Here’s hoping the history uncovered in my lifetime is not forgotten.