Coffin Stainer or Stainer Coffin?

Jane Hemblen, half-sister of my great great grandmother, Elizabeth Hemblen, married William Stainer Coffin, on 7 June 1867 at Bath, Somerset.  William's father is named as Thomas Coffin, a baker.  Their relationship produced 7 children, whose births were registered in Bath registration district as follows -
1862 William Stainer Coffin Hemblen
1864 Thomas Stainer Coffin Hemblen (died 1865)
1866 Thomas Stainer
1869 Elizabeth Stainer Coffin (died 1870)
1871 Elizabeth Coffin
1873 Emily Coffin
1875 Samuel Stainer Coffin
1877 Charles Stainer Coffin

I have not found William Stainer / William Coffin in the 1841 or 1851 census of England and Wales, but in the 1861 census he is listed as William Stainer, a knife grinder, born at Wimborne, Dorset; and Jane Hemblen is listed as his servant.  In the 1871 and later censuses he is listed as William C. Stainer or William Coffin Stainer.  His death is registered under the surname Stainer and also under the hyphenated surname Coffin-Stainer.  When his wife Jane, died in 1892, her death registration identified her as Jane Coffin Stainer.

When their children married and had children of their own, the events were registered under the surname Stainer, but Coffin was often used as a second given name, resulting in many "Coffin Stainer" registrations.

In researching the extended family, I found several related family trees on the Ancestry.com websites.  Many of these trees did not identify the parents of William Stainer Coffin, while others suggested that he was descended from a line of Stainers, not Coffins.

I believe it more likely that William Stainer Coffin was a son of Thomas Coffin and Ann Beale Stainer, who married in Wimborne, Dorset in 1819.  Thomas Coffin is listed in the 1841 census of Wimborne, as a 40 year old baker with 4 children, and appears to be a widower, as no wife is listed.  Thomas Coffin's listed occupation of baker, matches the information from William's marriage certificate.  Two of Thomas Coffin's children listed in the 1841 census are Samuel and Emily, names also given to two of the children of William and Jane Coffin / Stainer.

Why William Stainer Coffin changed his surname we will likely never know, but my guess is that it relates to William's life prior to meeting Jane Hemblen.  In the 1861 census Jane is listed as his servant, but there is also a 6 month old daughter, Mary Stainer, living with them.  It is unclear from the census entry whether Mary is Jane's daughter, or William's daughter from a previous relationship. William and Jane had 3 additional children together before they married in 1867, so perhaps William was still married, and not a widower as suggested by the 1861 census record?

The New 23andMe

Finally, after 18 months of waiting, my account was transitioned to the "new 23andMe" experience last week.  I had read a lot of negative comments about the new experience, so I was somewhat apprehensive about the transition.

The new experience certainly presents the information in a different way, and I wouldn't give the site any prizes for being user-friendly, but overall, I find the new experience is more useful to a genealogist than the old site was.

The new experience splits information into 4 broad categories, two of which are health related (Traits and Wellness) and two of which are ancestry related (Ancestry and DNA Relatives)

The New 23andMe Home Screen

The health-related reports are of some interest, but it's the ancestral stuff that is important to me, and this can be accessed by clicking on Ancestry Reports.  From here you can looking at your paternal and maternal haplogroup (to gain some insight into your ancient origins), see how much Neanderthal DNA you have, look at your genetic composition by region (I am 99.9% European, which is not unexpected), and view your DNA family.  These are all screens that you will likely ignore after your initial curiosity, if you want to use the site to find relatives with whom you share significant DNA.

Ancestry Reports Screen

The easiest way to access your DNA matches (those people with whom you share DNA), is by clicking on Tools on the top horizontal menu and then selecting DNA Relatives.

Tools Menu

The DNA Relatives screen is similar to the DNA Relatives screen on the old site, but with less visible information - you see only the name, predicted relationship, and amount of shared DNA.  Additional information can be viewed by clicking on an individual's name.  Two enhancements are the ability to mark matches as favourites (I use this to mark people with whom I have determined how we are related), and the use of coloured dots to indicate the sharing status of the individual (sharing, request pending, etc.).

When you click on an individual match, you see much more detail about the person (haplogroups, matching segments, ancestral surnames, geographic origins, and relatives in common).  It is this last feature that is most useful in determining which ancestral line someone may be connected through.

Some positive changes with the new experience -

• You can now contact anonymous users (a feature that was removed 18 months ago, when this transition began).
• The Relatives in Common feature is great for isolating which ancestral line someone may be connected through.
• Open Sharing - If you opt in to Open Sharing, all matches can see your Ancestral Composition and your matching DNA segments, without having to send you a sharing request and waiting for you to accept it.
• Favourites - Allows you to mark individual DNA matches with a star.  I use this to identify those with whom I have established how we are related.
• Sharing Status - The use of coloured dots on the DNA Relatives screen to show the sharing status of your matches is very useful, but the colours are not different enough to work well for colour blind people like myself.  The use of different shaped indicators (e.g. circle, square, triangle, and diamond) in addition to the colour, would be an even bigger improvement.

My only real dislike of the new experience is the lack of user-friendliness when using DNA Relatives and Share and Compare.  But each time I use the new site, I get more comfortable with it.

Overall, the new 23andMe is my second favourite DNA testing site, but FamilyTreeDNA remains my first choice.

Using Ancestry's Surname Filter

I decided to utilise the surname filter tool on my Ancestry DNA matches to try and determine which ancestral lines some of the 2500 matches might be on.  It should be noted that the filters will only identify other DNA test subjects, where the person tested has also created a family tree on Ancestry - if a person has not created an ancestral family tree on Ancestry, then they will not show up when you filter by surname.  When you enter a surname into the filter field, the quantity of matches will be limited to show only the DNA test subjects who have that surname in their ancestral family tree.

 

My Great Great Grandmother, Elizabeth Hemblen was transported to Tasmania in the 1850s for stealing a frying pan, and although we have strong circumstantial evidence that "our" Elizabeth was the daughter of a Stonemason in Bath, Somerset, named Isaac Hemblen, we don't have any firm evidence, so a DNA match with other descendants of Isaac Hemblen, would add more credibility to the paper research to date.

 

When I filtered my 2500 Ancestry DNA matches with the surname Hemblen, I had only one match - Diane R.  So far so good!

 

Hemblen Filtered Matches

 Investigating further, I found that Diane and I are predicted to be 5th - 8th cousins, and that we share 6.4 cM (centiMorgans) of DNA on a single segment of one chromosome. 

Shared DNA Details

This is the point, when looking at DNA matches on other DNA testing websites, that I would look at the details of how many cM we shared, on which chromosomes, and compare the matching segments to other known matches, to try and isolate which ancestral line the match is likely on.  Unfortunately, with Ancestry, this is as good as it gets.

 

But, again using the Ancestry surname filter, I tried various surnames, to see which other surnames also appear in Diane's ancestry.  The first surname that I tried was Meale, the surname of Elizabeth Hemblen's husband (my great great grandfather) - Diane R. was not in the list of matches.  Next I tried surnames associated with spouses of Elizabeth Hemblen's siblings and half siblings.  Diane R. appeared as a match when I filtered with the surname Stainer, suggesting that Diane is a descendant of Elizabeth's half-sister, Jane Hemblen, who married William Stainer.  By filtering with the surname Enefer, I was able to narrow down the potential match to Thomas Coffin Stainer, son of Jane Hemblen, who married Mary Ann Enefer, suggesting that Diane is a descendant of Thomas Stainer and Mary Ann Enefer.

 

I contacted Diane, and outlined how I believed we are connected, and within 24 hours she confirmed that Thomas Stainer and Mary Ann Enefer were her great grandparents.  Diane and I are actually 4th cousins, a little closer than Ancestry suggested.

 

So despite the limited information provided by Ancestry on which segments of which chromosomes I share with Diane, the Ancestry surname filtering tool provided a high level of confidence in identifying how we connected, and I now have much greater confidence that Elizabeth Hemblen, daughter of Isaac Hemblen is my great great grandmother.

Pet Peeves with DNA Matching

With the exception of those who test with 23andMe for health related information, the vast majority of people take autosomal DNA tests to identify familial connections.   But many people severely limit their opportunities to identify connections with others by not maximising the functionality of the testing service. 

My pet peeves related to DNA testing for family history are -

1. People who do not reply to messages related to a DNA match - Communication with others who share portions of your DNA is the best way to establish how you may be related, or to get help with achieving your objectives of taking a DNA test.  If someone contacts you, have the courtesy to reply.
2. No associated family tree - All of the major testing companies (and GEDmatch) provide a facility for publicising your ancestral family tree, and all provide protections for hiding information on living people.  Publish the information that you know, to make it easier for DNA matches to see how you might be related.
3. Associated family tree is not public - Why hide your research from others?  You may have identified an ancestor that others have not, or you may have made a mistake in identifying an ancestor.  If your online tree is private, you will miss the opportunity to help others and correct errors.
4. Anonymous people on 23andMe - I am still on "the old experience" so I get to see that I have a DNA match, and how much DNA we share, but I cannot contact people who have chosen to be anonymous.  Why did they bother taking the test?
5. DNA result not uploaded to GEDmatch - If you have tested with one of the major DNA testing companies, you can avoid a lot of the drawbacks of the individual companies' capabilities by uploading your DNA test result to GEDmatch, which facilitates matching between people who tested with different companies.
6. Not accepting genome sharing requests on 23andMe - 23andMe (the old experience) does not automatically show you which segments of which chromosome you share with another customer, so you have to send a genome sharing request to each potential match, to identify which segments you have in common.  If you do not accept genome sharing requests you can only identify that you share DNA with a person, but have no idea of which line you may be related on.
7. Ancestry and MyHeritage do not provide information on which segments of which chromosomes are shared - These two testing companies know exactly which segments of which chromosomes you share with every other person in their database, but they choose to not provide you with the information.  At least 23andMe lets the user decide to share or not share, but Ancestry and MyHeritage severely limit their DNA test capability by not allowing users to ever see this information.

Please, take a few minutes to -

1. Check the privacy settings on your DNA test account
2. Upload a GEDCOM file of your ancestors or manually add your ancestors to the family tree associated with your DNA test account, and make sure that viewing the tree is not restricted
3. Upload your DNA test results to GEDmatch, and include a GEDCOM file
4. Check for new matches every week or two
5. Communicate, communicate, communicate!

One New Date - 3 New Generations of Ancestors

Some time ago I had hit a brickwall with researching Marlene's maternal Great Great Grandmother, Julie LeBlanc, and despite collaborating with other LeBlanc descendants, I could not confirm her parentage, mainly because I did not have a birth date for her.

 

As I identified in a previous post, the Alberta Archives has recently put historical death indexes online, and the death index entry for Julie LeBlanc identified that she was born in Quebec on 13 March 1857.

 

This one date was all that I needed to find her baptism entry (14 March 1857) in the Drouin Collection on Ancestry.com, and to very quickly take her family back an additional 3 generations, all verified through baptism and marriage records - the French Canadians kept excellent records. 

 

Ancestry of Julie Bergeron

 

One of Julie's descendants, Bonnie Konkal, had told me that Julie was adopted by an aunt and uncle, and I was able to identify the likely family that adopted her - Julie was living with Egesippe Bergeron and his wife Ludmille Croteau in the 1871 census, and I determined that Egesippe Bergeron, was Julie's father's brother.

 

An added bonus was finding that Julie had a sister, Alphonsine Bergeron, who married in Massachusetts and had several children.

 

All of this from just one birth date!

AncestryDNA's DNA Communities

AncestryDNA provides you with a breakdown of your ethnicity, based on your DNA.  They identify that I am 80% Irish, 13% Great Britain, 2% Iberian Peninsular, with smaller amounts of Italy / Greece and Europe West, but these are very broad categories.

 

Recently, Ancestry added another layer of depth to the ethnicity calculation, by identifying specific genetic communities that you likely belong to.  For me, they only identified one genetic community, which not surprisingly, is Munster Irish.  This was an easy call by Ancestry, as both of my maternal grandparents were born in Tipperary, and their families lived there for generations before. 

 

The feature also allows you to see which of your DNA matches are also in these communities, but just because you both appear in the same genetic community does mean that your common ancestor is from that genetic community.  Out of my 8,750 DNA matches on Ancestry, only 48 are identified as being members of the Munster Irish, so Ancestry is certainly erring on the side of caution. 

 

I was disappointed that they did not identify me as being part of Ulster Irish or Scottish genetic communities, which would help to identify whether my Cosgrave ancestors were long-time Irish or Scottish plantation settlers.  Hopefully over time, as Ancestry refines this new Genetic Communities feature, I will be identified as being part of some other communities.

Jim's Genetic Communities

 

Marlene was a little bit luckier, in that she is identified as being part of three genetic communities, but despite being 52% Irish, she was not identified as being part of any of the Irish genetic communities.  I was not surprised that she was part of the three identified communities, and of her 11,350  DNA matches on Ancestry, 114 are in the French Settlers in Quebec community, 39 are in the Southern English community, and 20 in the Scots in Northeast and Central Scotland community.

 

Marlene's Genetic Communities

 

I was most interested in Marlene's Southern English community, as this is the area where I have had the least success in confirming ancestral matches through DNA.  I was happy to see that Geraldine Hayes was at the top of the list of Marlene's matches in this community, and she was suggested to be a 4th cousin, which is in line with the paper match that Geraldine and I had identified some time back.

 

So I will not be rushing to promote this new feature on AncestryDNA as being a "must have", but it is interesting and may become more useful as a larger proportion of our DNA matches are identified as being part of specific ancestral communities.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Alberta Historic BMD Indexes Online

Marlene's Great Great Grandmother, on her maternal line, Julie Bergeron, has been a brick wall for a year or more.  Her 1881 marriage certificate identifies that the 24 year old Julie was born in Quebec, and married Louis Philippe LeBlanc in Douglas, Massachusetts, but her parents names are not recorded.  Julie and Philippe LeBlanc appear in the Canadian census records through to 1921 (last available census), and her year (1857/1858) and place of birth (Quebec) are consistent throughout the census records.  But I could not positively identify her in any records prior to her marriage, as I did not know her parents' names nor her date of birth.

 

Various researchers have provided conflicting information, but no evidence, including suggestions that she died in Legal, Alberta in 1945, and that she was raised by an Aunt and Uncle. 

 

This week I learned from the Global Genealogy newsletter that the Provincial Archives of Alberta has recently published historical birth, marriage and death indexes online, so off I went in search of Julie's death entry in the indexes. 

 

The Provincial Archives website does not provide a search box where you can enter a surname and given names and be presented with all matches.  The indexes are in a series of pdf files for a range of years / portions of the alphabet, based on surnames.

 

I scrolled down the list of files, to "L (1945-1949)", clicked on the file name, and within a few seconds the pdf file was open on my computer.  My heart sank when I found no entry in 1945, but I skipped down a few pages to get to 1946, and there was Julie's death entry, which identified that she died in St. Albert (district) on 17 May 1946, and that she was born in Quebec (province number 04) on 13 May 1857. 

 

Wow, I finally have a definite date of birth for Julie, so now I should be able to find her baptism record in the Drouin Collection on Ancestry, and identify the names of her parents.

LEBLANC, Julie - 1946 Death Entry

 I checked similarly for the death of Julie's husband, Philippe LeBlanc, and also found his death entry, which provided his date and place of death - St. Albert (district) on 28 February 1944, and confirmed his known date of birth.

LEBLANC, Philippe - 1944 Death Entry

It seems realistic that Philippe and Julie LeBlanc did both die in Legal, Alberta, as Legal is only 40 Km North of St. Albert, so is likely within the St. Albert registration district.  I sense a road trip coming up!

 

A big thank you to the Alberta Provincial Archives for making these indexes available online, and to Global Genealogy for sharing the knowledge.