"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.