Saturday, January 12, 2013

Saturday Night Genealogy Fun - Semi-Random Research

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)  We're going to do a little bit of Semi-Random Research tonight...

2)  Go to your family tree database of choice (you know, like RootsMagic, Reunion, Ancestry Member Tree), and determine who the very last person on your list of names is.

3)  What do you know about this person based on your research?  It's OK to do more if you need to - in fact, it's encouraged!

4)  How are you related to this person, and why is s/he in your family tree?

5)  Tell us about it in a blog post of your own, in a comment to this blogp ost, or in a Facebook Status post or Google+ Stream post.

Here's mine:

2)  The last person in the index of my 41,552 person family tree in RootsMagic is:  John J. Zusinas.

3)  John J. Zusinas was born 15 August 1910 to Joseph and Anna Zusinas, probably in Pittsburgh, Allegheny, Pennsylvania.  He married Gertrude M. (Remley) Hoyland at some time in an unknown place.  John J. Zusinas died 10 December 1984 in Hollywood, Broward, Florida.  The dates are from the Florida State Death Index on  The parents are from the 1920 U.S. census. There are several Ancestry Member Trees with John J. Zusinas as an entry.

4)  The relationship is complicated.  John Zusinas is the second husband of Gertrude M. Remley (1902-1977), who is an aunt of James Howard Remley (1912-2007, son of Frederick Lloyd Remley, 1887-1957), who was the husband of Geraldine Seaver (1917-2007), who is my aunt (the youngest sister of my father).  I built a Remley database about 15 years ago for Jim and his children, and included it in my family tree database several years ago.  

5)  I just did!

I had no information about John Zusinas before I started this post...and found quite a bit of information on  I added a birth date/place and death date/place for John, and a death date/place for Gertrude, with sources, in minutes!

The URL for this post is:

Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver

Surname Saturday - DRAPER (England > Medfield, Mass.)

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

I am in the 7th great-grandmothers, up to number 553: Susanna DRAPER (1688-????). [Note: the 7th great-grandfathers have been covered in earlier posts].

My ancestral line back through three American generations of this DRAPER family is:

1.  Randall J. Seaver

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

4. Frederick Walton Seaver (1876-1942)
5. Alma Bessie Richmond (1882-1962)

8. Frank Walton Seaver (1852-1922)
9. Hattie Louise Hildreth (1857-1920)

16. Isaac Seaver (1823-1901)
17. Lucretia Townsend Smith (1827-1884)

34.  Alpheus B. Smith (1802-1840)
35.  Elizabeth Horton Dill (1791-1869)

68.  Aaron Smith (1765-1841)
69.  Mercy Plimpton (1772-1850)

138.  Amos Plimpton (1735-1808)
139.  Mary Guild (1735-1800)

276.  John Plimpton (1708-1756)
277.  Abigail Fisher (1711-1785)

552.  John Plimpton, born 17 March 1679/80 in Dedham, Norfolk, Massachusetts, United States; died 19 January 1729/30 in Medfield, Norfolk, Massachusetts, United States.  He was the son of 1104. John Plimpton and 1105. Elizabeth Fisher.  He married 13 November 1707 in Medfield, Norfolk, Massachusetts, United States.

553.  Susanna Draper, born 01 August 1688 in Dedham, Norfolk, Massachusetts, United States. 
Children of John Plimpton and Susanna Draper are:  John Plimpton (1708-1756); James Plimpton (1709-1784); Daniel Plimpton (1721-1777); Elizabeth Plimpton (1726-1757).

1106.  John Draper, born 24 June 1656 in Dedham, Norfolk, Massachusetts, United States; died 05 April 1749 in Dedham, Norfolk, Massachusetts, United States.   He married 03 September 1686 in Dedham, Norfolk, Massachusetts, United States.
1107.  Abigail Mason, born 06 January 1659/60 in Dedham, Norfolk, Massachusetts, United States; died 23 January 1709/10 in Dedham, Norfolk, Massachusetts, United States.  She was the daughter of 2214. John Mason and 2215. Mary Eaton.
Children of John Draper and Abigail Mason are:  Abigail Draper (1686-1730); Susanna Draper (1688-????); John Draper (1690-1766); Mary Draper (1693-1700); Hannah Draper (1695-1700); Joseph Draper (1699-????); James Draper (1701-1719); Mehitable Draper (1704-????).

2212.  James Draper, born before 28 July 1622 in Heptonstall, Yorkshire, England; died 13 July 1697 in Roxbury, Suffolk, Massachusetts, United States.  He was the son of 4424. William Draper and 4425. Grace Mitchell.  He married 21 April 1646 in Heptonstall, Yorkshire, England.
2213.  Marie Stansfield, born before 20 January 1626/27 in Heptonstall, Yorkshire, England; died 12 August 1682 in Roxbury, Suffolk, Massachusetts, United States.  She was the daughter of 4426. Gideon Stansfield and 4427. Grace Eastwood.
Children of James Draper and Marie Stansfield are:  Miriam Draper (1647-1678); Susanna Draper 1650-1678); Sarah Draper (1652-1675); James Draper (1654-1698); John Draper (1656-1749); Moses Draper (1663-1693); Daniel Draper (1665-????); Patience Draper (1668-????); Jonathan Draper (1670-1747).

Most of the information I have about these Draper families are from the town vital records and the book:

Thomas Waln-Morgan Draper, The Drapers in America, being a history and genealogy of those of that name and connection (New York : John Polhemus Printing Company, 1892).

The URL for this post is:

Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver

Friday, January 11, 2013

Whose Hand Is This?

I was paging through the Google Books page images of the Vital Records of Medfield, Massachusetts to the Year 1850, and came across this image just before page 214:

There are three images of pages with blurry partially turned pages in this book.  Fortunately, all of the blurry pages were included with good page images, but I was surprised to see this hand.

I wonder whose hand it is?  Male or female?  Did they chew their nails?  How was this missed by Google quality control?

The URL for this post is:

Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver

How Fast Could You Travel Across the USA in the 1800s?

Michael Graham Richard wrote an interesting article on this subject on 26 December 2012 on the Mother Nature Network website - titled How fast could you travel across the U.S,. in the 1800s?

The article notes:

"Today, we shrug off the convenience of long-distance travel as part of life, but it wasn't that long ago that simply getting there required a huge investment of time and money."

The article shows maps, derived from a series of maps from the 1932 Atlas of the Historical Geography of the United States shows the progressive decrease in travel time by depicting the time required to travel from New York to various western locations in 1800, 1830, 1857, and 1930.  They were found on a University of Nebraska webpage (

Here is the 1857 map:

I thought the whole set of maps was interesting.  The author of the MNN article seemed to think that people traveled by train in the 1800 to 1830 time frame.  My sense is that people usually traveled by walking, horse, buggy, cart, wagon, coach and boat rather than using the train, at least until the train tracks and service was extended into the countryside.  Even when it was, persons disembarked from the train to travel away from the rail line.

I tried to think about how long it would have taken my Carringer ancestors to migrate from western Pennsylvania to southeastern Iowa in the 1860 time frame.  The map above implies that it would have taken about two days using the train.  However, if they went by wagon and roads, it likely took two weeks according to the 1830 map, if there were no problems with roads, equipment and livestock.

Using the 1830 map, I estimated that it took three to four weeks for my Smith ancestors to travel from Jefferson county, New York to Dodge County, Wisconsin in the 1840 time frame.

In 2013, I cannot imagine the patience and suffering it took to travel over rutted roads for weeks at a time.  I complain when there are two hour delays at the airport, or even a traffic jam on the freeway that delays me by minutes.

My thanks to Miles Meyer for highlighting the MNN post on Google+ today.

The URL for this post is:

Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver

Randy will be at Sun City Palm Desert Genealogy Club on Monday, 14 January

I will be presenting "Finding Your Elusive Ancestor: The Genealogical Proof Standard, and Doing a Reasonably Exhaustive Search" at the Sun City Palm Desert Genealogy Club on Monday morning, 14 January 2013, starting at 9:30 a.m.  

The Genealogy Club meets in a room in the Mountain View Clubhouse in the Del Webb Resort in Palm Desert.  The Genealogy Club doors will open at 9 a.m.

If you are in the area, please stop by and enjoy the meeting and my presentation.  You can see the list of my presentations, with short descriptions, on my Randy's Presentations page.

Linda and I will get to the Palm Springs area on Sunday afternoon, and we will probably go up the gondola to the top of Mount San Jacinto to see the snow and the beauty.  We will return home on Monday afternoon, so blogging may be light on Monday.

I look forward to meeting new faces, and hopefully Genea-Musings readers, at this meeting.

The URL for this post is:

Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver

The Family History Writing Challenge Motivates Members to Write Their Stories

Lynn Palermo sent this press release yesterday:


For Immediate Release
Contact : Lynn Palermo

The Family History Writing Challenge returns for the third year of motivating family historians dedicating daily time for writing their family history stories.

Family historians wishing to take up the torch of writing their stories are encouraged to put down the microfilm and pick up the pen for the month of February, and start writing their family history stories.

Upon signing up for The Family History Writing Challenge, participating members are invited to declare a goal in the form of a word count and to commit to completing that word count during the 28 days in February. In exchange for the commitment, Lynn Palermo (The Armchair Genealogist) host of the month long challenge will send out daily newsletters that include motivational messages, writing lessons, along with instructional guest posts by leading genealogists, published authors and editors.

Lynn Palermo states, “by committing to a daily word count my hope is for all participants to make substantial headway in their family history writing goals and to create long lasting writing habits that will carry them forward throughout 2013.”

Lynn encourages members to sign up early to take advantage of the January newsletters that will help participants organize themselves to begin writing on February 1st. A forum for the event is available to participants who want to exchange ideas, struggles and successes in a more intimate atmosphere.

Special guest authors include certified genealogist, author and writing instructor Sharon DeBartolo Carmack from and author, speaker, genealogist and writing instructor Lisa Alzo from The Accidental Genealogist. Guest posts also include writer, educator, historian Biff Barnes Editor at Stories to Tell Books, author and writing coach Tami Koenig from Your Story Coach and Mariann S. Regan, author of the family memoir Into The Briar Patch blog. Lynn Palermo suggests participants should watch for future developments in coming weeks, as this list was not complete at press time.

Family historians who wish to participate in the challenge can sign up or learn more about the challenge at The Family History Writing Challenge website. The event will run from February 1st-February 28th.


I urge my readers who want to participate in this writing challenge to do it - start planning now, and then write during February.  You don't have to be a professional researcher or writer to write family history - you just need to want to do it and then do your best to achieve the goal.  You don't have to be a genealogy blogger to do it, either.

WikiTree Announces Free GEDCOM Comparisons

This press release was received today from Elyse Doerflinger, the WikiTree Evangelist:


January 8, 2013: WikiTree is proud to announce its new GEDMatches tool, open to all genealogists. This tool enables anyone with a GEDCOM to compare their family tree with the worldwide family tree being grown by the WikiTree community.

GEDMatches does an automatic search for each individual in a GEDCOM (up to 5,000 individuals). Each one is compared with the names and dates of the 4.3 million people in the shared tree. Suggested matches are presented in a convenient, sortable table.

The genealogist can compare each suggested match side-by-side with the person in their GEDCOM. If it appears to be a match they can post a comment on the WikiTree profile or send a private message to the profile manager.

To use GEDMatches, a genealogist simply has to register as a temporary guest member and then upload their file. The report will be ready within about 10 minutes. There is no commitment to participate on WikiTree or contribute any data to the project.

There is no catch. Temporary guest memberships and GEDMatches reports are automatically deleted unless the member volunteers to be a contributing Wiki Genealogist and signs the Wiki Genealogist Honor Code. If they do become a full member and want to import their GEDCOM, GEDMatches enables them to do it without creating duplicates on the shared tree.

GEDMatches, along with every other feature and function on WikiTree, is completely free.

About WikiTree: Growing since 2008, is a 100% free shared family tree website that balances privacy and collaboration. Community members privately collaborate with close family members on modern family history and publicly collaborate with other genealogists on deep ancestry. Since all the private and public profiles are connected on the same system this process is helping to grow a single, worldwide family tree that will eventually connect us all and thereby make it free and easy for anyone to discover their roots. See


That sounds great - I'm going to go try it out.  

Follow-Up Friday - Helpful Reader Comments

On some Fridays, I like to post helpful and useful reader comments to my Genea-Musings posts from the last week or two, and answer any questions raised by my readers.  There were several posts this past week that drew helpful reader comments, including:

1)  On My Purported Line Back to Adam and Eve -- 140 Generations from Adam to Randy! (posted 10 January 2013):

*  QuiltinLibraryLady commented:  "I found a tree for my husband's great-grandfather's line that I know contains some of those names & purports to go back to Adam & Eve. The more recent parts of the tree seemed credible when compared to other data so I added the whole thing to my database even though I consider a lot of the earliest stuff to be questionable. It's just fun to think about. And after all, aren't we all descendants of Adam & Eve??"

My comment:  If you believe in the literal translation of the Bible, you're right.  I can't recall if DNA testing shows that there is ONE "Adam" and one "Eve" several hundred thousand years ago.

*  Tim Forsythe noted:  "Most experts agree that the best lines devolve into mythology about 400 to 500 A.D. Anyone interested in these early lines should consult the GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives for more details.

"I monitor the mailing list regularly because I connect to several of these lines and make a concerted effort to keep mythology in its place."

My comment:   Thanks for the link to the mailing list, Tim.  I agree with the experts, but couldn't resist posting this.

*  Geolover said:  "Interesting that nearly all of the list are males, when the one certain parent is the one who gave birth. That's what makes the 'begats' hilarious, with scarce a woman ever mentioned.

"Actually, very few English lineages can be traced before the late 16th century, when Henry VIII had so many church records destroyed."

My comment:  I note that 8 of the names in the "English" line on my post are female, and two on my "American" line are female.  You're right about the medieval part and earlier - males are exclusively on the line (I think - I can't tell gender of many of the names).

*  Tim Forsythe added:  "Randy, at the transition from your Scottish line to your Irish line, is Fergus Mor (

"There are three early Irish sources that list the genealogies of Fergus. All three list Ercc, King of Dalriada as his father and Eochaid Muinremur, King of Dalriada as his grandfather. Weis follows these lines. 

"Stewart Baldwin (author of The Henry Pages - says this is uncertain as Ercc may be legendary, and Eochaid Muinremur probably is."

My comment:  Drat, you mean there's an error in my line back to Adam?  I'm devastated, but not surprised.

2)  The post Genealogy Searching Then and Now - Part 1: Then (pre-1999) (posted 4 January 2013) spurred some memories of "Then:"

*  Heather Rojo noted:  "I remember driving all the way from New Hampshire to Boston, Massachusetts to the Boston Public Library. It was the closest place to look up patent records. I had to use giant indexes to find the correct volumes, which were in closed stacks. It all involved using a librarian to do the heavy lifting. Now I can just use Google patent to look up any patent by number, name, etc. It takes less than a minute."

*  Sherry Pries said:  "It was a good time back then with much more personal contact with "new" cousins. I think the finds were more rewarding as there was more "work" to it. Although I still like genealogy, I find it is rather anti-social. A keyboard is not as stimulating as looking through the "real" things and one-on-one contacts. "

*  Linda Schreiber commented:  "Hours and hours poring through books and directories. Hours, sometimes days, and lots of eyestrain headaches, looking through microfilm readers page by page by page. Many hours in courthouses and other repositories, most of the time spent waiting for the my record request to come up in the queue when most of the employees were busy with current-day customers. They had time to look up my 'genealogy thing' when there were no other people in line....

"Taking the bits and pieces home, and trying to analyze and record everything by hand, on paper. 
*Really* careful and meticulous set-up of the filing system so I was not just buried in paper!
And it was still fun, believe it or not. But I like today much better!"

*  Rootsonomy added:  "FHL Lookups. Pre-1999 it could take up to 15 weeks to receive records from FHL. Then the time required was shortened to just a few weeks. Now, it only takes a day or two to receive your records. The research firm Rootsonomy provides lookups of books, magazines, fiche, or film at the Family History Library in Salt Lake City in fewer than 72 hours. Simple 2-step process: 

"1. Locate the desired collection in the FamilySearch Catalog: OR

"2. Facebook users can send the request by going to: and clicking the button "Request Research or a Lookup".  All others can submit requests at: Now, it's just a day or two.

My comments:  I too like today much better, although I know that I don't do as much 'organizing" and 'listing" and 'logging' as I should do.  I think that it will get even better as more of the microforms in the FHL are digitized and indexed.  I posted Rootsonomy's "advertising" here because it is a service that can be advantageous for those who "can't wait for the digital microfilm" but it does cost money.  

To address Sherry's point, there are many opportunities for researchers to socially interact with other researchers at local genealogy societies, seminars and conferences, online social networks, online family trees (especially in wiki format), online message boards and mailing lists, etc.  Many of these options are increasing the opportunities for collaborating and consulting with others with the same interests.  

*  Sharon said:  "Good article Randy, but I guess I must be older than I thought. I could relate to everything in Part 1. It even brought back the smell of those old coated paper photocopies!

"As for 2013 land records and probate. There is one more possibility. Some county recorder offices have indexes online for these records, and some indexes go back to the origin of the county. Once in a while I run across a county that even has old images online -- for free!"

*  John D. Tew noted:  "In fact the first part inspired me to write about genealogy research 1904 style with examples of my great grandmother's efforts and results. It is on my Sat., Jan. 6th post on my new Blog at , which you mentioned last Saturday in your new blogs posting."

*  David Newton commented:  "The thing about the online records now is that they are frequently the most used and also the ones that you find the first information about a person from. That way you can start your research a lot faster and get quite far before you need to go offline.

"The other advantage of online records is that you can search indexes in many, many ways. Previously for example BMD records might have been arranged by year and then by surname and then by forename. However say you have an index that also records the maiden name of the mother of a child. Doing a search by all those whose birth was registered in a particular year whose mother has a particular maiden name is now easy. Previously it would have been so labour-intensive as to have been impossible."

My comments:  Sharon reminded me of the smell of those slick microfilm printer copies...yuck!  I'm glad that I could stimulate John's blog post - it was a good one!  David highlights the real benefits of doing online searches - both as finding quick aids for further research and also the search engine options.

4)  On Dear Randy - How Do I Cite an Online Family Tree? (posted 9 January 2013):

*  Cormac asked:  "Is your citation done in the ESM method?"

My response:  I used the RootsMagic source template based on the QuickSheet: Citing Databases and Images" for Documented Family Trees, written by Elizabeth Shown Mills.  I didn't find it in the First Edition of Evidence! Explained.  

*  John Carruthers suggested:  "I would like to suggest that when we cite an online source that can only be viewed by subscription we should make that aspect of the citation clear to the reader."

My response:  That's a good idea...especially when it is an obscure database.  A source citer could use the phrase "online subscription database," "free online database," and/or " (subscription website)," or "FamilySearch (free website)" in their source citations.  

Obviously, almost every researcher knows that is a subscription site and that FamilySearch is a freely available site.  I have used an indicator like ($$) in my presentations and handouts, but haven't added them to my source citations.  When the same database is on both free and subscription sites, I tend to cite the free site.  Unfortunately, has the only complete U.S. census with every-name indexes and links to images (and I cite to the image).  

*  Carmen Johnson said:  "I live in Lewiston, ID and am familiar with the Brocke surname. Lewiston is major town in the area and therefore the Lewiston Morning Tribune is the predominant local paper. At one time the Kendrick, Juliaetta area was part of Nez Perce Co., ID before part of it was siphoned off to Latah Co., ID. So, if you are interested in looking at the archives of the Lewiston Morning Tribune to find additional information on the family...go to and it will bring up the archives. They are by no means complete but there is a lot of information. By the way, my family also come from Nebraska in Burt Co. - and my father and I were just back there in September. Small world!"

My comment:  Thank you for the Google News link to the Lewiston newspaper, and for the geography lesson on Idaho.  My readers always know more about a place than I do!  One of the reasons that I blog is to enhance my own knowledge through reader comments.

*    Wendy commented:  "Thanks for posting these search tips! It gives me ways to search - especially via maps & Google Earth - for land my ancestors settled on."

My comment:  This is another reason I blog - to share information and tips about genealogy resources that help other genealogists.  

*  Colleen G. Brown Pasquale offered:  "... it is great to talk to others in the family about your family's history. You never know where it will lead!"

My response:  Yes it is. I wish that I had more cousins to do it with.  Paul and I just started checking online resources on my laptop spontaneously...and look where it led!

*  Linda Schreiber was happy:  "I always enjoy your posts, but this one had two *WOWs* for me. I had seen the Google search type 'site:' mentioned before, but had never realized how much it might find beyond a search at the site itself. And I had never heard of EarthPoint before. You can enter township-range specifics and SEE THE PLACE!  Between the two, I am going to be very, very busy.... Thanks!!"

My comment:  Thanks, and go for it.  And please report what you find!  Several of us posted about the EarthPoint site when it first became available (my post is here). Pam Boyer Sayre and Lisa Louise Cooke do presentations about it at conferences and on webinars.  Legacy Family Tree has a CD of Lisa's webinar available.

Thank you to all of my readers for their help, useful and complimentary comments!  

Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver

Thursday, January 10, 2013

My Purported Line Back to Adam and Eve -- 140 Generations from Adam to Randy!

The topic of Biblical genealogy and lines of descent from Adam and Eve came up yesterday in the Chula Vista Genealogical Society Research Group.  Several of us tried to dissuade the guest who was expounding on his line... and then today Nathan Murphy posted the article "I Have My Tree Back to Adam and Eve" on the FamilySearch Blog.

I recall finding a line in a book published about 100 years ago:

George Edward Congden, One hundred thirty-eight generations from Adam : being a pedigree traced from Adam to the present time (Hiawatha, Kan. : E. Herbert, printer, 1910).

Fortunately, the line from Adam hooked into one of my royal lines and so I grafted my own ancestry onto the line (names from the Congden book (which has limited information about almost all of these Biblical to medieval persons) in purple, names from Frederick Lewis Weis' book Ancestral Roots of Sixty Colonists) in green, my own research in red):

The Biblical line (see Genesis):
 7. ENOCH 
10. NOAH
 12. MAGOG

The Scythian line: 
 13. BAATH
 15. NIUL
18. SRU
22. TAT

The Getulian line (where Carthage was):
35. BILE

The Ireland line:
 37. HEREMON (about 1700 BC)
46. MAEN
48. DIAN
 49. SIRNA
 71. FIONN
75. CRIMHTHANN NIADHNAIR (100th Monarch of Ireland, ca. AD 9)
80. CONN CEDEATHACH (Conn of the 100 Battles, 110th Monarch, AD 123-157)
87. NIALL NAOIGHIALLACH (Niall of the 9 Hostages, 126th Monarch of Ireland, AD 379-405) 

Scotland line: 
 94. AIDAN
 100. ALPIN
 108. DUNCAN I
110. MATILDA OF SCOTLAND, married Henry I, King of England (1070-1135)

English line:
111. ROBERT Of Caen
112. MAUD
113. HUGH of Kevelioc
114. AGNES of Chester
128. GRACE DOWRISH (1540-1604)

American Line: 
 128. MARY GYE (1580-1666)
 129. MOSES MAVERICK (1611-1686)
130. SARAH MAVERICK (1659-1723)
131. EUNICE NORMAN (1686-1743)
132. EUNICE RAYMENT (1707-1773)
133. NORMAN SEAVER (1734-1787)
134. BENJAMIN SEAVER (1757-1816)
135. BENJAMIN SEAVER (1791-1825)
136. ISAAC SEAVER (1823-1901)
 137. FRANK W. SEAVER (1852-1922)
138. FRED WALTON SEAVER (1876-1942)
140.  RANDALL JEFFREY SEAVER (1943-....)

Obviously, I don't know how accurate the line is before the American folks, but some of it, at least back to the Scottish line, is documented by the royal and noble ancestries published by experts in the field (and perhaps more recent research has shown some of the names or relationships above to be wrong).

I did note the expert opinion of Robert C. Gunderson in the FamilySearch blog post, who said:

"In thirty-five years of genealogical research, I have yet to see a pedigree back to Adam that can be documented. By assignment, I have reviewed hundreds of pedigrees over the years. I have not found one where each connection on the pedigree can be justified by evidence from contemporary documents. In my opinion it is not even possible to verify historically a connected European pedigree earlier than the time of the Merovingian Kings (c. a.d. 450–a.d. 752).

“Every pedigree I have seen which attempts to bridge the gap between that time and the biblical pedigree appears to be based on questionable tradition, or at worst, plain fabrication. Generally these pedigrees offer no evidence as to the origin of the information, or they cite a vague source.”

I'll take his word for it.  But I thought that it was interesting.  I can't help thinking that since Jesus of Nazareth was in the 42nd generation from Adam, that he and I are probably about 30th cousins 98 times removed!  

I offer this only in the interest of discussion.  When I composed my list in 1995, I shared it with my Seaver cousins.  It impressed them... but I doubt that it is accurate before about 1500.  Please don't write me about an error or here there.  I'm not a royal or noble or medieval or Biblical scholar.  I don't have these folks in my database, although I've been tempted to add them back through the English line.

The URL for this post is:

Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver ($$) Adds More Vital Records

The blog revealed today that 28 new (to vital record collections recently were added to the record collections.  See Massively Expands U.S. Vital Records Collections.

The blog post lists the 28 newly added record collections.  They include:

*  Alabama Death Records, 1908-1959

*  Arkansas Death Records, 1914-1959

*  Connecticut Town Death Records, Barbour Collection, pre-1870

*  Connecticut Town Marriage Records, Barbour Collection, pre-1870

*  Delaware Birth Records, 1800-1908

*  Delaware Death Records, 1811-1935

*  Georgia Death Records, 1919-1998

*  Illinois Marriage Records, 1790-1860

*  Indiana Marriage Records, 1800-1941

*  Louisiana Death Index, 1900-1949

*  Maryland Marriage Records, 1655-1850

*  Michigan Death Records, 1897-1920

*  Minnesota Birth Index, 1935-2002

*  Minnesota Death Index, 1908-2002

*  Mississippi Marriage Records, 1776-1935

*  Missouri Marriage Records, 1805-2002

*  New Hampshire Death and Burial Index, 1654-1949

*  New Jersey Birth and Christening Index, 1660-1931

*  New Jersey Death and Burial Index, 1798-1971

*  New York City Birth Records, 1891-1902

*  New York City Death Records, 1892-1902

*  North Carolina Death Records, 1908-2004

*  Pennsylvania, Philadelphia Death Index, 1803-1915

*  Tennessee State Death Records, 1908-1958

*  Tennessee Marriage Records, 1780-2002

*  Texas State Marriage Records, 1814-1909 and 1966-2002

*  Virginia Death and Burials Index, 1853-1917

There are many more vital records databases available at - you can see the lists at (these are subscription databases):

I haven't compared the lists of Birth, Marriage and Death databases on with the lists on, or

Someone will probably wonder "Are all of the vital records collection included in the list of historical record collections (since owns"

I don't know the answer to that question, but my guess is the answer is "Yes."

The subscription cost of is $39.95 for a 12-month subscription, which is much cheaper than an subscription ($155.40 for one year membership).  However, has many more historical record collections available.  To each their own.

As always, no online record collection includes  every event that occurred, or every record ever created,, in the jurisdiction covered.

Perhaps Joe Beine can add these listings to his Online Birth, Marriage and Death Indexes sites so that we can compare the different websites offerings.  Also, the FamilySearch Wiki offers links to online records collections by State (e.g., see California here - look for State Online Collections when you search the Wiki for your state of interest.).

The URL for this post is:

Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver

Treasure Chest Thursday - 1860 U.S. Census Record for David Auble Family

It's Treasure Chest Thursday - time to look in my digital image files to see what treasures I can find for my family history and genealogy musings.

The treasure today is the 1860 United States Census record for my Auble great-great-grandparents and their family in Newark, Essex County, New Jersey:

The David Auble family entry:

The extracted information for the family, residing in the 4th Ward of Newark City, taken on 27 June 1860, is:

*   Daniel Auble -- age 42, male, white, Shoe Store, personal property worth $500, born New Jersey
*  Sarah Auble -- age 59, female, white, born New Jersey 
*  Wm A. Auble -- age 15, male, white, born New Jersey, attended school
*  Mary F. Auble -- age 13, female, white, born New Jersey, attended school
*  Chas Auble -- age 11, male, white, born New Jersey, attended school
*  Kate Auble -- age 8, female, white, born New Jersey
*  Anna Auble -- age 1, female, white, born New Jersey
*  Mary Conglin -- age 26, female, white, Servant, born Ireland, over 20 years of age and cannot read or write.

The source citation for this census entry is:

1860 United States Federal Census, Population Schedule, Essex County, New Jersey, 4th Ward, Newark; Page 106 (penned), Dwelling #554, Family #753, David Auble household; digital image, ( : accessed 29 October 2011); citing National Archives Microfilm Publication M653, Roll 688.

The errors I see in this enumeration include:

*  Sarah Auble was born in 1818, so about age 42 in 1860, not age 59.  
*  Charles Auble (my grandfather) was age 10, not 11.
*  Anna Auble was born in February 1860 according to the 1900 census, so she should be age 3 months, not age 1; unless the 1900 census is wrong...

I think it is strange that daughter Kate Auble is not in school at age 8.

Charles Auble's age in the 1860 census reflects his 1849 birth date, as did the 1870 (age 21) and 1880 census (age 30).  In the 1900 census (age 35), 1910 census (age 55), his 1898 marriage record (age 34) and his 1916 death record (age 61), he lied about his age.

Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver