My Ancestry.com Sliders Have Appeared - My First Look at Using Them

I no sooner posted Where Did My Ancestry.com Sliders Go? How I Search Without Them this morning, and the next time I brought up Ancestry.com and did a search the "sliders" appeared.  I didn't have time to update the post this morning, so I decided to write a new post about them tonight.

1)  I did the same search as in this morning's post - Isaac Seaver, born in 1823 in Massachusetts (with default settings, no exact match box checked, etc.).  Here are the Results on the "Categories" tab:

You can see the "Sliders" at the top of the left-hand panel under "Search Filters."  Since I entered data into four search fields on the search form, there are four sliders, one for each term.

2)  I can still edit the search form by clicking on "Edit Search" (below the sliders) or by hitting the "r" key (a hot key for "refine search), as shown below:

 On the screen above, I can use the search filters for Given name, Last name, and Location fields by clicking on the "Use default settings" link to show the dropdown menus - as I showed in this mornings post.  I didn't change anything for the search.

3)  Back on the Results page, I slide the search filter sliders to the settings I want to use.  I chose:

*  Given name:  position #2 - "Exact, similar, sounds like, and initials"
*  Last name:  position #3 - "Exact, sounds like, and similar"
*  Birth year:  position #4 - +/-  2 years"
*  Birth place:  position #5 - "State"

Before I click the "Update" button, the sliders look like this:

3)  I clicked the green "Update" button on the screen above, and saw the Results that reflected my slider settings:

And the "Records" tab results show them also:

  As before, the results above are mostly for "my" Isaac Seaver, because the search found them based on the search criteria I chose using the sliders.  

4)  I was curious just what each position for each slider type was, so I hovered my mouse over the slider at each position (with #1 being the broadest, and #6 being the most exact) and found that:

a)  Given name:

*  Position #1:  Not exact
*  Position #2:  Exact, similar, sounds like, and initials
*  Position #3:  Exact, similar and sounds like
*  Position #4:  Exact and similar
*  Position #5:  Exact

b)  Last name:

*  Position #1:  Not exact
*  Position #2:  Exact, similar, sounds like, and initials
*  Position #3:  Exact, similar and sounds like
*  Position #4:  Exact and similar
*  Position #5:  Exact

c)  Birth date:

*  Position #1:  Not exact
*  Position #2:  +/- 10 years
*  Position #3:  +/- 5 years
*  Position #4:  +/- 2 years
*  Position #5:  +/- 1 year
*  Position #6:  Exact

d)  Location:

*  Position #1:  Not exact
*  Position #2:  Country
*  Position #3:  State and adjacent states
*  Position #4:  State
*  Position #5:  Exact

Sliders for other events will be similar, I think.  For instance, a Death year slider will be similar to the Birth year slider.

The next question I have is "how many matches do I receive based on varying the positions."  I'll try to work that up in the next day or two.

5)  Please note that the new slider settings are very similar to the settings that the user can select on the "Search" tab page for names, dates and locations.  They just made them easier to use without going back to the "Search" page.  The key is to select wisely, and to be sure to click on the green "Update" button to see the new results.

The so-called "New Search" is not really "new" any longer.  It;'s been around for three or four years, and the search algorithms have been manipulated in an effort to bring the user the best set of results possible.

Users need to understand that the search results are dependent upon the user input - if the user inputs a name, date or location that is grossly inaccurate, the search engine is not likely to have records at or near the top of the list of Results.  That's the user's fault, not the search engine's fault.

I like and appreciate all of the Search features added by the Ancestry.com user experience team over the past few years.  They have made it possible to  find records for my ancestors much more efficiently and faster than ever before.  I appreciate that!

The URL for this post is:  http://www.geneamusings.com/2014/03/my-ancestrycom-sliders-have-appeared-my.html

Copyright (c) 2014, Randall J. Seaver

Amanuensis Monday - Post 209: 1827 Deed of John Treat to Amos Underhill in Erie County, New York

Genea-blogger John Newmark (who writes the excellent TransylvanianDutch blog) started his own Monday blog theme many months ago called Amanuensis Monday. What does "amanuensis" mean? John offers this definition:  

"A person employed to write what another dictates or to copy what has been written by another."  

The subject today is the deed by John and Eunice Treat selling land in Aurora, Erie County, New York to Amos Underhill in 1827 [starts on left-hand page on the image below]:

Here is my transcription of this entry (handwritten portions in italics) in Erie County, New York, Land Records, Liber 20, Page 240 (accessed in the "New York, Land Records, 1630-1975" collection on https://FamilySearch.org):

[on page 240]

1  John Treat to Amos Underhill
2  This indenture made the seventh day of March in the year ofo ur
3  Lord one thousand eight hundred and twentyseven.  Between John Treat
4  and Eunice his wife of the first part and Amos Underhill of the second part
5  Witnesseth  that the said party of the first part for and in consdieration
6  of the sum of three hundred and twelve dollars and fifty cents, to them in
7  hand paid by the said party of the second part, the receipt thereof is
8  hereby confirmed and acknowledged have granted, bargained, sold, remised, 
9  released, aliened and confirmed and by these presents do grant, bargain, sell,
10 remise, release, alien and confirm unto the said party of the second
11 part and to his heirs and assigns forever. All that certain piece & parcel of
12 land situate in the town of Aurora, County of Erie and State of New\
13 York, being part of lot number twelve in said town.  Bounded as follows,
14 viz: Beginning at the north east corner of said lot and running South-
15 westerly along the margin of the highway, about five chains and seventy
16 five links to the margin of the highway running northwesterly, thence
17 four chains and fifteen links along the margin of said highway
18 to the north line of said lot thence east along said line about seven
19 chains to the place of beginning containing about one acre and thirty
20 one rods of land be the same more or less, according to the plan laid
21 down in the margin hereof.  Together with all and singular the
22 hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging in anywise
23 appertaining and the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders
24 unto, issues and profits thereof, and all the estate, right, title, interest

[page 241]

25 claim or demand whatsoever of the said party of the first part either in law or
26 equity of, in, and to the above bargained premises with the said hereditaments
27 and appurtenances.  To Have and To Hold the 
28 said premises as above described with the appur-
29 tenances unto the said party of the second
30 part and to his heirs and assigns forever.
31 And the said party of the first part, for themselves
32 and their heirs, executors and administrators do
33 covenant, grant, bargain and agree to and
34 with the said party of the second part his heirs
35 and assigns that at the time of the ensealing
36 and delivery of these presents he is well seized
37 of the premises above conveyed as of a good, sure,
38 perfect, absolute and defensible estate
39 of inheritance in the law in fee simple,
40 and that the above bargained premises with
41 quiet and peacable possession of the said party of the second part, his heirs 
42 and assigns against all and every person or persons lawfully claiming or to
43 claim the whole or any part thereof they will forever warrant and and Defend.
44 In witness whereof the party of the first part have hereunto set their hands
45 and seals the day and year above written.
46 Signed, Sealed and Delivered                   John Treat, S.S.
47 In the presence of  Oren Treat                Eunice Treat S.S.

48 Erie County Ss.  Be it remembered that on this 8th day of March A.D. 1827
49 came before me James Enos a Commissioner to take the acknowledgment
50 of Deeds &c. John Treat whom I know to be the person described who ac-
51 knowledged that the signed, sealed and delivered the same for the uses and 
52 purposes therein contained and I having examined the same and finding
53 therein no material, interlineations, or evasions, do allow the same to be
54 recorded.                                     James Enos.  Com-r.

55 State of New York, Erie County Ss.  Be it remembered that on the fifth
56 day of February 1833 personally appeared before me Peter M. Vosburgh
57 Commissioner of deeds for the County of Erie, the within named Eunice
58 Treat well known to me to be the wife of the withing named John Treat
59 and being by me examined separate and apart from her said husband,
60 acknowledged that she had executed the within deed for the uses and
61 purposes therein mentioned and freely and voluntarily and without
62 any fear or compulsion from her said husband and there appearing
63 herein no material interlineations and the same being satisfactory
64 to me.  I do allow the same to be recorded.
65                                                                     P.M. Vosburgh
66                                                                    Commissioner of Deeds

67 Recorded, Examined and Compared with the original Feb'ry
68 15th 1833 at 3/4 past 1 o'clock P.M.
69                                                               Noah P. Sprague, Clerk

There is a sketch of the land location on the deed page image above:

According to the land description, the plot that Amos Underhill bought in 1827 is in the small triangle in the northeastern corner of the map, bounded by the two crossing highways.  

The source citation for this deed is:

"New York, Land Records, 1630-1975," Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, FamilySearch(https://familysearch.org : accessed 10 December 2012), digital image of clerk's copy, "Erie County, N.Y. Deeds, 1832-1833 Volume 20-21," Volume 20, Pages 240-241 [stamped] (image 125 of 549), James and Eunice Treat to Amos Underhill, written 7 March 1827, recorded 5 February 1833, from FHL US/CAN Microfilm 590018, original records at Erie County, N.Y. courthouse, Buffalo, N.Y.

Amos and Mary (Metcalf) Underhill are my fourth great-grandparents.  They came to Erie county before the War of 1812.  This is not the first land that they owned in Erie County, New York.  They sold this piece of land in 1936.

The URL for this post is:  http://www.geneamusings.com/2014/03/amanuensis-monday-post-209-1827-deed-of.html

Copyright (c) 2014, Randall J. Seaver

Where Did My Ancestry.com Sliders Go? How I Search Without Them

I was using my laptop computer on Friday night while I was in Hemet, and was happy to see that I had sliders for refined searching on Ancestry.com when I was logged into Ancestry.com.  I tried them out, and considered writing a blog post that night about them, but figured i'll wait until Monday to do that.  So here's the Monday post...

I don't have Ancestry.com sliders today, and I have no clue why.  I'm in the same Ancestry.com account.  I'm searching the same person.  But no sliders.  

Here's my proof:

1)  The "Search" tab screen:

Note that I have information in the following fields:

*  Exact match box not checked.
*  First and middle names:  Isaac
*  Last name:  Seaver
*  Event:  Birth [selected from dropdown list]
*  Year:  1823
*  Birthplace:  Massachusetts, USA [selected from dropdown list]

2)  The results page (using the "Records" tab to see the "best match" records found at the top of the list:

Note that there are NO sliders at the top of the left-hand panel for some reason.  All of my Facebook Friends have them for default-type searches, why don't I?  Ancestry.com is teasing me...

The "Matching Records" at the top of the list of 92,420 matches include these records for "my" Isaac Seaver (born 1823, died 1901):

1.  Ancestry Family Tree entry for Isaac Seaver (1823-1901)
2.  1900 U.S. Federal Census for Isaac Seaver (1823-1901)
3.  1880 U.S. Federal Census for Isaac Seaver (1823-1901)
4.  1870 U.S. Federal Census for Isaac Seaver (1823-1901)
5 to 19:  Public Member Tree photos for records and pictures of Isaac Seaver (1823-1901)
20 to 22:  Birth Records for Isaac Seaver in 1823 from Mass. Town and Vital Records, 1630-1988.  (not duplicates, different entries)
23.  Death Record for Isaac Seaver in 1901 from Massachusetts Vital Records, 1841-1915.
24.  1860 U.S. Federal Census for Isaac Seaver (1823-1901)
25.  1850 U.S. Federal Census for Isaac Seaver (1823-1901)
26. U.S. Civil War Draft Registration, 1863-1865 for Isaac Seaver (1823-1901)
27.  Westminster, Mass. 1864 Militia List for Isaac Seaver from Mass. Town and Vital Records, 1630-1988 (this was a new find for me)
28.  Find A Grave Index entry for Isaac Seaver (1823-1901)
29.  Westminster, Mass. 1865 Militia List for Isaac Seaver from Mass. Town and Vital Records, 1630-1988 (this was a new find for me)
30.  Marriage Record for Isaac Seaver and Alvina Lewis in 1888, from Mass. Town and Vital Records, 1630-1988.
31 and 32.  Marriage Record for Isaac Seaver and Lucretia Smith in 1851 from Mass. Town and Vital Records, 1630-1988.  (not duplicates, different entries)
33.  Westminster, Mass. 1866 Militia List for Isaac Seaver from Mass. Town and Vital Records, 1630-1988 (this was a new find for me)
34 and 35.  Marriage Record for Isaac Seaver and Lucretia Smith in 1851 from Mass. Town and Vital Records, 1630-1988. (not duplicates, different entries)
36.  Marriage Record for Isaac Seaver and Juliet Glazier in 1846 from Mass. Town and Vital Records, 1630-1988.
37.  Marriage Record for Isaac Seaver and Lucretia Smith in 1851 from Mass. Vital Records, 1841-1915.
38.  Marriage Record for Isaac Seaver and Alvina Bradley in 1888 from Mass. Vital Records, 1841-1915.
39.  Marriage Record for Isaac Seaver and Alvina Lewis in 1888 from Mass. Vital Records, 1841-1915.
40.  Marriage Record for Isaac Seaver and Juliet Glazier in 1846 from Mass. Vital Records, 1841-1915.
41.  Isaac Seaver Civil War Soldier Record and Profile, 1861-1865
42 to 45.  Public Member Tree Photos and Scanned Documents
47.  Marriage Record of Lucretia Smith (to Isaac Seaver) in Mass. Marriage Records, 1840-1915.
48.  Eliza A. Seaver Marriage Record to Isaac Seaver in Vermont Vital Records, 1720-1908 [not my guy]
49 and 50.  Marriage Record of Lucretia Smith (to Isaac Seaver) in Mass. Town and vital Records, 1630-1988.

Out of the top 50 matches, 49 of them are for my Isaac Seaver.  There are more matches for him in the set of 50 records also - especially City Directory matches.  However not all of the matches are "my guy."

3)  I clicked on the "Categories" tab on the Results page and saw the list of categories with records that match my search criteria:

Note that there are no sliders in the left-hand panel...still.

I could search within each Category item if I wanted to, and the matches would, generally, put "my guy" at the top of the list.

For instance, for the 1900 U.S. census, here is the top of the list:

Still no sliders in the left-hand panel.

5)  I clicked on the link for the record at the top of the 1900 U.S. Census list above, and saw:

6)  Doesn't everybody start with "easy" searches like this - with only a name, birth date (if known) and birth place (if known), and just default matches?  The Ancestry.com search engine find records very efficiently that match your search field criteria.  And it presents the "Best Matches" at the top of the "Records" tab listing.  I think that is fantastic.

I entered data into four search fields - given name, last name, birth year, birth place (think of four stars).  The first 41 matches found records for all four of them (with a birth year variance of 1 year).  Granted, I had the birth year in the Photos attached to my Ancestry Member Tree.

Because I started with "default" matches for everything, it found a lot of matches (92,420 of them).  For my search above, the system looked for four star matches, then three-star, two-star, etc.

7)  If I clicked the "Exact match" box at the top of the search screen, I would get many fewer matches because I'm narrowing the search.  But I would also miss the variant name spellings of the given and last names.  Or I can use wild cards for the names and find variant spellings.

I can choose refined settings for the given name, last name, add some range to the birth year, etc.  For instance, the Given Name settings include:

All you have to do is click on the "Use default settings" link and pick from the dropdown box.

The Last Name settings are similar  (just click on the "Use default settings" link):

And the Location settings have refinements too (just click on the "Use default settings" link):

8)  I realize that I used someone with lots of records and uploaded images in my tree to do this blog post.  I will get similar results for every 19th and 20th century ancestor I search for.  Records are sparser before 1850, but the search processes above should work before 1850 also, but with fewer matches for "my guy."

I usually start with exact matches (so that I get fewer extraneous matches), but with a 2-year range on birth year. When I do that, I miss the name variants and records that don't have a birth year or birth place associated with it.  So I often use wild cards to cover the name variants, and expand the birth year range and perhaps the birth place range to find more records.  When I find very little, then I use the "default settings" for all search fields, and go through the top 100 to 200 matches.  I rarely have to do that.

9)  So how do you search on Ancestry.com?  Do you use the exact matches or default matches first?  Do you add a birth year and birth place?  Do you use the "Records" tab or the "Categories" tab on the results page?

10)  I'm still wondering where my sliders went.  Maybe I should check the nearby Applebees.  Take my laptop.  Maybe they're there!

Frankly, I don't need them.  The name and location setting options cover them and I know how to use them.  If, or when, I get sliders, I will do a similar exercise for the same search above and tell you if anything different occurs.  I doubt that it will.

The URL for this post is:  http://www.geneamusings.com/2014/03/where-did-my-ancestrycom-sliders-go-how.html

Copyright (c) 2014, Randall J. Seaver

Best of the Genea-Blogs - 2 to 8 March 2014

Hundreds of genealogy and family history bloggers write thousands of posts every week about their research, their families, and their interests. I appreciate each one of them and their efforts.

My criteria for "Best of ..." are pretty simple - I pick posts that advance knowledge about genealogy and family history, address current genealogy issues, provide personal family history, are funny or are poignant. I don't list posts destined for daily blog prompts or meme submissions (but I do include summaries of them), or my own posts.

Here are my picks for great reads from the genealogy blogs for this past week:

* !2 Genealogical Resources to Look For at Your Local Library by Karin Hadden on The Art of Genealogy blog.  Karin found quite a few items of interest in your locals, what have you found?

*  Has Evernote Made Research Logs Obsolete? by Denise Barrett Olson on the Moultrie Creek Gazette blog.  Denise shares her use of Evernote to capture search results and documents as part of her genealogy research process.

*  Exploring New Formats for Genealogy Instruction by Amy Coffin on The We Tree Genealogy Blog.  Amy, and her readers, continue the discussion about conferences, institutes, seminars and other educational opportunities.  Read the comments too.

*  Find A Grave App Now Available! by Thomas MacEntee on the Hack Genealogy blog.  Thomas provides directions and commentary on the features of the new Find A Grave mobile app for iOS devices.

*  The Divorce by Michael Lacopo on the Hoosier Daddy? blog.  Michael found the divorce record in 1982 and it revealed much more than expected.

*  Tuesday's Tip:  Podcasts by Miriam Robbins on the Ancestories: The Stories of My Ancestors blog.  Miriam lists the available genealogy-oriented podcasts for our listening pleasure.

*  Conferences and New Formats by Karen Blackmore on Karen's Genealogy Oasis blog.  Karen shares her thoughts on conferences and other learning experiences.

*  Family History in 2050: DNA's Impact by Nathan W. Murphy on the FamilySearch Blog.  Well, this is different...seer or humorist?  I want to hear what the genetic genealogists have to say.

*  A Visit to the Rhode Island State Archives by Diane Boumenot on the One Rhode Island Family blog.  Diane shares her experiences at these Archives and some of the interesting records she found.  I need to go there...

*  Sliding Around: Ancestry Rolls Out New Sliders to Edit Search Results by Diane Haddad on The Genealogy Insider blog.  Diane describes this new feature on Ancestry.com.

*  How Do You Handle URLs in Citations? by Jill K. Morelli on the Genealogy Certification: My Personal Journal blog.  Great question, and interesting discussion.

*  My Commitment to PERSI by Jen Baldwin on the Ancestral Breezes blog.  Jen has been finding "good stuff" in PERSI.  Have you looked yet?

*  Who Do You Think You Are? Live 2014 by Emily Aulicino on the DNA - Genealem's Genetic Genealogy blog.  Emily reports on her WDYTYA? experience in London, and more.

These genea-bloggers wrote weekly pick posts and news summary posts this week:

*  NN Genealogy Things You Need to Know This Morning, Sunday, 2 Mar 2014; Monday, 3 Mar 2014; Tuesday, 4 Mar 2014; Wednesday, 5 Mar 2014; Thursday, 6 Mar 2014; Friday, 7 Mar 2014; Saturday, 8 Mar 2014 by Caroline M. Pointer on the 4YourFamilyStory.com blog.

*  Follow Friday ~ Fab Finds for March 7, 2014 by Jana Last on Jana's Genealogy and Family History Blog.

*  Friday's Finds - 3/7/14 by Julie Cahill Tarr on Julie's Genealogy & History Hub blog.

*  Saturday Serendipity (March 8,. 2014) by John D. Tew on the Filiopietism Prism blog.

Readers are encouraged to go to the blogs listed above and read their articles, and add their blogs to your Favorites, Feedly, another RSS feed, or email if you like what you read. Please make a comment to them also - all bloggers appreciate feedback on what they write.

Did I miss a great genealogy blog post? Tell me! I am currently reading posts from over 1470 genealogy bloggers using Feedly, but I still miss quite a few it seems.

Read past Best of the Genea-Blogs posts here.

The URL for this post is:  http://www.geneamusings.com/2014/03/best-of-genea-blogs-2-to-8-march-2014_9.html

Copyright (c) 2014, Randall J. Seaver  

Saturday Night Genealogy Fun - A Fearless Females Prompt

It's Saturday Night - 

time for more Genealogy Fun! 

Your mission, should you decide to accept it (cue the Mission Impossible! music) is to:

1)  Read Lisa Alzo's blog post Back for a Fourth Year: Fearless Females: 31 Blogging Prompts to Celebrate Women's History Month on her blog, The Accidental Genealogist.  [Yes, I know it was last year, but Lisa's using the same list this year.]

2)  Choose one of her daily blog prompts from the list (this is March 8th, do that one if you don't want to choose another), and write about it.

3)  Tell us about it in a blog post of your own, in a comment to this blog post, in a Facebook post or a Google+ post.

Here's mine:

I'm going to choose the March 8th prompt :  "Did one of your female ancestors leave a diary, journal, or collection of letters? Share an entry or excerpt."

My great-grandmother, Della (Smith) Carringer (1862-1944) kept a scrapbook, wrote letters to family and friends, and kept a journal for at least one year, 1929.  I have transcribed the journal in my Della's Journal series.  

I have transcribed several of the letters that were in the "collection" of artifacts, ephemera and papers.  One of them has been very useful - a rough draft of a letter she wrote to at least one sister or cousin, and perhaps to several of them.  Here it is:

Letter from Della (Smith) Carringer to her "cousins" (unspecified). Undated, although it is probably October 1903. No envelope. The letter is on “Greetings from Southern California” letterhead, with three pictures (copyright 1901 by Edw. H. Mitchell S.F.):

San Diego
510 Watkins Ave.

Dear Cousins,

Your good letter recived and I was so surprised to hear of two more boys in the family but I know George is proud now the men always are when it is a boy. I always wanted a girl I think they are just as nice don’t you? Wish I could have had my two boys to raise together. Hope you all can keep yours they are so much company one for the other. But I am thankfull for my one boy. He will be twelve next month. He is doing nicely in school now. 

If it is not to much trouble when you write next time give me the childrens ages for I want to set down all of the cousins children and see how big a tree we will be in fifty years from now. Davie was fourty the 15th of this month so that makes the fourth to enter the four tens if Orpha & Nellie had lived. 1 I am the oldest. 2 Orpha next then 3 Nellie & 4 Davie. 5 (Ada dead). 6 Mary Dyar. 7 Matie Smith. 8 (Aggie Smith dead). Then 10 George 9 Myrtle Crouch. 11 Amy. 12 Willie C. 13 Lutie S. (dead). 14 Louie. Bert Vaux 15 (Ralph Crouch dead), 16 Bert Vaux. 17 Guy Vaux dead 19 Callie. I think 18 Gean Woodward was older than Callie but I do not know for shure. You know from there down Myrtle is older than George for I can remember her saying Monkey for Munger when he was a baby. You know from there down this younger generation of cousins.

20 Ada Woodward. 21 Verdie Dyar. 22 Roy Dyar. 24 Nellie Woodward. 23 Devier Carringer. 26. Chester Dyar. 27 Lyle Carringer. 25 Eva Smith. 28 Vern Dyar. 29 Ellen Doctor. 30 Lezzie Doctor. 31 Grace Doctor. 32 Mable Smith. 33 34 Will Cruchs 2 girls. 35 36 37 Amy 2 boys 1 girl. 38 39 40 Geo 2 girls 1 boy. 41 Orpha 1 girl. 18 Grand chil, 23 G Grand chil.

[no further information]

I finally figured out who the "parents" of this family are - it's Samuel and Mary Ann (Underhill) Vaux.  Note the 18 grandchildren and 23 great grandchildren comment.  The names of the children given on the list above are all children of the children of Samuel and Mary Ann (Underhill) Vaux. 

I think that this letter was sent to Della's aunt, Celia Ann (Vaux) (Redfield) Munger in Belleville, Kansas because she refers to George's having just had a son - George is certainly George Francis Munger of Belleville, who had a son, Frank E. Munger on 30 May 1903, and had two daughters before that.   The second boy that Della refers to is probably Amy (Munger) Doctor's son, Peter Doctor, who was born in August 1903 in Belleville.

I really do think that Della would be ecstatic that someone in the family found her collection and is using it to create a family tree.  I also think that she would be amazed at what I've found in her ancestry, and in her husband's ancestry also.  

The URL for this post is:  http://www.geneamusings.com/2014/03/saturday-night-genealogy-fun-fearless.html

Copyright (c) 2014, Randall J. Seaver

Surname Saturday - SAMBORNE (England to colonial New England)

It's Surname Saturday, and I'm "counting down" my Ancestral Name List each week.  

I am in the 7th great-grandmothers and I'm up to Ancestor #883, who is Mary SAMBORNE (1690-1790).   [Note: the earlier great-grandmothers and 7th great-grandfathers have been covered in earlier posts].

My ancestral line back through three generations in this SAMBORNE family line is:

1.  Randall J. Seaver (1943-living)

2. Frederick Walton Seaver (1911-1983)
3. Betty Virginia Carringer (1919-2002)

6.  Lyle Lawrence Carringer (1891-1976)
7.  Emily Kemp Auble (1899-1977)

12.  Henry Austin Carringer (1853-1946)
13.  Abbey Ardell Smith (1862-1944)

26.  Devier James Lamphier Smith (1839-1884)
27.  Abigail A. Vaux (1844-1931)

54.  Samuekl Vaux (1814-1880)
55.  Mary Ann Underhill (1816-1883)

110.  Amos Underhill (1772-1865)
111.  Mary Metcalf (1780-1855)

220.  John Underhill (1745-812)
221.  Hannah Colby (1745-????)

440.  John Underhill (1721-1793)
441.  Joanna Healey (1723-1809)

882.  William Healey, born 29 January 1690 in Salisbury, Essex, Massachusetts, United States; died Abt. 1772 in Chester, Rockingham, New Hampshire, United States.  He was the son of 1764. Samuel Healey and 1765. Hannah Smith.  He married 13 January 1716 in Hampton Falls, Rockingham, New Hampshire, United States.
883.  Mary Samborne, born 27 October 1690 in Hampton Falls, Rockingham, New Hampshire, United States; died about 1790 in Chester, Rockingham, New Hampshire, United States.  

Children of William Healey and Mary Samborne are:
*  Phebe Healey (1716-1806), married 1738 Winthrop Sargent (1711-1788)
*  Joanna Healey (1718-1809), married 1741 John Underhill (1721-1793)
*  Samuel Healey (1720-????), married Abigail Smith.
*  Mary Healey (1722-????), married 1737 Joseph Clifford (1718-1783)
*  Dorothy Healey (1724-????), married Winthrop Wells.
*  Sarah Healey (1726-1826), married 1742 Isaac Clifford (1721-1818)
*  William Healey (1729-????)
*  Paul Healey (1730-1790), married 1751 Abigail (1730-????)
*  Hannah Healey (1734-1805), married 1752 William Preston (1728-1804).

1766.  Benjamin Samborne, born 20 December 1668 in Hampton Falls, Rockingham, New Hampshire, United States; died 15 December 1740 in Hampton Falls, Rockingham, New Hampshire, United States.  He married before 1690 in New Hampshire, United States.
1767.  Sarah Worcester, born 15 August 1667 in Salisbury, Essex, Massachusetts, United States; died 29 January 1721 in Hampton, Rockingham, New Hampshire, United States.  She was the daughter of 3534. Timothy Worcester and 3535. Susanna.

Children of Benjamin Samborne and Sarah Worcester are:
*  Mary Samborne (1690-1790), married 1716 William Healey (1690-1772).
*  Joanna Samborne (1692-1717), married 1714 Cornelius Clough (1680-????)
*  Sarah Samborne (1694-1756), married 1714 Reuben Samborne.
*  Theodate Samborne (1696-1756), married 1719 Jonathan Samborne.
*  Dorothy Samborrne (1698-1757), married (1) 1721 Jethro Bachiler (1698-1723), (2) 1736 Alexander Moulton.
*  Abigail Samborne (1700-1741), married 1725 Enoch Colby (1702-1780).
*  Jemima Samborne (1702-????), married John Stacy.
*  Susanna Samborne (1704-1776), married 1750 Joshua Blake (1701-1777).
*  Benjamin Samborne (1706-????)
*  Judah Samborne (1708-????), married 1725 Robert Quimby.
*  Benjamin Samborne (1712-1748), married (1) 1733 Hannah Tilton; (2) 1736 Dorothy Tilton.

3532.  John Samborne, born 1620 in England; died Bef. 20 December 1692 in Hampton, Rockingham, New Hampshire, United States.  He was the son of 7064. John Samborne and 7065. Ann Bachiler.  He married about 1648 in New Hampshire, United States.
3533.  Mary Tuck, born about 1622 in Gorlston, Suffolk, England; died 30 December 1668 in Hampton, Rockingham, New Hampshire, United States.  She was the daughter of 7066. Robert Tuck and 7067. Joanna.

Children of John Samborne and Mary Tuck are:
*  John Samborne (1649-1727), married 1674 Judith Coffin (1653-1724).
*  Mary Samborne (1651-1654)
*  Abigail Samborne (1653-1743), married 1677 Ephraim Marston.
*  Richard Samborne (1655-1716), married (1) 1678 Ruth Moulton (1659-1685); (2) 1693 Mary Drake (1657-????).
*  Mary Samborne (1657-1660).
*  Joseph Samborne (1659-1724), married 1682 Mary Gove.
*  Stephen Samborne (1661-1662).
*  Ann Samborne (1662-1745), married Samuel Palmer.
*  Dinah Samborne (1664-????), married 1678 James Marston.
*  Nathaniel Samborne (1666-1723), married (1) Sarah Nelson (1663-1748); (2) 1691 Rebecca Prescott (????-1704).
*  Benjamin Samborne (1668-1740), married (1) 1690 Sarah Worcester (1667-1721); (2) 1721 Meribah Page; (3) 1724 Abigail Gove.


Information about these Samborne/Sanborn (many spellings!) was found in:

(1)  V.C. Sanborn, F.B. Sanborn, Genealogy of the Family of Samborne or Sanborn, 1198-1898 (Concord, N.H. : The Rumford Press,  1899).


(2)  Malva Lynn Teed and Mary L. Emil, "We Are Because They Were", typescript (1983), accessed on FHL US/CAN Microfilm 1,033,945, Item 6.

The URL for this post is:  http://www.geneamusings.com/2014/03/surname-saturday-samborne-england-to.html

copyright (c) 2014, Randall J. Seaver

Ancestry Drops "Old Search" - Hysteria Ensues

I haven't seen an official announcement about this yet, unless you count the one back in June 2013 that announced the eventual demise, but Ancestry.com dropped the "Old Search" function recently.  

The Ancestry Insider wrote about this last month in Old Search Retirement, Ancestry.com Pays Down Technical Debt.

A lot of my Facebook Friends, and many more on the Ancestry.com Facebook Group Page and the Ancestry Site Comments Message Board, are complaining that the "Old Search" is gone, and that they don't like the "New Search."  Some have cancelled their Ancestry.com subscription, and some advocate boycotting Ancestry.com for a week.  Here's a gravestone that reader Talbotrail back in June 2013:

My own feelings about this are mixed - I understand the "lost" and "frustrated" feeling that "it's not like it used to be, " "I have to learn how do something differently," and "I'll show them - I'll quit or boycott them."  But change happens...

I continue to believe that the Ancestry.com "New Search" (actually the only search now) is the most powerful, most comprehensive, most flexible, most complicated and most misunderstood set of search features I've seen in the genealogy world.  I embrace it, and try to use every feature I find on the website, in order to maximize the value of my Ancestry.com subscription (yes, I pay for my own, so that I can objectively write about it).

To that end, and to help my genealogist colleagues, I wrote a series of posts about Ancestry "New Search" vs. "Old Search" back in 2013.  Here is a list of some of the posts for your reading pleasure (I know, they're long, and detailed, that's me.  Enjoy!):

*  Comparing "Old Search" and "New Search" Results on Ancestry.com (28 June 2013)

*  Is this the Problem Users Have with Ancestry.com's "New Search?" (28 June 2013)

*  How I Search on Ancestry.com "New Search" - Post 1: Name and Locality Filters (29 June 2013)

*  Searching Records From Within An Ancestry Member Tree (2 July 2013)

*  Comparing "Old Search" and "New Search" Results on Ancestry.com - Exact Matches (5 July 2013)

*  Another Ancestry.com "Old Search" vs. "New Search" Comparison (4 September 2013)

*  Ancestry "Old Search" and "New Search" Comparison with Exact Matches (5 September 2013)

*  Ancestry.com "New Search" Results With Wild Card Names (6 September 2013)

All of my posts about Ancestry.com are in my Ancestry.com label file - 599 of them to date!

Most of those posts listed above generated a number of reader comments.  I responded to many of them in some of my Follow Friday posts (they are in the Ancestry.com label file also).

During those months of working and comparing "Old Search" with "New Search," I drew several conclusions, including:

*  Exact searches in "New Search" cannot be done from the Home page, but can be done on the "Advanced Search" page and "Search" tab.
*  The user can pick either the "Records" view tab (which looks like the "Ranked Matches" results in "Old Search") or the "Categories" view tab (which looks like the "Old Search" Exact Match results) on the search results page.

*  "New Search" found more applicable matches for the requested name, and different records, than "Old Search."
*  The number of matches found for "my guy" in "New Search" were the same records found in "Old Search," but were in a different order in the Match list.

*  The "Records" view list in "New Search" Matches put records for "my guy" near the top of the list.
*  The "Records" view list, in either "New Search" or "Old Search," did not find records for "my guy" that had different indexed name spellings that did not match in Soundex. 
*  For results with many matches, the "Categories" view might be easier to work with than the "Records" view.

*  Searchers should not totally rely on the "Records" view search results with only a name and birth year/place.  A wild card search and a wider birth year range would have found missed records.
*  Different wild card searches in "New Search" produce different results.  In general, the more characters you use, the fewer matches you receive. 
*  If the user uses too many alphabetical characters in a Wild Card search, all of the relevant results may be limited even with wild cards.

*  Narrowing the search using "not exact" dates and locations drives the relevant matches for the target person to the top of the "Records" view match list.
*  Narrowing the search using "exact" dates and locations may miss relevant records.
*  If the results do not find an expected record in a specific database for the target person, then search that database separately and use all of the tricks (exact name, wild cards, expand the date range, remove birthplace, first name only in a county, etc.) one at a time or in combination. 

*  "New Search" is complex, and needs to be practiced and learned on a regular basis.  If you are paying for an Ancestry.com subscription, you should be willing to invest enough time to learn how to use it efficiently and effectively. 

Ancestry.com provides many helpful articles on their Ancestry.com Blog and on video on the Ancestry.com YouTube Channel.  Please go read and watch those articles and videos to help you adjust to "New Search."

After over 5 years of getting to know, and, in some cases, consulting with them at conferences or meetings or phone calls, I know that Ancestry.com personnel really want the customer to succeed at finding genealogical records pertinent to their ancestors.  Everything they've done has been intended to make the user experience better.  They've been willing to listen to "Old Search" advocates, and have added features that look and work like "Old Search" to "New Search."  Their customer base is very diverse geographically, agewise, in technological expertise, and in genealogical research experience.  They can't have one user experience for me, and one for Elizabeth, and one for Vladimir and one for Rafael.  

Like life, change happens.  Without change there is no progress, but not all change results in progress.  My opinion is that Ancestry.com "New Search" is progress, and will continue to be improved and changed over time.  

The URL for this post is:  http://www.geneamusings.com/2014/03/ancestry-drops-old-search-hysteria.html

Copyright (c) 2014, Randall J. Seaver

52 Ancestors - Week 10: #17 - Lucretia Townsend (Smith) Seaver (1828-1884)

Amy Johnson Crow suggested a weekly blog theme of "52 Ancestors" in her blog post Challenge:  52 Ancestors in 52 Weeks on the No Story Too Small blog.  Here is my ancestor biography for week #10:

Lucretia Townsend (Smith) Seaver  (1828-1884) is #17 on my Ancestor Name List, and is my 2nd-great-grandmother.  She married #16 Isaac Seaver (1823-1901) in 1851.

 I am descended through:

*  their son, #8 Frank Walton Seaver (1852-1922), who married 1874 Hattie L. Hildreth (1857-1920)
*  their son, #4 Frederick Walton Seaver (1876-1942), who married 1900 Alma Bessie Richmond (1882-1962)
* their son, #2 Frederick Walton Seaver (1911-1983), who married 1942 Betty Virginia Carringer (1919-2002) 
*  their son, #1 Randall J. Seaver (1943-....)

To create this post, I made an Individual Summary report in RootsMagic 6, then saved it into an RTF file.  I then copied and pasted the Person, the Individual Fact List, the Marriages/Children, the General Notes, and the Source Citations into this blog post.  Unfortunately, the source citations superscripts did not survive this process as superscripts, so I put them in brackets in the Individual Facts list below, and without brackets in the Source Citation list.  I have images of many of these records, but have not included them in this blog post due to the length of the post.  Many of them have been transcribed or shown in Amanuensis Monday and Treasure Chest Thursday posts.

=====================================================
1)  PERSON (with source citations as indicated in brackets):

*  Name:                   Lucretia Townsend Smith [1]    
*  Sex:                      Female   
*  Father:                  Alpheus B. Smith (1802-1840)   
*  Mother:                 Elizabeth Horton Dill (1791-1869)   
  
2) INDIVIDUAL FACTS ( with source citations as indicated in brackets):

*  Birth:                    6 September 1828, Medfield, Norfolk, Massachusetts, United States [1]

*  Census:                 1 June 1850 (age 21), Medfield, Norfolk, Massachusetts, United States [2]
*  Census:                 1 June 1855 (age 26) Medfield, Norfolk, Massachusetts, United States [3]
*  Census:                1 June 1860 (age 31), Westminster, Worcester, Massachusetts, United States [4]
*  Census:                1 June 1865 (age 36), Westminster, Worcester, Massachusetts, United States [5]
*  Census:                1 June 1870 (age 41), Leominster, Worcester, Massachusetts, United States [6]
*  Census:                1 June 1880 (age 51), Leominster, Worcester, Massachusetts, United States [7]   
*  Death:                  24 March 1884 (age 55), of an abscess; Leominster, Worcester, Massachusetts, United States [8–9]
*  Burial:                  after 24 March 1884 (after age 55), Leominster, Worcester, Massachusetts, United States [10–11]
*  Probate:               22 April 1884 (age 55), Letter of Administration filed; Worcester, Worcester, Massachusetts, United States [12]
   
*  Alt. Name:           Lucretia T. Smith [2]    
*  Alt. Name:           Lucretia T. Seaver [3, 5, 10, 12]
*  Alt. Name:           Lucretia Smith [13–14]
*  Alt. Name:           Lucretia Seaver [4, 7]    
*  Alt. Name:           Lucretia D. Seaver [6, 8–9]   
  
3)  MARRIAGES/CHILDREN (with source citations as indicated in brackets):    
*  Spouse 1:            Isaac Seaver (1823-1901)   
*  Marriage 1:         9 September 1851 (age 23), Walpole, Norfolk, Massachusetts, United States [13-14]
*  Child 1:              Frank Walton Seaver (1852-1922)   
*  Child 2:              Benjamin Seaver (1854-1894)   
*  Child 3:              Elizabeth Lucinda Seaver (1859-1914)   

*  Child 4:              Ellen Maria "Nellie" Seaver (1861-1933)  

4)  NOTES (with source citations as indicated in brackets):

The birth of Lucretia Townsend Smith is recorded in the Medfield, Massachusetts Vital Records book as [1]:

"[SMITH], Lucretia Townsend, d[aughter]. Alpeus B. and Elizabeth, Sept. 6, 1828"

Her first and middle names commemorated one of her mother's teacher colleagues in Dedham, Lucretia Townsend.

She was also called Lucretia Smith and Lucretia T. Smith before her marriage, and Lucretia Seaver, Lucretia T. Seaver and Lucretia D. Seaver after her marriage. 

In the 1850 US census, Elizabeth H. Smith (age 52, female, born MA) resided in Medfield, Norfolk County, Massachusetts with Lucretia T. Smith (age 22, female born MA) [2].

The marriage record in the Massachusetts Vital Records, 1841-1915 record collection has this information [13]:

*  Date:  Sept. 4 1851 in Walpole

*  Groom:  Isaac Seaver, resident of Medfield, age 27, a Blacksmith, born Westminster, parents Benj & Abigail Seaver, Second marriage

*  Bride:  Lucretia Smith, resident of Medfield, age 23, born in Medfield, parents Alpheus & Eliza Smith, First marriage

*  Officiant:  Rev. Geo. R. Newhall

In the 1855 Massachusetts State Census, the Isaac Seaver family was enumerated on 14 September 1855 residing in Medfield, Norfolk county, Massachusetts [3].  The household included:

*  Isaac Seaver - age 31, male, a machinist, born in Mass.

*  Lucretia T. Seaver - age 28, female, born Mass.

*  Juliette G. Seaver - age 8, female, born Mass.

*  Frank W. Seaver - age 3, male, born Mass.

*  Benjn Seaver - age 1, male, born Mass.

In the 1860 census, this family resided in Westminster, Worcester County, Massachusetts [4]. The household included:

*  Isaac Seaver 3rd -- age 36, male, blacksmith, $1800 in real property, $600 in personal property, born MA

*  Lucretia Seaver -- age 32, female, born MA

*  Juliette G. Seaver -- age 13, female, born MA, attended school

*  Frank W. Seaver -- age 8, male, born MA, attended school

*  Benjamin Seaver -- age 6, male, born MA, attended school

*  Elizabeth L. Seaver -- age 1, female, born MA.

The 1865 Massachusetts State Census entry for the Isaac Seaver family in Westminster, Worcester County, Massachusetts includes [5]:

*  Isaac Seaver - age 41, male, born Westminster, Mass., married, a blacksmith, ratable polls checked, legal voter checked

*  Lucretia T. Seaver - age 37, female, born Medfield, Mass., married, a housekeeper

*  Juliet G. Seaver - age 17, female, born Westminster, Mass., single, a domestic

*  Frank W. Seaver - age 13, male, born Medfield, Mass.

*  Benjamin Seaver - no age, male, born Medfield, Mass.

*  Lizzie L. Seaver - age 6, female, born Westminster, Mass.

*  Nellie M. Seaver - age 4, female, born Westminster, Mass.

In the 1870 US census, this family resided in Leominster, Worcester County, Massachusetts [6]. The household included:

*  Isaac Seaver -- age 46, male, white, works in a fork shop, $2000 in real property, $1500 in personal property, born MA

*  Lucretia D. Seaver -- age 42, female, white, keeping house, born MA

*  Frank W. Seaver -- age 18, male, white, attends school, born MA

*  Benjamin Seaver -- age 16, male, white, attends school, born MA

*  Elizabeth Seaver -- age 11, female, white, attends school, born MA

*  Ellen M. Seaver -- age 8, female, white, attends school, born MA

In the 1880 census, the Isaac Seaver family resided in Leominster, Worcester County, Massachusetts [7].  The family included:

*  Isaac Seaver -- white, male, age 56, married, born MA, blacksmith, parents born MA

*  Lucretia Seaver -- white, female, age 52, wife, married, born MA, keeping house, parents born MA

*  Nellie Seaver -- white, female, age 18, daughter, single, attended school, born MA, parents born MA.

The death entry for Lucretia (Smith) Seaver in the Massachusetts Vital Records, 1841-1915 has this information [8]:

*  Date/Place:  24 March 1884 in Leominster, Mass.

*  Lucretia D. Seaver, Female, Married, age 56-6-18 at death; cause of death an Abscess; Residence is Leominster, Place of Death is Leominster, Burial in Leominster; birthplace Medfield; father is Alpheus Smith, born in Medfield; Mother is Elizabeth - , born in Eastham, Mass.

The gravestone inscription of Isaac Seaver, two of his wives, and two children in Evergreen Cemetery in Leominster, Massachusetts reads [10-11]:

1823  Isaac Seaver  1901

1826 Juliett his wife 1847

1828 Lucretia T. his wife 1884

1854 Benjamin Seaver 1894

1861  Nellie M. Seaver  1931

Lucretia T. (Smith) Seaver died in 1884, intestate.  Her probate papers are in Worcester County Probate Records, Probate Packet B-3169 [12]. Her husband, Isaac Seaver was named administrator, and he filed bond of $1000 on 22 April 1884.  The  administrator's petition was filed on the same date, listing the following children:

Frank W. Seaver of Leominster    son

Benjamin Seaver of Maitland FL    "

Eliz. L. Blanchard of Harvard    daughter

Ellen M. Seaver of Leominster      "

5)  SOURCES:

1. Vital Records of Medfield, Massachusetts to the Year 1850 (Boston, Mass. :  New England Historic Genealogical Society, 1903), Births, page 92: Lucretia Townsend Smith entry.

2. 1850 United States Federal Census, Norfolk County, Massachusetts, population schedule; Medfield town, Page 348A, Dwelling #488, Family #632, Eliza Smith household; online database, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com); citing National Archives Microfilm Publication M432, Roll 331.

3. "Massachusetts State Census, 1855,"  indexed database and digital image, FamilySearch.org  (https://www.familysearch.org), Norfolk county, Medfield, page 19 (penned), Dwelling #55, Family #55, Isaac Seaver household.

4. 1860 United States Federal Census, Population Schedule, Worcester County, Massachusetts, Westminster:  Page 94, dwelling #354, family #386, Isaac Seaver household; digital images, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com); citing National Archives Microfilm Publication M653, Roll 531).

5. "Massachusetts, State Census, 1865", Worcester County, Westminster, Page 30 (penned), Dwelling #272, family #310, Isaac Seaver household; digital image, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org).

6. 1870 United States Federal Census, Population Schedule, Worcester County, Massachusetts, Leominster: Page 284, dwelling #398, family #526, Isaac Seaver household; digital images, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com); citing National Archives Microfilm Publication M593, Roll 654.

7. 1880 United States Federal Census, Population Schedule, Worcester County, Massachusetts, Leominster:  Page 533C, dwelling #493, family #621, Isaac Seaver household; digital images, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com); citing National Archives Microfilm Publication T9, Roll 565.

8. "Massachusetts Vital Records, 1841-1915," indexed database and digital images,  New England Historic Genealogical Society, American Ancestors (http://www.AmericanAncestors.org), Deaths: Volume 357, Page 414.

9. Leominster, Massachusetts, Death Certificate, Certificate of Death, Lucretia D. Seaver, 24 March 1884; City Clerk's Office, Leominster, Mass. (certificate dated 28 August 1991).

10. Evergreen Cemetery (Leominster, Mass., on Main Street), Lucretia T. Seaver gravestone.

11. Find A Grave, database and images (http://www.findagrave.com), Evergreen Cemetery (Leominster, Mass.), Lucretia Townsend Smith Seaver memorial.

12. "Worcester County, Massachusetts Probate Court Records" (Worcester County Probate Courthouse, Worcester, Mass.), Probate Packet B-3169, Lucretia Seaver (1884), letter of administration filed.

13. "Massachusetts Vital Records, 1841-1915," England Historic Genealogical Society, American Ancestors, Marriages: Volume 55, Page 214, Walpole:  Isaac Seaver and Lucretia Smith entry.

14. Walpole, Massachusetts, Certificate of Marriage, Isaac Seaver and Lucretia Smith, 4 September 1851, Town Clerk's Office, Medfield, Mass. (certificate dated 7 October 1994).

=====================================================

The URL for this post is:  http://www.geneamusings.com/2014/03/52-ancestors-week-10-17-lucretia.html

Copyright (c) 2014, Randall J. Seaver