I had a question from Ricky in email several weeks ago, and I've had discussions on this recently in my CVGS Research Group, so I thought that I would put it in the blog in case others have the same issue:
"I would like to know how you name a census page when you download it to a
digital image? I know how to cite the image, but am curious how other
Genealogy researchers name their images. I'm hoping to find a method
that I can incorporate which will help me organize my research images."
My response: I try to include the following elements in a census record image file (with an example):
* Name: FrederickWSeaver
* Date: 1940
* RecordType: CensusUS
* Location: LeominsterMA
* ED: 14-191
* Sheet: 9A
* NARA ID: T627-1651
The file name would then be:
FrederickWSeaver1940-CensusUS-LeominsterMA-ED14-191-Sheet9A-NARAT627-1651.jpg
If I am consistent in doing this (especially for name and year), then I have a file folder for the Frederick W Seaver and Alma Bessie Richmond family with all of Fred's records in chronological order with enough information that I know what the image is. Another benefit is that I can see what documents I don't have - for instance, I can tell immediately if I don't have a certain census year or vital record for each person.
I do this for my photographs too. The elements I use in a photograph are:
* Name: AlmaBessieRichmond+FrederickWSeaver
* Year: 1900
* RecordType: PhotoMarriage
* Location: LeominsterMA
* Detail: StMarksEpiscopalChurch
The file name would then be:
AlmaBessieRichmond+FrederickWSeaver-1900-PhotoMarriage-LeominsterMA-StMarksEpiscopalChurch.jpg
For a marriage, I list both persons, the bridge first. For group photos, I will usually pick the senior person and do something like FrederivkWSeaver+group to identify a group photo. If there is more than one family in a photo, I will duplicate it and put it in the file folders for each family.
Obviously, the file names get relatively long, but I can look at a list and see what these files are.
I chose this system because I wanted all of my digital information for a couple in one family file folder, including their children up until they married. If I know a surname, and the father's name, I can find the file I want with several clicks. This system may be "too much" for some people - I like more information than abbreviated information. Other people have different systems that work for them, but this one works for me.
In my RootsMagic program database, I save only one image for the household, so the name in the first element is for the head of household. I create a source citation for the household, and then copy the source citation for each person in the household. I add the image as a Media item for the head of household, and Tag it to the other members of the household.
One problem I have with all of my downloaded census image files is that they were downloaded and named before I decided on the "best" naming scheme (the one above), so only some of my file names are to that standard. It's too much work for now to revise the file names, then delete the existing media (with the previous file name), and then attach the media with the revised file name. I have over 1,000 media items in my database now...
The lesson learned here is: Choose your file naming scheme carefully, and follow your file name convention consistently, and do it before you attach media to the persons and events in your genealogy program.
The URL for this post is: http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/07/dear-randy-how-do-you-name-downloaded.html
Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
Tuesday, July 16, 2013
Am I A Bad Researcher Because I Cite "Indexes?"
I've been reading the new Thomas W. Jones book, Mastering Genealogical Proof. The author states (on page 9):
"Finding aids, indexes, and search engines usually are not genealogical sources. Their purpose, like that of a book's index, is to lead us to the useful information, not provide it."
On page 26 (item 6. in Table 1), Jones says:
"...When a source, database, or index suggests a source is relevant to our search...we try to locate the source. If it is available, we examine it. We are not satisfied with references to sources, because they usually provide fewer, if not less accurate, information items than the source itself."
Please read the complete context of the statements in the book.
There has been an extended discussion in the DearMYRTLE's Genealogy Community on Google+ about this issue. I posted on 14 July 2013 the following in the community:
There has been an extended discussion in the DearMYRTLE's Genealogy Community on Google+ about this issue. I posted on 14 July 2013 the following in the community:
"...tt matters, obviously, whether an index is a name index in a book, a list of names in a publication or on a website, or a searchable database without images."
And discussion ensued, with excellent points for and against using indexes as sources while pursuing genealogy and family history research.
True confession: I cite "indexes" found in books, periodicals, web pages, and online databases when that is where I obtain my information about names, events, dates, places, relationships, etc.
A common definition of "index" is:
"Alphabetically arranged list of items (such as names or terms) given at the end of a printed text with page numbers on which the item can be found."
That describes the typical book "index" very well - where you look in the back of a book to see the page(s) where a name or term is used.
In genealogy research, we often use the term "index" to mean a list of items within a document, publication or database, and as something that we can search for specific terms. Examples might include a list of births, marriages or deaths found in a book or on a microfilm, or in a searchable set of entries in an online database,
Perhaps the term "index" is not used correctly when applied to databases like the "California Death Index," the "Social Security Death Index," or the Find A Grave website. Information in those "indexes" was transcribed or abstracted from some original record created by a public or private entity. These "indexes" often don't exist in a published A to Z form - they are entries in a linked database that enables users to search them for specific search terms.
In those typical online genealogical databases, the "indexed information" is what I find - whatever an "indexer" put into a relational database field. I did not find the original record that the "indexed" information was obtained from. The "indexed" information may not include everything that is included in the original record.
We are told to cite what you find, rather than citing the "source of the source," so I'm citing the "index" entry. If an image of a document is available, then I cite the image, which is usually a more authoritative source.
Are the "index" entries accurate? My experience is that vital records "indexes" are very accurate (but not 100%), and that some user-contributed "indexes" are not always accurate. But they do provide information that can be found in a more original form with further effort.
My practice, for my ancestral families, is to dig deeper when I find the "indexed" information and try to find, and obtain a copy of, the original source, or to obtain a vital records certificate from an agency. When I find a better, seemingly more authoritative, source, I add that source citation to the Event in my database, and keep the "index" item also. I'd like to think that this practice fits Jones' description of what a researcher should do in pursuit of genealogical proof.
However, for my one-name studies, I usually do not dig deeper because of the time and expense that may be involved. These are not my "people" but they may be distant cousins that other researchers may be searching for. My one-name studies are in my family tree database as a finding aid for other researchers who might find a connection to my Seaver, Richman, Dill, Carringer, Auble and Vaux families. Therefore, I have thousands of source citations to online genealogy "index" collections and published vital record books in the interest of providing finding aids for myself and other researchers.
During the MGP Hangouts on Air and in comments on the Google+ community, several persons noted that what Thomas W. Jones wrote in his book applied to "genealogical proof" arguments that support "conclusions," and not necessarily to "working files" for a researcher that lead to a hypothesis and eventual conclusion for a name, event or relationship. Mr. Jones' book is geared to the prospective or current professional researcher who does client research, writes peer-reviewed periodical articles and books, etc.
We each do things differently, and we don't have to do things exactly like other researchers do. It often depends upon the level of education and experience of the researcher. For me, the most important thing is to "cite the source you used so that you can evaluate the accuracy of the source and can find that source again." The next most important thing is to "use the source you find to find original source information if at all possible."
Let me be clear: I am an advocate of the Genealogical Proof Standard, and try to apply it when I have a research challenge and conflicting evidence, but I don't use it for every person and Event. I appreciate the research and documentation standards that have been developed over the last 20 years to promote source citations, proof arguments, etc., including the Evidence Explained and Mastering Genealogical Proof books. I am a researcher on two tracks - my own family history and genealogy, and the one-name studies for certain surnames. I use indexes and online databases as sources in an effort to get the most return on my time and money investment. I am very much a "conclusion-based" researcher rather than an "evidenced-based" researcher. I use family tree software because the program features organize the collected information in a form that minimizes errors, duplication and paper, and provide a way to create standard genealogy reports and charts.
What do my readers think? Am I a bad researcher because I cite "indexes?"
The URL for this post is: http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/07/am-i-bad-researcher-because-i-cite.html
Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
True confession: I cite "indexes" found in books, periodicals, web pages, and online databases when that is where I obtain my information about names, events, dates, places, relationships, etc.
A common definition of "index" is:
"Alphabetically arranged list of items (such as names or terms) given at the end of a printed text with page numbers on which the item can be found."
That describes the typical book "index" very well - where you look in the back of a book to see the page(s) where a name or term is used.
In genealogy research, we often use the term "index" to mean a list of items within a document, publication or database, and as something that we can search for specific terms. Examples might include a list of births, marriages or deaths found in a book or on a microfilm, or in a searchable set of entries in an online database,
Perhaps the term "index" is not used correctly when applied to databases like the "California Death Index," the "Social Security Death Index," or the Find A Grave website. Information in those "indexes" was transcribed or abstracted from some original record created by a public or private entity. These "indexes" often don't exist in a published A to Z form - they are entries in a linked database that enables users to search them for specific search terms.
In those typical online genealogical databases, the "indexed information" is what I find - whatever an "indexer" put into a relational database field. I did not find the original record that the "indexed" information was obtained from. The "indexed" information may not include everything that is included in the original record.
We are told to cite what you find, rather than citing the "source of the source," so I'm citing the "index" entry. If an image of a document is available, then I cite the image, which is usually a more authoritative source.
Are the "index" entries accurate? My experience is that vital records "indexes" are very accurate (but not 100%), and that some user-contributed "indexes" are not always accurate. But they do provide information that can be found in a more original form with further effort.
My practice, for my ancestral families, is to dig deeper when I find the "indexed" information and try to find, and obtain a copy of, the original source, or to obtain a vital records certificate from an agency. When I find a better, seemingly more authoritative, source, I add that source citation to the Event in my database, and keep the "index" item also. I'd like to think that this practice fits Jones' description of what a researcher should do in pursuit of genealogical proof.
However, for my one-name studies, I usually do not dig deeper because of the time and expense that may be involved. These are not my "people" but they may be distant cousins that other researchers may be searching for. My one-name studies are in my family tree database as a finding aid for other researchers who might find a connection to my Seaver, Richman, Dill, Carringer, Auble and Vaux families. Therefore, I have thousands of source citations to online genealogy "index" collections and published vital record books in the interest of providing finding aids for myself and other researchers.
During the MGP Hangouts on Air and in comments on the Google+ community, several persons noted that what Thomas W. Jones wrote in his book applied to "genealogical proof" arguments that support "conclusions," and not necessarily to "working files" for a researcher that lead to a hypothesis and eventual conclusion for a name, event or relationship. Mr. Jones' book is geared to the prospective or current professional researcher who does client research, writes peer-reviewed periodical articles and books, etc.
We each do things differently, and we don't have to do things exactly like other researchers do. It often depends upon the level of education and experience of the researcher. For me, the most important thing is to "cite the source you used so that you can evaluate the accuracy of the source and can find that source again." The next most important thing is to "use the source you find to find original source information if at all possible."
Let me be clear: I am an advocate of the Genealogical Proof Standard, and try to apply it when I have a research challenge and conflicting evidence, but I don't use it for every person and Event. I appreciate the research and documentation standards that have been developed over the last 20 years to promote source citations, proof arguments, etc., including the Evidence Explained and Mastering Genealogical Proof books. I am a researcher on two tracks - my own family history and genealogy, and the one-name studies for certain surnames. I use indexes and online databases as sources in an effort to get the most return on my time and money investment. I am very much a "conclusion-based" researcher rather than an "evidenced-based" researcher. I use family tree software because the program features organize the collected information in a form that minimizes errors, duplication and paper, and provide a way to create standard genealogy reports and charts.
What do my readers think? Am I a bad researcher because I cite "indexes?"
The URL for this post is: http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/07/am-i-bad-researcher-because-i-cite.html
Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
This Week's Genealogical Eclectica - 16 July 2013
This week's collection of genealogical eclectica includes:
1) The July 2013 of The In-Depth Genealogist magazine is out - read it online at http://www.theindepthgenealogist.com/?page_id=6086. 70 pages of excellent genealogy writing, and it's FREE to read and download:
2) The Federation of Genealogical Societies (FGS) announced a new webinar focusing on the use of military records in genealogical research. J. Mark Lowe will present "Discovering Local and State Militia Records" on Tuesday, 16 July 2013, at 8 pm Eastern, 5 pm Pacific, 0000 GMT (17 July). This webinar is FREE and open to the public You can register at https://www3.gotomeeting.com/register/934226718
3) This week's Legacy Family Tree Webinar is "Research in the Old Line State: An Overview of Maryland genealogy" by presenter Michael Hait. The date is Wednesday, 17 July 2013, 2 pm Eastern, 11 am Pacific, 1800 GMT. You can register (for free) at https://www3.gotomeeting.com/register/611901414.
4) The Utah Genealogical Association Virtual Chapter is hosting a FREE webinar - "Can I Use That In My Genealogy? What YOU Should Know About copyright" presented by Thomas MacEntee, on Thursday, 18 July 2013, at 9 pm Eastern, 6 pm Pacific, 0100 GMT (on 19 July). You can register at https://www4.gotomeeting.com/register/584591559.
5) Another Legacy Family Tree Webinar is "Top Ten Techniques for Finding More in Library Catalogs" by presenter Barbara Renick. The date is Friday, 19 July, at 2 pm Eastern, 11 am Pacific, 1800 GMT. You can register for free at https://www3.gotomeeting.com/register/169310278
6) Elizabeth Lapointe's weekly Canadian Week in Review 15 July 2013 post has some interesting stories andl inks.
7) Mick Southwick's weekly British and Irish Genealogy News blog post always has useful links and tips - see Genealogy News - 16th July.
8) The FamilySearch Family Tree Guide has been updated - read it or download it at http://broadcast.lds.org/eLearning/fhd/Community/en/FamilySearch/FamilyTree/pdf/familyTreeUserGuide.pdf.
9) This week's "Mondays With Myrt" (watch on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxXTg15LxWE) discussed the upcoming Who Do You Think You Are? episode, the Evidence! Explained website, genealogy software, cloud technology, Mastering Genealogical Proof, and more.
10) This weeks' "DearMYRTLE's Mastering Genealogical Proof Study Group" (watch on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=py1gt6It4IM) discussed Chapter 3 of the book, and discussed some of the homework assignments.
The URL for this post is: http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/07/this-weeks-genealogical-eclectica-16.html
copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
1) The July 2013 of The In-Depth Genealogist magazine is out - read it online at http://www.theindepthgenealogist.com/?page_id=6086. 70 pages of excellent genealogy writing, and it's FREE to read and download:
2) The Federation of Genealogical Societies (FGS) announced a new webinar focusing on the use of military records in genealogical research. J. Mark Lowe will present "Discovering Local and State Militia Records" on Tuesday, 16 July 2013, at 8 pm Eastern, 5 pm Pacific, 0000 GMT (17 July). This webinar is FREE and open to the public You can register at https://www3.gotomeeting.com/register/934226718
3) This week's Legacy Family Tree Webinar is "Research in the Old Line State: An Overview of Maryland genealogy" by presenter Michael Hait. The date is Wednesday, 17 July 2013, 2 pm Eastern, 11 am Pacific, 1800 GMT. You can register (for free) at https://www3.gotomeeting.com/register/611901414.
4) The Utah Genealogical Association Virtual Chapter is hosting a FREE webinar - "Can I Use That In My Genealogy? What YOU Should Know About copyright" presented by Thomas MacEntee, on Thursday, 18 July 2013, at 9 pm Eastern, 6 pm Pacific, 0100 GMT (on 19 July). You can register at https://www4.gotomeeting.com/register/584591559.
5) Another Legacy Family Tree Webinar is "Top Ten Techniques for Finding More in Library Catalogs" by presenter Barbara Renick. The date is Friday, 19 July, at 2 pm Eastern, 11 am Pacific, 1800 GMT. You can register for free at https://www3.gotomeeting.com/register/169310278
6) Elizabeth Lapointe's weekly Canadian Week in Review 15 July 2013 post has some interesting stories andl inks.
7) Mick Southwick's weekly British and Irish Genealogy News blog post always has useful links and tips - see Genealogy News - 16th July.
8) The FamilySearch Family Tree Guide has been updated - read it or download it at http://broadcast.lds.org/eLearning/fhd/Community/en/FamilySearch/FamilyTree/pdf/familyTreeUserGuide.pdf.
9) This week's "Mondays With Myrt" (watch on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxXTg15LxWE) discussed the upcoming Who Do You Think You Are? episode, the Evidence! Explained website, genealogy software, cloud technology, Mastering Genealogical Proof, and more.
10) This weeks' "DearMYRTLE's Mastering Genealogical Proof Study Group" (watch on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=py1gt6It4IM) discussed Chapter 3 of the book, and discussed some of the homework assignments.
The URL for this post is: http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/07/this-weeks-genealogical-eclectica-16.html
copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
Monday, July 15, 2013
Do RootsMagic 6 Source Template Citations Transfer to FamilySearch Family Tree?
I posted about using RootsMagic 6 to transfer source citations to FamilySearch Family Tree in Sources Can Now Be Interchanged Between RootsMagic 6 and FamilySearch Family Tree (posted 20 June 2013) and in Checking How Sources From RootsMagic 6 Transfer to FamilySearch Family Tree (posted 8 July 2013).
In the latter post, all of the source citations that I transferred were "free-form" source citations (meaning I used the "free-form" source template with only one field for the Master Source element and one field for the Citation Detail element. The actual source citation (with the two elements together) transferred well, except for the limitations noted in the second post.
What about source citations crafted using the source templates in RootsMagic 6 that were derived from Elizabeth Shown Mills' book, Evidence! Explained? I recently blogged about the Online Newspaper Image source citation in Creating a Source Citation for an Online Newspaper Image in Family Tree Maker 2012 - UPDATED! (posted 11 July 2013), and noted that I wanted to make sure source citations crafted using the RootsMagic 6 source templates also transferred to FamilySearch Family Tree without a problem.
1) In RootsMagic 6, I clicked on the FamilySearch icon for my grandfather, Frederick Walton Seaver), and then on the "Sources" tab. The comparison of RootsMagic sources and Family Tree sources appeared.
I scrolled down to the "Fitchburg Sentinel newspaper ..." source citation in the left-hand column and checked that box, which opened the "What do you want to do with this RootsMagic source?" window:
I clicked to attach this source to his Name and to his Death Fact.
2) After clicking "OK," the list of Family Search Sources on the right-hand side of the screen was refreshed:
The screen above shows the newly added source added to the FamilySearch Family Tree.
3) In the FamilySearch Family Tree, I navigated to Frederick Walton Seaver, and opened his Person Profile. Here's the top of it:
Further down the web page is the "Sources" section. The "Fitchburg Sentinel newspaper ... " source title was the first one listed (I think it puts the last added source first, but I may be wrong). I clicked on the source title and expanded the view:
The FamilySearch Family Tree source citation for the specific source says:
"Deaths: Frederick W. Seaver," obituary, <i>Fitchburg (Mass.) Sentinel</i>, 13 March 1942, page 9, column 2; digital image, <i>Ancestry.com</i> (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 17 November 2006).
That is exactly the same as the source citation created in RootsMagic 6 for this source, except for the italicizing of the newspaper name and the website name. Those are indicated by <i> in the source citation above. I noted that in the third blog post noted above.
I wondered if the Tags for the Name and the Death Events also transferred. I clicked on the "Tags" link and saw:
The Tags transferred without an overt act on my part (other than what I did in the first screen above). I checked the Name and the Death Event, and the Sources were listed for this newspaper clipping.
4) My conclusion is that source citations in RootsMagic 6 created using the source templates transfer to FamilySearch Family Tree well, subject to the same limitations noted in the third post above. That is good news.
Where is the problem with the italics? Is it because RootsMagic uses the <i> in their code that transfers, or is it in FamilySearch where it cannot read the italics directly or can't implement the italics indicator?
The URL for this post is: http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/07/do-rootsmagic-6-source-template.html
Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
In the latter post, all of the source citations that I transferred were "free-form" source citations (meaning I used the "free-form" source template with only one field for the Master Source element and one field for the Citation Detail element. The actual source citation (with the two elements together) transferred well, except for the limitations noted in the second post.
What about source citations crafted using the source templates in RootsMagic 6 that were derived from Elizabeth Shown Mills' book, Evidence! Explained? I recently blogged about the Online Newspaper Image source citation in Creating a Source Citation for an Online Newspaper Image in Family Tree Maker 2012 - UPDATED! (posted 11 July 2013), and noted that I wanted to make sure source citations crafted using the RootsMagic 6 source templates also transferred to FamilySearch Family Tree without a problem.
1) In RootsMagic 6, I clicked on the FamilySearch icon for my grandfather, Frederick Walton Seaver), and then on the "Sources" tab. The comparison of RootsMagic sources and Family Tree sources appeared.
I scrolled down to the "Fitchburg Sentinel newspaper ..." source citation in the left-hand column and checked that box, which opened the "What do you want to do with this RootsMagic source?" window:
I clicked to attach this source to his Name and to his Death Fact.
2) After clicking "OK," the list of Family Search Sources on the right-hand side of the screen was refreshed:
The screen above shows the newly added source added to the FamilySearch Family Tree.
3) In the FamilySearch Family Tree, I navigated to Frederick Walton Seaver, and opened his Person Profile. Here's the top of it:
Further down the web page is the "Sources" section. The "Fitchburg Sentinel newspaper ... " source title was the first one listed (I think it puts the last added source first, but I may be wrong). I clicked on the source title and expanded the view:
The FamilySearch Family Tree source citation for the specific source says:
"Deaths: Frederick W. Seaver," obituary, <i>Fitchburg (Mass.) Sentinel</i>, 13 March 1942, page 9, column 2; digital image, <i>Ancestry.com</i> (http://www.ancestry.com : accessed 17 November 2006).
That is exactly the same as the source citation created in RootsMagic 6 for this source, except for the italicizing of the newspaper name and the website name. Those are indicated by <i> in the source citation above. I noted that in the third blog post noted above.
I wondered if the Tags for the Name and the Death Events also transferred. I clicked on the "Tags" link and saw:
The Tags transferred without an overt act on my part (other than what I did in the first screen above). I checked the Name and the Death Event, and the Sources were listed for this newspaper clipping.
4) My conclusion is that source citations in RootsMagic 6 created using the source templates transfer to FamilySearch Family Tree well, subject to the same limitations noted in the third post above. That is good news.
Where is the problem with the italics? Is it because RootsMagic uses the <i> in their code that transfers, or is it in FamilySearch where it cannot read the italics directly or can't implement the italics indicator?
The URL for this post is: http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/07/do-rootsmagic-6-source-template.html
Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
Interesting Questions About Online Family Trees
I gave my 60-minute "Growing Your Ancestry Member Tree" presentation on Saturday, 13 July 2013 at the San Diego Genealogical Society meeting.
During the short question and answer session at the end of the meeting, I was asked several interesting questions, including (thank you to Susi Pentico in her blog post Society Saturday, San Diego Genealogical Society on the Ancestor Seeking by the Root-Bound blog for writing come of them down and commenting).
I wish that I had given better responses to the questions, but time was short and I couldn't think that fast. Here are the questions I recall, and the answers I could have given:
1) "What are the disadvantages if a person does not put their tree on Ancestry?"
With more thinking time, I think I would say:
* Ancestry has the largest collection of online family trees (46 million trees, over 2.8 person profiles) and provides the best opportunity to find other family members and cousins researching your ancestors, or to have them find you. Once found, you can work with them and share information on the families of mutual interest. You don't have to have an Ancestry subscription to add and maintain your tree, but you do need to be a registered user. The disadvantage is that you would miss out on potential finding and working with other family members and cousins.
* One way you can find these cousins is this: Ancestry Member Tree persons are found in a search from the Ancestry.com Search page, from within an Ancestry Member Tree, or from within Family Tree Maker or other software programs. You do need to have an Ancestry subscription in order to perform searches. This short-circuits your search process significantly. The disadvantage...you miss out!
* Another way that you can find these cousins is the Hints (green leaves) in your Ancestry Member Tree, in Family Tree Maker and on the Ancestry mobile App (iOS and Android), assuming you have an Ancestry subscription. Same disadvantage - you miss out!
* Ancestry makes it possible to contact a person with information in an Ancestry Member Tree using the anonymous Member Connect mail feature. You can send a message to another registered Ancestry member without disclosing your email address or anything else about yourself. Same disadvantage -- you miss out.
* Another disadvantage is that you, and others, cannot compare your DNA test results with that of other AncestryDNA customers. Ancestry provides a list of common surnames and permits searches by surname and birthplace to find matches. Again, you miss out.
* Another disadvantage is that you may not have a backup for your family tree. Ancestry provides that. The synchronization feature with Family Tree Maker is a plus, but you have to regularly sync it to keep both trees up-to-date.
* Another disadvantage is that you won't have your family tree in your pocket using the Ancestry mobile App (iOS or Android) - and you won't be able to add content to it while at a repository, at home or at someplace without access to your computer. There are other companies with family tree apps, of course.
2) "What are the privacy issues with an Ancestry Member Tree?"
* Each tree can be made (and/or changed to) a "Public" tree or a "Private" tree. A Public tree will be searchable by any subscriber. A Private tree can be searchable or not searchable at the user's discretion.
* Ancestry.com uses an algorithm to determine if a person without a death date is still living. They use 100 years from birth as the date. If no birth date is provided, I don't know what they do.
* The user can also mark living persons as "living" in an Ancestry Member Tree.
* The Photos for living persons are Private by default.
* Only persons authorized by the owner of the Ancestry Member Tree can see information for living persons.
* If you don't want information, or photos, or stories, about a person to appear online, then exclude the person, or their information, from the family tree that you import into an Ancestry Member Tree. Or, you can delete information from within the Ancestry Member Tree. If you don't post it, nobody will be able to see it. You need to be careful who you share it with, however, because they might post it online.
See http://help.ancestry.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/3082/kw/privacy%20forl%20iving%20persons for Ancestry's answer.
3) "What happens to my Ancestry Member Tree information after I die? Can I pass it along to my family?"
* A registered user (who is not currently subscribed) can still access their Ancestry Member Tree, maintain it and delete it. If you die, someone in your family could use your userID and password to access your Ancestry Member Tree, if they know the userID and password. If you want them to have continued access, then you'd better write it down somewhere for them to find or tell them directly.
* I don't think Ancestry permits an Ancestry Member Tree to be passed from one owner to another. However, a current owner could export a GEDCOM file of their tree to their computer, and give it to a second person, who could import it into their computer, register for an Ancestry account, and import the GEDCOM file into an Ancestry Member Tree on the second person's registered account.
* A major unknown is that we don't know if Ancestry Member Trees, or any other family tree website, will live "forever" in the digital world. The company could go out of business, be bought and the trees pruned, or the company could remove trees based on the date last updated at some time in the future.
See http://help.ancestry.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/5035/kw/family%20tree%20after%20death for Ancestry's answer.
4) I was disappointed to hear in Susi's blog post that some attendees sitting near her do not believe in putting their family tree online in a public way, or in sharing information with other persons.
My view is that a significant percentage of genealogical society members have this attitude because:
* they do not trust this "newfangled computer genealogy" fad.
* they are fearful that their family tree information will be "stolen."
* they are fearful that their information will be shown to be erroneous.
* they've published their book and the research is done and cannot be improved.
If a person does not take steps to save their family tree information for their family, then the information may be lost when they die. Putting the work onto an online family tree website will enable the person's work to live on, at least until the family tree website closes down.
5) What do my readers think? What other reasons are there to NOT put a tree online at Ancestry or another website? What happens upon the death of an owner of an Ancestry Member Tree? Why do you not want a public family tree?
Thank you to Susi for her comments and notes. I'll try to add more humor to this talk...like add content to my relative, Preserved Fish, or another marriage for my Elizabeth Dill, to a man named Pickle.
The URL for this post is: http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/07/interesting-questions-about-online.html
Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
During the short question and answer session at the end of the meeting, I was asked several interesting questions, including (thank you to Susi Pentico in her blog post Society Saturday, San Diego Genealogical Society on the Ancestor Seeking by the Root-Bound blog for writing come of them down and commenting).
I wish that I had given better responses to the questions, but time was short and I couldn't think that fast. Here are the questions I recall, and the answers I could have given:
1) "What are the disadvantages if a person does not put their tree on Ancestry?"
With more thinking time, I think I would say:
* Ancestry has the largest collection of online family trees (46 million trees, over 2.8 person profiles) and provides the best opportunity to find other family members and cousins researching your ancestors, or to have them find you. Once found, you can work with them and share information on the families of mutual interest. You don't have to have an Ancestry subscription to add and maintain your tree, but you do need to be a registered user. The disadvantage is that you would miss out on potential finding and working with other family members and cousins.
* One way you can find these cousins is this: Ancestry Member Tree persons are found in a search from the Ancestry.com Search page, from within an Ancestry Member Tree, or from within Family Tree Maker or other software programs. You do need to have an Ancestry subscription in order to perform searches. This short-circuits your search process significantly. The disadvantage...you miss out!
* Another way that you can find these cousins is the Hints (green leaves) in your Ancestry Member Tree, in Family Tree Maker and on the Ancestry mobile App (iOS and Android), assuming you have an Ancestry subscription. Same disadvantage - you miss out!
* Ancestry makes it possible to contact a person with information in an Ancestry Member Tree using the anonymous Member Connect mail feature. You can send a message to another registered Ancestry member without disclosing your email address or anything else about yourself. Same disadvantage -- you miss out.
* Another disadvantage is that you, and others, cannot compare your DNA test results with that of other AncestryDNA customers. Ancestry provides a list of common surnames and permits searches by surname and birthplace to find matches. Again, you miss out.
* Another disadvantage is that you may not have a backup for your family tree. Ancestry provides that. The synchronization feature with Family Tree Maker is a plus, but you have to regularly sync it to keep both trees up-to-date.
* Another disadvantage is that you won't have your family tree in your pocket using the Ancestry mobile App (iOS or Android) - and you won't be able to add content to it while at a repository, at home or at someplace without access to your computer. There are other companies with family tree apps, of course.
2) "What are the privacy issues with an Ancestry Member Tree?"
* Each tree can be made (and/or changed to) a "Public" tree or a "Private" tree. A Public tree will be searchable by any subscriber. A Private tree can be searchable or not searchable at the user's discretion.
* Ancestry.com uses an algorithm to determine if a person without a death date is still living. They use 100 years from birth as the date. If no birth date is provided, I don't know what they do.
* The user can also mark living persons as "living" in an Ancestry Member Tree.
* The Photos for living persons are Private by default.
* Only persons authorized by the owner of the Ancestry Member Tree can see information for living persons.
* If you don't want information, or photos, or stories, about a person to appear online, then exclude the person, or their information, from the family tree that you import into an Ancestry Member Tree. Or, you can delete information from within the Ancestry Member Tree. If you don't post it, nobody will be able to see it. You need to be careful who you share it with, however, because they might post it online.
See http://help.ancestry.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/3082/kw/privacy%20forl%20iving%20persons for Ancestry's answer.
3) "What happens to my Ancestry Member Tree information after I die? Can I pass it along to my family?"
* A registered user (who is not currently subscribed) can still access their Ancestry Member Tree, maintain it and delete it. If you die, someone in your family could use your userID and password to access your Ancestry Member Tree, if they know the userID and password. If you want them to have continued access, then you'd better write it down somewhere for them to find or tell them directly.
* I don't think Ancestry permits an Ancestry Member Tree to be passed from one owner to another. However, a current owner could export a GEDCOM file of their tree to their computer, and give it to a second person, who could import it into their computer, register for an Ancestry account, and import the GEDCOM file into an Ancestry Member Tree on the second person's registered account.
* A major unknown is that we don't know if Ancestry Member Trees, or any other family tree website, will live "forever" in the digital world. The company could go out of business, be bought and the trees pruned, or the company could remove trees based on the date last updated at some time in the future.
See http://help.ancestry.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/5035/kw/family%20tree%20after%20death for Ancestry's answer.
4) I was disappointed to hear in Susi's blog post that some attendees sitting near her do not believe in putting their family tree online in a public way, or in sharing information with other persons.
My view is that a significant percentage of genealogical society members have this attitude because:
* they do not trust this "newfangled computer genealogy" fad.
* they are fearful that their family tree information will be "stolen."
* they are fearful that their information will be shown to be erroneous.
* they've published their book and the research is done and cannot be improved.
If a person does not take steps to save their family tree information for their family, then the information may be lost when they die. Putting the work onto an online family tree website will enable the person's work to live on, at least until the family tree website closes down.
5) What do my readers think? What other reasons are there to NOT put a tree online at Ancestry or another website? What happens upon the death of an owner of an Ancestry Member Tree? Why do you not want a public family tree?
Thank you to Susi for her comments and notes. I'll try to add more humor to this talk...like add content to my relative, Preserved Fish, or another marriage for my Elizabeth Dill, to a man named Pickle.
The URL for this post is: http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/07/interesting-questions-about-online.html
Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
Amanuensis Monday - Agreement by Sons of Henry and Ann (--?--) Collins in 1694.
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 an agreement between three brothers in the probate file of Henry Collins (1606-1687) of Lynn, Essex County, Massachusetts. As background, Henry married Ann --?-- in about 1629, and they had nine children:
* Henry Collins (1629-1722), married Mary Tolman (1632-1723)
* John Collins (1632-1679), married Abigail Johnson (1644-1680)
* Margery Collins (1633-1702), married Isaac Williams
* Hannah Collins (1635-????), married Nathaniel Ingersoll (1632-1718)
* Mary Collins (1641-1682), married Samuel Johnson (1640-1723)
* Joseph Collins (1643-1724), married (1) Sarah Silsbee (1646-1682), and (2) Mariah Smith (1664-after 1724)
* Riall Collins (1645-1681)
* Elizabeth Collins (1647-1690), married John Tolman (1635-1725)
* Benjamin Collins (1648-1711), married (1) Priscilla Kirtland (1648-1676), and (2) Elizabeth Leach.
I posted the will of Henry Collins in Amanuensis Monday - Probate Records of Henry Collins (1606-1687) of Lynn, Mass. (posted 1 July 2013), and the will of Ann (--?--) Collins in Amanuensis Monday - Probate Records of Ann (--?--) Collins (1605-1691) of Lynn, Mass. (posted 8 July 2013).
Three years after the death of Ann Collins in 1691, the three surviving sons made an agreement on 27 November 1694 to divide the lands left to them by their father. The agreement reads (from Essex County [Mass.] Probate Records, Probate Packet #6,057, transcribed from the Probate Court copy book Volume 305, page 066, accessed by Randy Seaver on FHL US/CAN Microfilm 0,860,486):
"This indenture, covenant and agreement made between Henry Collins, senior, Joseph Collins & Benjamin Collins, sons to Henry Collins deceased of Linn in the County of Essex in Their Maj-ties province N England. Witnesseth that wheras our Honoured Father in his Last Will and Testament left us our several portions or proportions of land & meadow or marsh undivided, leving also his sollemn dying charge that love & unity & peace may be maintained & continued amongst his children to avoid therefore any difference that may for the future arise either among ourselves or posterity in succeeding generations with reference to the devisions or bounds of the several tracts or parcels of land or meadow willed and bequeathed to us by our honored Father. We have therefore mutually agreed and consented to and accepted of our several divisionall parts & parcels of land & meadow or marsh with their limitts and bounds settled & firmly agreed upon forever therwith, to rest satisfied & contented & we doe therefore by these presents firmly & for ever bind our selves our heires executors and administrators to accept of and forever to rest satisfied with the several divisional parts & parcels of land & marsh or meadow & whatsoever Specified & Expresed in this present Indenture with the bounds & limitts & priviledges and commodities of the said tracts of land or meadow or marsh or their bounds and limitts Respectively allotted laid out & bounded to said Joseph Henry and Benjamin Collins according as is herewithin written and Subscribed.
"Henry Collins, Sen-r, his divisionall part. Eighteen acres of upland more or less lying or being in his Fathers land or pasture bounded southeast by his own land and so butting upon the tenn acre lotts eastwardly, west by an apple tree; southwest to a stake in the field and so on to an heap of stones in the fence westerly, & from thence to a Walnut tree marked in the mill pasture with an heap of stones about it, and so from thence east north east to an heap of stones at the corner of a swamp, the said tract of land containing in it the five acres towards payment of said Henry Collins thirty pounds willed to him by his father.
"Item: one third part of the meadow in Rumny Marsh staked out bounded on the river west and northeast, bounded on the marsh of his brother Joseph Collins & so as it is staked out.
"Item: Three acres in the fresh meadow be it more or less bounded upon Crispus Brewar on the southeast, northwardly upon the brook, west northwest upon the meadow of Joseph Collins, southwest upon the common and as it is staked out. Also in the Towne Marsh 2 acres towards his thirty pounds willed to him and one acre more as his divisionall part bounded on the south upon the river, west upon the marsh of Benjamin Collins & as it is staked out also to said Henry is allotted two thirds of the westerly end of the old barne with the orchard adjoyning.
"Joseph Collins, his divisionall part allotted to him: Fifteen acres of upland more or less from the ten acre lots westerly to three rocks and so along to his couzen Joseph Collins his land and southwardly bounded upon Benjamin's line. Also one third part of the marsh in Rumny Marsh bounded on the marsh of his brother Henry southwardly, westerly on the River, northwardly on Benjamin Collins his marsh, eastwardly to a stake. Also in the Towne Marsh one acre adjoyning norwardly to Benjamin, southward bounded by the River as it is staked out, west on Mr. Cobbits Marsh. Also in the fresh meadow three acres more or less bounded southwardly on Henry Collins meadow, norward upon the brook, west upon the common as it is staked out.
"Benjamin Collins, his divisional part allotted to him: Twenty eight acres more or less comprehending his ten acres by his deed of gift, bounded southward by the land of his brother Henry, norward by the ten acre lotts, norwest upon his brother Josephs land to three rocks and so along to his kinsman Joseph Collins his land. Also all Tailors rocks in lewe of the Cows leases & from thence to Henry Silsbe his land and from thence to an heap of stones in the fence adjoyning Henry Collins his land & from thence westward to a Walnutt tree in the mill pasture and all the land of Henry Collins deceased in said Mill Pasture on the norwest side of his brother Henrys bounds & so downe to the fresh marsh excepting an highway through the said pasture. Also Eight acres more or less of fresh meadow containing the five acres given to him by his father, southward bounded by the highway, norwardly by the brook, norwest by Crispus Brewar, westward by towne common.
"Also allotted to Benjamin in Rumny Marsh one third of his Fathers marsh as it is staked out bounded upon the river west south upon the marsh of Joseph Collins & east upon the marsh of John Burrill Sen-r. Also in the towne marsh one acre more or less bounded upon the River southward upon the marsh of his brother Henry westward upon the marsh of his brother Joseph & as it is now staked out. Also the orchard adjoyning to Benjamins dwelling house up to his Fathers barn & to have the east bay of the old barn & liberty to thresh on the floor & liberty of carting to the barne through the yard only care to be taken for putting up the barrs for the security of the said yard.
"And we the said Henry Collins, Senr Joseph Collins & Benjamin Collins, sons to said Henry Collins dec-d doe by these presents firmly freely truly & really covenant promise indent bind & oblige our selves & our heires for ever to stand to these promises the divisional tracts & parcells of land & marsh & meadow and whatever els according as they are here bounded & stated never to molest each other in the free enjoyment theirof. In Witness whereof the said Henry Joseph and Benjamin have to these presents set our hands & afixed our seals this Twenty Seventh day of November Anno Domo 1694 and the Sixth year of the Reign of King William and Queen Mary.
"Signed Sealed & Delivered Henry Collins (by mark)
in the presence of us Joseph Collins
Jeremiah Shepard Benjamin Collins
John Floyd
Mary Shepard "
Written along the side of the document was:
"Memorandum: We mutually agree that whereas there is about 2 acres of land within the bounds of Benjamin Collins over and above his share and division of true intent and meaning is that said 2 acres being near the saw mill in Lynn shall be common for free use of all parties hereunto subscribing."
The agreement was accepted by the Judge of Probate, Bartholomew Gedney, on 22 July 1695, with all three sons appearing before the Court.
It appears from this record that these three sons amicably sorted out the grants of property left by their father in a reasonable manner. We'll likely never know if there was disagreement or enmity between them. If they did settle this amicably and equitably, then it is a tribute to their negotiating skills and sense of fairness.
The URL for this post is: http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/07/amanuensis-monday-agreement-by-sons-of.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 an agreement between three brothers in the probate file of Henry Collins (1606-1687) of Lynn, Essex County, Massachusetts. As background, Henry married Ann --?-- in about 1629, and they had nine children:
* Henry Collins (1629-1722), married Mary Tolman (1632-1723)
* John Collins (1632-1679), married Abigail Johnson (1644-1680)
* Margery Collins (1633-1702), married Isaac Williams
* Hannah Collins (1635-????), married Nathaniel Ingersoll (1632-1718)
* Mary Collins (1641-1682), married Samuel Johnson (1640-1723)
* Joseph Collins (1643-1724), married (1) Sarah Silsbee (1646-1682), and (2) Mariah Smith (1664-after 1724)
* Riall Collins (1645-1681)
* Elizabeth Collins (1647-1690), married John Tolman (1635-1725)
* Benjamin Collins (1648-1711), married (1) Priscilla Kirtland (1648-1676), and (2) Elizabeth Leach.
I posted the will of Henry Collins in Amanuensis Monday - Probate Records of Henry Collins (1606-1687) of Lynn, Mass. (posted 1 July 2013), and the will of Ann (--?--) Collins in Amanuensis Monday - Probate Records of Ann (--?--) Collins (1605-1691) of Lynn, Mass. (posted 8 July 2013).
Three years after the death of Ann Collins in 1691, the three surviving sons made an agreement on 27 November 1694 to divide the lands left to them by their father. The agreement reads (from Essex County [Mass.] Probate Records, Probate Packet #6,057, transcribed from the Probate Court copy book Volume 305, page 066, accessed by Randy Seaver on FHL US/CAN Microfilm 0,860,486):
"This indenture, covenant and agreement made between Henry Collins, senior, Joseph Collins & Benjamin Collins, sons to Henry Collins deceased of Linn in the County of Essex in Their Maj-ties province N England. Witnesseth that wheras our Honoured Father in his Last Will and Testament left us our several portions or proportions of land & meadow or marsh undivided, leving also his sollemn dying charge that love & unity & peace may be maintained & continued amongst his children to avoid therefore any difference that may for the future arise either among ourselves or posterity in succeeding generations with reference to the devisions or bounds of the several tracts or parcels of land or meadow willed and bequeathed to us by our honored Father. We have therefore mutually agreed and consented to and accepted of our several divisionall parts & parcels of land & meadow or marsh with their limitts and bounds settled & firmly agreed upon forever therwith, to rest satisfied & contented & we doe therefore by these presents firmly & for ever bind our selves our heires executors and administrators to accept of and forever to rest satisfied with the several divisional parts & parcels of land & marsh or meadow & whatsoever Specified & Expresed in this present Indenture with the bounds & limitts & priviledges and commodities of the said tracts of land or meadow or marsh or their bounds and limitts Respectively allotted laid out & bounded to said Joseph Henry and Benjamin Collins according as is herewithin written and Subscribed.
"Henry Collins, Sen-r, his divisionall part. Eighteen acres of upland more or less lying or being in his Fathers land or pasture bounded southeast by his own land and so butting upon the tenn acre lotts eastwardly, west by an apple tree; southwest to a stake in the field and so on to an heap of stones in the fence westerly, & from thence to a Walnut tree marked in the mill pasture with an heap of stones about it, and so from thence east north east to an heap of stones at the corner of a swamp, the said tract of land containing in it the five acres towards payment of said Henry Collins thirty pounds willed to him by his father.
"Item: one third part of the meadow in Rumny Marsh staked out bounded on the river west and northeast, bounded on the marsh of his brother Joseph Collins & so as it is staked out.
"Item: Three acres in the fresh meadow be it more or less bounded upon Crispus Brewar on the southeast, northwardly upon the brook, west northwest upon the meadow of Joseph Collins, southwest upon the common and as it is staked out. Also in the Towne Marsh 2 acres towards his thirty pounds willed to him and one acre more as his divisionall part bounded on the south upon the river, west upon the marsh of Benjamin Collins & as it is staked out also to said Henry is allotted two thirds of the westerly end of the old barne with the orchard adjoyning.
"Joseph Collins, his divisionall part allotted to him: Fifteen acres of upland more or less from the ten acre lots westerly to three rocks and so along to his couzen Joseph Collins his land and southwardly bounded upon Benjamin's line. Also one third part of the marsh in Rumny Marsh bounded on the marsh of his brother Henry southwardly, westerly on the River, northwardly on Benjamin Collins his marsh, eastwardly to a stake. Also in the Towne Marsh one acre adjoyning norwardly to Benjamin, southward bounded by the River as it is staked out, west on Mr. Cobbits Marsh. Also in the fresh meadow three acres more or less bounded southwardly on Henry Collins meadow, norward upon the brook, west upon the common as it is staked out.
"Benjamin Collins, his divisional part allotted to him: Twenty eight acres more or less comprehending his ten acres by his deed of gift, bounded southward by the land of his brother Henry, norward by the ten acre lotts, norwest upon his brother Josephs land to three rocks and so along to his kinsman Joseph Collins his land. Also all Tailors rocks in lewe of the Cows leases & from thence to Henry Silsbe his land and from thence to an heap of stones in the fence adjoyning Henry Collins his land & from thence westward to a Walnutt tree in the mill pasture and all the land of Henry Collins deceased in said Mill Pasture on the norwest side of his brother Henrys bounds & so downe to the fresh marsh excepting an highway through the said pasture. Also Eight acres more or less of fresh meadow containing the five acres given to him by his father, southward bounded by the highway, norwardly by the brook, norwest by Crispus Brewar, westward by towne common.
"Also allotted to Benjamin in Rumny Marsh one third of his Fathers marsh as it is staked out bounded upon the river west south upon the marsh of Joseph Collins & east upon the marsh of John Burrill Sen-r. Also in the towne marsh one acre more or less bounded upon the River southward upon the marsh of his brother Henry westward upon the marsh of his brother Joseph & as it is now staked out. Also the orchard adjoyning to Benjamins dwelling house up to his Fathers barn & to have the east bay of the old barn & liberty to thresh on the floor & liberty of carting to the barne through the yard only care to be taken for putting up the barrs for the security of the said yard.
"And we the said Henry Collins, Senr Joseph Collins & Benjamin Collins, sons to said Henry Collins dec-d doe by these presents firmly freely truly & really covenant promise indent bind & oblige our selves & our heires for ever to stand to these promises the divisional tracts & parcells of land & marsh & meadow and whatever els according as they are here bounded & stated never to molest each other in the free enjoyment theirof. In Witness whereof the said Henry Joseph and Benjamin have to these presents set our hands & afixed our seals this Twenty Seventh day of November Anno Domo 1694 and the Sixth year of the Reign of King William and Queen Mary.
"Signed Sealed & Delivered Henry Collins (by mark)
in the presence of us Joseph Collins
Jeremiah Shepard Benjamin Collins
John Floyd
Mary Shepard "
Written along the side of the document was:
"Memorandum: We mutually agree that whereas there is about 2 acres of land within the bounds of Benjamin Collins over and above his share and division of true intent and meaning is that said 2 acres being near the saw mill in Lynn shall be common for free use of all parties hereunto subscribing."
The agreement was accepted by the Judge of Probate, Bartholomew Gedney, on 22 July 1695, with all three sons appearing before the Court.
It appears from this record that these three sons amicably sorted out the grants of property left by their father in a reasonable manner. We'll likely never know if there was disagreement or enmity between them. If they did settle this amicably and equitably, then it is a tribute to their negotiating skills and sense of fairness.
The URL for this post is: http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/07/amanuensis-monday-agreement-by-sons-of.html
copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
Sunday, July 14, 2013
Best of the Genea-Blogs - 7 to 13 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:
* Copyright, Plagiarism and Citing Your Sources by Michael Hait on the Planting the Seeds blog. Michael reviews the current controversy, and has damning evidence concerning Barry Ewell in his slideshow.
* Evidence Based Genealogy by Philip Trauring on the Blood and Frogs: Jewish Genealogy and More blog. Philip reviews software that can be used to produce evidence-based genealogy results.
* Time to Name Names by Michele Simmons Lewis on the Ancestoring's Ask A Genealogist blog. Michele does on the plagiarism issue, and she's right.
* What Email Lists are Not by Harold Henderson on the Midwestern Microhistory blog. Harold reviews what genealogy-oriented email mailing lists are good for...a very useful learning tool.
* Photo Tutorial: How to Relax and Rehumidify Old Rolled Photographs and Documents by Denise Levenick on The Family Curator blog. An excellent demonstration of this process.
* The Organzied Genealogist -- How Do You Become One? Some New Resources & Tips to Help You by guest blogger Susan Petersen on Diane Richards' Upfront With NGS blog. Susan reviews the basic principles, and the website.
* MAAGI Begins!!, Midwestern African-American Genealogy Institute, Day 1 by Angela Walton-Raji on the My Ancestor's Name blog. Angela shares her experience at the MAAGI institute.
* The Midwestern African-American Genealogy Institute (MAAGI Day #1, Part 1) by Yvette Porter Moore on The Ancestors Have Spoken blog. Yvette shares her MAAGI experience.
* O come, all Ye Drama Llamas by Kerry Scott on the Clue Wagon blog. Kerry shares about the Barry Ewell case.
* Stone Boats and Whiffletrees by Judy G. Russell on The Legal Genealogist blog. Judy finds the most interesting terms in legal documents. Who knew?
* What Makes FamilySearch Family Tree Different? by James Tanner on the Genealogy's Star blog. Shhh, don't tell anybody...James says it's because it's a wiki. I think he's right.
These genea-bloggers wrote weekly pick posts and news summary posts this week:
* Follow Friday - Fab Finds for July 12, 2013 by Jana Last on Jana's Genealogy and Family History Blog.
* Follow Friday - Favorites for July 12, 2013 by Heather Kuhn Roelker on the Leaves For Trees blog.
* Friday Finds - 07/12/13 by Julie Cahill Tarr on the GenBlog blog.
* News and Blog Posts for Genealogists, July 12, 2013 by Michael J. Leclerc on the Mocavo Genealogy Blog.
* Ruth's Recommendations by Ruth Blair on The Passionate Genealogist blog.
* Saturday Serendipity (July 13, 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 Google Reader, 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-7-to-13-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:
* Copyright, Plagiarism and Citing Your Sources by Michael Hait on the Planting the Seeds blog. Michael reviews the current controversy, and has damning evidence concerning Barry Ewell in his slideshow.
* Evidence Based Genealogy by Philip Trauring on the Blood and Frogs: Jewish Genealogy and More blog. Philip reviews software that can be used to produce evidence-based genealogy results.
* Time to Name Names by Michele Simmons Lewis on the Ancestoring's Ask A Genealogist blog. Michele does on the plagiarism issue, and she's right.
* What Email Lists are Not by Harold Henderson on the Midwestern Microhistory blog. Harold reviews what genealogy-oriented email mailing lists are good for...a very useful learning tool.
* Photo Tutorial: How to Relax and Rehumidify Old Rolled Photographs and Documents by Denise Levenick on The Family Curator blog. An excellent demonstration of this process.
* The Organzied Genealogist -- How Do You Become One? Some New Resources & Tips to Help You by guest blogger Susan Petersen on Diane Richards' Upfront With NGS blog. Susan reviews the basic principles, and the website.
* MAAGI Begins!!, Midwestern African-American Genealogy Institute, Day 1 by Angela Walton-Raji on the My Ancestor's Name blog. Angela shares her experience at the MAAGI institute.
* The Midwestern African-American Genealogy Institute (MAAGI Day #1, Part 1) by Yvette Porter Moore on The Ancestors Have Spoken blog. Yvette shares her MAAGI experience.
* O come, all Ye Drama Llamas by Kerry Scott on the Clue Wagon blog. Kerry shares about the Barry Ewell case.
* Stone Boats and Whiffletrees by Judy G. Russell on The Legal Genealogist blog. Judy finds the most interesting terms in legal documents. Who knew?
* What Makes FamilySearch Family Tree Different? by James Tanner on the Genealogy's Star blog. Shhh, don't tell anybody...James says it's because it's a wiki. I think he's right.
These genea-bloggers wrote weekly pick posts and news summary posts this week:
* Follow Friday - Fab Finds for July 12, 2013 by Jana Last on Jana's Genealogy and Family History Blog.
* Follow Friday - Favorites for July 12, 2013 by Heather Kuhn Roelker on the Leaves For Trees blog.
* Friday Finds - 07/12/13 by Julie Cahill Tarr on the GenBlog blog.
* News and Blog Posts for Genealogists, July 12, 2013 by Michael J. Leclerc on the Mocavo Genealogy Blog.
* Ruth's Recommendations by Ruth Blair on The Passionate Genealogist blog.
* Saturday Serendipity (July 13, 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 Google Reader, 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-7-to-13-july-2013.html
Copyright(c) 2012, Randall J. Seaver
Saturday, July 13, 2013
Saturday Night Genealogy Fun (SNGF) - The Date Your Father Was Born
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) What day of the week was your Father born? Tell us how you found out.
2) What has happened in recorded history on your Father's birth date (day and month)? Tell us how you found out, and list five events.
3) What famous people have been born on your Father's birth date? Tell us how you found out, and list five of them.
4) Put your responses in your own blog post, in a comment on this blog post, or in a status or comment on Facebook.
Here's mine (without the "how you found out" parts):
1) My father, Frederick Walton Seaver, was born on 15 October 1911, in Fitchburg, Worcester County, Massachusetts.
That date was a Sunday.
2) These significant world events have occurred on 15 October throughout history:
* 1582 – Pope Gregory XIII implements the Gregorian calendar. In Italy, Poland, Portugal, and Spain, October 4 of this year is followed directly by October 15.
* 1815 – Napoleon I of France begins his exile on Saint Helena in the Atlantic Ocean.
* 1917 – World War I: At Vincennes outside of Paris, Dutch dancer Mata Hari is executed by firing squad for spying for the German Empire.
* 1951 – The first episode of I Love Lucy, an American television sitcom starring Lucille Ball, Desi Arnaz, Vivian Vance, and William Frawley, airs on the Columbia Broadcasting System (CBS).
* 1956 – Fortran, the first modern computer language, is shared with the coding community for the first time.
3) These famous persons were born on my father's birth date:
* 1844 – Friedrich Nietzsche, German philosopher (died 1900)
* 1908 – John Kenneth Galbraith, Canadian-American economist (died 2006)
* 1924 – Lee Iacocca, American businessman and author
* 1945 – Jim Palmer, American baseball player
Those are pretty mundane - no real heavy hitters here, and none listed for 1911 (his birth year).
4) Done. My own blog. Twitter, Favebook, Google+.
The URL for this post is: http://www.geneamusings.com/2013/07/saturday-night-genealogy-fun-sngf-date.html
Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
Surname Saturday - DAVIS (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 #631, who is Sarah DAVIS (1676-1754) [Note: the earlier great-grandmothers and 7th great-grandfathers have been covered in earlier posts].
My ancestral line back through three American generations of this DAVIS 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-????)
156. Isaac Buck (1732-????)
157. Mary Richards (1733-????)
314: Joseph Richards (1703-1748)
315. Mary Bowden (1705-????)
630. Michael Bowden, born 1673 in Lynn, Essex, Massachusetts, United States; died before 12 October 1741 in Lynn, Essex, Massachusetts, United States. He was the son of 1260. Michael Bowden and 1261. Sarah Nurse. He married 20 November 1697 in Danvers, Essex, Massachusetts, United States.
631. Sarah Davis, born 01 February 1675/76 in Lynn, Essex, Massachusetts, United States; died 01 September 1754 in Lynn, Essex, Massachusetts, United States.
Children of Michael Bowden and Sarah Davis are:
* Susanna Bowden (1699-1709)
* Francis Bowden (1701-1737), married 1735 Elizabeth Webster (1710-????)
* Sarah Bowden (1702-????), married 1724 John Riddan (1695-1756)
* Mary Bowden (1705-????), married 1726 John Richards (1703-1748)
* Martha Bowden (1705-1719)
* Hannah Bowden (1707-1753)
* John Bowden (1709-????)
* Lydia Bowden (1712-????), married 1731 Samuel Kelley (1706-????)
* Michael Bowden (1714-1761), married 1735 Hannah Hendley (1712-????)
* Ebenezer Bowden (1716-????)
* Susanna Bowden (1717-1799), married 1740 Moses Newhall (1718-1774)
* Benjamin Bowden (1721-1741).
1262. John Davis, born about 1640 in England. He married 05 October 1664 in Lynn, Essex, Massachusetts, United States.
1263. Sarah Kirtland, born 27 September 1646 in Lynn, Essex, Massachusetts, United States. She was the daughter of 2526. Phillip Kirtland and 2527. Alice.
Children of John Davis and Sarah Kirtland are:
* Sarah Davis (1665-1665)
* Sarah Davis (1667-1667)
* Mary Davis (1668-????)
* Joseph Davis (1672-1673)
* John Davis (1674-1754), married 1700 Ann Lewis (1676-????)
* Sarah Davis (1676-1754), married 1697 Michael Bowden (1673-1741)
* Ebenezer Davis (1678-????)
* Benjamin Davis (1681-????)
* Joseph Davis (1686-????)
2524. Jenkin Davis, born about 1614 in England; died 1661, probably in Lynn, Essex, Massachusetts. He married before 1640 in England.
2525. Sarah, born about 1616 in England.
Child of Jenkin Davis and Sarah is:
* John Davis (1640-????), married 1664 Sarah Kirtland (1646-????).
The only information I have about the Jenkin Davis family is from:
Alonzo Lewis and James Robinson Newhall, The History of Lynn, Essex County, Massachusetts, Including the Town of Lynnfield, Saugus, Swampscott & Nahant (Boston, Mass. : John L. Shorey, 1865).
The book has a short sketch of Jenkin Davis on page 151, which is not very complimentary.
Information about the family of John Davis was gleaned from the Lynn, Massachusetts Vital Records book, online at Archive.org and other websites.
The URL for this post is:
Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
I am in the 7th great-grandmothers, I'm up to Ancestor #631, who is Sarah DAVIS (1676-1754) [Note: the earlier great-grandmothers and 7th great-grandfathers have been covered in earlier posts].
My ancestral line back through three American generations of this DAVIS 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-????)
156. Isaac Buck (1732-????)
157. Mary Richards (1733-????)
314: Joseph Richards (1703-1748)
315. Mary Bowden (1705-????)
630. Michael Bowden, born 1673 in Lynn, Essex, Massachusetts, United States; died before 12 October 1741 in Lynn, Essex, Massachusetts, United States. He was the son of 1260. Michael Bowden and 1261. Sarah Nurse. He married 20 November 1697 in Danvers, Essex, Massachusetts, United States.
631. Sarah Davis, born 01 February 1675/76 in Lynn, Essex, Massachusetts, United States; died 01 September 1754 in Lynn, Essex, Massachusetts, United States.
Children of Michael Bowden and Sarah Davis are:
* Susanna Bowden (1699-1709)
* Francis Bowden (1701-1737), married 1735 Elizabeth Webster (1710-????)
* Sarah Bowden (1702-????), married 1724 John Riddan (1695-1756)
* Mary Bowden (1705-????), married 1726 John Richards (1703-1748)
* Martha Bowden (1705-1719)
* Hannah Bowden (1707-1753)
* John Bowden (1709-????)
* Lydia Bowden (1712-????), married 1731 Samuel Kelley (1706-????)
* Michael Bowden (1714-1761), married 1735 Hannah Hendley (1712-????)
* Ebenezer Bowden (1716-????)
* Susanna Bowden (1717-1799), married 1740 Moses Newhall (1718-1774)
* Benjamin Bowden (1721-1741).
1262. John Davis, born about 1640 in England. He married 05 October 1664 in Lynn, Essex, Massachusetts, United States.
1263. Sarah Kirtland, born 27 September 1646 in Lynn, Essex, Massachusetts, United States. She was the daughter of 2526. Phillip Kirtland and 2527. Alice.
Children of John Davis and Sarah Kirtland are:
* Sarah Davis (1665-1665)
* Sarah Davis (1667-1667)
* Mary Davis (1668-????)
* Joseph Davis (1672-1673)
* John Davis (1674-1754), married 1700 Ann Lewis (1676-????)
* Sarah Davis (1676-1754), married 1697 Michael Bowden (1673-1741)
* Ebenezer Davis (1678-????)
* Benjamin Davis (1681-????)
* Joseph Davis (1686-????)
2524. Jenkin Davis, born about 1614 in England; died 1661, probably in Lynn, Essex, Massachusetts. He married before 1640 in England.
2525. Sarah, born about 1616 in England.
Child of Jenkin Davis and Sarah is:
* John Davis (1640-????), married 1664 Sarah Kirtland (1646-????).
The only information I have about the Jenkin Davis family is from:
Alonzo Lewis and James Robinson Newhall, The History of Lynn, Essex County, Massachusetts, Including the Town of Lynnfield, Saugus, Swampscott & Nahant (Boston, Mass. : John L. Shorey, 1865).
The book has a short sketch of Jenkin Davis on page 151, which is not very complimentary.
Information about the family of John Davis was gleaned from the Lynn, Massachusetts Vital Records book, online at Archive.org and other websites.
The URL for this post is:
Copyright (c) 2013, Randall J. Seaver
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)