Anyone watching "Who Do You Think You Are"?

[skyvue]

I'll admit somewhat sheepishly that I always thought people were heavy into tracing their family trees were kind of dorky (I mean, different strokes and all that, of course, but if pressed for my opinion, that's what I'd have said).

But after watching the first episode of NBC's Who Do You Think You Are? with Sarah Jessica Parker, my wife and I were hooked, both on the television show and on the idea of getting to know more about our own ancestors.

(I wasn't aware before of the BBC version of WDYTYA, but I've ordered the second season on DVD, so the wife can watch the Stephen Fry episode -- she's crazy about him.)

We even signed up for a two-week free trial at ancestry.com, just to test the family-tracing waters, and it looks as though we'll be extending that into a paid membership, suckers that we are.

I've quickly traced my family back to the 1700s on three of the four branches of my tree (my mom's mother's ancestors have proven more problematic so far). What I'm most excited about is the following:

I knew only one of my great-grandparents -- my grandfather's mother. She was in her eighties and nineties during my lifetime and she frightened me just a bit when I was a kid. She wasn't mean or anything, but she was just so different, so old, so shriveled (that sounds awful, but hey, I was a kid!).

Of course, I'd give my eyeteeth for an hour of convernsation with her now.

She was born in Illnois in 1881 and came to Oklahoma (where I grew up) in a covered wagon in 1898. And yet, she lived to see men on the moon. That's a remarkable life span, and I'd give anythinhg to talk to her about all the changes and events she witnessed in her lifetime.

The cool thing about Ancestry.com is, you benefit from the efforts of the other members who have already posted so much material that overlaps with your own family tree.

For instance, one member had posted a picture (but she hadn't made it publicly available) of my great-grandmother and her husband, whom I never met. In fact, my mother never met him, either, as he and Maude (my great-grandmother) were divorced more than a decade before Mom was born. I don't know what he did to inspire the parting, but it must have been pretty bad, as my grandfather (his eldest son) never spoke of him thereafter (he was in high school when his parents parted). I spoke to my aunt last night, and she confirmed that, as far as she could recall, Granddad has never spoken a word of his father.

I had never seen a photograph of my great-grandmother and, having known her only in her extreme old age, I had no idea what she looked like when she was younger. But this member at ancestry.com was willing to share the photo with me, and it was thrilling to see it. I can tell quite clearly, for example, that my grandfather takes after her side of the family, not his father's. And it just gives one such a different insight into a relative's life to see her at a younger age than you ever knew her.

I'm not touting ancestry.com or anything -- they don't need my help -- but my wife and I are very excited about learning more about our ancestors, and we're having great fun conducting the search. So, I guess we are now officially dorks.

Anyone else watching Who Do You Think You Are? We're going to watch the PBS show Faces of America next, which seems to be a similarly themed show, and we may just end up watching all of the BBC seasons, too (we don't know who many of the British celebs are, but it probably won't matter much, in the end).

I've included great-grandmother's pic below -- I'd be pleased to have the input of those more expert than me in estimating approximately what year it might have been taken. Any thoughts?

​

(I hope I placed this thread in the correct forum; feel free to move it if necessary, bartenders.)

 

[texasgirl]

I am hooked too! I actually watched four episodes this weekend on the On Demand. It's really got me interested in doing more to find out about my Native American roots, which I have on both sides

 

[skyvue]

The great-grandmother mentioned above was, I think, one-eighth Native American, which means I have a drop or two of NA blood myself, I guess. I wish I knew which tribe it was, but my mom's no longer able to discuss such matters (she's not well) and Dad's forgotten (if he ever knew).

Maybe my ongoing research will turn up that info (though for now, I can't even find out who her parents were, so I've got my work cut out for me).

 

[Miss Sis]

I've found every episode I've watched of the British version of this really interesting, regardless of who the subject of that week's programme is.

I've even started watching some thinking I won't like it and will probably switch it off but get hooked into watching to the end!

I am lucky to know quite alot about many branches of my family, mostly on my Mother's side, but will probably do more research one day into those I know less about.

 

[skyvue]

I've found every episode I've watched of the British version of this really interesting, regardless of who the subject of that week's programme is.

Oh, that's good to know, Miss Sis -- thanks.

Anyone have any thoughts on the approximate year that picture of my great-grandmother was taken?

 

[Tourbillion]

I've been watching the show, though I have been an ancestry.com member for 8 years so there isn't a lot left to find for me. I also watched Dr. Gates show on PBS, "Faces of America" recently too.

So, I took the 23andme test last summer when they released Relative Finder beta. Actually they have a sale on their ancestry test until March 31. https://www.23andme.com/partner/foa/ It is usually $399 for the ancestry edition and $499 for the full, so $200 off is a big deal. Their service is really interesting, both the ancestry and health information.

Look for Tourbillion if you do sign up.

 

[skyvue]

What's the difference between the ancestry and full versions?

And what exactly does one learn from those tests?

 

[Randolph]

For those of you interested in doing genealogy research, public libraries often have tons of information about local families.

The library I work at has access to the full version of Ancestry.com from their computers and a room dedicated to genealogy and local history. You might want to see if yours does the same, it beats paying for it.

 

[Tourbillion]

The full version has ancestry plus traits and health information, and you can download your 500,000+ SNP's and compare them to science and medical journal articles.

For ancestry, they give you your mtDNA haplogroup, Y-DNA haplogroup (if male), autosomal DNA, ancestral origins, global similarity. They have relative finder, which gives you a list of potential distant cousins, so you can compare your genealogy. You can also compare your results to other members by sharing genomes. If you don't know what this means you can go to their website and read their FAQ's.

The health information contains information like HIV resistance, Norovirus resistance, Hemocromatosis status, Plavix efficacy, Warfarin sensitivity, Abacavir hypersensitivity. Statin response, etc. So, some of the information is potentially life saving. It also includes genetic risks for many diseases and conditions and general traits--like eye color, caffeine metabolism etc. (doesn't mean you will get the disease, but your risk relative to general population).

I recommend the full version unless you are terrified of learning about risks for things like cancer. Personally, I would rather know so that I can change detrimental behaviors and get early screening. Plus it is a better deal for the money. You can upgrade later if you do get just the ancestry edition though.

 

[Maj.Nick Danger]

I've included great-grandmother's pic below -- I'd be pleased to have the input of those more expert than me in estimating approximately what year it might have been taken. Any thoughts?

​

Well,..I don't claim to be an expert, but from the look of the garb it appears to be from the Titanic era. Maybe around 1910 give or take 5 years or so. [huh] Also you mentioned her birth date as being 1881, and they look to be about age 30 or so in the pic.
I have a pic of my grandmother, (who passed away before I was born) in which she is dressed similarly, and it is dated at about 1912.​

 

[skyvue]

I have a pic of my grandmother, (who passed away before I was born) in which she is dressed similarly, and it is dated at about 1912.​

That was my guess, too, Nick -- thanks.

 

[Tourbillion]

I think that 1912 is a bit too late for that photograph. It is probably before 1910. If it is after 1910 her outfit is out of fashion.

Here's why:

-By 1910 or so the hobble skirt was in fashion. Her skirt is a-line.
-The pleated sleeves and v-shaped ruffles on the lady seem more 1900-09 to me. Soon after 1910 a more natural sleeve (less poofy) was more popular.
-The corset shape isn't 1910's, they were tightest under the ladies bust rather than tightly nipped at the waist like your ancestor's corset.
-In the 10's a slightly lower neckline became more popular, though the high collar probably did continue somewhat.
-During the teens ladies clothing became less fitted at the waist and more straight in the skirt as well.

So, most likely 1900-1908. When did they marry? It is likely to be from around then.

 

[skyvue]

I'm not certain, but the best info I have says they were married in 1900.

 

[Gracie Lee]

I've included great-grandmother's pic below -- I'd be pleased to have the input of those more expert than me in estimating approximately what year it might have been taken. Any thoughts?

​

(I hope I placed this thread in the correct forum; feel free to move it if necessary, bartenders.)

Hi! I collect antique clothes from this era, and I think this pic was likely taken around 1903ish. I see a lot of the details Tourbillion mentioned, and I'm placing toward the beginning of that time range for a couple of reasons. The A line skirt is one of them, as toward 1905-1908 a trumpet shaped skirt became more popular, and the waistline began to rise in an effort to elongate the body through the hips. This still shows the waistline of the outfit at the natural waist, and with a bloused pigeon front look that began in the late 1890s. The shape of the corset could be either a late Victorian or an Edwardian S curve, and the look would be similar, but either would be out of fashion by 1909 or thereabouts. Also, take a look at the sleeves and collar on her coat. This coat screams mid to late 1890s to me, with a two-piece leg-of-mutton sleeve and wide lapels. Even toward the turn of the century, this look was on its way out. However, it was quite common for middle income families to remodel and continue to wear good pieces, as this clearly is, past the height of their fashion. But I think 1910 is pushing it for a coat of this age. What a great picture, and a wonderful piece of family history. I can understand why you're excited to have found it. Best of luck in continuing your search!