I have not only my own, and my wife's, ancestral family information in my family tree database, but also have significant content in several one-name studies - my Seaver/Sever, Richmond/Richman, Dill, Carringer, Auble, Vaux, and my wife's McKnew family.
An issue for me in using online information to update information on my family tree database is this:
I find information about a family in an online database - let's say an Ancestry Member Tree - and it has much more information than I have about a person in my family tree who is not part of one of my ancestral families. For example, I find online information that fills out a tree completely back to an immigrant ancestor and into the ancestral homeland, and would add several generations of descendants to my database down to living descendants. The person who created this tree has done an excellent job of documenting his ancestry, and has document images and stories in his tree. We have been emailing each other. I asked him specifically about adding content to my tree and he is very willing to share his information.
My question is: How much of this should I add to my tree?
Here is how I'm dealing with this, and have dealt with it in the past:
1) I use online family trees that seem to have adequately sourced content as research leads and finding aids, and then try to find supporting source information for the Facts/Events listed as I add content to my tree.
2) Since Fact/Events (names, relationships, dates, places, etc.) are not protected by copyright laws, I add the content for each family in the online information up to the persons who are still living. I don't enter the information I find about living people unless I find it in a public record (e.g., a vital records index, a census record, etc.)
3) I think it's important to have contact with person that provides the tree information using email or a message service (like Ancestry Messages). Often, they contact me to correct my current information and we have discussions about our research. When I enter the information about the family, I add the name and email address of the person who provided it in the Notes for each head of household.
4) I use the Fact/Events in the online information to find the best source available (really good databases and trees provide links to some of it!), and then cite that source for the Fact/Event. I use previously known data to find more online data for the person when possible. However, I don't cite online family trees in my sources.
5) For unrelated families in my one-name studies, I add only the parents of a spouse that marries into that surname family, if the parents information is available. For example, if John Smith marries Mary Seaver, I will add John Smith's parents to the database, with whatever Facts/Events I can find, but not John Smith's siblings. That will provide researchers looking for the ancestors of the spouse a lead to go on, but spares me research that doesn't really interest me.
6) For my ancestral families, I try to add at least one more generation of the children (and their spouses) of the siblings (and their spouses) of my ancestors. After all, these are my cousins.
I can hear some of my readers saying "Ewww, you add information from those terrible online family trees that provide wrong information copied from someone else."
My response is "Well, I don't use the bad ones, I use the good ones (there are many of them!) according to my judgment. The ones I use often have relatively complete family information with attached records and sources; the information comes from official records and family information. Very few persons will add erroneous content about the families that they knew in real life."
What do you think? Are my practices reasonable? What would you add to the list above?
The URL for this post is: http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/07/how-much-online-information-should-i.html
Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
Tuesday, July 23, 2013
Search Records From Within the FamilySearch Family Tree
I read The Ancestry Insider's post FamilySearch Family Tree Navigation Features this morning, and a bell rang in my head:
Somehow I missed the "Research Help" box on a Person Profile in the FamilySearch Family Tree. I don't know how long it's been there, but it will be very useful. It's already paid off for me today!
1) To remind all readers how to get to a Person Profile in the FamilySearch Family Tree, the user clicks on a name in the Pedigree or Fan Chart and a box with that person's name and basic information opens (e.g., see Lyle Lawrence Carringer below):
The box for Lyle has two links at the bottom, for "Tree" and "Person."
2) You get to the Person Profile by clicking on "Person:"
In the right-hand frame, there is a section for "Research Help" and a link for "Search Records."
3) Clicking on "Search Records" takes you to the FamilySearch Record Collection results for that person:
The screen above shows the results for Lyle Lawrence Carringer, with a birthplace and birth year filled in.
There were only three results for Lyle on the list - a World War II Draft Registration, a California Death Index record, and a Social Security Death Index record. What about the census records from 1900 to 1940? Where are they? Well, broadening the birth year information will reveal them...I modified the Birth Year field entries.
4) Here are the results with the birth year range broadened to 1887 to 1894:
Yes! They're all there. Broadening birth year ranges often reveals more results, but why doesn't the search find the records without broadening the year range? It's a fuzzy, or "not Exact" search.
5) The payoff for doing this search was the World War II Draft Registration Card for Lyle L. Carringer:
I can Add this source to his Person Profile in the Family Tree.
I can also click on the "View Image" link and see:
Did you know that there are two sides to these cards? I advanced the image (by clicking the right arrow next to the image number) and saw:
This card provides the earliest record I have for his birth date. I don't think that I ever knew that their telephone number was Randolph 3683 in 1942. It provides an address, his closest relative, his employer and employer's address, and his race, height, weight, eye color, hair color and complexion. I had forgotten that he had hazel eyes! My mother and father had blue eyes, I have blue eyes, but one of my brothers has hazel eyes, and my two daughters do also.
6) The "Search Records" link will be very helpful, and is another major improvement to the overall FamilySearch experience
A user can search for historical records in the FamilySearch Historical collections by clicking on the "Search Records" link in each person's Person Profile in the Family Tree. That will minimize the time it takes to add record links and source citations to each Person Profile.
I was surprised that there isn't a built-in "fuzzy search" for the birth year. Nothing was checked as "Exact" on the search form, yet the search did not go past the year entered in the search box. I hope that they fix that feature to go at least five or ten years before and after the nominal year in the Family Tree.
I wondered about female spouses whose name is changed by marriage. I had to enter a married surname in order to find her records after her marriage. This could be easily handled by the initial search, I think.
The URL for this post is: http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/07/search-records-from-within-familysearch.html
copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
Somehow I missed the "Research Help" box on a Person Profile in the FamilySearch Family Tree. I don't know how long it's been there, but it will be very useful. It's already paid off for me today!
1) To remind all readers how to get to a Person Profile in the FamilySearch Family Tree, the user clicks on a name in the Pedigree or Fan Chart and a box with that person's name and basic information opens (e.g., see Lyle Lawrence Carringer below):
The box for Lyle has two links at the bottom, for "Tree" and "Person."
2) You get to the Person Profile by clicking on "Person:"
In the right-hand frame, there is a section for "Research Help" and a link for "Search Records."
3) Clicking on "Search Records" takes you to the FamilySearch Record Collection results for that person:
The screen above shows the results for Lyle Lawrence Carringer, with a birthplace and birth year filled in.
There were only three results for Lyle on the list - a World War II Draft Registration, a California Death Index record, and a Social Security Death Index record. What about the census records from 1900 to 1940? Where are they? Well, broadening the birth year information will reveal them...I modified the Birth Year field entries.
4) Here are the results with the birth year range broadened to 1887 to 1894:
Yes! They're all there. Broadening birth year ranges often reveals more results, but why doesn't the search find the records without broadening the year range? It's a fuzzy, or "not Exact" search.
5) The payoff for doing this search was the World War II Draft Registration Card for Lyle L. Carringer:
I can Add this source to his Person Profile in the Family Tree.
I can also click on the "View Image" link and see:
Did you know that there are two sides to these cards? I advanced the image (by clicking the right arrow next to the image number) and saw:
This card provides the earliest record I have for his birth date. I don't think that I ever knew that their telephone number was Randolph 3683 in 1942. It provides an address, his closest relative, his employer and employer's address, and his race, height, weight, eye color, hair color and complexion. I had forgotten that he had hazel eyes! My mother and father had blue eyes, I have blue eyes, but one of my brothers has hazel eyes, and my two daughters do also.
6) The "Search Records" link will be very helpful, and is another major improvement to the overall FamilySearch experience
A user can search for historical records in the FamilySearch Historical collections by clicking on the "Search Records" link in each person's Person Profile in the Family Tree. That will minimize the time it takes to add record links and source citations to each Person Profile.
I was surprised that there isn't a built-in "fuzzy search" for the birth year. Nothing was checked as "Exact" on the search form, yet the search did not go past the year entered in the search box. I hope that they fix that feature to go at least five or ten years before and after the nominal year in the Family Tree.
I wondered about female spouses whose name is changed by marriage. I had to enter a married surname in order to find her records after her marriage. This could be easily handled by the initial search, I think.
The URL for this post is: http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/07/search-records-from-within-familysearch.html
copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
This Week's Genealogical Eclectica - 23 July 2013
This week's collection of genealogical eclectica includes:
1) Can blogging be reduced to this:
2) Legacy Family Tree has been previewing their upcoming Legacy Family Tree Version 8 software on their Legacy News blog. Michele Simmons Lewis does us all a favor by listing all of the announced changes announced to date in her post, Legacy 8.
3) Is this the first Blogger?
This is from the 1860 U.S. Census, Virginia, Alexandria county, Alexandria, Page 944, NARA M653, Roll 1331.
I couldn't resist!
4) Elizabeth La Pointe's Canadian Week in Review 22 July 2013 post has interesting links.
5) John D. Reid listed the Canadian resources now available on FindMyPast.com in Finally ... FindMyPast Adds Canadian Resources.
6) Leland Meitzler provides the press release, and comments on the copyright issues, associated with the FindMyPast announcement about digitizing the PERSI catalog and periodicals - see PERSI Finds New Home on FindMyPast, and This Will Not Be Easy!
7) DearMYRTLE's Mastering Genealogical Proof Hangout on Air for Chapter 4 of Thomas W. Jones' book was on Sunday, 21 July. This chapter deals with source citations and there is excellent discussion among the panelists.
8) DearMYRTLE's Mondays With Myrt Hangout On Air was on Monday, 22 July. You can watch it at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQwE-0rcxB8. This was a broad ranging discussion from new resources to using Dropbox for cloud storage, and much more.
9) This week's Legacy Family Tree Webinar is "Top 21st Century Genealogy Resources - A Baker's Dozen" by presenter Tom Kemp. The date is Wednesday, 24 July 2013, 2 pm Eastern, 11 am Pacific, 1800 GMT. You can register (for free) at http://familytreewebinars.com/webinar_details.php?webinar_id=32
10) Crista Cowan has a video "Top Tips for Beginning English Family History Research" on the Ancestry.com YouTube channel - watch it at http://youtu.be/inFGt9GbCYk.
11) The GenealogyBank blog has several articles each week highlighting interesting items found in historical newspapers. I really enjoyed reading the article on Find the Oldest People to Ever Live, as Reported in Newspapers.
The URL for this post is: http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/07/this-weeks-genealogical-eclectica-23.html
Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
1) Can blogging be reduced to this:
2) Legacy Family Tree has been previewing their upcoming Legacy Family Tree Version 8 software on their Legacy News blog. Michele Simmons Lewis does us all a favor by listing all of the announced changes announced to date in her post, Legacy 8.
3) Is this the first Blogger?
This is from the 1860 U.S. Census, Virginia, Alexandria county, Alexandria, Page 944, NARA M653, Roll 1331.
I couldn't resist!
4) Elizabeth La Pointe's Canadian Week in Review 22 July 2013 post has interesting links.
5) John D. Reid listed the Canadian resources now available on FindMyPast.com in Finally ... FindMyPast Adds Canadian Resources.
6) Leland Meitzler provides the press release, and comments on the copyright issues, associated with the FindMyPast announcement about digitizing the PERSI catalog and periodicals - see PERSI Finds New Home on FindMyPast, and This Will Not Be Easy!
7) DearMYRTLE's Mastering Genealogical Proof Hangout on Air for Chapter 4 of Thomas W. Jones' book was on Sunday, 21 July. This chapter deals with source citations and there is excellent discussion among the panelists.
8) DearMYRTLE's Mondays With Myrt Hangout On Air was on Monday, 22 July. You can watch it at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQwE-0rcxB8. This was a broad ranging discussion from new resources to using Dropbox for cloud storage, and much more.
9) This week's Legacy Family Tree Webinar is "Top 21st Century Genealogy Resources - A Baker's Dozen" by presenter Tom Kemp. The date is Wednesday, 24 July 2013, 2 pm Eastern, 11 am Pacific, 1800 GMT. You can register (for free) at http://familytreewebinars.com/webinar_details.php?webinar_id=32
10) Crista Cowan has a video "Top Tips for Beginning English Family History Research" on the Ancestry.com YouTube channel - watch it at http://youtu.be/inFGt9GbCYk.
11) The GenealogyBank blog has several articles each week highlighting interesting items found in historical newspapers. I really enjoyed reading the article on Find the Oldest People to Ever Live, as Reported in Newspapers.
The URL for this post is: http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/07/this-weeks-genealogical-eclectica-23.html
Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
Monday, July 22, 2013
Search FamilySearch and View Historical Records by Record Types and Record Collections
In Search Gets Major Feature Enhancements posted today on the FamilySearch Blog, Robert Kehrer announced several enhancements for use of the FamilySearch Historical Records.
The MOST important new feature enhancement, in my view, is the ability to search for a person in all of the historical record collections from the "Collections" Tab on the Search Results page. The blog post says:
Let's see how this works, using the data for Harvey Edgar Carringer (1852-1946):
1) Here is the Search Results page from my search for Harvey Carringer in the 1880 U.S. Census:
Do you see the two tabs above the "United States Census, 1880" record collection title? The screen above is on the "Records" tab specifically for the 1880 U.S. Census.
There is a "Collections" tab beside the "Records" tab.
2) I clicked on the "Collections" tab and saw:
The screen above shows the top of the web page with all of the FamilySearch Record Collections that found a "Harvey Carringer" (with an inexact name search), and listed them by the different Record Types, with the top five collections listed. To see the rest of the collections, all the user has to do is click on the "Show All" link for each Record Type.
3) I clicked on the first record collection on the Vital Records list, and saw:
Harvey Carringer is the first one on the list in the California, Death Index, 1940-1997 record collection.
4) At any time, the user can change the search parameters in the left-hand frame to refine or modify their search results.
A user can now go through the list of Record Collections on the "Collections" tab, and add records and sources to person profiles in the FamilySearch Family Tree one record collection at a time! I described this in Attach Historical Records to FamilySearch Family Tree.
This is a MAJOR enhancement to FamilySearch - it is similar to the "Categories" match list on Ancestry.com. It significantly reduces the search time in indexed databases and the hassle of going back to the Record Collection page after looking in one record collection.
Of course, a search for "Harvey Carringer" on the FamilySearch Search page would have found entries for my Harvey Carringer in the search results created by that search, but I have to wade through 311 matches to find them all. I still have to search through all of the record collections in the "Collections" tab, but it's easier to search through 10 to 50 matches for each Record Collection than a list of 311. Also, I can ignore Record Collectinos that I know don't apply (e.g., the North Carolina Birth Index, 1800-2000.
The URL for this post is: http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/07/search-familysearch-and-view-historical.html
Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
The MOST important new feature enhancement, in my view, is the ability to search for a person in all of the historical record collections from the "Collections" Tab on the Search Results page. The blog post says:
"To help you make better sense of and explore search results, FamilySearch now allows you to view results grouped by collection. When you initiate a search, you will see a new tabbed interface above the search results. The Records tab is the default and gives the actual results of the search, and the Collections tab presents a collection-by-collection summary.
"The ability to see the results of a search grouped by collection helps you see what collections are available. It also guides you to collections with the most matches in a record type and keeps a single collection from being over-represented in the top hits.
"If you click the Collections tab, you will see the collections present in the set of search results, grouped by record type with the five collections with the most hits shown for each type. You can sort the collection lists alphabetically by title or by hit count. If you desire to see all the collections of a specific record type, click Show All in the header for that type.
"Clicking a collection name will take you to the Records tab, with the results on that tab filtered by the selected collection. The Collection filter below the Refine your search form will still show, but it will now display the Collections tab, which replaces its previous fly-out functionality."
Let's see how this works, using the data for Harvey Edgar Carringer (1852-1946):
Do you see the two tabs above the "United States Census, 1880" record collection title? The screen above is on the "Records" tab specifically for the 1880 U.S. Census.
There is a "Collections" tab beside the "Records" tab.
2) I clicked on the "Collections" tab and saw:
The screen above shows the top of the web page with all of the FamilySearch Record Collections that found a "Harvey Carringer" (with an inexact name search), and listed them by the different Record Types, with the top five collections listed. To see the rest of the collections, all the user has to do is click on the "Show All" link for each Record Type.
3) I clicked on the first record collection on the Vital Records list, and saw:
Harvey Carringer is the first one on the list in the California, Death Index, 1940-1997 record collection.
4) At any time, the user can change the search parameters in the left-hand frame to refine or modify their search results.
A user can now go through the list of Record Collections on the "Collections" tab, and add records and sources to person profiles in the FamilySearch Family Tree one record collection at a time! I described this in Attach Historical Records to FamilySearch Family Tree.
This is a MAJOR enhancement to FamilySearch - it is similar to the "Categories" match list on Ancestry.com. It significantly reduces the search time in indexed databases and the hassle of going back to the Record Collection page after looking in one record collection.
Of course, a search for "Harvey Carringer" on the FamilySearch Search page would have found entries for my Harvey Carringer in the search results created by that search, but I have to wade through 311 matches to find them all. I still have to search through all of the record collections in the "Collections" tab, but it's easier to search through 10 to 50 matches for each Record Collection than a list of 311. Also, I can ignore Record Collectinos that I know don't apply (e.g., the North Carolina Birth Index, 1800-2000.
The URL for this post is: http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/07/search-familysearch-and-view-historical.html
Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
Attach Historical Records to FamilySearch Family Tree
In Search Gets Major Feature Enhancements posted today on the FamilySearch Blog, Robert Kehrer announced several enhancements for interaction between the FamilySearch Historical Records and the FamilySearch Family Tree.
One of the most important and useful, in my view, is the ability to attach historical records to a person in the FamilySearch Family Tree. The blog post says:
One of the most important and useful, in my view, is the ability to attach historical records to a person in the FamilySearch Family Tree. The blog post says:
"FamilySearch has a goal of properly linking each of the persons found in the world’s historical records to the Family Tree. To help facilitate accurate person-to-person linking, an “Attach to Family Tree” button is now available on each person’s details page in historical records.
"When you click the button, you will see a list of persons in the Family Tree that match the person on the record. You may also choose a name from your history list, showing the people you most recently viewed in the Family Tree, or you can initiate a search of the Family Tree. Once you have identified the correct person in the Family Tree, click Attach to create a link to the source on the person’s page in the Family Tree, add the source link to the source box, and provide a reason for making the connection."
That sounds easy - let's see how it works:
1) I found the 1880 U.S. Census record for the Harvey E. Carringer family on FamilySearch. My great-grand uncle, Harvey Edgar Carringer, was listed as the first match:
2) After clicking on the link for the Harvey E. Carringer match, the page for Harvey Carringer opened with information about him:
Note the bright blue "Attach to Family Tree" button on the right-hand side of the page.
3) I clicked on the bright blue "Attach to Family Tree" button and a popup window appeared:
The pop-up window has two tabs - "Possible Matches" and "History List." If the person is not listed, the user can click on the "Search Family Tree" link.
4) Harvey Edgar Carringer was the only matching person on the list, so I clicked on the bright blue "Select" button in the popup box above. Another popup box appeared in the right side of the screen::
The "Is This Your Person" popup box opened, and since it was my person, I typed in a reason to attach the source.
5) I clicked the bright blue "Attach" button on the popup screen, and was back to Harvey E. Carringer's census page:
Note that, instead of the bright blue "Attach to Family Tree" button in the right-hand frame, there is no a "View In Family Tree" link. That means that this source was attached to the person in the Family Tree.
6) I went to the FamilySearch Family Tree and found the profile for Harvey Edgar Carringer (top of page shown below):
If you look carefully in the "Latest Changes" area of the right-hand frame, it says "Source Attached" "22 July 2013" "by randyseaver1." That's what I just added (this was maybe two minutes after I did it).
Further down the page is the "Sources" area of Harvey Edgar Carringer's profile:
The 1880 U.S. Census Record is listed in the "Sources" area of the person's profile.
7) That is really easy to do. It is much easier than using the "My Source Box" feature!! One really neat feature is that a user can add the source for the whole family, one person at a time, without leaving the Historical Record page.
In my humble opinion, this is a significant enhancement to the FamilySearch website - it ties the records to persons in the Family Tree, and enables attaching a source citation to a person in the Family Tree.
The URL for this post is: http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/07/attach-historical-records-to.html
Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
That sounds easy - let's see how it works:
1) I found the 1880 U.S. Census record for the Harvey E. Carringer family on FamilySearch. My great-grand uncle, Harvey Edgar Carringer, was listed as the first match:
2) After clicking on the link for the Harvey E. Carringer match, the page for Harvey Carringer opened with information about him:
Note the bright blue "Attach to Family Tree" button on the right-hand side of the page.
3) I clicked on the bright blue "Attach to Family Tree" button and a popup window appeared:
The pop-up window has two tabs - "Possible Matches" and "History List." If the person is not listed, the user can click on the "Search Family Tree" link.
4) Harvey Edgar Carringer was the only matching person on the list, so I clicked on the bright blue "Select" button in the popup box above. Another popup box appeared in the right side of the screen::
The "Is This Your Person" popup box opened, and since it was my person, I typed in a reason to attach the source.
5) I clicked the bright blue "Attach" button on the popup screen, and was back to Harvey E. Carringer's census page:
Note that, instead of the bright blue "Attach to Family Tree" button in the right-hand frame, there is no a "View In Family Tree" link. That means that this source was attached to the person in the Family Tree.
6) I went to the FamilySearch Family Tree and found the profile for Harvey Edgar Carringer (top of page shown below):
If you look carefully in the "Latest Changes" area of the right-hand frame, it says "Source Attached" "22 July 2013" "by randyseaver1." That's what I just added (this was maybe two minutes after I did it).
Further down the page is the "Sources" area of Harvey Edgar Carringer's profile:
The 1880 U.S. Census Record is listed in the "Sources" area of the person's profile.
7) That is really easy to do. It is much easier than using the "My Source Box" feature!! One really neat feature is that a user can add the source for the whole family, one person at a time, without leaving the Historical Record page.
In my humble opinion, this is a significant enhancement to the FamilySearch website - it ties the records to persons in the Family Tree, and enables attaching a source citation to a person in the Family Tree.
The URL for this post is: http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/07/attach-historical-records-to.html
Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
PMGDOE - Different Views About Posting Genealogy Research Online
After I wrote Have You Posted Your Genealogy Research on the Internet? I Practice PMGDOE! (18 July 2013), I received several comments from readers stating why they don't post their genealogy data online, and I think that their views need to be heard and understood:
1) Anonymous (D) wrote: "I have not posted my family history to the web in any location or method. My reasons being; I have been 'BURNED' a couple times now by people that I call Gleaners. (They go on the web hunting, finding, and then posting to their database without verifying or acknowledging their source.) Plus their database I find so many times to have major errors in it and they will not acknowledge, correct, or give verification as to 'why' they feel their posting is truer than mine would be. When I started my family researching I shared with a man some data I had just obtained and I advised him it had not been checked and verified yet. I asked that he do so and work with me to do this before ever posting it, he did not, immediately posting it to his website. Needless to say as I progressed thru my verification process I did find errors. Now that wrong information is out there on his and other sites that have gleaned it from his website.
"Your theory of 'cousin bait' is fine, but in my particular case I have found that many of those cousins do not do complete and verified research,,, only to post and grow the size of their family tree to the most entries they can seem to acquire, right or wrong, proven or not…. As if there is some contest out there for the largest amount of people posted within a family lineage tree.
"I have found one (1) cousin that we work together researching the family name because we have the same feelings as how to research and prove and this cousin does not post to the web either for the same reasons.
"I do my research to pass to my children and have decided finding cousins is not worth the stomach acid I get from the people that refuse to 'prove' their postings, only to grow a tall tree giving the impression they do and use good solid researching methods when in fact I feel they 'glean' data from others hard work.
"I know I am part of the minor group doing researching this way and my attitude frustrates many people, but CORRECT and VERIFIED data is much more important to me.
"A good way to insure your research and hard work is preserved is to share it with a genealogy society in the area of your research, i.e. where you grew up, where your ancestry comes from, etc.
"I respect other peoples' thoughts about posting on line. Please respect our feeling on 'not' posting our 'facts and family' on line.
DJN"
1) Anonymous (D) wrote: "I have not posted my family history to the web in any location or method. My reasons being; I have been 'BURNED' a couple times now by people that I call Gleaners. (They go on the web hunting, finding, and then posting to their database without verifying or acknowledging their source.) Plus their database I find so many times to have major errors in it and they will not acknowledge, correct, or give verification as to 'why' they feel their posting is truer than mine would be. When I started my family researching I shared with a man some data I had just obtained and I advised him it had not been checked and verified yet. I asked that he do so and work with me to do this before ever posting it, he did not, immediately posting it to his website. Needless to say as I progressed thru my verification process I did find errors. Now that wrong information is out there on his and other sites that have gleaned it from his website.
"Your theory of 'cousin bait' is fine, but in my particular case I have found that many of those cousins do not do complete and verified research,,, only to post and grow the size of their family tree to the most entries they can seem to acquire, right or wrong, proven or not…. As if there is some contest out there for the largest amount of people posted within a family lineage tree.
"I have found one (1) cousin that we work together researching the family name because we have the same feelings as how to research and prove and this cousin does not post to the web either for the same reasons.
"I do my research to pass to my children and have decided finding cousins is not worth the stomach acid I get from the people that refuse to 'prove' their postings, only to grow a tall tree giving the impression they do and use good solid researching methods when in fact I feel they 'glean' data from others hard work.
"I know I am part of the minor group doing researching this way and my attitude frustrates many people, but CORRECT and VERIFIED data is much more important to me.
"A good way to insure your research and hard work is preserved is to share it with a genealogy society in the area of your research, i.e. where you grew up, where your ancestry comes from, etc.
"D. (verified data is solid research all other is garbage and not trustworthy.)"
"In my early stages of research, I too used 'other peoples' info thinking it was verified facts. It took me several years of searching until I met my cousin on line. We share the original surname spelling which has been changed on my side several generations ago. Once we got to trust each other, our data base has grown very nicely.
2) Anonymous (DJN) wrote: "I am the cousin that 'Anonymous' mentions in blog. We live in two different countries and four time zones away from each other. We have shared combined info for several years and do our research for 'our children.' They need to know where they came from.
"I found a relative that shared my surname spelling by accident through a newspaper clipping. Since that discovery, we have amassed a very large data base on this man and his family. All this info is in plain sight and easy to find through newspapers, town clerks and the Family History Center. Nobody has found this family even though the information is in plain sight and our surname is fairly common and widely researched.
"Many people may not agree with our thinking, but that is your right. We do not collect hundreds and in some cases thousands of names just for the sake of collecting and not verifying facts.
"I respect other peoples' thoughts about posting on line. Please respect our feeling on 'not' posting our 'facts and family' on line.
DJN"
My comments:
* D and DJN make valid points about "gleaners" and being "burned" and have found a way to build a "verified" family tree by collaborating with each other. I understand that and have been burned myself in my younger days. However, facts (names, dates, places, records) are not under copyright protection and "gleaning" is not prohibited.
* We all want "Correct" data. However, I don't know what "verified data" means - verified by whom? Have they followed the Genealogical Proof Standard? Have they done a reasonable exhaustive search, including drilling down to original and/or official records, adequately cited their sources for the available evidence, analyzed all of their evidence, resolved evidence conflicts, and written a soundly reasoned conclusion to satisfy the GPS? I hope so! Original records and "certified" data can be wrong, but are usually very reliable. Following the Genealogical Proof Standard process helps a researcher determine the validity of their conclusions.
* How are they ensuring that their research "lives on?" D says they have done it for their children, which is great...but paper or computer files are just one bad family decision away from the trash can or recycle bin. Putting the research in a local library, genealogical society or historical society is another option as D mentions, but again it is one bad society decision away from the recycle bin. You don't know what will happen to it after you are no longer here to ensure its' safety. Creating a bound book with the researched information, and donating copies to local and regional libraries, is probably the best way to ensure that the work will "live on forever."
* I would be interested in knowing if D and DJN regularly search the online family trees to search for more information that may lead them to additional records.
* I would be interested in knowing if D and DJN have had autosomal DNA testing done that indicates that they are cousins, and if so, have they identified other close cousins since it is a fairly common surname.
* It may be that "Nobody has found this family even though the information is in plain sight and our surname is fairly common and widely researched" because D and DJN are the only leaves on this particular branch of the surname family tree. I have this problem - my mother was an only child of only children and consequently I have no close cousins in that line.
* I know that D and DJN are not the only ones with these views, and those of us fishing for "cousin bait" need to be respectful of their views. The frustration for many researchers is when someone will not share their information, for whatever reason (including "they might put it on the Internet"), with other researchers who are close cousins or relatives.
* My thanks to D and DJN for sharing their experiences and opinions with Genea-Musings readers.
The URL for this post is: http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/07/pmgdoe-different-views-about-posting.html
Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
Amanuensis Monday - Probate Records of Francis Nurse (1618-1695) of Salem, Mass.
Genea-blogger John Newmark (who writes the excellent TransylvanianDutch blog) started a Monday blog theme 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 probate records of Francis Nurse (1618-1695) of Salem, Essex County, Massachusetts. As background, Francis married Rebecca Towne (1622-1692, one of the hanged "Salem witches") in 1644, and they had eight children:
* John Nurse (1645-1719), married (1) 1672 Elizabeth Smith (????-1673), and (2) 1677 Elizabeth Very
* Sarah Nurse (1648-????), married 1669 Michael Bowden (1651-1740)
* Samuel Nurse (1650-1720), married 1677 Mary Smith
* Mary Nurse (1653-1749), married John Tarbell
* Rebecca Nurse (1656-1719) married 1669 Thomas Preston (????-1697)
* Elizabeth Nurse (1658-????), married 1678 William Russell
* Francis Nurse (1661-1716) married 1685 Sarah Tarbell
* Benjamin Nurse (1666-1748) married 1688 Tamesin Smith (????-1713)
Francis Nurse died intestate on 22 November 1695, but he made an agreement with his eight children (his sons and the spouses of his daughters) for his support on 4 December 1694. It reads (transcribed by Randy Seaver from Essex County [Mass.] Probate Records, Volume 305, page 104, accessed on FHL Microfilm 0,860,486):
"Know all men by these presents that I Francis Nurse of Salem in the County of Essex in his Maj-ties Province in New England Throw age Imperfect in body yet Competent of understanding but throw Weakness not being able to manage my outward Estate I Seeing Cause to Settle my Estate as Followeth That is first my whole Estate Shall be to my eight Children Equally divided in quantity & quality to their proper use and behoofen to have & to hold in fee Simple to them and Their heires for ever all Except so much as Shall be after named that is to Say John Samuel Francis Benjamin Michael Thomas John William the Condition of this Settlement is as followeth.
"Imp-r That my eight Children above named that is to say John Nurse Samuel Nurse Francis Nurse Benjamin Nurse Michael Bowden Thomas Preston John Tarbell William Russell all above Named shall pay all debts legally due from my said Estate and also that they pay or Cause to be paid to mee the above mentioned Francis Nurse yearly and Equally Each of them in proportion fourteen pounds a year yearly in Currant money of New England that is to say the above mentioned articles being performed the above mentioned Estate to be to my Children & their heires forever but if not performed this act to be void in Law. Further this fourteene pounds above Named is to be understood to be paid betwixt all the Brothers that is thirty five shillings a peice annually in specia as before mentioned. Itt is to be understood that hee or they only that shall fail or Neglect to performe there obligation Shall Suffer thereby without any Damage or detriment to the Rest of Their Brethren.
"Further I Francis Nurse do Reserve in my hands as followeth viz my bed and beding Woolen and Lining and my Crop of corne both Indian and English that I have this year and Soe much fodder as will Sufficiently winter my mare Which I also keep in my hands and one Chest.
"Further I give to my Grandson John Nurse Son of my Son John Nurse ten pounds in or as money after my decease but if I have not Enuff Estate left in my hands then to be made up to him by my Children Equally if the above mentioned fourteen pounds be not Sufficient for my Comfortable maintenance then to be made up by my Children Equally. And further my will is that my Children do all of them Equally Contribute to my Decent buriall. The word him interlined near the End was before Signing and Sealing.
"Signed Sealed DeliveredDated this 4th day of December 1694
in presence of us his mark
William Raiment Francis F Nurse (seal)
Israel Porter John Nurse (seal)
Exercise Conant Samuel Nurse (seal)
Francis Nurse (seal)
Benjamin Nurse (seal)
Michael Bowden (seal)
Thomas Preston (seal)
John Tarball (seal)
William Russell (mark) (seal)"
On 23 December 1695, the eight Children personally appeared before Probate Court Judge Bartholomew Gedney and consented to the above written agreement. The Court allowed the agreement.
An inventory of the estate of Francis Nurse (besides what he had disposed of among his children during his lifetime) totaled 35 pounds, 9 shillings, 6 pence. Debts due included funeral charges and the legacy given to his grandson, and totaled 30 pounds, 17 shillings, 10 pence. The debts due to the estate totaled 22 pounds, 5 shillings, 6 pence. On 2 March 1696/7, John Nurse and Samuel Nurse, administrators for the estate, made an oath that the above was a true and perfect inventory of the estate of their father. The inventory was allowed by the Court.
Francis and Rebecca (Towne) Nurse are one set of my 9th great-grandparents, through their daughter Sarah Nurse who married Michael Bowden.
The URL for this post is: http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/07/amanuensis-monday-probate-records-of_22.html
Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
"A person employed to write what another dictates or to copy what has been written by another."
The subject today is the probate records of Francis Nurse (1618-1695) of Salem, Essex County, Massachusetts. As background, Francis married Rebecca Towne (1622-1692, one of the hanged "Salem witches") in 1644, and they had eight children:
* John Nurse (1645-1719), married (1) 1672 Elizabeth Smith (????-1673), and (2) 1677 Elizabeth Very
* Sarah Nurse (1648-????), married 1669 Michael Bowden (1651-1740)
* Samuel Nurse (1650-1720), married 1677 Mary Smith
* Mary Nurse (1653-1749), married John Tarbell
* Rebecca Nurse (1656-1719) married 1669 Thomas Preston (????-1697)
* Elizabeth Nurse (1658-????), married 1678 William Russell
* Francis Nurse (1661-1716) married 1685 Sarah Tarbell
* Benjamin Nurse (1666-1748) married 1688 Tamesin Smith (????-1713)
Francis Nurse died intestate on 22 November 1695, but he made an agreement with his eight children (his sons and the spouses of his daughters) for his support on 4 December 1694. It reads (transcribed by Randy Seaver from Essex County [Mass.] Probate Records, Volume 305, page 104, accessed on FHL Microfilm 0,860,486):
"Know all men by these presents that I Francis Nurse of Salem in the County of Essex in his Maj-ties Province in New England Throw age Imperfect in body yet Competent of understanding but throw Weakness not being able to manage my outward Estate I Seeing Cause to Settle my Estate as Followeth That is first my whole Estate Shall be to my eight Children Equally divided in quantity & quality to their proper use and behoofen to have & to hold in fee Simple to them and Their heires for ever all Except so much as Shall be after named that is to Say John Samuel Francis Benjamin Michael Thomas John William the Condition of this Settlement is as followeth.
"Imp-r That my eight Children above named that is to say John Nurse Samuel Nurse Francis Nurse Benjamin Nurse Michael Bowden Thomas Preston John Tarbell William Russell all above Named shall pay all debts legally due from my said Estate and also that they pay or Cause to be paid to mee the above mentioned Francis Nurse yearly and Equally Each of them in proportion fourteen pounds a year yearly in Currant money of New England that is to say the above mentioned articles being performed the above mentioned Estate to be to my Children & their heires forever but if not performed this act to be void in Law. Further this fourteene pounds above Named is to be understood to be paid betwixt all the Brothers that is thirty five shillings a peice annually in specia as before mentioned. Itt is to be understood that hee or they only that shall fail or Neglect to performe there obligation Shall Suffer thereby without any Damage or detriment to the Rest of Their Brethren.
"Further I Francis Nurse do Reserve in my hands as followeth viz my bed and beding Woolen and Lining and my Crop of corne both Indian and English that I have this year and Soe much fodder as will Sufficiently winter my mare Which I also keep in my hands and one Chest.
"Further I give to my Grandson John Nurse Son of my Son John Nurse ten pounds in or as money after my decease but if I have not Enuff Estate left in my hands then to be made up to him by my Children Equally if the above mentioned fourteen pounds be not Sufficient for my Comfortable maintenance then to be made up by my Children Equally. And further my will is that my Children do all of them Equally Contribute to my Decent buriall. The word him interlined near the End was before Signing and Sealing.
"Signed Sealed DeliveredDated this 4th day of December 1694
in presence of us his mark
William Raiment Francis F Nurse (seal)
Israel Porter John Nurse (seal)
Exercise Conant Samuel Nurse (seal)
Francis Nurse (seal)
Benjamin Nurse (seal)
Michael Bowden (seal)
Thomas Preston (seal)
John Tarball (seal)
William Russell (mark) (seal)"
On 23 December 1695, the eight Children personally appeared before Probate Court Judge Bartholomew Gedney and consented to the above written agreement. The Court allowed the agreement.
An inventory of the estate of Francis Nurse (besides what he had disposed of among his children during his lifetime) totaled 35 pounds, 9 shillings, 6 pence. Debts due included funeral charges and the legacy given to his grandson, and totaled 30 pounds, 17 shillings, 10 pence. The debts due to the estate totaled 22 pounds, 5 shillings, 6 pence. On 2 March 1696/7, John Nurse and Samuel Nurse, administrators for the estate, made an oath that the above was a true and perfect inventory of the estate of their father. The inventory was allowed by the Court.
Francis and Rebecca (Towne) Nurse are one set of my 9th great-grandparents, through their daughter Sarah Nurse who married Michael Bowden.
The URL for this post is: http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/07/amanuensis-monday-probate-records-of_22.html
Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
Sunday, July 21, 2013
Best of the Genea-Blogs - 14 to 20 July 2013
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:
* A Genealogist's Worst Nightmare Came True! by Cindy Freed on the Genealogy Circle blog. Oh, no! Cindy's house had a basement flood...there's lessons here for all of us.
* The Miner, the Curator, and the Law by Judy G. Russell on The Legal Genealogist blog. Judy gets the most interesting reader questions, and finds very interesting information to answer it, using FamilySearch.
* Proving Genealogical Proof by Michael John Neill on the Rootdig.com blog. Michael discusses genealogical proof relative to legal proof and mathematical proof.
* How Do We Get Our Fellow Genealogists to Share Images, Documents, Stories, and More? by Diane L. Richard on the Upfront with NGS blog. Diane discusses genealogy grinches.
* Down the Rabbit Hole... by Nikki LaRue on the Blog of a Genealogist in Training. Nikki followed a promising lead and came up dry...but it was necessary.
* The Midwestern African-American Genealogy Institute 2013: Day #1, Part #2, Day #2, Day #2, Part #2 and Final Day at MAAGI Day #3 by Yvette Porter Moore on The Ancestors Have Spoken blog. Yvette continues her summaries of her MAAGI trip.
* WoflramAlpha: A New Tool for Genealogy by Thomas MacEntee on the Archives.com Expert Series. Thomas highlights this site which answers many questions that can help genealogists.
* What Did Yuur Ancestor look Like? 5 Ways to Find Physical Characteristics by Kenneth R. Marks on The Ancestor Hunt blog. Kenneth lists several databases that provide a physical description of persons.
* Preparing for a Research Trip to Washington, D.C. by Angela Packer McGhie on the Adventures in Genealogy Education blog. Angela has excellent advice for researchers going to D.C. to research.
* Let's See What's Going On Around Here by Louis Kessler on Louis Kessler's Behold Genealogy blog. Louis has updates on genealogy software, and opinions on some issues.
These genea-bloggers wrote weekly pick posts and news summary posts this week:
* Follow Friday ~ Favorites for July 19, 2013 by Heather Kuhn Roelker on the Leaves For Trees blog.
* Genealogy News Corral, July 15-19 by Diane Haddad on the Genealogy Insider blog.
* Follow Friday - Fab Finds for July 19, 2013 by Jana Last on Jana's Genealogy and Family History Blog.
* Friday Finds - 07/19/13 by Julie Cahill Tarr on the GenBlog blog.
* Blog Posts and News Stories for Genealogists, July 19, 2013 by Michael J. Leclerc on the Mocavo Genealogy Blog.
* Saturday Serendipity, July 20, 2013 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, Google Reader, 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 1400 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/2013/07/best-of-genea-blogs-14-to-20-july-2013.html
Copyright(c) 2012, Randall J. Seaver
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:
* A Genealogist's Worst Nightmare Came True! by Cindy Freed on the Genealogy Circle blog. Oh, no! Cindy's house had a basement flood...there's lessons here for all of us.
* The Miner, the Curator, and the Law by Judy G. Russell on The Legal Genealogist blog. Judy gets the most interesting reader questions, and finds very interesting information to answer it, using FamilySearch.
* Proving Genealogical Proof by Michael John Neill on the Rootdig.com blog. Michael discusses genealogical proof relative to legal proof and mathematical proof.
* How Do We Get Our Fellow Genealogists to Share Images, Documents, Stories, and More? by Diane L. Richard on the Upfront with NGS blog. Diane discusses genealogy grinches.
* Down the Rabbit Hole... by Nikki LaRue on the Blog of a Genealogist in Training. Nikki followed a promising lead and came up dry...but it was necessary.
* The Midwestern African-American Genealogy Institute 2013: Day #1, Part #2, Day #2, Day #2, Part #2 and Final Day at MAAGI Day #3 by Yvette Porter Moore on The Ancestors Have Spoken blog. Yvette continues her summaries of her MAAGI trip.
* WoflramAlpha: A New Tool for Genealogy by Thomas MacEntee on the Archives.com Expert Series. Thomas highlights this site which answers many questions that can help genealogists.
* What Did Yuur Ancestor look Like? 5 Ways to Find Physical Characteristics by Kenneth R. Marks on The Ancestor Hunt blog. Kenneth lists several databases that provide a physical description of persons.
* Preparing for a Research Trip to Washington, D.C. by Angela Packer McGhie on the Adventures in Genealogy Education blog. Angela has excellent advice for researchers going to D.C. to research.
* Let's See What's Going On Around Here by Louis Kessler on Louis Kessler's Behold Genealogy blog. Louis has updates on genealogy software, and opinions on some issues.
These genea-bloggers wrote weekly pick posts and news summary posts this week:
* Follow Friday ~ Favorites for July 19, 2013 by Heather Kuhn Roelker on the Leaves For Trees blog.
* Genealogy News Corral, July 15-19 by Diane Haddad on the Genealogy Insider blog.
* Follow Friday - Fab Finds for July 19, 2013 by Jana Last on Jana's Genealogy and Family History Blog.
* Friday Finds - 07/19/13 by Julie Cahill Tarr on the GenBlog blog.
* Blog Posts and News Stories for Genealogists, July 19, 2013 by Michael J. Leclerc on the Mocavo Genealogy Blog.
* Saturday Serendipity, July 20, 2013 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, Google Reader, 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 1400 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/2013/07/best-of-genea-blogs-14-to-20-july-2013.html
Copyright(c) 2012, Randall J. Seaver
Saturday, July 20, 2013
Saturday Night Genealogy Fun - The Rivers of Your Ancestors
Hey genea-folks,
it's Saturday Night again,
time for more Genealogy Fun!
Your mission this week, should you decide to accept it, is to:
1) I posted The "Rivers of America" Map yesterday, and demonstrated how to find the downstream course of a river in the United States, or the upstream watershed area of a river. Please refer to that blog post.
2) This week, your Saturday Night Genealogy Fun mission is to make a map using the National Atlas map (at http://nationalatlas.gov/streamer/Streamer/streamer.html) showing the downstream course of a river that one of your ancestors may have traveled on. What does it tell you? What did you learn? Did they live at other places on that river, or downstream of that river?
3) Tell us about it in a blog post of your own (please show us the map you created - use an image snipping tool or take a screen shot), or make a comment here on this post, or write a Facebook status or a Google+ stream post.
Here's mine:
I was curious about the river system in Mercer County, Pennsylvania. My Carringer family migrated from there to Louisa County, Iowa in the late 1850s. I don't know if they traveled by horse/oxen and wagon or by river and then wagon. If they went by river, I figured that they went down by wagon to a place on the Ohio River, then down the Ohio River to the Mississippi River and up the Mississippi River to Louisa County, Iowa.
I am interested in the rivers and creeks around Perry township, Mercer County, Pennsylvania. Here is a zoomed in map of the area (unfortunately, county boundaries are hard to see):
The Martin Carringer family settled in 1796 right about where the red dot is on the map above (I put it there are then copied the image). This appears to be one of the highest spots in the area. As you can see, there is Neshannock Creek to the south of the homestead, which drains to the south, through the towns of Mercer and New Castle to Beaver, where it empties into the Ohio River. The stream to the north of the red dot is the Little Shenango River which drains through Greenville, Sharpsville and New Castle, and thence to Beaver and into the Ohio River.
The watercourse for the Little Shenango River is:
The URL for this post is: http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/07/saturday-night-genealogy-fun-rivers-of.html
Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
Surname Saturday - SMITH (England to colonial Massachusetts)
It's Surname Saturday, and I'm "counting down" my Ancestral Name List each week.
I am in the 7th great-grandmothers, I'm up to Ancestor #633, who is Sarah SMITH (1661-????) [Note: the earlier great-grandmothers and 7th great-grandfathers have been covered in earlier posts].
My ancestral line back through two American generations of this SMITH family line is:
1. Randall J. Seaver (1943-living)
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)
18. Edward Hildreth (1831-1899)
19. Sophia Newton (1834-1923)
38. Thomas J. Newton (ca 1800 - ????)
39. Sophia Buck (1797-1882)
78. Isaac Buck (1757-1847)
79. Martha Phillips (1757-????)
158. John Phillips (1722-????)
159. Hannah Brown (1725-????)
316. Ebenezer Phillips (1695-1746)
317. Mary Smith (1698-????)
632. Andrew Phillips, born about 1661 in probably Charlestown, Suffolk, Massachusetts, United States; died 10 December 1717 in Charlestown, Suffolk, Massachusetts, United States. He was the son of 1264. Andrew Phillips and 1265. Elizabeth. He married 11 November 1683 in Charlestown, Suffolk, Massachusetts, United States.
633. Sarah Smith, born before 04 August 1661 in Malden, Middlesex, Massachusetts, United States.
Children of Andrew Phillips and Sarah Smith are:
* Andrew Phillips (1687-????), married 1706 Mary Covell.
* Ebenezer Phillips (1695-1746), married 1719 Mary Smith (1698-????).
* Joanna Phillips (1697-????)
* Samuel Phillips (1699-1722).
1266. Michael Smith, born about 1620 in England; died after 1687 in Malden, Middlesex, Massachusetts, United States. He married before 1639 in Massachusetts, United States.
1267. Jane, born about 1620 in England; died 10 November 1692 in Malden, Middlesex, Massachusetts, United States.
Children of Michael Smith and Jane are:
* Nathaniel Smith (1640-????)
* Michael Smith (1643-????)
* John Smith (1645-1678)
* Samuel Smith (1648-????)
* Pelatiah Smith (1651-????0, married Sarah.
* Sarah Smith (1661-????), married 1683 Andrew Phillips (1661-1717).
The only information I have about the Michael Smith family is from derivative sources such as town histories.
The URL for this post is:
Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
I am in the 7th great-grandmothers, I'm up to Ancestor #633, who is Sarah SMITH (1661-????) [Note: the earlier great-grandmothers and 7th great-grandfathers have been covered in earlier posts].
My ancestral line back through two American generations of this SMITH family line is:
1. Randall J. Seaver (1943-living)
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)
18. Edward Hildreth (1831-1899)
19. Sophia Newton (1834-1923)
38. Thomas J. Newton (ca 1800 - ????)
39. Sophia Buck (1797-1882)
78. Isaac Buck (1757-1847)
79. Martha Phillips (1757-????)
158. John Phillips (1722-????)
159. Hannah Brown (1725-????)
316. Ebenezer Phillips (1695-1746)
317. Mary Smith (1698-????)
632. Andrew Phillips, born about 1661 in probably Charlestown, Suffolk, Massachusetts, United States; died 10 December 1717 in Charlestown, Suffolk, Massachusetts, United States. He was the son of 1264. Andrew Phillips and 1265. Elizabeth. He married 11 November 1683 in Charlestown, Suffolk, Massachusetts, United States.
633. Sarah Smith, born before 04 August 1661 in Malden, Middlesex, Massachusetts, United States.
Children of Andrew Phillips and Sarah Smith are:
* Andrew Phillips (1687-????), married 1706 Mary Covell.
* Ebenezer Phillips (1695-1746), married 1719 Mary Smith (1698-????).
* Joanna Phillips (1697-????)
* Samuel Phillips (1699-1722).
1266. Michael Smith, born about 1620 in England; died after 1687 in Malden, Middlesex, Massachusetts, United States. He married before 1639 in Massachusetts, United States.
1267. Jane, born about 1620 in England; died 10 November 1692 in Malden, Middlesex, Massachusetts, United States.
Children of Michael Smith and Jane are:
* Nathaniel Smith (1640-????)
* Michael Smith (1643-????)
* John Smith (1645-1678)
* Samuel Smith (1648-????)
* Pelatiah Smith (1651-????0, married Sarah.
* Sarah Smith (1661-????), married 1683 Andrew Phillips (1661-1717).
The only information I have about the Michael Smith family is from derivative sources such as town histories.
The URL for this post is:
Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)