Treasure Chest Thursday - Post 207: Birth and Baptism Record for Hannah Rich (1824-1911) in Hilperton, Wiltshire

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

The treasure today is the Birth and Baptism Record for Hannah Rich (1824-1911) in Hilperton, Wiltshire, England, and two of her siblings:

There are entries for three children of John and Rebecca (Hill) Rich in Hilperton in 1837 on this record.  The information for each child is:

1)  No.  703

When baptized:  Feb'y 19th [1837], Born April 16th, 1824

Child's Christian Name:  Hannah Daughter of

Parent's Christian Names:  John, Rebecca

Parent's Surname:  Rich

Abode:  Hilperton

Quality, Trade or Profession:  Weaver

By Whom Ceremony Performed:  J. Bailes, Curate

2)  No.  704

When baptized:  Feb'y 19th [1837], Born March 11, 1830

Child's Christian Name:  William, Son of

Parent's Christian Names:  John, Rebecca

Parent's Surname:  Rich

Abode:  Hilperton

Quality, Trade or Profession:  Weaver

By Whom Ceremony Performed:  J. Bailes, Curate

1)  No.  705

When baptized:  Feb'y 19th [1837], Born Feb. 28, 1833

Child's Christian Name:  Samuel, Son of

Parent's Christian Names:  John, Rebecca

Parent's Surname:  Rich

Abode:  Hilperton

Quality, Trade or Profession:  Weaver

By Whom Ceremony Performed:  J. Bailes, Curate

The source citation for this entry in the Hilperton parish register book (actually the Bishop's Transcripts of the parish register) is:

Church of England, Parish Church of Hilperton (Wiltshire, England), Bishop's Transcripts, 1622-1880, "Baptisms, Marriages, Burials, 1813-1838," FHL BRITISH Microfilm 1,279,404, Item 14, unnumbered page, Baptisms: No. 703, Hannah, daughter of John and Rebecca Rich.

Hannah Rich is one of my second great-grandmothers, who married James Richman (1821-1912) in 1845 in Hilperton.  James and Rebecca Rich had 11 children, and 10 of them are in the Hilperton parish records.  These three, Hannah (born 1824), William (born 1830) and Samuel (born 1833), were baptized as children rather than infants.  It may be that John and Rebecca Rich were not members of the Church of England for some years and baptized these children in 1837 in the Church of England.

Note that the children of other parents on the page with the Rich children do not have a birth date included.

The URL for this post is:  http://www.geneamusings.com/2014/03/treasure-chest-thursday-post-207-birth.html

Copyright (c) 2014, Randall J. Seaver

William Knapp Entries in The Settlers of Beekman Patent (Dutchess County, N.Y.)

I reviewed all of my previous blog posts about William Knapp (1775-1856), born in Dutchess County, New York, and all of the comments made by readers.

In my post Possible Knapp Families in Dutchess County - Post 2: The "Nicholas Knapp Genealogy" (15 December 2011), Martin commented:

"Have you used the series the Beekman Patent? They have passed the K's so, it should have everyone listed."

I recall looking through the Knapp Family section in Volume VII of The Settlers of The Beekman Patent books at one of the local libraries some time ago, and looking for candidate families in Dutchess County for parents of my William Knapp  I recall that I didn't find any that fit "my" William Knapp.  I even wrote Possible Knapp Families in Dutchess County - Post 4: Knapps in the Settlers of the Beekman Patent.  However, I did not use the index to find all instances of the name William Knapp.

However, it's worth reviewing the books again.  I will concentrate on Volume VII (surnames Hunter to Leavens), because that is the volume with the K surnames.  

I recalled that the New England Historic Genealogical Society website (which I subscribe to), www.AmericanAncestors.org, has digitized the book pages for the first eight volumes.  A search for Knapp on the website quickly found that the Knapp Family section was from pages 591 to 610, and the index for Volume VII is on pages 1101 to 1104.  I downloaded those pages to my computer and put them in my Knapp surname file folder in a separate Beekman Patent file folder.  

Here is the index page with the listing for William Knapp names:

That's not so bad - there are a total of 8 entries for William Knapp listed.  There are also two William Knap entries.  I carefully  checked each one of them out and have listed the entries below:

*  page 597:  William Knapp is mentioned as a son of Elijah and Irine Knapp, listed in Elijah Knapp's 1820 will in Schenectady County, N.Y. (Wills, B:21).  A possible candidate.

*  page 603:  William Knap is mentioned as a son of Jonathan and Elizabeth Knap, listed in Jonathan Knapp's 1799 will in Orange County, N.Y. (Wills, C:163).  A possible candidate.

*  page 604:  William Knapp is mentioned as a son of Lebbeus Knapp, listed in the 1834 will in Rockland county, N.Y. (Wills, C:222).  A possible candidate.

*  page 610:  there are 7 entries on this page, shown below:

I can eliminate four of the entries on page 610 because they pertain to another William Knapp born later than mine, or to parents who could not be my William's parents.  The ones on the list of most interest are:

William Knapp who died in Dutchess County and left an extensive estate (Dutchess County Wills Box 1025).  A possible candidate.

William Knapp of Goshen, Orange County, N.Y. who named a son William R. Knapp in his 1817 will (Orange County Wills, F:146).  A possible candidate.

William Knapp, Jr. of Warwick, Orange County, N.Y., who named his nephew William in his 1822 will (Orange County Wills, G:130).  A possible candidate.

*  page 613:  this entry refers to an 1800 U.S. census entry for Ruleff Knickerbocker who was enumerated next to a William Knapp.  A possible candidate.

*  page 595:  William H. Knapp, son of Chauncey Knapp,  was age 13 in the 1850 U.S. census.  Not a candidate.

That's all there is!  As you can see, there are some possible candidates here for parents of my William Knapp, but several of them are outside of Dutchess County.  I will try to review those tonight and tomorrow to see what I can find.  

I don't know how complete the Settlers of the Beekman Patent book is with respect to all of the extant records for a given surname.  It appears that it found probate records in many New York counties (and even in adjacent states!) and abstracted names of heirs.  It found U.S. census records for 1790 to 1850.  It found some church baptism and marriage records, and some cemetery records.  I don't know if it found land records, so I will look at those soon.

If you have families in Dutchess County, New York, you really should review the Settlers of the Beekman Patent books.  The author , Frank J. Doherty, may have already found your target persons and provided a reference to the original records.  The complete list of available books, with links to a list of family names reviewed, is at http://www.beekmansettlers.com/.

The URL for this post is:  http://www.geneamusings.com/2014/03/william-knapp-entries-in-settlers-of.html

Copyright (c) 2014, Randall J. Seaver

Previous blog posts about this research problem include:

*  My Elusive Ancestor - William Knapp (1775-1856) (9 October 2006)
*  Possible Knapp Families in Dutchess County NY - Post 1: The 1790 U.S. Census (14 December 2011)
*  Possible Knapp Families in Dutchess County - Post 2: The "Nicholas Knapp Genealogy" (15 December 2011)
*  Follow-Up Friday - The William Knapp Search (16 December 2011)
*  Possible Knapp Families in Dutchess County - Post 3: Given Names of the Children (19 December 2011)

*  Possible Knapp Families in Dutchess County - Post 4: Knapps in the Settlers of the Beekman Patent (20 December 2011)

*  Knapp Entries in Probate Records for Dutchess County, New York - Post 1: Will Books (25 March 2014)

New Videos on Ancestry.com YouTube Channel

I try to stay up on the latest information on Ancestry.com and appreciate all of the social media connections posted by Ancestry.com on the Internet.

Ancestry.com continues to add instructional and informational videos to their YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/user/AncestryCom).

The recently added videos include:

*  Updating Your Ancestry.com Profile Page and Other Account Settings

*  Googling Your Family History

*  Genealogy To-Do Lists

*  How Irish Are You?

*  Genealogy Spring Cleaning

*  State Research Guides and Place Pages

*  What's New at Ancestry.com: March 2014 Edition

*  Five Minute Find: Sending Documents Home From the Library

*  Five Minute Find:  Start Small, Go Big -- How Sliders Can Improve Your Searching

*   Five Minute Find: Finding Irish Origins

*  Five Minute Find: One Trick That Will Improve Your Search For Vital Records

*  Correcting Mistakes in Your Family Tree

*  Some Genealogy Records Have No Names

*  AncestryDNA:  Contacting and Collaborating With Cousins

*  Love Stories in Your Family Tree

*  Five Minute Finds: Favorite Genealogy Myths Debunked

*  Highlights from RootsTech 2014

*  African-American Family History Research:  Breaking the 1870 Wall

*  What's New at Ancestry.com: February 2014 Edition

*  Soundex, Wildcards and Other Search Options

*  Understanding Baptismal Records

That's just in the last two months!  There are a lot more on the Ancestry.com YouTube Channel that may help you work in Ancestry.com and find information about genealogical topics.

I like the Ancestry.com videos because they are relatively short (5 to 30 minutes) and I can listen/watch them while doing other tasks.

There are, of course, other online webinars and videos available on other sites.

The URL for this post is:  http://www.geneamusings.com/2014/03/new-videos-on-ancestrycom-youtube.html

Copyright (c) 2014, Randall J. Seaver

The Lyle and Emily Carringer House in Point Loma - Post 300 for (Not So) Wordless Wednesday

I'm posting family photographs from my collection on Wednesdays, but they won't be Wordless Wednesday posts like others do - I simply am incapable of having a wordless post.

Here is a photograph of an ancestral home from the Seaver//Carringer family collection handed down by my mother in the 1988 to 2002 time period:

This photograph shows the Lyle and Emily Carringer home at 825 Harbor View Place on Point Loma in San Diego soon after it was ready for occupancy, probably in November 1951.  The landscaping is installed, the roof is on, and the external walls are finished.

Look at the million dollar view.  It sat about 100 feet above sea level less than half a mile from San Diego Bay, with a view from the airport to the north, downtown San Diego and beyond to the east, and North Island Naval Station to the southeast.  As soon as they moved into the house, my grandparents bought binoculars so that they could see the numbers and names on the ships entering or leaving San Diego Bay.  

The street coming down the hill to the house is Lucinda Street, which has a high slope.  The view from the top of the street is spectacular, but not from the houses along the street since they are not pointing towards the city.  

I loved this house, and not only because of the view.  It was fun to play in and around as a boy (I was 8 in 1951).  My brother and I had a lot of fun finding hiding places around the house, running up and down the streets, and going exploring up the hills and down the hills.  Unfortunately, there were no other children in this neighborhood, so we made up our own games.

The URL for this post is:  http://www.geneamusings.com/2014/03/the-lyle-and-emily-carringer-house-in.html

Copyright (c) 2014, Randall J. Seaver

Knapp Entries in Probate Records for Dutchess County, New York - Post 1: Will Books

I haven't done a lot of work on my elusive William Knapp (1775-1856) recently.  He was born in Dutchess County, New York according to his death record in Newton, Sussex County, New Jersey.  William Knapp married Sarah Cutter in Woodbridge, New Jersey in about 1804, and had 11 children between 1805 and 1831.

I don't know who his parents were, although one of the Knapp books says they were Shubael and Rebecca (Mead) Knapp, and that William was born in 1786 (which doesn't match other age data from the 1850 U.S. census and the death record).

My To-Do list includes searching for potential parents in New York probate records, so I spent several hours doing that today.

1)  I went into FamilySearch and found the New York Probate Records, 1629-1971 collection in the list of historical records.  This is a "Browse Only" collection, so I clicked on the link to "Browse through 14,045,812 images."  That opened the list of Counties that are in this collection:

2)  Dutchess County is on the list.  Here is the top of the list of books or volumes available for Dutchess County:

There are several record collections on this list that might have records that name my William Knapp as the son of a Knapp father or mother, including:

*  General Index, 1721-1862, and Ancient Documents, 1721-1862 (in voulmes by document number)

*  Will Index, 1790-1905, plus Will Books from 1796-1903.

*  Probates, 1793-1868 in packet number order (I don't see an index).

*  Letters of administration and testamentary, 1787-1865

These were all included in the Family History Library Catalog for Dutchess County, New York.

It may take me some time to explore all of these, so I'll report on my first foray now and report on the rest later.

3)  I chose to look at the "Will Index, 1790-1905" collection first, since that has the most promise of a Knapp naming a son William Knapp. 

I found the K surnames in the Will Index, and saved them to my computer:

I figured that William's parents must have died by 1862 (if he was born in 1775, then the parents were born before 1760, and doubt that they lived to over 102).

The "likely candidates" from the list are:

*  Benjamin Knapp, 1788, Volume A, page 474
*  Israel Knapp, 1797, Volume B, page 49
*  Nehemiah Knapp, 1806, Volume C, page 600
*  Phineas Knapp, 1812, Volume E, page 217
*  Elizah Knapp, 1822, Volume G, page 336
*  William X. Knapp, 1852, Volume R, page 240
*  Asa Knapp, 1852, Volume R, page 242
*  Isaac Knapp, 1859, Volume U, page 268
*  Amos T. Knapp, 1862, Volume V, page 71

Those are fairly easy to find and save and read, and I've worked through the first five of them, which are, in my estimation, the most likely candidates from this collection.  I'll check the rest of them in the days ahead.

4)  For example, the Will of Nehemiah Knapp in 1806 in Volume C, page 600 looks like this (one screen shown, full will on three pages):

The will of Nehemiah Knapp named his wife Jane, his two sons Isaac Knapp and Enos Knapp, and his daughter Abigail Hill in the will.  He also named several grandsons, but none were a William Knapp.

5)  Unfortunately, I did not find a reference in the ones I checked for William Knapp as an heir in the wills.  So I can cross those that I have checked out off my list of potential parents.

It could be that there is a probate packet for more Knapps that did not have wills, and there is the Probate packet collection to investigate further, plus the Letters Testamentary collection and the Ancient documents collection.

That was a fun excursion into these probate records, but it was fruitless as far as finding parents for William Knapp (1775-1856).  However, I was able to eliminate five possible Knapp families from my target list.

I will look in the Probate Packets files next.

The URL for this post is:

Copyright (c) 2014, Randall J. Seaver

Previous blog posts about this problem include:

*  My Elusive Ancestor - William Knapp (1775-1856) (9 October 2006)
*  Possible Knapp Families in Dutchess County NY - Post 1: The 1790 U.S. Census (14 December 2011)
*  Possible Knapp Families in Dutchess County - Post 2: The "Nicholas Knapp Genealogy" (15 December 2011)
*  Follow-Up Friday - The William Knapp Search (16 December 2011)
*  Possible Knapp Families in Dutchess County - Post 3: Given Names of the Children

*  Possible Knapp Families in Dutchess County - Post 4: Knapps in the Settlers of the Beekman Patent

More on Norwegian Names, Church Records, and Sources

Reader Linda has asked several questions and made comments on my blog post Crafting a Norway Church Record Digital Image Source Citation in Family Tree Maker 2014 (18 March 2014), and I'd rather answer them in a blog post than in a comment to the earlier post.  She asked:

1)  On another note, I see that you list name as Sjur Torgerson and birth location as Tungeteigens, Voss, Hordaland, Norway. I am assuming that Tungeteigens is the name of the farm where Sjur was born. I had followed your pattern of patronymic as last name for my ancestors, but then at www.geni.com/projects/Norwegian-Ancestry-information/11383 under Norwegian Naming Practices, p. 2, the directions say to use the farm name at birth as the surname. Hmmm...so many questions.

My response:  Your assumption is correct - I used the patronymic name (the father's first name) as the last name and Tungeteigens was the farm where the parents were residing, and presumably where Sjur was born, according to the Voss parish record book.  Therefore, Sjur Torgerson was the son of Torger Olson and Anna Sjursdtr.  I did this for all of my Norwegian research, at least until permanent surnames were chosen in the 1870-1900 time frame.

I was not aware of the Geni.com naming practice article, nor the Geni.com Wiki about Scandinavian Patronymic names and naming practices at  http://wiki.geni.com/index.php/Patronymics#Scandinavian_Patronymics.  I went and looked at the FamilySearch Research Wiki article on Norway (https://familysearch.org/learn/wiki/en/Norway) and checked the links and there is nothing as detailed as the Geni.com Wiki article.  

There is general information on how to do research in Norway in  https://familysearch.org/learn/wiki/en/Starting_Research_in_Norway on the FamilySearch Research Wiki.

As the Geni.com article notes, the family may change residences and have children on different farms.  However, I haven't seen the surname change due to a farm name change in the church records - the parents are always named using their patronymics.  If patronymics are used consistently, all of the children for a couple will have the same surname.  When they marry, they use their patronymics.  So maybe I'm doing it wrong according to a seemingly authoritative article.

2)  I see in this post that you included more specific information in the Source field. In the previous post regarding Sjur you had a more generic source and the specifics were in the citation detail section. Have you changed your mind regarding this? I had an issue with typing the Norwegian letter ø in my Source information that shows up as A with a line above it in the reference note. Should I just type "o" instead of ø and such?  

My response:  I did change some of the specifics a bit because, after thinking about it a bit, I realized that the source citation I had done before was not easily followed to the record.  I tried to improve the "bread-crumb trail."

Some of the software programs don't permit the unique "Scandinavian (and other) characters" with diacriticals to be used in their fairly primitive note and source editors.  I didn't notice that when I did the source citations.  The A with a line above it is misleading - I would use the "o" for the ø character.  The software companies should fix that, though.  

3)  I am struggling with patronymic names. I see that you list name as Sjur Torgerson and birth location as Tungeteigens, Voss, Hordaland, Norway. I am assuming that Tungeteigens is the name of the farm where Sjur was born. His parents are listed with patronymic surnames, but his son is listed as Torger Sjursen Leland. Do you have a recommendation for when to use farm name surname and when to use patronymic surname? This is making me crazy, because I like to be consistent.

My response:  I like to be consistent too.  The Sjur Torgerson family used patronymics in Norway, including the birth of Torger Sjursen in Voss in 1851.  They migrated to Wisconsin in the 1850s, and used the patronymics up until about 1880.   Torger Sjursen's marriage in 1876 used patronymics, but his 1880 U.S. Census record and all other records after 1880 used the adopted farm name, Leland, and his children used Leland after 1880.  

I treated this like a name change.  They were "directed" by Norway to select a surname and many families chose the father's surname, but some adopted a farm name, an occupation name, or something else.  In this case, Sjur Torgerson's brother Ivar Torgerson married in 1838 to Kari Larsdtr of Liland farm in Norway, and both Ivar and Sjur adopted Leland as the surname in the 1880 time frame for some reason.  I guess it was better than being called Sjur Tungeteigens or Sjur Molster, etc.  I'm glad they did - or my wife would have been a Tungeteigens!

4)  Thank you, Linda for the questions and comments.  I'm not a Norwegian research expert - just a researcher with some experience and I did not draw up a list of standard practices for dealing with the names when I did the research.  Now i'm struggling with the need for consistency in the patronymic suffixes (I've used -sen and -son, and -datter and -dtr, interchangeably it seems).

5)  If readers have other articles about these issues, please let us know about them.

The URL for this post is:  http://www.geneamusings.com/2014/03/more-on-norwegian-names-church-records.html

Copyright (c) 2014, Randall J. Seaver

Tuesday's Tip: Catch Up With Genealogy News on Geneatopia

This week's Tuesday's Tip is:  Catch up to the weekly genealogy news by listening to Geneatopia podcasts or by reading the news script provided by Patty Roy.

The Geneatopia home page (above) has links to "Genealogy News" (where you can listen or download the podcasts) and "Transcripts" (where you can read the script for each podcast.

I clicked on the "Genealogy News" link and the page provided a list of the available episodes, with the most recent episode at the top of the list:

On the right-hand side of the page on the screen above there are links to get the direct podcast feed, listen to the podcast on iTunes, or listen on Stitcher.

Each podcast has a link to "Read more" which provides a link to listen to the podcast in a new window or to download it to your computer for listening later.

The three podcasts that I listened to were 15 to 30 minutes in length, and feature Patty discussing the news items for the week.

On the "Read more" screen above, there are links for the news items that Patty discusses during the podcast.  She also provides some "coming soon" items such as webinars, conferences, chats, etc.

At the bottom of the screens above, there are Tags to keywords that can be clicked on to see when that topic has been discussed in other podcasts.

I clicked on the "Transcripts" link and saw the list of podcast transcripts:

Each transcript is text of the items that Patty discusses on the podcast.  A reader can easily find items of interest by reviewing the transcript.

Since I learn best by reading and doing rather than hearing something said, I prefer the transcripts.

After reviewing a number of the transcripts, I learned quite a bit about what has happened in the genealogy world over the past few months.

Patty Roy is providing a valuable service to genealogists - she has organized and archived genealogical history in the 29 episodes (from July 2013 to the present) to date.  This is a worthy endeavor, I think, and I know I'll be a frequent reader and listener.

The URL for this post is:  http://www.geneamusings.com/2014/03/tuesdays-tip-catch-up-with-genealogy.html

Copyright (c) 2014, Randall J. Seaver

Revisiting and Debating Ancestry.com's "Primary Search" Features

I had several challenging and helpful comments on my blog post Ancestry Drops "Old Search" - Hysteria Ensues (posted 7 March 2014).  Here are some of them, with my comments, if needed, added:

1)  Anonymous commented:  "With the old search, I search for a person in a particular census in a particular county just by first name or by birthplace. This was invaluable when looking for relatives whose names were misspelled. Now when I search for Michael in Jones County, AR, I get results from Australia and Wyoming. My biggest beef is getting a kazillion hits in Las Vegas newspapers when I specifically narrow the search to another city and I can't skip forward through them, I can only go page by page. I plan to unsubscribe because there's no point in having the subscription if I can't narrow the results to ones that might be pertinent to me."

Tessa responded with:  "Wondering about Anonymous' comment as there is no reference to a Jones County in Arkansas. When I do that search in Ancestry, it clearly tells me where there are Jones Counties AND if I am asking for records in the United States and/or Census records, I can easily limit it to just those records. It does not bring back data from Wyoming or Australia. What was the exact search Anonymous was doing - I think some of this might be user error rather than Ancestry error."

Paul K. Graham tried to help with:  "By recreating the search, I think there are two thing that Anonymous needs to be aware of. There are a lot of valid argument for what's good and bad, but this is the reality of what's been implemented.

"First, getting hits from all over the world results from choosing 'Use default settings' with the place name. If you 'Restrict to this place exactly' the results will only be for that place. I personally use 'restrict to county/adjacent counties' most often. Make sure to use the drop-down list to pick your place, rather than typing it free-form.

"Second, having to browse page by page through all the results means Anonymous was using the 'Records' view in the results area. If Anonymous clicked on the 'Category' tab at the top of the results, they would see the results organized by record type and database.

"Even in the Records view, you can use the filters on the left side to drill down into specific record types.

"One of the things I don't like is that the Category view is sorted by number of matches. That means if you don't search exact place, the irrelevant matches from big collections float to the top. Using exact place removes that problem.

"I liked the old Category view because it could be sorted alphabetically by database title. The new system doesn't give you any choice in that. It's frustrating, but you can work around it by learning how to create more targeted searches."

My comments:  I think that Paul is exactly right with his two observations - restricting a place name to a country, or state, or county will eliminate the matches from other countries, and using the "Category" tab will sort the matches by record type and database.  I also like Paul's suggestion that the Category tab be enabled to sort alphabetically by database title.  

I tried to help Anonymous out with hias search for Michael in Jones County.  Here is my search box with "Match all items exactly" checked, with Michael as a First name, with no last name, and with the "Any Event" location with Jones County, Georgia about to be selected:

And the results, in "Category" tab format, are:

I don't understand what Anonymous was trying to say about Newspaper matches.  Was that a search for "Michael" or was it a search for another name?  When I receive Ancestry.com Newspapers, each page with my search criteria appears on the match list and I can look at one, come back to the match list, and look at the next one.  

2)  Lynn David said:  "I have tried to reproduce results with the exact same parameters and I have gotten completely different returns. Moreover, I cannot get similar returns for past searches which provided information which was instrumental in discovering European origins for an immigrant ancestor. I can't even get some search returns for my own public trees. Christa Cowen better have a good talk in mind to explain what we might be doing wrong."

My comments:  Lynn may have the "Family Trees" unchecked in his search box.  I don't know.

I did a similar task as Lynn last year, knowing that this would be an issue soon, and received results with the exact same parameters and got very similar results.  My blog posts that covered this are:

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

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

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

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

I summarized my conclusions from all of the comparisons in Ancestry Drops "Old Search" - Hysteria Ensues.

In one of the posts, I noted:  "The point here is to show that 'New Search' finds essentially the same results as 'Old Search' does, no matter what search field parameters are used.  It's imperative for the user to understand what search field parameters they used.  If the user is not getting expected results, then they should look critically at their search field parameters.

"The fix for the 'Exact Match' problem noted above is to use wild cards for the names (to handle name spelling problems) and to narrow the search using birth years, or death years, or birth or death places, or relative names, etc. in your search."

3)  Reader ~B noted:  "I don't have a big problem with them changing things as long as it's not just change for changes sake. I'd rather see them put the resources into completing databases they've been supposedly going to complete for a long time now.

"I do however object when they change things and it doesn't work properly. I don't know how many problems there are with the new search, but I know some aren't getting results when they did with the old. It's like when they went to the new viewer. While it was in beta problems were pointed out time and again. They acknowledged it was a problem but forced use of the new viewer anyway and still haven't fixed the problems although they say they will someday."

My comments:  Concerning the first issue, can someone point to incomplete databases on Ancestry.com?  How do you know that they are not complete?  Is there a list somewhere?

On the second issue, I'm not aware of problems with the new viewer.  Can you describe what they are?  Have they been addressed in the Ancestry/RootsWeb message board system?

I am concerned with the Slider problems that were introduced at the same time as "Old Search" was eliminated.  It seemed to me that the sliders often did not reflect my selections on the search form and the results were inconsistent.  This may have caused some of the problems and complaints that :Old Search" users had when they had to use "New Search."  I  haven't received any indication that the Slider problems have been addressed or fixed from Ancestry.com, although they told me that they were aware of the problems and were working on them.

4)  Anonymous said:  "New search makes me furious. It's like shooting with .000 buckshot. One pellet may hit the mark, but in the meantime you have to wade through thousands of useless bits of info. When I say I want to search the United States, I want to search the United States, not Canada and England as well. Likewise, when I say I want to search a state, I want to search that state and not get results for ever other state in the country. Old search was bad about that, too. 

"New search seems designed specifically to impress everyone with the size of it its database, not to give useful information. 

"New Search has rendered the way i prefer to search virtually useless. I search individual databases, and access to those are severely limited on New Search.  New search is geared to those interested in gathering names and not to actually gathering information.   Pray God new search is short lived."

My comments:  You can select one country to search for records, and even select one state and one county.  You need to use the Advanced Search form to do so - it's at http://search.ancestry.com/search/ (the "Search" tab).   Old search had the same feature.

The size of the "database" didn't change when "Old Search" was dropped and "New Search" was made "Primary Search."  Both search engines searched the same databases - all 31,000 plus of them.  

You can find matches in individual databases in the "Category" tab on the search results page.  It looks just like what was in "Old Search"  when you did "Exact" matches.  See my screen shot above.

Ancestry.com calls THE present search function "Primary Search" rather than "New Search."  We all had five years to learn how to use it.  We also had warnings that "Old Search" was going to be eliminated.  

I think that "Primary Search" is geared to all researchers who want to find records for their ancestral families.  Everything they've done has been to target records in places in time frames for searchers.  I think they've done a great job of it (well, except for the Sliders!).  However, you have to understand all of the features and options that are offered, and that takes some time to learn and master.  

5)  Reader Laura captured my thoughts wonderfully, saying:  "When new search was added, I started using it.

"The deletion of the old Search has no effect on me as I am already used to the new search because I am already familiar with the new and now like it better than the old search with the improvements that have been made.

"I try to view change in anything as an opportunity to learn something new. Life is too short to go through it frustrated because of changes."

Amen!!

The URL for this post is:  http://www.geneamusings.com/2014/03/revisiting-and-debating-ancestrycoms.html

Copyright (c) 2014, Randall J. Seaver

CVGS Spring Seminar on Saturday, 29 March, Features Jean Wilcox Hibben - Register Now!

The Chula Vista Genealogical Society Spring Seminar on March 29th is still open for reservations and we have an interesting ‘menu’ planned for you. 

Please mark Saturday, March 29 on your calendar and plan to attend and learn all sorts of ways to improve your genealogy research, have some fun, AND enjoy a catered lunch. We’ll have drawings for great prizes, vendors and expert speakers. 

The popular and knowledgeable Jean Wilcox Hibben will offer four presentations, with additional talks by her husband Butch Hibben.

 Jean’s first talk will be “This is NOT Your Grandma's Genealogy: Making the Transition from Paper to Electronic Record-Keeping.” Are you a bit intimidated by the thought of organizing and storing all your research on the computer or ‘in the cloud’? Are you still stuck with boxes and boxes of paper? Jean will give you tips to convince you that modern technology is, indeed, your friend. She’ll discuss the advantages and disadvantages of computer over paper and will cover what to you need to know to transition away from total paper record keeping. Butch Hibben will discuss how to use Smart Phone technology for those interested in portable genealogy. He will also present his popular Living Legacy Project and be will be available throughout the day to share more information.

 The second morning session will be Jean’s presentation of "Elisabeth: The Story of a German Immigrant." Jean’s novelization of her great great grandmother’s life is full of drama, love and history. Her narrative is a compelling picture of American history and will deal with topics such as the Civil War, law, and immigration.  The book will also be for sale at the seminar.

After lunch, Jean will present "Lessons Learned from Genealogy Roadshow."  Remember how the TV show made genealogical research look so easy? Jean shares with us how developing stories for a television show means having a minimum of time to gather together a wealth of family history, and how we can use those methods to make an interesting narrative of our family. How does one record lead to the next, and what alternate resources are available when one is unable to travel to other locations? 

Jean’s final presentation will be "Up Close and Personal," a discussion of suggestions for doing research where our ancestors lived and died. This will include travel tips, hints for cemetery visits, contacting libraries and societies in advance, planning interviews of living relatives, and post-visit “debriefing” and organization. If there is time, attendees will be encouraged to share their personal experiences.

It will be an informative and entertaining day, so register now on our website (http://cvgenealogy.org/). You may pay by check or credit card - $45 for CVGS members, $50 for non-members.  

So sign up now, before you forget! And remember, this is our big fundraiser for high school scholarships. We will have a drawing for a deluxe kitchen accessories basket too (have you bought your tickets yet?).   There will be door prizes and opportunity drawings also.

Come join us for our “Recipe for Genealogy” seminar!

The URL for this post is:  http://www.geneamusings.com/2014/03/cvgs-spring-seminar-on-saturday-29.html

Amanuensis Monday - Post 211: 1856 Deed of Land from Amos Underhill to Deloss Underhill in Aurora, Erie County, New York

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

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

The subject today is the deed by Amos Underhill selling land in Aurora, Erie County, New York to Deloss Underhill in 1856 [starts on the bottom half of the right-hand deed record on the first image below]:

[and continues in the top part of the left-hand page below]

Here is my transcription of this entry (handwritten portions in italics) in Erie County, New York, Land Records, Liber 196, Pages 459-460 (accessed in the "New York, Land Records, 1630-1975" collection on https://FamilySearch.org):

[page 459]

1  Deed

2  This Indenture made the nineteenth day of April one thousand eight hundred 
3  and fifty-six Between Amos Underhill of the Town of Aurora in the County
4  of Erie in the State of New York of the first part and Deloss Underhill of the
5  same place of the second part Witnesseth:  that the said party of the first part
6  in consideration of the sum of five hundred Dollars to him duly paid has sold
7  and by these presents does grant and convey to the said party of the second part
8  the equal undivided one half of all that certain piece or parcel of land Situate lying &
9  being in the town of Aurora.  Known and distinguished as the East part of
10 lot number twenty one in said town Bounded as follows.  East by lot number
11 thirteen twenty-one chains Seventy five links. South by lot number twenty
12 twenty-nine chains eighty three links.  West by a line parallel to the last
13 bounds of said lot number twenty one twenty one chains seventy five links
14 and North by land conveyed by Deed to Bryan Hawley December 18th 1834
15 twenty nine chains eighty three links.  containing Sixty five Acres
16 be the same more or less.  With the appurtenances and all the estate title and
17 interest of the said party of the first part therein.  And the said Amos Under-
18 hill does hereby covenant and agree that at the delivery hereof he is well

[page 460]

19 Siezed of the said premises of an estate in fee Simple therein.  Also that
20 he has the power to sell and convey the same as hereby intended also that the
21 same is free from encumbrance.  also that he will Warrant and Defend
22 the above granted premises in quiet and peaceable possession of the said party
23 of the second part his heirs and assigns forever.

24 In Witness Whereof the said party of the first part has hereunto Set his hand
25 and Seal the day and year first above written.
26                                                                                   Amos Underhill

27 Jas C. Paul J.P.
28 State of New York  }  ss
29 Erie County           }     On this 19th day of April A D 1856 before me the subscriber
30 personally appeared Amos Underhill to me known to be the same person described
31 in & who executed the above instrument and acknowledged that he executed the same.
32                                                                                James C. Paul
                                                                                                    J.P.
33 Recorded August 20th 1859 at 10-1/4 AM
34                                S.E. Adams  L.S. clk

The source citation for this deed is:

"New York, Land Records, 1630-1975," Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org : accessed 10 December 2012), digital image of clerk's copy, "Erie County, N.Y. Deeds, 1858-1868, Volumes 196-197," Volume 196, Pages 459-460 (images 234-235), Amos Underhill to Deloss Underhill, written 19 April 1856; from FHL US/CAN Microfilm 0,590,106, citing original records at Erie County, N.Y. courthouse, Buffalo, N.Y.

Amos and Mary (Metcalf) Underhill are my fourth great-grandparents.  They came to Erie County, New York before the War of 1812.  This is not the first land that they owned in Erie County, New York. They bought this land in 1834.  Deloss Underhill (1834-1864) was the oldest son of their son Cyrus Metcalf Underhill (1804-1841).  The other half of this land was described in the deed transcribed last week in Amanuensis Monday - Post 210: 1860 Deed of Land from Amos Underhill to Delos Underhill in Aurora, Erie County, New York.

The URL for this post is:  http://www.geneamusings.com/2014/03/amanuensis-monday-post-211-1856-deed-of.html

Copyright (c) 2014, Randall J. Seaver