Down the Rabbit Hole ...

Lewis Carroll surely had family historians in mind when he wrote the classics, Alice in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass. As with most things "genealogy," there is more to this story than might meet the eye.  

Like Alice, we follow White Rabbits 

Our White Rabbits are each a great hypothesis. For some of us, the clues come easily; hypothesis form quickly. I work on historic families; notes and hints might build up for years before a hypothesis seems worth the extended work. Regardless, once an attractive notion has formed, the White Rabbit is in sight and a trip to Wonderland begins.  Down the rabbit hole we go. 

"Alice in Wonderland," Wikipedia, cited as "Jessie Willcox Smith's illustration of Alice surrounded by the characters of Wonderland (1923)."

For those who love the quest, Wonderland is a playground. There are keys to find, doors to open; odd drinks and enticing cakes are served.  Magic mushrooms appear oft' in different source materials. One calls out, "Pick me," while another whispers, "Not him, I'm the real deal." Like a Cheshire Cat, though, blink your eyes twice and you will find there is little information in the source by which an identity could be known.   

Experimentation +1. My objective is to construct the framework of a family, often from low lying fruit found among the magic mushrooms. The framework typically extends to about 2-1/2 generations of relatives and some number of associates. At least at this point, I don't have an equal interest in all of those individuals. For now, some are like the supporting characters in Wonderland--I am learning more from them, not necessarily a lot about them. 

Even in Wonderland, experimenting can be messy business. More than one royal house of cards may come tumbling down before a picture of the family comes together. 

Things are a little more serious Through the Looking Glass. It is a logic laboratory. The source materials are of a higher quality, more diversified and/or advanced (my term). 

For me, the process is systematic--it takes a good plan to navigate the Jabberwocky through to the eighth row of the chessboard.  

My objective is to develop a theory of the case that will advance the work from a hypothesis to a conclusion.

Not every case is successful. But when the White Knight appears, and I step across the last brook, my hypothesis stays behind. A crown has appeared; I have a conclusion.  

Fields of information have been tamed; the magic mushrooms, mastered. I have evidence. 

Bring on the White and Red Queens. Let them confuse each other with this source or that. I am ready to present my case; I have a genealogical proof.  

Checkmate.

Once I have a conclusion, supported by a proof that is based on evidence, then it is time. I shake the cards off my face, leave the chessboard behind and return to the real world ...

...Where many things appear not as they should 

Sigh. Were the fantasy characters supposed to stay behind? Internet profiles about the historic families that I research are filled with Jabberwocky's slithy toves and beamish boys. There are too many Tweedledees conflated with Tweedledums, for no rhyme or reason. 

"Humpty Dumpty," Wikipedia, cited as "Humpty Dumpty as illustrated by W. W. Denslow in 1904"; annotated by GeneJ.

Fingers and toes at the ready! We could count all day and all night, the Humpty Dumpty-like broken profiles that are scattered about. All the king's horses and all the king's men couldn't repair the damage--how will we ever put them back together again? 

"But we must," I hear the Mock Turtle call out. "Do it for me. Remember, I was once real."  And, he chants

hypotheses and conclusions are like night and day,

information and evidence are different, I say,

a source and a proof, they don't work the same way.

Who's stealing the truth? Let the trial begin. 

"Gather the knaves," orders the Queen of Hearts. "There are rules. Discover who among them has not read the book."

One by one, the accused tell their story. "It's not me and, really, no harm has been done. I just gathered the leaves, now I'm chasing down leads." 

Inevitably, some begin to point the finger at one another. An anxious crowd awaits the Queen of Hearts' dreaded words, "Off with their heads." 

It is Alice who steps in with her voice of reason.  Confronting the Queen, Alice commands, "Stop this nonsensical inquisition!" 

"It's the chessboard that's broken, and Wonderland, too." 

hypotheses and conclusions are like night and day,

information and evidence are different, I say,

a source and a proof, they don't work the same way.

"If we are to become better genealogists, we need a better model."

So said A. C. "Tony" Proctor last spring.  Engineers know the system is broken. There are good engineering solutions for "what's needed." Some still insist it be "their way." Not knowing any better, an innocent knave might boldly suggest that a few engineers would like Wonderland and the chessboards reserved for their own work.   

Alas, those who write the books and teach the classes, they have a few guidelines, too. The knaves who buy the books and attend the classes will find expert tips often begin with (for good reason), "Move out of your software, and then ..." 

There is a better way. Let's work together.  

hypotheses and conclusions are like night and day,

information and evidence are different, I say,

a source and a proof, they don't work the same way.

http://fhiso.org/

Honored Bear

This blogger is honored to have been recognized as a top 2012 blogger by Genealogic. 

It is equally an honor to share the stage with other bloggers I so admire: 

Caroline Pointer
http://yourfamilystory-cmpointer.blogspot.com/ 

Laura Cosgrove Lorenzana
http://thelastleafonthisbranch.blogspot.com/

Debbie Kennett
http://cruwys.blogspot.co.uk/

The Jones Genealogist
http://thejonesgenealogist.blogspot.com/


More to this than just an award
Genealogic developed this program to encourage us to recognize fellow bloggers. There are stars in our futures--read all about it.

Big Thanks
Thank you Genealogic! Thank you, too, Ezri J. Rediker (Rediker Genealogy). 

Stories of Christmas Past

This is the fifth article in a six part series about the case of Joseph Peter Miller (1814-1895). 


The first article introduced the challenge, and
the next four articles present research about
different aspects of the case, working generally
from the most compelling evidence through to
that which is more conflicted. The sixth article
critiques our work program.  Links follow.



a. OooO, Joe. Could this be a match made in (wiki) heaven?
b. Research Part 1 - Joseph Peter Miller takes a bride
c. Research Part 2 - Sticky Dates and Aha! Moments
d. Research Part 3 - "How do you solve a problem like Maria?"
e. Research Part 4 - Stories of Christmas Past
f. Wacky, wiki wonders

Note: The four research articles are also intended to provide examples to technologists who are developing evidence models that support the research process.

"When what to my wondering eyes should appear ..."

"Celebrating family historians, everywhere." 

                   -- Thankful Bear

This article is a celebrates the remarkable work done by family historians. It highlights two family historians whose work greatly advanced the case of Joseph Peter Miller. 

Largely because of Jack Stover's "boots on the ground" and tenacity, research about his ancestor, Joseph Peter Miller (1814-1895), and about Peter Miller's son, Joseph Miller (b. 1814) has gone well beyond the low-lying fruit. At some length, we have drilled into each source and the conflicts found among the different information. 

Jack has been doing this kind of work all along. Communicating by phone more than 2,000 miles away, he's said, "Okay, I've reached the end of this cemetery row, should I turn right or left?" Jack has driven from county to county, usually in the rain (but that is another story), to visit this or that library. At least once, someone has told him, "We don't really know much about those records, maybe you'll figure them out."  Knowing Jack is a reminder that family historians DIG, with passion and persistance. :-) He is a great family historian.

Sigh. We had learned much from our collaboration, but the proof that Joseph Peter Miller was Peter Miller's son remained based on circumstantial evidence. Haunted by the knowledge that some 400 men named Joseph Miller had married at Ohio at about the same time, the good news was that we could say Joseph Peter Miller was perhaps the son of Peter Miller. The bad news was that we could say no more. Heartbreaking, as the man at the center of the story, Joseph Peter Miller, had lived such a long and full life. 

And then came the note from Dena Z, hoping to confirm that her her ancestor, Homer Miller, was the grandson of Peter Miller (ca1779-1845). 

At the time, Jack and I were still pretty hung up on the problem 1837 baptismal entry (see, "How do you solve a problem like Maria?") 

Dena could make the connection between her ancestor and Peter Miller, but she was tentative about some of the family history materials she had inherited--those materials might not be accurate or complete.  

Pure gold 

Dena hasn't necessarily been at this a long time, but she has that special gift of curiosity--where did it come from and what does it mean? Knowing Dena reminds me that family tradition doesn't just happen--it is passed with care from generation to generation. We strive to maintain the unbroken chain, or to repair those links that might otherwise have been broken.  Dena is a great family historian.

Among Dena's materials she found the previously transcribed version of a 1908 Christmas greeting written by Lettie Miller (1851-1935), Peter Miller's granddaughter. 

Lettie's 1908 greeting had apparently been sent to close family members, including Dena's ancestors, Homer and Anna (Rohrbaugh) Miller. When Anna wrote a "Miller Family History" some years later, she incorporated Lettie's greeting. 

In her Christmas greeting, Lettie included something personal about each of Peter Miller's children--her aunts and uncles. The work is remarkable as the earliest family record known about Peter's family that calls out more than just the children's names.  

About her uncle Joseph, Lettie wrote one line, "Joseph was a minster of the gospel in the denomination known as the 'Church of God.'" 

Lettie's one line was just what the doctor ordered. The personal recollection about her uncle Joseph (Peter Miller's son) could be associated/corroborated with the independent recollection written about Joseph Peter Miller by one of his descendants, as below.

Changed Perspective

Genealogical conclusions are not set in stone. In this case, we needed to re-visit our earlier recorded evidence and conclusions in light of the newly discovered/corroborated information about Joseph Peter Miller. 

As a result of revisiting the different evidence, I believe I have proven and have so concluded that Joseph Peter Miller was the first born son of Peter Miller and his second wife, Mary Stewart. I will be adding the different links, relationships, sources and proof to my materials. 

This new information has changed how I perceive the different conflicts about Joseph Peter Miller, too. 

(a) I still am not certain about whether Joseph Peter Miller was born on 6 July 1814 (death record) or 6 August 1814 (baptismal record). I do accept the notion that his parents may have fibbed about his age for the purpose of the baptismal record. (See, Sticky Dates, for "More to the Story.")

(b) Little Maria Miller born in 1837 is now probably (rather than perhaps) the daughter of Joseph Peter Miller and wife Rebecca Thoma. (See "How do you solve a problem like Maria?")

With great family historians like Jack Stover and Dena Z involved, I just know we'll learn even more about these circumstances and families. 

How do you solve a problem like Maria?

This is the fourth article in a six part series about the case of Joseph Peter Miller (1814-1895). 


The first article introduced the challenge, and
the next four articles present research about
different aspects of the case, working generally
from the most compelling evidence through to
that which is more conflicted. The sixth article
critiques our work program.  Links follow.



a. OooO, Joe. Could this be a match made in (wiki) heaven?
b. Research Part 1 - Joseph Peter Miller takes a bride
c. Research Part 2 - Sticky Dates and Aha! Moments
d. Research Part 3 - "How do you solve a problem like Maria?"
e. Research Part 4 - Stories of Christmas Past
f. Wacky, wiki wonders

Note: The four research articles are also intended to provide examples to technologists who are developing evidence models that support the research process.

"How do you solve a problem like Maria?"

"Record data is subject to error, omission, bias ... and old German script." 

            -- Cross-eyed Bear, who has enough problems with modern script

Almost 200 years ago, in 1816, Peter Miller moved his family to Paris Township, Stark County, Ohio. The township was then still part of Osnaburg Township, but Rudolph Bair had already set aside "two acres of land within [the limits of Paris (town)]" for the German Reformed and Lutheran Congregations' church and cemetery. A "log building," early erected on the site, served as both a church and schoolhouse.[1] Today, the early church site is home to Israel's Lutheran Church. The map below shows where Peter Miller's 1816 farm was located (highlighted in blue) in relation to the church site. 

More than 10 years ago, Jack Stover took on the task of learning about the extant church records, which date to about 1830 (the earliest church records are lost).  The baptismal records Jack located were written in old German script.  Throughout the 1830s, different ministers performed services at the church. The record of the services they provided are commingled in the ledgers, more or less in date order. This means that an array of script/handwriting appears on any given ledger page. At least to our knowledge, the ledgers have never been interpreted or transcribed as a body of work.

To make sense out of the ledgers and gain insight into the church history, Jack Stover consulted with Dr. Daniel Jay Grimminger, Obl.O.S.B., Ph.D., author of Images of America: Paris and former Israel Lutheran church historian. 

In the course of his work, Jack hoped to locate records that would help prove his ancestor, Joseph Peter Miller (1814-1895), was otherwise the son Joseph Miller born 1814 to Peter Miller (ca1779-1845) and his second wife, Mary Stewart (ca1786-1855). Then "of Paris Township," Jack's ancestor had married in 1835 at Stark County to Rebecca Thoma (1816-1895) [2] According to family tradition, Joseph and Rebecca had been childhood sweethearts.  "She was the only girl [Joseph] ever went with and he was her first and only sweetheart."[3]  

Rather than a supporting record, Jack found a conflicting Paris church ledger that showed Peter and Maria Miller had witnessed the 1837 baptism of a daughter Maria born to a couple, Joseph and Regina Miller. The graphic below is of the page on which Jack found the problem entry.

• Working with Dr. Grimminger and various other records, Jack was unable to improve upon his initial interpretation of the recorded wife's name, "Regina." 
• None of us have been able to locate ledger entries that make any other reference to a Joseph Miller and wife "Regina." 
• No entries have been found in the ledgers for any children known born to Joseph Peter and Rebecca (Thoma) Miller.  
• Finally, all of us agree that "Peter and Maria Miller" most likely refers to Peter Miller (ca1779-1845) and his second wife, Mary Stewart (ca1786-1855), otherwise known to have been members of the church and buried at Paris Cemetery.   

Like pouring salt on an open wound, this single 1837 record posed what seemed an insurmountable challenge.  After a great amount of researching different "what if" scenarios, we decided to take another look at the old German Script in 2012.

Thus here is where the challenge begins. 

This is Palæography: The study of ancient writing; for some, a form of genealogical torture. 

The story of how we approached a solution follows. We're hoping you'll play along and let us know how you would interpret the entry/name of Joseph Miller's wife in the ledger entry.  

Lacking full translations/transcriptions, we worked with references about old German script that are readily available.  A few of these sources follow:

• "Wir lernen die Sütterlin - Schrift" and also its index of helpful links and references, "Contents."  
• Examples of 17th to 19th century lower case script and upper case script. 
• For yet another good reference, see the article "Sütterlin" in Wikipedia.

Step 1: Taking a bite off both ends

Ol' Myrt often reminds us to eat an elephant one bite at a time, and that is how we set out to tackle this problem. 

We started by trying to decipher and compare the name Regina to the letters in the challenge script. Although none of the work was easy, we could decipher what seemed "Re-" at the beginning and an "-a" at the end. It was the letters in the middle that were far less obvious.  

As with the name Regina, the name Rebecca also begins with "Re-" and ends with "-a." There could be countless, similar names. 

Step 2: Divide and Conquer by Isolating Ascenders and Descenders in the record

The old German script alphabet has some letters that stand out, or rather they stand up or hang down. In the typography world, the part of a letter that rises above the midpoint is called an ascender; the part that hangs below the baseline is called a descender. In old German script, as many as half of the lower-case letters (also called "minor letters" or "minuscules") have these ascender and/or descender characteristics.

Our challenge name (below) has a lower-case ascender toward the end of the name, but the name "Regina" has no such ascender.  The challenge also has a descender toward the middle, which may be one of the reasons "Regina" developed as a possible solution.  

The ascender toward the end of the name seemed to be the letter "k." See especially the usage examples of lower-case 17th to 19th century German script HERE. 

The descender in the middle of the challenge name remains a mystery.

Step 3: A Tittle should Tell

We've all heard the saying, "dot your Is ... " In the world of typography and script, some letters are formed and include distinguishable marks such as the common "dot." In old German script that "dot" is called a tittle. See "Tittle," Wikipedia. 

The letters "c" and "i" are distinguishable in old German script by the tittle that is part of the letter "i." 

One would expect to find such a tittle in the name, "Regina." In our challenge case, however, no such tittle appears. Alas, rather than "i" that letter could be a "c." 

Step 4: Finding Re_ecka--no more, no less

We were not able to solve the mystery of the descender in the middle of the name. The balance of our work left the spelling as Re_ecka. 

We separately found Joseph Peter Miller's wife's name was written "Rebecka" in their Stark County, Ohio, marriage record. 

Rebecka (also Rebekah, Rebekka, etc.) is a variant of the name Rebecca. The spelling Rebecka was not as uncommon in the 19th century (US) as it might seem today.  In the 1850 US census, there were 920 entries indexed with the spelling "Rebecka"; just over 600 entries were so indexed in the 1940 US census. [Ancestry.com] See also the entry, "Rebecca," Wiktionary. 

From the various work then, we find the mother's name in the baptismal entry is not "Regina," but rather "Re_ecka," from which we devise little Maria's parent names to be "Joseph Miller [and wife] Re[b]ecka." 

But what does it mean?

The family histories written about Joseph and Rebecca (Thoma) Miller make no mention of a daughter, Maria. The histories do, however, remark about children (sons) who died young. 

There is also a reasonable gap in the births of the children known born to Joseph and Rebecca (Thoma) Miller, but nothing separately conclusive. 

Although we have yet to prove an 1840 US census for Joseph Peter Miller and family, research continues about a particular entry at Knox County, Ohio. [4] That entry provides for only one child in the home--a son, who we presume to be William, b. 1839. 

Assuming this little Maria is indeed the daughter of Joseph Peter and Rebecca, then she likely died before 1840. 

Based on our work with the 1837 Paris church baptismal ledger and old German script, we concluded that little Maria was perhaps the daughter of Joseph and Maria (Thoma) Miller. 

So if you decided to play along, what did you discover? 

--------
References: 
1. William Henry Perrin, ed., History of Stark County with an outline sketch of Ohio (Chicago: Basking & Battey, 1881).
2. “Married,” news item concerning Joseph Miller-Rebecca Thoma wedding; digital image, supplied by Jack Stover (Ohio), e-mail to GeneJ, 2012, cites The Ohio Repository, Thursday, November 19, 1935. page 3, column 5.  
3. Quote from John I. Miller (1870-1963), "Miller Family History," [1954], 2 pp; digital images, supplied by Jack Stover, e-mail to GJ ca13 Jan 2003.
4. 1840 U.S. census, Knox County, Ohio, page 354 (stamped on right-sided extension), Jefferson twp., sheet 4 (penned at upper left), line 22, J. P. Miller household (1-0-0-0-1^0-0-0-0-1); digital image(s), Ancestry.com (accessed 17 April 2012), citing National Archives microfilm publication M704, roll 406 and Family History Library film 0020169.