AI for Genealogy: Solving Multiple Same-Name Ancestors in English Parish Records Using AI | UK Genealogy

Three John Smiths. Same parish. Same occupation. All married to women named Mary. Which one is YOUR ancestor?

If you research English or UK family history, you've hit this genealogy brick wall: multiple people with identical names in the same small community, and parish registers giving you almost nothing to tell them apart. This episode shows you exactly how to solve this using AI tools.

THE CHALLENGE: I tackle one of the most common English genealogy problems, distinguishing between three John Smiths in Market Rasen parish, Lincolnshire, England, 1790-1850. All agricultural laborers. All married women named Mary. Parish registers offered minimal detail. Traditional cluster genealogy methods weren't revealing the patterns I needed.

THE AI SOLUTION: Learn how Claude AI and Perplexity became invaluable research assistants in untangling this knot. I'll show you the exact prompts and complete workflow:

• Organizing with Claude: Upload transcribed parish entries and create comparison tables that reveal subtle differences you've been missing
• Historical context with Perplexity: Research 19th-century naming patterns, social class distinctions (farmer vs. agricultural laborer), migration patterns—with citations
• Pattern recognition: AI identifies witness patterns, naming traditions, and generational differences across baptism, marriage, and burial records
• FAN Club principle with AI: Map Friends, Associates, and Neighbors relationships to spot family connections
• Dead ends and pivots: Real examples of AI theories that failed—and why verification matters

ENGLISH GENEALOGY ESSENTIALS:

• Parish registers vs. civil registration (1837 cutoff)
• Bishop's Transcripts and when they're useful
• FamilySearch, FreeBMD, FreeREG (all free!)
• Social class distinctions in 19th-century England
• Farmers vs. agricultural laborers
• Naming patterns: deceased children and name reuse

AI TECHNIQUES YOU'LL LEARN: 

✓ Five copy-paste prompts for parish record analysis 

✓ Timeline comparisons using Claude 

✓ When to use Perplexity vs. Claude 

✓ Document comparison for handwritten records 

✓ Verifying AI suggestions against primary sources 

✓ Organizing complex family relationships

WHO THIS HELPS:

• Genealogists researching English, Scottish, Welsh, Irish ancestors
• Anyone with same-name ancestors in small communities
• Parish registers and church records researchers
• Family historians integrating AI into workflow
• Beginners and experienced genealogists

RESOURCES: All prompts and free tools at ancestorsandai.com

Whether researching Market Rasen, Manchester, or anywhere in the UK, these AI techniques work for any same-name genealogy challenge. International researchers can adapt these methods too.

Connect with Ancestors and Algorithms:

📧 Email: ancestorsandai@gmail.com
🌐 Website: https://ancestorsandai.com/
📘 Facebook Group: Ancestors and Algorithms: AI for Genealogy - www.facebook.com/groups/ancestorsandalgorithms/

Golden Rule Reminder: AI is your research assistant, not your researcher.

Join our Facebook group to share your AI genealogy breakthroughs, ask questions, and connect with fellow family historians who are embracing the future of genealogy research!

New episodes every Tuesday. Subscribe so you never miss the latest AI tools and techniques for family history research.

Transcript

So there were three John Smiths, all living in the same parish, all baptized within 15 years of each other, all agricultural laborers, all with a wise named Mary, and one of them was my ancestor. But which one? This is the kind of brick wall that makes genealogists want to scream into a pillow. But here's the thing. AI didn't solve this mystery by magic. It solved it by helping me see patterns I've been staring at for months without recognizing. Today, I'm going to show you exactly how I untangled three identical John Smiths in a tiny English parish, and I'm going to give you the exact prompts that made it possible. Welcome to Ancestors and Algorithms, where family history meets artificial intelligence. I'm your host, Brian, and if you've ever wrestled with English parish records, you know the unique frustration they can bring. Today, we're heading across the pond to Lincolnshire, England, where I got to experience British genealogy brick walls firsthand. This episode is part of our international research series, and if you've been waiting for UK-specific content, this one's for you. We're going to tackle one of the most common problems in English research, multiple people with the same name in the same small community. And I'll show you how AI tools help me crack a case that had me stumped for the better part of a year. Let's dive in. 

Here's how this all started. I've been tracing my English lines back through American records. Immigration, naturalization, the usual path. I found my ancestor, William Smith, who came to Pennsylvania in 1848. His death certificate said he was born in Lincolnshire, England, and through some detective work with ship manifests, I narrowed it down to a specific parish. Market Rasen. Now, if you're familiar with English research, you know that's actually pretty good. A lot of American immigrants left us nothing. No hometown. No parish. Sometimes not even a county. But I had a parish name. I was feeling pretty confident. That confidence lasted about 20 minutes. I pulled up the parish registers for Market Rasen on FamilySearch. Fantastic resource, by the way. I was looking for a parish name. I was looking for a parish name. I was looking for a parish name. 

I was looking for a I was looking for a parish name. Baptized 1824, son of John, Smith, and Mary. Except when I started looking for John Smith's marriage record to trace the family back further, I hit a wall. Because there wasn't just one John Smith in Market Rasen Parish. There were three. All born between 1790 and 1805. All agricultural laborers. All married to women named Mary. And the parish registers? God love them. Didn't exactly give me distinguishing details. The entries looked something like this. John Smith, son of John and Anne. Baptized 1795. That's it. No middle names. No street addresses. No helpful occupations to differentiate them. Just John Smith, son of John Smith. Now, you might be thinking, Well, just look for William's baptism and work backward from the parents listed there. Great idea. I did that. The baptism record for William Smith in 1824 lists his parents as John Smith and Mary. Which John Smith? The record doesn't say. Because why would it? In a parish with 300 people? Everyone knew which John Smith you meant. Except I didn't. Because I'm sitting in Utah 200 years later staring at a computer screen. This is where I'd normally roll up my sleeves and do the traditional cluster genealogy approach. Map out every Smith family. Every witness at every event. Create elaborate charts of who associated with whom. And I did some of that. But what I really needed was a way to see patterns across dozens of records simultaneously. That's where AI became invaluable. Now, before we go further, let me be clear about something that's going to become our refrain today. AI is your research assistant, not your researcher. These tools didn't do my research for me. They didn't magically identify which John Smith was mine. What they did was help me organize information, spot patterns, and develop theories that I could then verify against primary sources. Keep that in mind as we work through this. 

The first thing I needed to do was get organized. I had downloaded images of about 40 parish register pages from FamilySearch covering the period from 1790 to 1850. Baptisms, marriages, burials. The images were decent quality, 18th century handwriting, but legible. I'd transcribed about a dozen of them by hand, but I was getting bogged down in the details and losing the big picture. So I opened up Claude and decided to use it as my organizational partner. Now, here's a key point about working with Parish Records and AI. I wasn't uploading sensitive information about living people. These are records from the 1700s and 1800s. Everyone involved has been dead for well over a century. Privacy isn't a concern here, which meant I could work freely. I uploaded the first set of transcriptions I've already done and gave Claude this prompt. Quote, I'm researching the Smith family in Market Rasen Parish, Lincoln Shire, England, between 1790 and 1850. I have transcribed several parish register entries. Please create a table organizing these individuals by generation, showing name, event type, baptism, marriage, burial, date, parents' names if listed, spouse name if applicable, any other identifying details. Then, identify which entries might refer to the same person appearing multiple times. End quote. What Claude gave me back was beautifully organized. It created a table that grouped all the John Smiths together, then listed every event associated with each name. And here's where it got interesting. It flagged something I'd missed. One of the John Smiths appeared as a witness at a marriage in 1818, and the occupation listed was farmer, not agricultural laborer. Now, that might sound like a tiny distinction, but in 19th century England, that's a meaningful class difference. A farmer owned or leased land. An agricultural laborer worked for wages. This is a clue. I went back to family search and looked specifically for that marriage record where John Smith was a witness. Sure enough, John Smith farmer, witnessed the marriage of his daughter. Daughter? The entry said, daughter of John Smith farmer. This John Smith had daughters old enough to marry in 1818, which meant he was likely born in the 1780s or earlier, making him probably too old to be the father of a child born in 1824. One down, two to go. But I needed more context about what these records meant. What was typical for the time and place? This is where perplexity became essential. I asked, quote, what were typical naming patterns for agricultural laborers in Lincolnshire, England in the early 1800s? Specifically, how did families handle having multiple male children with the same name in a community? End quote. Perplexity came back with citations to scholarly articles and genealogy guides explaining that it was very common to name the eldest son after the father, which is why you'd get these clusters of same names. But, and this was the key insight, when a child died young, the next child of the same gender was often given the deceased child's name. 

I went digging back through the burial registers, and there it was. John Smith, infant, buried, 1795. Parents, John and Mary Smith. Then another baptism, John Smith, baptized 1797. Parents, John and Mary Smith. The same couple had lost a son named John and then named their next son John. This is the kind of pattern that's heartbreaking and also genealogically crucial. It meant that one of my three John Smiths might actually be two entries for the same person. One who died as an infant. One who survived. But I needed to verify this. I couldn't just assume based on dates. So, I went back to Claude with a new task. I uploaded the burial register page showing the infant John Smith's death and the baptism register showing the later John Smith's birth. And I asked, quote, Analyze these two records. Are there any details that suggest these refer to children of the same parents? Look for handwriting similarities, proximity of entries, any matching witnesses, or other contextual clues, end quote. Claude pointed out something subtle and overlooked. The vicar's handwriting style shifted between 1795 and 1797, suggesting these entries were made by the same person over time and the parish had small enough population that John and Mary Smith, appearing in both records, likely referred to the same couple. It also noted that the 1795 burial listed no occupation for John Smith, while the 1797 baptism listed agricultural laborer, suggesting the family circumstances hadn't changed, consistent with the same couple. This verification process is exactly what I mean when I say AI is your research assistant, not your researcher. Claude helped me see the connections, but I verified every detail against the actual parish register images. 

Now, I had a clearer picture. There were likely two distinct John Smith families in the parish, not three. John Smith the farmer, born approximately 1780-1785. John Smith the agricultural labor, born approximately 1797. My William, born 1824, was most likely the son of the younger John Smith, the agricultural laborer born 1797, but I needed more evidence to be confident. This is where I employed what I call the fan club, friends, associates, and neighbors, a term coined by the renowned genealogist Elizabeth Sean Mills. It's a genealogy methodology where you research everyone connected to your ancestor, not just direct family. Who witnessed their events? Who lived near them? Who worked with them? I compiled a list of every witness mentioned in the Smith family records I'd found. Then I asked Claude to help me map the relationships. Here's a list of witnesses from Smith family events between 1815 and 1830. Please identify Names that appear multiple times Whether any witnesses are also identified as godparents in baptism records Any patterns in who witnesses what types of events Possible family relationships suggested by witness patterns

Claude created a network map showing that a man named Thomas Cooper Thomas Cooper appeared as a witness at multiple Smith family events Specifically at events involving the agricultural laborer John Smith Thomas Cooper never appeared at events for John Smith the farmer This suggested different social circles So, I researched Thomas Cooper Perplexity helped me understand that Cooper was a common surname in Lincolnshire And a search through the parents showed Thomas Cooper was also an agricultural laborer Living in the same section of the parish as the younger John Smith Here's where it gets really interesting I found a burial record from 1862 for an elderly Thomas Cooper And the informant listed on the burial record was William Smith My William Smith was the informant for Thomas Cooper's burial That's a strong social connection People didn't just inform on anyone's death This was typically done by family members or very close friends This suggested that the relationship between the younger John Smith and Thomas Cooper Extended into the next generation with William maintaining that connection But I still needed something more definitive I went back to Claude and uploaded all the records I'd gathered Baptisms, marriages, burials, witness lists And asked it to create a timeline showing both John Smith families side by side Quote, create a chronological timeline from 1790 to 1850 Showing all events for both John Smith families in parallel columns Highlight any events that occur within the same year for both families To help me identify distinguishing patterns, end What Claude produced was revelatory When laid out side by side I could see the John Smith the Farmer's family events clustered in the earlier years Children baptized 1810 to 1820 Daughters' marriages in 1818 His burial was in 1843 John Smith agriculture laborer's family events started later Marriage around 1815 Children baptized 1816 to 1830 Including my William in 1824 He was still appearing in records through 1850 The timeline made it visually obvious that these were two different men of different generations But more importantly, it showed me where to look for confirming evidence I noticed that in 1843, when John Smith the Farmer died, the burial record listed John Smith Farmer, age 61 That would put his birth around 1782, which matched my earlier estimate But when I searched for a burial record for John Smith agriculture laborer I couldn't find one in Market Rasen Parish This actually makes sense and here's why People moved Especially agriculture laborers who didn't own land I used perplexity to research migration patterns in Lincolnshire during the 1840s And learned that this was a period of significant agricultural changes Enclosure acts were disrupting traditional farming And many laborers migrated to industrial cities or immigrated Which led me to a theory What if John Smith agriculture laborer had immigrated along with his son William? What if they came to America together and I just hadn't found the Elder John's record yet? I went back to the ship manifest William Smith arrived in Philadelphia in 1848 on the ship Margaret I looked at the entire passenger list for that voyage And there Three lines above William was John Smith, age 52, agricultural laborer They immigrated together, father and son. When I calculated backward from age 52 in 1848, it put John's birth around 1796, exactly matching the 1797 baptism I'd found. The pieces were falling into place, but I wanted one more verification. I searched Pennsylvania records for John Smith and found him in the 1850 U. S. Census living in the same household as William. The census listed his birthplace as England and his age as 54, consistent with the birth year of 1796 to 1797. That was my confirmation. The younger John Smith, the agricultural labor-born 1797, was my ancestor. He raised his son William in Market Rasen Parish, and in 1848, they immigrated together to Pennsylvania to start a new life. The older John Smith, the farmer, was a completely different person who happened to share the same name in the same small parish. Thanks to class distinctions, witness patterns, and timeline analysis, I could finally tell them apart. 

Once I had that breakthrough, everything else started clicking into place. I went back and researched John Smith, the agricultural laborer's wife, Mary. Using the techniques I'd learned, I found her maiden name in their marriage record, Mary Thornton. Her family was also from Market Rasen Parish, and tracing the Thornton line opened up three more generations of research I could pursue. I also discovered something poignant. When I compared the passenger manifestations, from 1848 with the parish registers, I realized that John and William immigrated alone. Mary, John's wife and William's mother, had died in 1845. Her burial record listed cause of death as consumption, which we'd now call tuberculosis. That explained the timing of their immigration. They left England three years after Mary died, likely because there was nothing holding them to Market Rasen anymore. The land John worked on wasn't his own, and with Mary gone, America must have seemed like a chance for a fresh start. William went on to marry in Pennsylvania, have six children, and work as a farmer, not an agricultural laborer like his father, but actually owning land. The American dream, as it were. John lived with William's family until his death in 1865. He's buried in a small Presbyterian cemetery in rural Pennsylvania, far from the Lincolnshire parish where he was born. When I think about that journey, from a tiny parish in England to the vast farmlands of Pennsylvania, I'm struck by how close I came to never finding this connection. If I hadn't used AI to help organize the information, I might still be staring at those three John Smiths, unable to differentiate them. But here's what's important to understand. The AI didn't find the answer. I did. AI helped me see patterns, organize information, and ask better questions. Every single conclusion I drew had to be verified against primary sources. The parish registers, the census records, the ship manifests. AI is your research assistant, not your researcher. That's not just a catchy phrase. It's the methodology that makes this work. The breakthrough came from combining traditional genealogy techniques, fan cluster analysis, timeline construction, social history research. With AI's ability to process and organize large amounts of information quickly. AI helped me see the forest while I was getting lost in the trees. And that's what I want you to take away from this episode. When you're facing a brick wall like this, multiple people with the same name, limited distinguishing details, you don't need AI to replace traditional research methods. You need it to enhance them. 

Okay, let's recap the techniques we used today because I want you to be able to apply these to your own research. First, I use CLOD to organize transcribed records into tables, which helped me see all the John Smiths side by side and spot the subtle differences in how they were described. Second, I use perplexity to research historical context, naming patterns, social class distinctions, migration patterns, which gave me the background knowledge to interpret the records correctly. Third, I use CLOD again to create a timeline showing both families in parallel, which made the generational difference visually obvious. Fourth, I applied the FAN principle, friends, associates and neighbors, mapping out witness relationships, and using CLOD to spot patterns and who appeared at which events. And finally, I verified every single conclusion against primary sources. The parish registers, the census, the shit manifest. I checked them all. Here's your homework for this week. If you have English ancestors, or ancestors from any country where multiple people share the same name in small communities, try this technique. Take all the records you've found, transcribe the key details, and upload them to Claude. Ask it to create an organizational table and a timeline. See what patterns emerged that you might have missed. Then, and this is crucial, verify those patterns against the actual records. AI can suggest connections, but you must prove them. I want to hear from you. Have you tackled a similar problem with multiple same-name ancestors? What techniques worked for you? Head over to our Facebook group, Ancestors and Algorithms, AI for Genealogy, and share your story. Or email me at ancestorsandai at gmail.com. I read every message. Next week, we're diving into a completely different kind of challenge. Writing your ancestors' story. You've done all this research, gathered all these facts. Now, how do you turn that into a narrative that people actually want to read? We're going to explore using AI as a writing partner to create compelling ancestor biographies that bring your family history to life. You won't want to miss it. Thank you so much for listening to Ancestors and Algorithms. If you enjoyed this episode, please leave a review wherever you listen to podcasts. It helps other family historians find us. Don't forget to join our Facebook group, where you can share your discoveries and connect with other researchers using AI. I'm your host, Brian, and I'll see you next week for another journey into the past powered by the future. Until then, happy researching.