Note: I live in the US, and so this post is US-centered. Different laws apply in different countries.
The recent discussions on copyright, due to their origin, have mostly focused on "fair use" and technology's impact on copyright law. But if a work is in the public domain, it is free to be used in any way anyone likes, without the need to get anyone's permission.
In genealogy we read source material of various age, and the issue of public domain can arise. There is some confusion though about what is in the public domain, due partially to recent court decisions revising the code, and partially due to different laws being in effect depending upon when a work was written, and where.
I don't work somewhere that understanding copyright law is part of the job description, but a colleague a couple days ago told me he was certain that it no longer mattered when the author died, it was a flat 95 years after creation. This is wrong, but it is understandable why they might think this. There has been a lot of media about corporate copyright, and work-for-hire now lasts for 95 years. Another colleague in the discussion claimed that Disney is actually trying to argue that some of their characters were created by Walt Disney, and not by the company, so that the clock starts when Disney died in 1966. I haven't verified this, but it sounds like a smart business move, for if they are successful, Mickey Mouse won't be public domain until after 2036 (1966+70), instead of 2022 (1928+95). Yielding an extra 14 years of profit.
The Intellectual Property Officer at Cornell University creates an annual chart detailing what is in the public domain as of January 1st of the current year. It depends on factors such as whether the work was published, or unpublished, with notice or without, where, and when. But the chart does a great job in my opinion of simplifying it as much as it can be simplified, and still cover all contingencies.
Note: all my comments regarding length of copyright terms in this post come after reviewing the chart linked above. It's been 12 years since I had any formalized training on copyright law, and that was only one college course, though I do try to follow news stories about related issues.
Friday, September 14, 2007
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
9/11
I didn't think to write a post on 9/11 here this morning since I don't think about the day in relationship to genealogy, and I have another blog where I post my thoughts on all other topics.
But after reading Randy, Miriam and Jasia,
I decided to write a few thoughts.
First, I refuse to listen to Alan Jackson's song despite Miriam's suggestion. I didn't hear it played today, but I've heard it so much, I don't need to listen to it, and it has always bugged me. I like country music generally, and Alan Jackson has some good songs, but I can't stand the idea of bragging about not knowing the difference between Iraq and Iran. You can tell me the narrator of the song isn't bragging, but he's setting himself up as the 'common man' because he is ignorant of world geography and events, but somehow the fact that he is 'common' and ignorant is supposed to make his opinions more 'real' or 'valid' and that seems like bragging to me about his ignorance. The recent American phenomenon of actually turning knowledge and learning into something 'bad' and ignorance into something 'good' is very disturbing to me. I would much rather elect a politician - for any office - who spoke with intelligence than one who I felt I could sit down and have a beer with. End of Soapbox.
I won't bother anyone with any more of my political thoughts about the past six years.
9/11: I remember where I was. I was at work. And being at an investment brokerage there was a television playing the Financial News Network in the hallway all day. And every hour or so I'd get up and spend 10 minutes in the hallway with a group of others and see if any more news had come in.
Here's a poem I wrote shortly after 9/11, which I think is appropriate to post here:
Two Photographs
Looking at a photo
on my office cubicle shelf
taken 25 years ago
of my mother, brother, sister and I
standing at the Statue of Liberty,
my sister wearing a bicentennial tshirt,
and the New York skyline in the background
with the World Trade Center
three years old to my seven
I recollect another photo
from my grandfather’s collection
of him sitting on a horse
in front of a partially completed
Mount Rushmore.
© 2001 John Newmark
(Note: I had assumed the date of the photograph from my sister's tshirt, but after writing the poem, I showed it to my parents who told me that the picture was actually taken in 1977. My sister just liked the shirt enough to wear it a year later. I didn't change the ages in the poem, as I preferred the sound of the ages I had. The details in a poem don't always have to be 100% true.)
But after reading Randy, Miriam and Jasia,
I decided to write a few thoughts.
First, I refuse to listen to Alan Jackson's song despite Miriam's suggestion. I didn't hear it played today, but I've heard it so much, I don't need to listen to it, and it has always bugged me. I like country music generally, and Alan Jackson has some good songs, but I can't stand the idea of bragging about not knowing the difference between Iraq and Iran. You can tell me the narrator of the song isn't bragging, but he's setting himself up as the 'common man' because he is ignorant of world geography and events, but somehow the fact that he is 'common' and ignorant is supposed to make his opinions more 'real' or 'valid' and that seems like bragging to me about his ignorance. The recent American phenomenon of actually turning knowledge and learning into something 'bad' and ignorance into something 'good' is very disturbing to me. I would much rather elect a politician - for any office - who spoke with intelligence than one who I felt I could sit down and have a beer with. End of Soapbox.
I won't bother anyone with any more of my political thoughts about the past six years.
9/11: I remember where I was. I was at work. And being at an investment brokerage there was a television playing the Financial News Network in the hallway all day. And every hour or so I'd get up and spend 10 minutes in the hallway with a group of others and see if any more news had come in.
Here's a poem I wrote shortly after 9/11, which I think is appropriate to post here:
Two Photographs
Looking at a photo
on my office cubicle shelf
taken 25 years ago
of my mother, brother, sister and I
standing at the Statue of Liberty,
my sister wearing a bicentennial tshirt,
and the New York skyline in the background
with the World Trade Center
three years old to my seven
I recollect another photo
from my grandfather’s collection
of him sitting on a horse
in front of a partially completed
Mount Rushmore.
© 2001 John Newmark
(Note: I had assumed the date of the photograph from my sister's tshirt, but after writing the poem, I showed it to my parents who told me that the picture was actually taken in 1977. My sister just liked the shirt enough to wear it a year later. I didn't change the ages in the poem, as I preferred the sound of the ages I had. The details in a poem don't always have to be 100% true.)
Wait for it...
(ZombieNews Central) St. Louis - Mugged by his long dead great-great-great grandfather, who was recently reanimated, local man, Charles Whitley started to chase him. His ancestor was quicker than zombies have been rumored to be and a chase began. Passing a policeman, Charles shouted, “My ancestor stole my life savings. So I’m taking after my ancestor!”
Monday, September 10, 2007
Found this in a fortune cookie...
Confucius say: You may be my descendant
(There's probably something offensive about the way I phrased that, but I eat at Chinese restaurants a lot)
Apparently there is a large database of every descendant of Confucius. The last time it was updated was in the 1930s.
I think it's good news that they decided to include everyone in the database, including female descendants, this time around.
On some other blog recently I was reading that some people claim everyone is descended from Charlemagne. I found that doubtful. Charlemagne died in 814. Confucius died in 479 BCE. If Confucius only has 3 million descendants, Charlemagne must have less. Right?
(There's probably something offensive about the way I phrased that, but I eat at Chinese restaurants a lot)
Apparently there is a large database of every descendant of Confucius. The last time it was updated was in the 1930s.
I think it's good news that they decided to include everyone in the database, including female descendants, this time around.
On some other blog recently I was reading that some people claim everyone is descended from Charlemagne. I found that doubtful. Charlemagne died in 814. Confucius died in 479 BCE. If Confucius only has 3 million descendants, Charlemagne must have less. Right?
Privacy in Texas
Several discussions on legal and ethical issues lately. As a newcomer to the genealogical community, I don't know how common this is. I have come upon another one that's troubling me.
Last night, doing some research on a surname in Texas I came across the Ancestry databases of their birth, death and marriage indexes. Several states have their death indexes online. This can be useful. Missouri even has their death certificates online - up until 1956. But they stop with certificates less than 50 years. They have no index for recent deaths either. The St. Louis Public Library has an index for Post Disptach obituaries that isn't complete, but when it is, will be up-to-present. This doesn't trouble me much, since all the people in the index are deceased.
But indexes of births and marriages for people who are still living? The Texas birth index at Ancestry is for 1903-1997. The marriage index is for 1814-1909 and 1966-2002. If I had been born in Texas, I'd be on it, as would my parents, and grandparents. The birth index gives names of both parents, with maiden name for the mother. Combined with the marriage index, this provides an easy reference to track the generations. There is a large gap in the marriage index, but still, while the census stops at 1930, if the family remains in Texas, you can pretty much keep on going until the current generation of parents. And then at several phonebook websites (Or on Google if you figure out the city they live in) you can probably find the phone number of the living generations. And give them a call and say, Hi, I'm a cousin.
It certainly might not be advisable to start out the conversation that way. And you might do better trying to find their address and writing a "blind inquiry" letter to them. (Uncle Hiram has some good advice on that.) It's way too easy to hang up a phone. But Texas certainly makes it easy. I'm not sure how many other states do this. Randy at GeneaMusings back in February suggested California was the only other one. Chicago (Cook County) recently announced it is putting a lot of their vitals online - with an estimated date of arrival in January, but I don't know if this will include recent vitals.
He also asks for input on the privacy issue. I didn't see his post back then (see first paragraph) but I'm giving it now, I guess. I don't like it.
Well, that is, looking at it from the perspective of somebody tracking me down - online - within a couple hours of fairly easy research - if I don't want to be tracked down that easily. I don't have to worry about that, I don't live in Texas.
But I do have some Texas relatives. I now know their names. I won't mention the surname. And while I'm not about to pick up the phone, I think I'd be silly not to write a couple letters. Gives them the option of not replying. I might even play 'dumb' and say that I think 'we may' be related. Don't want to scare them by telling them that I *know* we are. Of course, I'd be surprised if this hasn't been discussed in Texas newspapers, and they know full well how easy it is. So they might see right through my facade.
Last night, doing some research on a surname in Texas I came across the Ancestry databases of their birth, death and marriage indexes. Several states have their death indexes online. This can be useful. Missouri even has their death certificates online - up until 1956. But they stop with certificates less than 50 years. They have no index for recent deaths either. The St. Louis Public Library has an index for Post Disptach obituaries that isn't complete, but when it is, will be up-to-present. This doesn't trouble me much, since all the people in the index are deceased.
But indexes of births and marriages for people who are still living? The Texas birth index at Ancestry is for 1903-1997. The marriage index is for 1814-1909 and 1966-2002. If I had been born in Texas, I'd be on it, as would my parents, and grandparents. The birth index gives names of both parents, with maiden name for the mother. Combined with the marriage index, this provides an easy reference to track the generations. There is a large gap in the marriage index, but still, while the census stops at 1930, if the family remains in Texas, you can pretty much keep on going until the current generation of parents. And then at several phonebook websites (Or on Google if you figure out the city they live in) you can probably find the phone number of the living generations. And give them a call and say, Hi, I'm a cousin.
It certainly might not be advisable to start out the conversation that way. And you might do better trying to find their address and writing a "blind inquiry" letter to them. (Uncle Hiram has some good advice on that.) It's way too easy to hang up a phone. But Texas certainly makes it easy. I'm not sure how many other states do this. Randy at GeneaMusings back in February suggested California was the only other one. Chicago (Cook County) recently announced it is putting a lot of their vitals online - with an estimated date of arrival in January, but I don't know if this will include recent vitals.
He also asks for input on the privacy issue. I didn't see his post back then (see first paragraph) but I'm giving it now, I guess. I don't like it.
Well, that is, looking at it from the perspective of somebody tracking me down - online - within a couple hours of fairly easy research - if I don't want to be tracked down that easily. I don't have to worry about that, I don't live in Texas.
But I do have some Texas relatives. I now know their names. I won't mention the surname. And while I'm not about to pick up the phone, I think I'd be silly not to write a couple letters. Gives them the option of not replying. I might even play 'dumb' and say that I think 'we may' be related. Don't want to scare them by telling them that I *know* we are. Of course, I'd be surprised if this hasn't been discussed in Texas newspapers, and they know full well how easy it is. So they might see right through my facade.
Genealogy Challenges and Puzzles
I've been having fun with Genealogue's challenges, but I often see them after the answers are revealed in the comments, or while I am at work without much time to solve them. I did submit one to him, and it was fun to see people solve it.
A local puzzler named Nobody published a puzzle late last night early this morning, and today it has a genealogy-related slant. I found it not too challenging, but still somewhat fun, since it involved some well-known names, and thought others might like to try their hand.
Nobody's site used to be much more active than it is now, but it's good to see they're not completely gone.
A local puzzler named Nobody published a puzzle late last night early this morning, and today it has a genealogy-related slant. I found it not too challenging, but still somewhat fun, since it involved some well-known names, and thought others might like to try their hand.
Nobody's site used to be much more active than it is now, but it's good to see they're not completely gone.
Saturday, September 8, 2007
In the attic
I was over at my parents' house today going through some old boxes in the attic. Discovered photo albums both of my grandmothers put together when they were young. 1920s and 1930s. Both contain high school graduation photos. And I think my favorite pictures are those of my grandfathers young and hamming it up for the camera. Though there are also some pictures of great-grandparents and great-great grandparents in the collections.
(I'm going to have to reread the posts on The Practical Archivist on rescuing glued photos, and find myself a microspatula.)
The most surprising find though wasn't a photograph. It was my maternal grandfather's resume. He updated it after he retired, in 1968, and saved it. Who does that? (My grandfather, I guess. He's the same grandfather who gave me his Hungarian birth certificate to put into a grade school report.) So I have a one page summary of his career that I couldn't have found anywhere else. I knew the highlights: brief stint as a lawyer, most of his career as a Postal Inspector, a few years in the army, but now my knowledge is more complete. He also had kept in a folder a lot of business correspondence.
(I'm going to have to reread the posts on The Practical Archivist on rescuing glued photos, and find myself a microspatula.)
The most surprising find though wasn't a photograph. It was my maternal grandfather's resume. He updated it after he retired, in 1968, and saved it. Who does that? (My grandfather, I guess. He's the same grandfather who gave me his Hungarian birth certificate to put into a grade school report.) So I have a one page summary of his career that I couldn't have found anywhere else. I knew the highlights: brief stint as a lawyer, most of his career as a Postal Inspector, a few years in the army, but now my knowledge is more complete. He also had kept in a folder a lot of business correspondence.
Friday, September 7, 2007
Friday Five
It's Friday, so five more names from various census.
It should be obvious what is on my mind this morning.
1900 – Cub Beers – Manhattan, NY – 22
1910 – Cardinal Butter – New Orleans, LA – 12
1920 – Astro Archie – Limestone, TX – 17
1930 – Met Pitt – Marshall, KY – 15
1880 – Pirate King – Richmond, MO - 45
It should be obvious what is on my mind this morning.
1900 – Cub Beers – Manhattan, NY – 22
1910 – Cardinal Butter – New Orleans, LA – 12
1920 – Astro Archie – Limestone, TX – 17
1930 – Met Pitt – Marshall, KY – 15
1880 – Pirate King – Richmond, MO - 45
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
Genealogy Jenny
Not too many people know what a Jenny is. A Jenny is a form of poetry I created last year. (Link is to my other blog). Like haiku, the word is both singular and plural.
It's a real simple form to learn. There is a specified number of lines, with a specified number of syllables for each line. Jenny have 7 lines, and a total of 38 syllables. The first line has 8 syllables. The second line has 6 syllables. The third line has 7 syllables. Can you guess the rest? Does this help: 8-6-7...
Here's an example:
Honor thy Great Grandmother and Great Grandfather
We all have eight great grandparents.
Half of us don’t know them.
I treasure all my surnames:
Newmark and Cruvant,
Feinstein, Blatt,
Deutsch, Lichtman, Van Every, Denyer.
That of course was more factual than poetic. The following is slightly better:
Advice Not Taken
In the hot summer heat I found
myself reading gravestones
looking for my ancestors.
All of the websites
said: Autumn.
I could not wait that long to find them.
© John Newmark
It's a real simple form to learn. There is a specified number of lines, with a specified number of syllables for each line. Jenny have 7 lines, and a total of 38 syllables. The first line has 8 syllables. The second line has 6 syllables. The third line has 7 syllables. Can you guess the rest? Does this help: 8-6-7...
Here's an example:
Honor thy Great Grandmother and Great Grandfather
We all have eight great grandparents.
Half of us don’t know them.
I treasure all my surnames:
Newmark and Cruvant,
Feinstein, Blatt,
Deutsch, Lichtman, Van Every, Denyer.
That of course was more factual than poetic. The following is slightly better:
Advice Not Taken
In the hot summer heat I found
myself reading gravestones
looking for my ancestors.
All of the websites
said: Autumn.
I could not wait that long to find them.
© John Newmark
Genealogy Haiku/Senryu
I find it a lot easier to think in syllables of 5-7-5. Maybe I'm part Japanese; from a past life?
Erosion
A British study
reveals half can't name one great
grandparent. Lost roots.
---
Epitaphs
I can't walk past graves
without stopping to read them.
Dead men do tell tales.
© John Newmark
Erosion
A British study
reveals half can't name one great
grandparent. Lost roots.
---
Epitaphs
I can't walk past graves
without stopping to read them.
Dead men do tell tales.
© John Newmark
Genealogy Limericks
Randy at Genea-Musings put out a request for some Genealogy Limericks
Since I consider myself something of a poet, and since my great Grandfather Barney claimed to be Irish even though the wasn't, I had to see what I could come up with...
I will note that I tried to stick to a 3-3-2-2-3 pattern with regard to metrical feet, though I know there are a few rough spots. I was more flexible with rhyme.
There once was a guy from Missouri
Knew nought ‘bout his granddad named Morrie
He searched at Ancestry;
Got help at the library
Now he knows where his granddad is buried.
There once was a lady named Maude
Who loved to explore a graveyard
With blue jeans and bug spray
She would spend the whole day
Rubbing graves and chatting with G-d.
I intentionally avoided the word 'genealogist'. I didn't see an easy way to fit that into the metrical scheme without totally ignoring it. Then it came to me...
Way back when ol' Beowulf was young
A kid searched for his dad and his mom
"Genealogist" they
might now call him today
But back then he was known as young Tom
© John Newmark
Since I consider myself something of a poet, and since my great Grandfather Barney claimed to be Irish even though the wasn't, I had to see what I could come up with...
I will note that I tried to stick to a 3-3-2-2-3 pattern with regard to metrical feet, though I know there are a few rough spots. I was more flexible with rhyme.
There once was a guy from Missouri
Knew nought ‘bout his granddad named Morrie
He searched at Ancestry;
Got help at the library
Now he knows where his granddad is buried.
There once was a lady named Maude
Who loved to explore a graveyard
With blue jeans and bug spray
She would spend the whole day
Rubbing graves and chatting with G-d.
I intentionally avoided the word 'genealogist'. I didn't see an easy way to fit that into the metrical scheme without totally ignoring it. Then it came to me...
Way back when ol' Beowulf was young
A kid searched for his dad and his mom
"Genealogist" they
might now call him today
But back then he was known as young Tom
© John Newmark
Monday, September 3, 2007
Labor Day
Since it's Labor Day in the United States, and I believe in Canada too, as opposed to all the other countries that still observe it on its original May day, I've been thinking about the work my ancestors did.
In the early 1900s they were tailors, launderers, undertakers, salesmen. The next generation had several lawyers and doctors. Most people see that as a jump, because we focus on the money, and the years of required education. But every one of my ancestors in the first list were self-employed businessmen, dealing with clients in much the same fashion.
I've found an online interview of a distant relative who left the city and started a medical practice in a small rural town in the 1930s because they had no other doctor. For years he charged his patients $1, and never sent out bills, because he knew they would pay if they could. Something which he, and his children, and his children's children should rightly be proud of.
In the interview he states one of his reasons for becoming a doctor was because his mother didn't want him to become a tailor like everyone else in the family. I cringe at the joke, even though it receives the expected laughter from the interviewer. Mostly because I know the interviewee's father, and his father's father were tailors, and I know his mother's father was a bootmaker.
It's not exactly what he said that bothers me, but how he said it. The parents of all his cousins probably had similar (mostly fulfilled) desires for their children. I like to think, though, that instead of looking down on the profession, they saw the hard work that went into it, and the years of poverty, and wanted an easier life for their children. That's probably how he looked at it too, and I'm just reading too much into a one-liner in an interview.
I was certainly thrilled to find a recording of his voice. The interview is about 30 minutes long.
In the early 1900s they were tailors, launderers, undertakers, salesmen. The next generation had several lawyers and doctors. Most people see that as a jump, because we focus on the money, and the years of required education. But every one of my ancestors in the first list were self-employed businessmen, dealing with clients in much the same fashion.
I've found an online interview of a distant relative who left the city and started a medical practice in a small rural town in the 1930s because they had no other doctor. For years he charged his patients $1, and never sent out bills, because he knew they would pay if they could. Something which he, and his children, and his children's children should rightly be proud of.
In the interview he states one of his reasons for becoming a doctor was because his mother didn't want him to become a tailor like everyone else in the family. I cringe at the joke, even though it receives the expected laughter from the interviewer. Mostly because I know the interviewee's father, and his father's father were tailors, and I know his mother's father was a bootmaker.
It's not exactly what he said that bothers me, but how he said it. The parents of all his cousins probably had similar (mostly fulfilled) desires for their children. I like to think, though, that instead of looking down on the profession, they saw the hard work that went into it, and the years of poverty, and wanted an easier life for their children. That's probably how he looked at it too, and I'm just reading too much into a one-liner in an interview.
I was certainly thrilled to find a recording of his voice. The interview is about 30 minutes long.
Friday, August 31, 2007
St. Louis Genealogy Search
I read Genealogue's recent post with interest. His "New Genealogy Message Searcher" is certainly useful. And it occurred to me that Google's Coop service could be utilized to group any number of databases together. I know I use a handful of databases locally that would be great to be able to search all together.
Even though all the sites I added had to be such that all the information was on real pages that a searchbot could crawl and index, I still came up with several. Including the St. Louis Genealogical Society, St. Clair County (IL) Genealogical Society, St. Louis Public Library resources (including a great indexing of obituaries), St. Louis specific message boards at Ancestry, Rootsweb and Genforum, and an AccessGenealogy website.
If you have any ancestors who stopped in St. Louis, you might find it useful. The St. Louis Genealogy Search. And after you're done there, don't forget to drop by the office of the Secretary of State, they have some great databases that can't be added to this.
Setting these searches is extremely easy, and there's a link on the search-page that will lead you through the process. Since the search is through Google's cached pages, it doesn't increase the load on the pages that are actually searched. It only, theoretically, increases the load on Google. They can handle it. (If they couldn't, they wouldn't have set this service up.)
Even though all the sites I added had to be such that all the information was on real pages that a searchbot could crawl and index, I still came up with several. Including the St. Louis Genealogical Society, St. Clair County (IL) Genealogical Society, St. Louis Public Library resources (including a great indexing of obituaries), St. Louis specific message boards at Ancestry, Rootsweb and Genforum, and an AccessGenealogy website.
If you have any ancestors who stopped in St. Louis, you might find it useful. The St. Louis Genealogy Search. And after you're done there, don't forget to drop by the office of the Secretary of State, they have some great databases that can't be added to this.
Setting these searches is extremely easy, and there's a link on the search-page that will lead you through the process. Since the search is through Google's cached pages, it doesn't increase the load on the pages that are actually searched. It only, theoretically, increases the load on Google. They can handle it. (If they couldn't, they wouldn't have set this service up.)
Peeps goes to the library
A humorous introduction to genealogy video from Birmingham Alabama found on YouTube:
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
MacFamilyTree
Deciding to purchase some genealogy software to be organized, and owning a Mac, in early July I walked into a local Mac Store and purchased MacFamilyTree. The only significant complaints I had seen online were some oddities in the GUI. Functionally it was rated highly.
[I know that the leading software packages are Legacy and Family Tree Maker, but both of these appear to be PC only, and while I could buy software that would allow me to run PC programs on my Mac, that would be an additional cost, and would in my opinion be wasteful if all I wanted it for was one software program.]
So far I have had few issues. Of course, I have nothing to compare it to. They've just announced an upcoming major overhaul, though, and the 'cutoff' for a free update when the release comes is an August 14th purchase. Grumble grumble. I do understand, though, the cutoff has to be somewhere.
[I know that the leading software packages are Legacy and Family Tree Maker, but both of these appear to be PC only, and while I could buy software that would allow me to run PC programs on my Mac, that would be an additional cost, and would in my opinion be wasteful if all I wanted it for was one software program.]
So far I have had few issues. Of course, I have nothing to compare it to. They've just announced an upcoming major overhaul, though, and the 'cutoff' for a free update when the release comes is an August 14th purchase. Grumble grumble. I do understand, though, the cutoff has to be somewhere.
Ancestry backs down
Ancestry has removed their collection of web caches. The announcement is carefully written in neutral language as one would expect from a corporate PR office, but they explain their initial intent ("an effort to preserve history – if a Web page featuring important family history information were taken down in the future, a cached version would still be available"), acknowledge they have heard the concerns raised (not listing those concerns, but PR rarely focuses on the negative unless they feel they have to), and announce they are removing the information 'for the time being.'
The announcement is pretty fresh, and already a few bloggers have picked up on those words. They're the most colloquial-sounding words in the release, but taking them at their word in the rest of the text, they still would like to provide the information, but they want to review the concerns that have been addressed by the community and come up with a way to do it that will be less objectionable. Which is commendable.
I'm a newcomer to this community, but considering the time frame this has all occurred in, their response is impressive. Companies are best judged not by the mistakes they make, because mistakes will be made, but in how they respond to criticism of those mistakes.
The announcement is pretty fresh, and already a few bloggers have picked up on those words. They're the most colloquial-sounding words in the release, but taking them at their word in the rest of the text, they still would like to provide the information, but they want to review the concerns that have been addressed by the community and come up with a way to do it that will be less objectionable. Which is commendable.
I'm a newcomer to this community, but considering the time frame this has all occurred in, their response is impressive. Companies are best judged not by the mistakes they make, because mistakes will be made, but in how they respond to criticism of those mistakes.
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Caching, Ancestry, Archive, and Google
I have a personal blog where I talk about everything that comes to my mind. This is what it looks like now.
This is what it looked like in March 2005, July 2004, December 2003, and a full five years ago in August of 2002. All the links are courtesy of the WayBack Machine. Archive.org has been archiving the internet for several years now. Here's what another website I maintain looked like in October of 2000
There has been some talk about Ancestry’s caching of genealogical websites – such as USGenNet and genealogy blogs. Such as at Genea-Musings, About.com’s Guide to Genealogy , and Genealogue.
When I blog I know what I blog may appear elsewhere. I consider myself a poet, and have included some poetry in some of my blog posts. I’ve had some of this poetry appear on other sites without credit. (In these instances I emailed the owners and asked them to include a byline…which they did.) I’ve also had poetry I’ve written appear on websites, credited, but without people asking, which legally they are required to do…but I’m not wealthy enough to take them to court, and I don’t really mind, usually. I now have a Creative Commons copyright notice on the blog which allows people to distribute the content as long as they don’t make any money off of it, and as long as they give me credit. I don't have that notice on this blog. It's probably not going to appear here.
Of course, USGenNet doesn’t have a Creative Commons copyright notice on their site. And if you search for their archives at archive.org you will be able to access their archived homepage, but when you try to follow a link, you will receive the error msg: "We're sorry, access to [url] has been blocked by the site owner via robots.txt." Basically, robots.txt files are files webmasters put on their sites to tell searchbots that they shouldn’t archive their pages. I could put these on my site, but I don’t. USGenNet does. Understandably, too. Bots are still physically able to ignore the requests and archive the pages…- it's just respectable archival search engines (such as Google and Archive.org) don’t ignore the requests. Partially probably due to fear of legal retribution. Ancestry, apparently (key word - I'm still stating an opinion here) is ignoring these electronic requests. Note: I've been assured they didn't ignore robots.txt files.
As others have stated, I state as well, what this means legally is beyond me. I’m not a lawyer. I took a media law course in college over ten years ago, and have some clues, and this looks suspicious, but I am certainly not an expert. It should be interesting to watch if Ancestry does insist what they appear to be doing is legitimate, as there are a whole bunch of companies – completely outside of the genealogy industry – who might justifiably be worried about the results of a court case in Ancestry's favor. If a court decides Ancestry can cache pages on sites with robots.txt files specifically requesting pages not be cached … will Google and Archive.org decide to still be nice? I suspect every newspaper in the country has a stake in the answer to that question.
And while it certainly feels more reprehensible for Ancestry to charge for viewing their cached files, I suspect that newspapers or any other website which wishes to protect their content hope that's not the deciding factor, as archival websites making their content available for free likely isn't an acceptable solution from their perspective.
This is what it looked like in March 2005, July 2004, December 2003, and a full five years ago in August of 2002. All the links are courtesy of the WayBack Machine. Archive.org has been archiving the internet for several years now. Here's what another website I maintain looked like in October of 2000
There has been some talk about Ancestry’s caching of genealogical websites – such as USGenNet and genealogy blogs. Such as at Genea-Musings, About.com’s Guide to Genealogy , and Genealogue.
When I blog I know what I blog may appear elsewhere. I consider myself a poet, and have included some poetry in some of my blog posts. I’ve had some of this poetry appear on other sites without credit. (In these instances I emailed the owners and asked them to include a byline…which they did.) I’ve also had poetry I’ve written appear on websites, credited, but without people asking, which legally they are required to do…but I’m not wealthy enough to take them to court, and I don’t really mind, usually. I now have a Creative Commons copyright notice on the blog which allows people to distribute the content as long as they don’t make any money off of it, and as long as they give me credit. I don't have that notice on this blog. It's probably not going to appear here.
Of course, USGenNet doesn’t have a Creative Commons copyright notice on their site. And if you search for their archives at archive.org you will be able to access their archived homepage, but when you try to follow a link, you will receive the error msg: "We're sorry, access to [url] has been blocked by the site owner via robots.txt." Basically, robots.txt files are files webmasters put on their sites to tell searchbots that they shouldn’t archive their pages. I could put these on my site, but I don’t. USGenNet does. Understandably, too. Bots are still physically able to ignore the requests and archive the pages…- it's just respectable archival search engines (such as Google and Archive.org) don’t ignore the requests. Partially probably due to fear of legal retribution. Ancestry, apparently (key word - I'm still stating an opinion here) is ignoring these electronic requests. Note: I've been assured they didn't ignore robots.txt files.
As others have stated, I state as well, what this means legally is beyond me. I’m not a lawyer. I took a media law course in college over ten years ago, and have some clues, and this looks suspicious, but I am certainly not an expert. It should be interesting to watch if Ancestry does insist what they appear to be doing is legitimate, as there are a whole bunch of companies – completely outside of the genealogy industry – who might justifiably be worried about the results of a court case in Ancestry's favor. If a court decides Ancestry can cache pages on sites with robots.txt files specifically requesting pages not be cached … will Google and Archive.org decide to still be nice? I suspect every newspaper in the country has a stake in the answer to that question.
And while it certainly feels more reprehensible for Ancestry to charge for viewing their cached files, I suspect that newspapers or any other website which wishes to protect their content hope that's not the deciding factor, as archival websites making their content available for free likely isn't an acceptable solution from their perspective.
Monday, August 27, 2007
Music and Genealogy
Warning: all four videos below, together, will absorb 20 minutes of your time. But they won't be wasted.
YouTube video of Ray Stevens song describing a classic genealogical nightmare...complete with an alternate surname spelling in the credits at the end. (sigh. note to YouTubers...please, if you're going to violate copyright, at least spell the musician's name correctly.) For those interested in the animation, it was created using Sims software.
If Ray Stevens' humor isn't your cup of tea, but you prefer Julie Andrews and Gene Kelly...here they explain why genealogy can be fun
Part I
Part II
And finally, more recently, another song on Family Trees from the group, Venice
YouTube video of Ray Stevens song describing a classic genealogical nightmare...complete with an alternate surname spelling in the credits at the end. (sigh. note to YouTubers...please, if you're going to violate copyright, at least spell the musician's name correctly.) For those interested in the animation, it was created using Sims software.
If Ray Stevens' humor isn't your cup of tea, but you prefer Julie Andrews and Gene Kelly...here they explain why genealogy can be fun
Part I
Part II
And finally, more recently, another song on Family Trees from the group, Venice
How much do I trust the research of others
This is a question I am facing. For example: My family can trace their roots back to a person named Ebenezer Denyer in Texas. We know he was a Confederate Soldier as we have a letter from his granddaughter, to the government asking for confirmation from their records, and their positive response.
According to a record at Family Search, Ebenezer's parents are William Denyer and Elizabeth Sliver. Which is as far as FamilySearch goes. However on Rootsweb there's a long descendency from Henry Rosenberger of Franconia. A Mennonite born in Germany around 1685. One line of the descendency ends at William and Elizabeth. Apparently all the information in this descendency comes from a book published in 1906 by an AJ Fretz. But I don't know AJ Fretz. I don't have the book. How much do I trust it?
I don't know the individual who entered the data at FamilySearch either so I don't know that Ebenezer's parents are William and Elizabeth. However, the county in Texas where Ebenezer got married does have the certificate, which might possibly contain some confirmation on that score; We'll see.
But it doesn't really answer my question. I downloaded the gedcom, and the Register, and told my mother she probably has a Mennonite minister as a direct ancestor. But I felt the need to insert the 'probably.'
According to a record at Family Search, Ebenezer's parents are William Denyer and Elizabeth Sliver. Which is as far as FamilySearch goes. However on Rootsweb there's a long descendency from Henry Rosenberger of Franconia. A Mennonite born in Germany around 1685. One line of the descendency ends at William and Elizabeth. Apparently all the information in this descendency comes from a book published in 1906 by an AJ Fretz. But I don't know AJ Fretz. I don't have the book. How much do I trust it?
I don't know the individual who entered the data at FamilySearch either so I don't know that Ebenezer's parents are William and Elizabeth. However, the county in Texas where Ebenezer got married does have the certificate, which might possibly contain some confirmation on that score; We'll see.
But it doesn't really answer my question. I downloaded the gedcom, and the Register, and told my mother she probably has a Mennonite minister as a direct ancestor. But I felt the need to insert the 'probably.'
Saturday, August 25, 2007
French twist on surnames
A recently married woman in Quebec wants to change her surname to her new husband's name. However, she isn't allowed to by Quebec law.
Actually, we'd only have four surnames to choose from, depending upon what surnames our parents had chosen, and their parents. But everyone in my generation could have a different last name.
In provinces where common law prevails, a woman can simply begin using her husband's surname after marriage. Armed with a copy of their provincially issued marriage certificate, a woman can easily acquire new identification for other documents such as a driver's licence.The rationale given is 'gender equality.'But in Quebec, since a 1981 reform of the civil law, women are not permitted to adopt their husband's name at marriage, not even if they apply for an official name change.
Procedures for any formal name change are very strict in Quebec, and the decision is up [to] the director of civil status. It requires a serious reason, such as difficulty of use due to spelling or pronunciation, or bearing a name that is mocked or that has been made infamous.Reading this I think to myself, "this certainly makes things easier for genealogists," but then I find a letter to the editor a few days later. Apparently hyphenated surnames for children are a common solution, resulting in the following:
Oy! Let's see. The sixteen surnames of my great-great-grandparents, assuming no name changes would be allowed: Newmark, Sundberg, Blatt, Wyman, Cruvant, Mojsabovski, Dudelsack, Perlik, Deutsch, Weiss, Lichtman, Adler, Van Every, Stuart, Heartley, Denyer. Which two would I choose? I wonder which two my siblings would choose. My cousins would have different choices.Their children will have to take her surname, his surname, or both. When their child marries the offspring of another couple married in Quebec, let's say a Sophie Gray-Bertrand, their grandchildren could be called Parent-Lamirande, Gray-Bertrand, Parent-Gray, Lamirande-Bertrand or any combination of these composed names - but only keeping two surnames.
When Caroline and Karl's grandchildren have children, the family surnames get further diluted, especially if these grandchildren also marry someone with a composed name, as they can only keep two surnames.
Imagine the convoluted family histories if all of their descendants opt for different combinations of these composed names.
Actually, we'd only have four surnames to choose from, depending upon what surnames our parents had chosen, and their parents. But everyone in my generation could have a different last name.
Friday, August 24, 2007
Family Myths: More on the Dudelsacks
The upcoming Carnival topic is: Confirm or Debunk: Family Myths, Legends, and Lore. For this topic I'm returning to my funny family surname which I discussed a few Carnivals ago. Dudelsack.
Myth:
Selig Dudelsack had several siblings. One brother, named Yidel, and one sister, named Toba, immigrated to the US, as did Selig. All three changed their surname at Ellis Island to something different. Selig chose Feinstein, Yidel chose Odelson, and Toba chose Oberman (or maybe married an Oberman…)
This myth comes from Selig’s youngest daughter, who was born in the US. I think she told the stories in the 1970s. None of her parents or siblings born in Poland/Russia were still alive.
Facts:
First, it wasn’t at Ellis Island. At least not Selig, and most likely not Yidel and Toba. It was Castle Garden. But that is a common mistake made with ancestors who immigrated pre-Ellis Island.
Second, the pervasive myth of name-changing at Ellis Island or Castle Garden is as unlikely with them as it was with anyone else. The myth is based on the idea that when an immigration official asked the immigrant their name, they either didn’t know what the question was, or decided to give them a different answer. This assumes that there were no translators available, and/or the only information the immigrant needed to provide to enter the US was a verbal declaration of who they were. It’s amazing that this myth is so ingrained in our collective minds that we don’t think about it rationally. I know I didn’t until recently. Of course they had translators. Of course they required documentation. Any name changes most likely occurred before or after, not during. Sure: changes in spelling are possible. But not entirely new names.
A)
A ship manifest for a Selig Dudersack has been located for 1890 which is the year that appears on the census reports for their immigration. No ship manifest for a Selig Feinstein has been found. But the argument that “I have never seen a black swan, so black swans don’t exist” is so common a logical fallacy it is taught in introductory logic courses and has its own name: The Black Swan Fallacy. One must be careful not to fall for it. There are black swans. (They're native to Australia.)
Selig Dudersack, for all appearances, traveled alone. But it's not unusual for a family member, especially the head of the family, to make the voyage first, and in 1891 there is a ship manifest that contains all the given names for mother, wife, and children. Can you guess the surname? Correct: Feinstein. The ages for the children are correct. The age for the wife is pretty close. The age for the mother is way off, by decades. Clerical error? No Selig though. It’s certainly still possible that one of two things happened. 1) After Selig immigrated, he changed his name to Feinstein, and sent communication overseas to his family who he knew would want to know. So they changed their names before immigration. 2) They made the decision to change their name before Selig left, but not in time for him to change his documents, so he traveled under Dudelsack, but the rest of the family had time to change their documents.
The only evidence that may exist for this is birth records and marriage records in Poland/Russia. Unfortunately, we don’t know what town they lived in. Selig’s wife, Anna, had a brother named Jacob. Jacob’s naturalization petition gave a town in Russia named Szdobirtzen. The certificate says Szdobeitzen, Poland. Either way, no one can find this town on a map. He immigrated several years after Anna and Selig so the town he came from, while likely the town Anna came from, isn’t necessarily. If we could find it though, it would be a starting place.
B)
Selig’s youngest daughter said that Yidel “Odelson” never had any descendants. So no one looked. I found a Judal Dudelsuck at Castle Garden, though. The Y/J spelling variance is common as there is no letter ‘J’ in Hebrew. Joseph is pronounced Yosef. Jacob is pronounced Yakob (or Yakov). I found a Julius and Jennie Odelsohn in St. Louis. Lots of Hebrew names were Americanized, and Julius isn’t too much of a stretch for Judal. What’s really interesting is that in 1910, Julius and Jennie are living next door to Selig’s oldest son, Harry. Julius and Jennie’s oldest child, Pearl, is married and living next door to a Aron and Tillie Oberman. (Remember Toba?) Relatives living next door to each other was common. Of course, non-relatives living next door to each other was even more common.
Pearl and Morris Feldman had six children. Julius and Jennie’s son Louis had a daughter named Bernice. That’s as far as I’ve gotten, though I have only been researching this thread since July. I’d like to find some descendants and see if they have family stories that match ours.
Update: August 30: I have found Tillie Oberman's death certificate. Not only do the given names for both parents on her death certificate match the parents of Selig, the informant gives her father's surname as "Duderzock." Not only is this what I am going to consider proof of all my assumptions, but a completely new spelling! (I guess someone could argue I don't have proof that Julius is Yidel. But I'd say the odds are high.)
Myth:
Selig Dudelsack had several siblings. One brother, named Yidel, and one sister, named Toba, immigrated to the US, as did Selig. All three changed their surname at Ellis Island to something different. Selig chose Feinstein, Yidel chose Odelson, and Toba chose Oberman (or maybe married an Oberman…)
This myth comes from Selig’s youngest daughter, who was born in the US. I think she told the stories in the 1970s. None of her parents or siblings born in Poland/Russia were still alive.
Facts:
First, it wasn’t at Ellis Island. At least not Selig, and most likely not Yidel and Toba. It was Castle Garden. But that is a common mistake made with ancestors who immigrated pre-Ellis Island.
Second, the pervasive myth of name-changing at Ellis Island or Castle Garden is as unlikely with them as it was with anyone else. The myth is based on the idea that when an immigration official asked the immigrant their name, they either didn’t know what the question was, or decided to give them a different answer. This assumes that there were no translators available, and/or the only information the immigrant needed to provide to enter the US was a verbal declaration of who they were. It’s amazing that this myth is so ingrained in our collective minds that we don’t think about it rationally. I know I didn’t until recently. Of course they had translators. Of course they required documentation. Any name changes most likely occurred before or after, not during. Sure: changes in spelling are possible. But not entirely new names.
A)
A ship manifest for a Selig Dudersack has been located for 1890 which is the year that appears on the census reports for their immigration. No ship manifest for a Selig Feinstein has been found. But the argument that “I have never seen a black swan, so black swans don’t exist” is so common a logical fallacy it is taught in introductory logic courses and has its own name: The Black Swan Fallacy. One must be careful not to fall for it. There are black swans. (They're native to Australia.)
Selig Dudersack, for all appearances, traveled alone. But it's not unusual for a family member, especially the head of the family, to make the voyage first, and in 1891 there is a ship manifest that contains all the given names for mother, wife, and children. Can you guess the surname? Correct: Feinstein. The ages for the children are correct. The age for the wife is pretty close. The age for the mother is way off, by decades. Clerical error? No Selig though. It’s certainly still possible that one of two things happened. 1) After Selig immigrated, he changed his name to Feinstein, and sent communication overseas to his family who he knew would want to know. So they changed their names before immigration. 2) They made the decision to change their name before Selig left, but not in time for him to change his documents, so he traveled under Dudelsack, but the rest of the family had time to change their documents.
The only evidence that may exist for this is birth records and marriage records in Poland/Russia. Unfortunately, we don’t know what town they lived in. Selig’s wife, Anna, had a brother named Jacob. Jacob’s naturalization petition gave a town in Russia named Szdobirtzen. The certificate says Szdobeitzen, Poland. Either way, no one can find this town on a map. He immigrated several years after Anna and Selig so the town he came from, while likely the town Anna came from, isn’t necessarily. If we could find it though, it would be a starting place.
B)
Selig’s youngest daughter said that Yidel “Odelson” never had any descendants. So no one looked. I found a Judal Dudelsuck at Castle Garden, though. The Y/J spelling variance is common as there is no letter ‘J’ in Hebrew. Joseph is pronounced Yosef. Jacob is pronounced Yakob (or Yakov). I found a Julius and Jennie Odelsohn in St. Louis. Lots of Hebrew names were Americanized, and Julius isn’t too much of a stretch for Judal. What’s really interesting is that in 1910, Julius and Jennie are living next door to Selig’s oldest son, Harry. Julius and Jennie’s oldest child, Pearl, is married and living next door to a Aron and Tillie Oberman. (Remember Toba?) Relatives living next door to each other was common. Of course, non-relatives living next door to each other was even more common.
Pearl and Morris Feldman had six children. Julius and Jennie’s son Louis had a daughter named Bernice. That’s as far as I’ve gotten, though I have only been researching this thread since July. I’d like to find some descendants and see if they have family stories that match ours.
Update: August 30: I have found Tillie Oberman's death certificate. Not only do the given names for both parents on her death certificate match the parents of Selig, the informant gives her father's surname as "Duderzock." Not only is this what I am going to consider proof of all my assumptions, but a completely new spelling! (I guess someone could argue I don't have proof that Julius is Yidel. But I'd say the odds are high.)
Friday not-so-random Five
Haven't done this for a few weeks, but here's a list of five names from various census - all found at ancestry.com, and all on a particular theme which is likely obvious:
Phantom Williams – Rowan NC – 1920 – 13 years old
Hair Martel – Quebec – 1911 – 9 years old
Oklahoma Redwine – Bear Creek AR - 1910 – 21 years old
Fiddler Franklin - Cherokee, SC – 1900 – 1 year old
Singing in Water – Fremont WY – 1900 – no age given
Phantom Williams – Rowan NC – 1920 – 13 years old
Hair Martel – Quebec – 1911 – 9 years old
Oklahoma Redwine – Bear Creek AR - 1910 – 21 years old
Fiddler Franklin - Cherokee, SC – 1900 – 1 year old
Singing in Water – Fremont WY – 1900 – no age given
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
How many of our ancestors are men?
NYTimes piece asks the question: What percentage of your ancestors are male?
Their answer isn't 50%. The article talks about how men die without reproducing significantly more than women, meaning we're descended from more women than men. And it goes into familiar areas on how men and women act differently based on biological needs. Some people believe this. Some people believe this is junk. Others, like me, don't really care.
I'm not sure I completely understand the math. I have one mother, and one father. Two grandmothers, and two grandfathers, etc. (Sure, there are ancestors with multiple spouses, but I'm only descended from one of them.) Less men may reproduce than women, but that just means men have to end up with more spouses than women. And even without the help of polygamous societies, I think there's evidence that that is true. Liz Taylor tried to even out the statistics, but she was unsuccessful. But each specific individual should have an equal number of male and female direct ancestors. And if we're talking collateral ancestors, it doesn't matter when they die.
Further, I can tell you that, while overall they may be right about today's society being descended from more women, in *my* family, there are more males. At least in recent generations. To the point that when my parents had their first child, and were told it was a girl, my father told the doctor, 'check again!' My father was one of three sons. My grandfather was one of three sons. In my generation there are 2 women and 6 men descended from my grandfather. My grandfather's brother also had two sons. So you're going to have a difficult time convincing me more of my ancestors are female.
update The NYTimes blogger updated and explained how one individual can have a different number of men/women in their ancestry. Incest. I'm sure if one goes back far enough in any line it's findable. The explanation he links to in the comments is better. If you go back enough generations you're likely to find duplicated individuals. Not due to incest, or at least not what society considers incest, since we're likely talking 3rd, 4th, or 25th cousins.
Their answer isn't 50%. The article talks about how men die without reproducing significantly more than women, meaning we're descended from more women than men. And it goes into familiar areas on how men and women act differently based on biological needs. Some people believe this. Some people believe this is junk. Others, like me, don't really care.
I'm not sure I completely understand the math. I have one mother, and one father. Two grandmothers, and two grandfathers, etc. (Sure, there are ancestors with multiple spouses, but I'm only descended from one of them.) Less men may reproduce than women, but that just means men have to end up with more spouses than women. And even without the help of polygamous societies, I think there's evidence that that is true. Liz Taylor tried to even out the statistics, but she was unsuccessful. But each specific individual should have an equal number of male and female direct ancestors. And if we're talking collateral ancestors, it doesn't matter when they die.
Further, I can tell you that, while overall they may be right about today's society being descended from more women, in *my* family, there are more males. At least in recent generations. To the point that when my parents had their first child, and were told it was a girl, my father told the doctor, 'check again!' My father was one of three sons. My grandfather was one of three sons. In my generation there are 2 women and 6 men descended from my grandfather. My grandfather's brother also had two sons. So you're going to have a difficult time convincing me more of my ancestors are female.
update The NYTimes blogger updated and explained how one individual can have a different number of men/women in their ancestry. Incest. I'm sure if one goes back far enough in any line it's findable. The explanation he links to in the comments is better. If you go back enough generations you're likely to find duplicated individuals. Not due to incest, or at least not what society considers incest, since we're likely talking 3rd, 4th, or 25th cousins.
Monday, August 20, 2007
FamilyTreeConnection
I found an interesting genealogy website: familytreeconnection.com - Like many sites, it's free to search, but to actually view any of the records requires a subscription -- and they only offer it at an annual price. Inexpensive for an annual price - $29.95.
However, while there are lots of great small databases, and some people might find several documents, a search on my surnames yielded one record, for my great grandfather, who appears in a 1928 list of masons. I knew he was a mason. He states this in a 1926 bio for the Who's Who in North St. Louis. I was a little curious what other information appeared on the record, but not $30 curious, though.
However, it did spur me to do something I had thought about before, but hadn't yet done. I went to the Missouri Grand Lodge website, and on their 'contact' page, there's a form, which contains 'I have a genealogy related question' as an option. I sent a request for any information they had on my great grandfather.
They sent me his 'initiation' date, the date he 'passed'. and the date he was 'raised.' I don't know what these terms really mean, but that's ok. So I now know he was a member from 1919-1956. They also told me he was never an officer, though if he had been, I suspect they would have told me the dates there too.
From a simple google search, I learned that Cardinals ballplayer Rogers Hornsby was also a member of the same lodge at the same time. (At least he was playing baseball in St. Louis from 1915-1926 and 1933-1937, so I assume his membership in the lodge overlapped my great-grandfather's.)
Update: This page has more information on what to expect to find from Masonic genealogical queries. Apparently individual local lodges may have slightly more information than the regional Grand Lodges, but still not a lot of biographical information is retained.
I sent my query to the grand lodge since their website contact page had a specific option for genealogical queries; that looked promising. And their response was fairly quick. (3 business days I believe.) But still, even if I were able to get a copy of my great-grandfather's petition to join, the only pertinent information it's likely to contain is birth date and address at the time of petition, and I know both pieces of information.
However, while there are lots of great small databases, and some people might find several documents, a search on my surnames yielded one record, for my great grandfather, who appears in a 1928 list of masons. I knew he was a mason. He states this in a 1926 bio for the Who's Who in North St. Louis. I was a little curious what other information appeared on the record, but not $30 curious, though.
However, it did spur me to do something I had thought about before, but hadn't yet done. I went to the Missouri Grand Lodge website, and on their 'contact' page, there's a form, which contains 'I have a genealogy related question' as an option. I sent a request for any information they had on my great grandfather.
They sent me his 'initiation' date, the date he 'passed'. and the date he was 'raised.' I don't know what these terms really mean, but that's ok. So I now know he was a member from 1919-1956. They also told me he was never an officer, though if he had been, I suspect they would have told me the dates there too.
From a simple google search, I learned that Cardinals ballplayer Rogers Hornsby was also a member of the same lodge at the same time. (At least he was playing baseball in St. Louis from 1915-1926 and 1933-1937, so I assume his membership in the lodge overlapped my great-grandfather's.)
Update: This page has more information on what to expect to find from Masonic genealogical queries. Apparently individual local lodges may have slightly more information than the regional Grand Lodges, but still not a lot of biographical information is retained.
I sent my query to the grand lodge since their website contact page had a specific option for genealogical queries; that looked promising. And their response was fairly quick. (3 business days I believe.) But still, even if I were able to get a copy of my great-grandfather's petition to join, the only pertinent information it's likely to contain is birth date and address at the time of petition, and I know both pieces of information.
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Carnival of Genealogy #30: Conferences
Carninval of Genealogy #30 has been posted, with several entries on conferences and seminars. All interesting reading.
I'm looking forward to the next carnival as it is on "Confirm or Debunk: Family myths, legends and lore," and my issue this month won't be if I have something to write about...but which of several options to choose.
I'm looking forward to the next carnival as it is on "Confirm or Debunk: Family myths, legends and lore," and my issue this month won't be if I have something to write about...but which of several options to choose.
Usenet - Google Groups
When I attended the local genealogical society presentation on Google resources, there were basically two items I thought could have been covered, but weren't. As it was, the presentation was already full with explaining advanced searching techniques on the basic search engine, the image search, the patent search, the product search, Google Books, Google Maps, and Google Earth. All in 90 minutes.
However, if they didn't cover these two items I knew about, it was possible they didn't know, and possible others might not either. Google has a lot of different services and search engines, and they don't make it possible to search them all at once, so some of them can remain hidden to users.
As I mentioned in the previous post, Google's News Archives can yield interesting finds, and now I am going to talk about what used to be called Usenet and which is now Google Groups.
Usenet began in the 1980s as a collection of discussion groups, mostly for college students and staff on any topic the users decided they wanted to talk about. Anything without limitations. Whenever a quorum decided a new topic was needed, it was added.
A company called DejaNews began organizing the Usenet archives in the late 1990s, and Google bought them in 2001 and formed Google Groups. Google Groups serves as both an archive going back to 1981 and a continuation of all the discussion groups. (This has frightened many former college students who began to ask, "Everything I posted there is now available for potential employers - or my kids! - to read? Forever?" It is possible to remove one's old posts, though if anyone quoted what you said, only they can remove that post.
A few of the groups that might be of of obvious interest to genealogists and family historians: Alt.Obituaries, and two dozen groups or so under the heading Soc.Genealogy.
Of course you can search all groups at once on the main page. Just be forewarned. In the search results, before clicking on something, take a look at what the title of the discussion-group is. This will likely give you a clue as to what posts you are likely to find in that group. This could change your mind on whether or not to read the post.
However, if they didn't cover these two items I knew about, it was possible they didn't know, and possible others might not either. Google has a lot of different services and search engines, and they don't make it possible to search them all at once, so some of them can remain hidden to users.
As I mentioned in the previous post, Google's News Archives can yield interesting finds, and now I am going to talk about what used to be called Usenet and which is now Google Groups.
Usenet began in the 1980s as a collection of discussion groups, mostly for college students and staff on any topic the users decided they wanted to talk about. Anything without limitations. Whenever a quorum decided a new topic was needed, it was added.
A company called DejaNews began organizing the Usenet archives in the late 1990s, and Google bought them in 2001 and formed Google Groups. Google Groups serves as both an archive going back to 1981 and a continuation of all the discussion groups. (This has frightened many former college students who began to ask, "Everything I posted there is now available for potential employers - or my kids! - to read? Forever?" It is possible to remove one's old posts, though if anyone quoted what you said, only they can remove that post.
A few of the groups that might be of of obvious interest to genealogists and family historians: Alt.Obituaries, and two dozen groups or so under the heading Soc.Genealogy.
Of course you can search all groups at once on the main page. Just be forewarned. In the search results, before clicking on something, take a look at what the title of the discussion-group is. This will likely give you a clue as to what posts you are likely to find in that group. This could change your mind on whether or not to read the post.
Friday, August 17, 2007
Google News Archive
For those unaware, Google News has an archives section that goes back to prior to 1920. You've got to pay for the complete articles, but they give you snippets. And once you know the newspaper and date, its possible you know people in the localities who have access to the newspaper archives through local libraries and such, so you might not need to pay, though its inexpensive.
As an example, I searched for the surname Cruvant. There are 53 results. A lot are articles written by a Dr. Bernard Cruvant, who was my grandfather's first cousin. I'm somewhat curious what he had to say about spanking children in 1949, but I was more pleased to discover the obituary in the Baton Rouge Advocate for Bernard's brother-in-law, Sammie Brown. Even the short free snippet contained his exact time of death, and the fact he competed on the LSU track team. Not a direct ancestor, but still interesting information to add to their files.
.
As an example, I searched for the surname Cruvant. There are 53 results. A lot are articles written by a Dr. Bernard Cruvant, who was my grandfather's first cousin. I'm somewhat curious what he had to say about spanking children in 1949, but I was more pleased to discover the obituary in the Baton Rouge Advocate for Bernard's brother-in-law, Sammie Brown. Even the short free snippet contained his exact time of death, and the fact he competed on the LSU track team. Not a direct ancestor, but still interesting information to add to their files.
.
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Microfilm
Made my first trip to the genealogy section of the local library today. Had two items to look up on microfilm. An obituary and a naturalization record. I figured it wouldn't take me long, I could figure out the process, and come back on a weekend when I had more time, and look up other records.
Kind of embarrassing since I talked in my last post about how technology has an inverse-age curve, and I needed assistance from someone I recognized from Tuesday night with the microfilm device both times. Of course, while skilled with a computer, I am very mechanically disinclined. If I could thread the film somehow with a keyboard or a mouse, it would have been simple.
I was taught how to use a microfilm reader back in grade school, and while they have changed a little, the basic process is the same. But my 20th high school reunion is coming up, and my recollection was fuzzy.
I brought my digital camera with me hoping I could take a picture off the screen and not have to spend 25 cents a copy. It didn't work. The picture was all white. There might be a special setting I need to set it on, so I'll probably spend some time with the users manual before going back. I did bring money with me as a backup, though, so I ended up spending 50c.
Kind of embarrassing since I talked in my last post about how technology has an inverse-age curve, and I needed assistance from someone I recognized from Tuesday night with the microfilm device both times. Of course, while skilled with a computer, I am very mechanically disinclined. If I could thread the film somehow with a keyboard or a mouse, it would have been simple.
I was taught how to use a microfilm reader back in grade school, and while they have changed a little, the basic process is the same. But my 20th high school reunion is coming up, and my recollection was fuzzy.
I brought my digital camera with me hoping I could take a picture off the screen and not have to spend 25 cents a copy. It didn't work. The picture was all white. There might be a special setting I need to set it on, so I'll probably spend some time with the users manual before going back. I did bring money with me as a backup, though, so I ended up spending 50c.
St. Louis Genealogical Society
Tuesday night I attended my first meeting of the St. Louis Genealogical Society. I've read other genea-blogger discussions on genealogical societies, such as Creative Gene and Genea-Musings so I had some idea of what to expect.
I wasn't surprised that I was the youngest person in the room. I kind of hoped there might be one or two others in my age bracket, but I didn't see any. The presentation topic was on how to use Google, and I didn't expect to learn much, but I did expect to get an idea of the quality of the presentations. Often in any group that solicits guest speakers from within its own membership - regardless of the group - you're going to get questionable expertise. And since technology topics still have an inverse age-curve, I figured the topic would be a good test for me. If the information presented was full of holes, or worse, incorrect, I would have doubts about the information presented in topics I was less familiar with.
I was happy with the presentation. There were additional features they could have mentioned, but in the 90 minute presentation they covered a lot of ground. I'm not sure if everyone in the audience followed well enough to be able to use the information on their return home, but it was still accurate and useful information. And one suggestion was made that I hadn't considered. (Searching the Patent database. I've searched it before at its main USPTO.gov site, but not for family surnames.)
I'm on the fence on whether to join the society or not. Most of their online databases are open acess on their website. They do have a local marriage database members-only, but it stops in the 1890s, and my earliest St. Louis ancestors arrived in 1885, so I know it won't be very helpful. (I have ancestors who were in the US in the 1700s, but not St. Louis) They have some useful CDs for sale containing data and maps and such, but non-members can purchase them for only a slight surcharge. Monthly presentations at their meetings are open to the public. I may purchase one year membership though in order to take a multi-session Beginning Genealogy course, which appears to be open only to members and is free with membership. Though at the moment I don't see why I would renew the membership afterwards. (That said, I might still volunteer for data-entry/proofreading. If they offered a VolunteerHour/$ exchange rate so people can volunteer instead of pay dues, I would definitely consider it. Of course, I didn't ask, but I might make the suggestion to someone at the next meeting I attend.)
I wasn't surprised that I was the youngest person in the room. I kind of hoped there might be one or two others in my age bracket, but I didn't see any. The presentation topic was on how to use Google, and I didn't expect to learn much, but I did expect to get an idea of the quality of the presentations. Often in any group that solicits guest speakers from within its own membership - regardless of the group - you're going to get questionable expertise. And since technology topics still have an inverse age-curve, I figured the topic would be a good test for me. If the information presented was full of holes, or worse, incorrect, I would have doubts about the information presented in topics I was less familiar with.
I was happy with the presentation. There were additional features they could have mentioned, but in the 90 minute presentation they covered a lot of ground. I'm not sure if everyone in the audience followed well enough to be able to use the information on their return home, but it was still accurate and useful information. And one suggestion was made that I hadn't considered. (Searching the Patent database. I've searched it before at its main USPTO.gov site, but not for family surnames.)
I'm on the fence on whether to join the society or not. Most of their online databases are open acess on their website. They do have a local marriage database members-only, but it stops in the 1890s, and my earliest St. Louis ancestors arrived in 1885, so I know it won't be very helpful. (I have ancestors who were in the US in the 1700s, but not St. Louis) They have some useful CDs for sale containing data and maps and such, but non-members can purchase them for only a slight surcharge. Monthly presentations at their meetings are open to the public. I may purchase one year membership though in order to take a multi-session Beginning Genealogy course, which appears to be open only to members and is free with membership. Though at the moment I don't see why I would renew the membership afterwards. (That said, I might still volunteer for data-entry/proofreading. If they offered a VolunteerHour/$ exchange rate so people can volunteer instead of pay dues, I would definitely consider it. Of course, I didn't ask, but I might make the suggestion to someone at the next meeting I attend.)
Sunday, August 12, 2007
What If...
It’s time for the Aug 15th Carnival of Genealogy. I was sure I wouldn’t be contributing to this one. The topic is Genealogy conferences and seminars, and I’ve never been to one. If I’m going to blog about something, it should be something with which I’m familiar. So I was content that I was going to sit this one out, and see what others had to say.
Then Janice at CowHampshire, admitting she had never attended a conference, posted her “Genealogy seminars I’d like to see” The list was humorous, I was listed as a host of one of the seminars, and I realized I could come up with a humorous list, too, but now it would be redundant, or worse, copying, unless I came up with my own unique twist.
Then Jasia, at Creative Gene, posted her suggestions for conferences from the perspective of one who had attended…and I realized there were some vague familiarities, and I had my topic.
What to expect when your favorite genealogical conference merges with a local SF convention.
1) Possible panel/seminar topics:
a. Homer Simpson’s Family Tree
b. Genealogy references in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: from Nature's Nobility to graveyard visits.
c. Did your great grandparents read science fiction? An introduction to First Fandom for Young Adults.
d. Did your ancestors get eaten by Grendel? Where would they be buried if they were?
e. Making whoopee in the 17th century, were there any differences? (midnight panel)
f. Podcasting for the Genea-blogger.
g. Heraldry – What your local branch of the Society for Creative Anachronism has to offer your local genealogy society – and vice versa.
h. The 1891 and 1901 England Census are online? Is HG Wells listed? (Yes - ancestry.co.uk, image)
2) Genealogy Guest of Honor: (live via time machine) Alex Haley. Huge line for autographs, but a smaller subset of attendees will turn their nose up, claim the writer was a hack, and refuse to get in line, even if they’ve read all his books.
3) There will be a masquerade. A chance to dress up like your ancestors – or your future descendents! Prizes will be awarded.
4) Art Show will have new categories for Coats of Arms and family photographs.
5) Free alcohol in the room parties after hours will lead to genealogists logging on to OneWorldTree and adding entries to prove they are descended from Isaac Newton or Beowulf.
Then Janice at CowHampshire, admitting she had never attended a conference, posted her “Genealogy seminars I’d like to see” The list was humorous, I was listed as a host of one of the seminars, and I realized I could come up with a humorous list, too, but now it would be redundant, or worse, copying, unless I came up with my own unique twist.
Then Jasia, at Creative Gene, posted her suggestions for conferences from the perspective of one who had attended…and I realized there were some vague familiarities, and I had my topic.
What to expect when your favorite genealogical conference merges with a local SF convention.
1) Possible panel/seminar topics:
a. Homer Simpson’s Family Tree
b. Genealogy references in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: from Nature's Nobility to graveyard visits.
c. Did your great grandparents read science fiction? An introduction to First Fandom for Young Adults.
d. Did your ancestors get eaten by Grendel? Where would they be buried if they were?
e. Making whoopee in the 17th century, were there any differences? (midnight panel)
f. Podcasting for the Genea-blogger.
g. Heraldry – What your local branch of the Society for Creative Anachronism has to offer your local genealogy society – and vice versa.
h. The 1891 and 1901 England Census are online? Is HG Wells listed? (Yes - ancestry.co.uk, image)
2) Genealogy Guest of Honor: (live via time machine) Alex Haley. Huge line for autographs, but a smaller subset of attendees will turn their nose up, claim the writer was a hack, and refuse to get in line, even if they’ve read all his books.
3) There will be a masquerade. A chance to dress up like your ancestors – or your future descendents! Prizes will be awarded.
4) Art Show will have new categories for Coats of Arms and family photographs.
5) Free alcohol in the room parties after hours will lead to genealogists logging on to OneWorldTree and adding entries to prove they are descended from Isaac Newton or Beowulf.
Friday, August 10, 2007
Deciphering an old family joke
My great-grandmother, Bertha, died in 1978. Her father died in 1911. I posted a picture of his tombstone , engraved almost entirely in Hebrew, a month ago.
I was 9 when she passed away, and I remember her vaguely, but only in her later years confined to a wheelchair at a retirement home. My father and uncle tell stories about her, and one they've told often is how she always referred to her father, and insisted everyone else do the same. Whenever you invoked his Hebrew name, Moshe Leyb, you were always supposed to follow it with, "the King". She never explained why. (Outside the family, he used the Americanized name, Morris.)
One might guess that it had something to do with family politics. Though it wasn't clear whether it was completely out of respect for someone who was the 'head' of the family, or whether there was a little poking fun at someone who wasn't always. We left it as a quirky inside joke we would probably never understand completely.
And then I found his tombstone, and discovered the answer was written on it. While my generation and my parent's generation know Hebrew characters enough to follow along in the prayer book during services, and we have a small vocabulary, we don't think in Hebrew. And his surname was Cruvant, which begins with a C, so in English it's not readily apparent.
If you know Hebrew well, you probably already realize what I finally realized, but since most of you probably don't, I'll spell it out. My great-great grandfather's initials in Hebrew were: מ ל ק (MLK), which is Hebrew for King.
The exact family politics behind the joke is still obscure, but it's clear how the epithet arose.
I was 9 when she passed away, and I remember her vaguely, but only in her later years confined to a wheelchair at a retirement home. My father and uncle tell stories about her, and one they've told often is how she always referred to her father, and insisted everyone else do the same. Whenever you invoked his Hebrew name, Moshe Leyb, you were always supposed to follow it with, "the King". She never explained why. (Outside the family, he used the Americanized name, Morris.)
One might guess that it had something to do with family politics. Though it wasn't clear whether it was completely out of respect for someone who was the 'head' of the family, or whether there was a little poking fun at someone who wasn't always. We left it as a quirky inside joke we would probably never understand completely.
And then I found his tombstone, and discovered the answer was written on it. While my generation and my parent's generation know Hebrew characters enough to follow along in the prayer book during services, and we have a small vocabulary, we don't think in Hebrew. And his surname was Cruvant, which begins with a C, so in English it's not readily apparent.
If you know Hebrew well, you probably already realize what I finally realized, but since most of you probably don't, I'll spell it out. My great-great grandfather's initials in Hebrew were: מ ל ק (MLK), which is Hebrew for King.
The exact family politics behind the joke is still obscure, but it's clear how the epithet arose.
Descendants
I found CowHampshire's reference to my blog today humorous, but all things considered, I am probably not related to Vlad the Impaler (Dracula), or his father Dracul. It's more probable (but still unlikely) that one of my ancestors was one of 'the impaled'.
But I did just discover there are some who claim that the British Royal Family are direct descendents. (Site claims Charles is Dracul's 16th Great Grandson...through Dracula's brother Vlad (the Monk).
Not too surprising since the royal lines of Europe are known to have intermingled. But perhaps reason for the British to be a little worried.
But I did just discover there are some who claim that the British Royal Family are direct descendents. (Site claims Charles is Dracul's 16th Great Grandson...through Dracula's brother Vlad (the Monk).
Not too surprising since the royal lines of Europe are known to have intermingled. But perhaps reason for the British to be a little worried.
Monday, August 6, 2007
Proper Storage of Historical Documents
Alamasu, Romania
County: Salaj
Hungarian alternate names: Varalmas; Nagyalmas
Jewish population 1900: 51
Jewish population 1910: 35
Jewish population 1930: 30
Most of the decline in those twenty years may be attributable to one 8 member family. However, there may have been more than three births, and additional departures.
Jewish population after 1944 transport to Auschwitz: 0 (source)
County: Salaj
Hungarian alternate names: Varalmas; Nagyalmas
Jewish population 1900: 51
Jewish population 1910: 35
Jewish population 1930: 30
Most of the decline in those twenty years may be attributable to one 8 member family. However, there may have been more than three births, and additional departures.
Jewish population after 1944 transport to Auschwitz: 0 (source)
For personal reasons, I’m glad that family made it out. The year was 1912. My grandfather was 4. He remembered little, but an older brother, Ted, had obtained a sixth grade education before leaving. At least, that’s what he claimed in a note to the government that provided a translation of my grandfather’s birth certificate which they had obtained from Nagyalmas, and which revealed the information my grandfather had previoulsy given as his birth date was incorrect.
I recently discovered a school report I did in fifth grade on my grandfather’s immigration. I opened it without thinking I’d find much of interest. My sister had done a similar school report for the same teacher, and I knew we had been allowed to ‘make things up’. The purpose wasn’t to find out information about our family, but to show we had an understanding of the ‘immigrant experience.’
But, unlike my sister’s which was a pseudo-diary of my great-grandmother, and even the ‘real information’ would have been entirely secondhand from my grandfather, mine was ‘written’ by my grandfather, so I had the direct source, and mine also included photos and documents which he must have provided. In it there was a copy of the birth certificate, and the translation.
At least, that was my thought at first glance, and then I did a doubletake. The birth certificate wasn’t on white paper like the rest of the report. It was more yellowed than the rest of the pages. I talked to my mom, and she didn’t remember the birth certificate. I’ve decided it’s not a copy. Well, a copy of the original, but the copy that the Nagyalmas government sent, and I put it directly in my school report, to be discovered 27 years later. Brilliant.
Sunday, August 5, 2007
SS-5
About 6-8 weeks ago I ordered the SS-5 for an ancestor of mine. The SS-5 is the Social Security Application form. It finally arrived this weekend. (Link describes what the SS-5 is, and how to order one.)
The SS-5 has a lot of useful information, including where the individual was employed, their address, and names of boh parents, but I ordered it primarily because it is supposed to contain as detailed a place of birth as the applicant knew. I am trying to figure out the town in Russia he was born in. Every other document just says ‘Russia’. He’s one of my Dudelsack ancestors, though he would have had his name changed at age 4.
Unfortunately, by 1936 when Social Security began and he applied, both of his parents were dead, and it turns out he didn’t know the town, so I am still in the dark.
Sunday, July 29, 2007
How much to say?
When I first saw the initial theme (family photos) for the Aug 1 Carnival of Genealogy, I noticed nothing wrong with it. Which is strange, since I have written over the years several blog posts involving copyright issues.
For example
1) When Google was sued for copyright violations,
2) The debunking of Poor Man’s Copyright by Snopes and myself.
3) Elvis Presley entering the public domain in Europe
4) Martha Reeves’ complaint to the FTC about Ebay
5) And my own violation of copyright law regarding photographs back in 2003
So I should have spotted the issues involved, but others did.
So the theme got changed to moral/ethical and legal issues we’ve experienced involving genealogy or genea-blogging.
I haven’t been researching my genealogy or genea-blogging very long. But I can think of one issue I’ve faced. I’m putting together a family website with all of the information I’m gathering from my research. It’s password protected so only family members will be able to access it. However, in listening to a tape recording made of Relative A who passed away several years ago, he made a comment about a dispute he had with Relative B. A dispute he claimed caused him to cease speaking with Relative B.
Relative B is still alive. I’m not sure he knows why Relative A stopped speaking with him – for if he did know, I suspect it was a dispute that could easily have been worked out, as I think Relative A was unfortunately misinformed.
I’ve decided there is no good that can come of putting the information on the website. Or of telling Relative B, since the dispute can no longer be resolved, and it’s even possible Relative A exaggerated a bit on the tape when they said they had ceased speaking with Relative B. It’s possible Relative B never knew Relative A was upset, and if so, I have no desire to inform him now.
It’s on the tape. Several others have copies of the tape if they wish to listen to it. It’s not like I’m burying the information. And it’s the only family dispute of this nature that I am aware of. I knew Relative A well, and the idea he would cease speaking to anyone over anger is surprising – but as I said, if he wasn’t exaggerating, I think he was misinformed about an action Relative B took.
Obviously, I also faced an issue of how much to say in this post.
Friday, July 27, 2007
Through marriage
On a mailing list a couple weeks ago, we were discussing who had famous relatives. I brought up my questionable oneworldtree genealogy of course.
In the past day a couple newcomers added to the thread. One said he was related through marriage to Mary Todd Lincoln.
I thought about the obvious joke “You’re married to Mary Todd Lincoln?”
But came up with a better response.
“Through marriage I’m related to Jesus. My second cousin, once removed, is a nun.”
Well, she is.
I went to high school with her niece; If she shows up at an upcoming reunion, I'll ask her about her Uncle Jesus.
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Dieku
Apparently a poet is putting up a new form of poetry around Manhattan. He is calling himself “Nick Beef” which is a reference to an empty grave next to the grave of Lee Harvey Oswald.
(Click to enlarge)
The words in Beef’s dieku above aren’t just references to chess pieces but to actual moves that can lead to a checkmate.
(source)
Saturday, July 21, 2007
I may not like, Bush, but...
I don’t believe that the sins of a First cousin, five times removed should be visited on someone, even if they happen to share your name.
I certainly don’t believe that the sins of a tenth cousin should be visited on someone. As that describes W’s relationship to me, according to One World Tree. (Have I neglected to mention this before when talking about Chaucer?)
Friday, July 20, 2007
Friday Not-So-Random Five
Five names from various census databases at ancestry.com
Some may think the names sound somewhat familiar.
Some may think the names sound somewhat familiar.
Louis Malfoy
Scotland, 1871
Age: abt 12
Arthur Weasley
US, 1920
Age: abt 25
Peter Voldemior
US 1900
Age 56
Septima Snape
England 1891
Age 24
Harry Potter (father named James)
England, 1901
Age: abt 1
Update: Changed a couple of the names because I liked them better.
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Coincidentally...
If you found the information about my family surname interesting, you might find these blog posts interesting as well. Apparently there’s a “Carnival of Genealogy” where bloggers who blog about genealogy post thematically twice a month. Who knew? (maybe me). My favorite of the bunch so far is Cow Hampshire’s post on the surname: LNU. At first glance it looks like an unusual surname, but it is really quite common!
It seems my blog is the only one of the bunch that is Genealogy only part of the time. But that doesn’t seem to be a problem. Probably because I am writing posts in this category during the rest of the month, too. At the beginning of the month the theme was on Independence Day, which was the impetus for my post on Independent Thinking.
So some of you who have followed some of the above links and learned the theme for the next carnival, may be expecting that in a couple weeks you will see a family photograph of some sort on this blog. I’ll try not to disappoint.
Monday, July 16, 2007
Now, that's impressive!
Last Tuesday (6 days ago) around 7 am (Central Daylight Time) or 1 pm (British Summer Time) I went online and ordered a marriage certificate from the British General Register Office. (The marriage took place in 1902 in the Great Synagogue of London, for those curious.)
It arrived today. And that, in itself, is impressive, because it took over two weeks to get documents from the Missouri Archives, and you know, I’ve driven to Jefferson City and back in one day. And I received a postcard from the Missouri Archives that initially told me it could take up to 8 weeks. It didn’t, but it could have.
So a six day turnaround from London is impressive. But that’s not the most impressive thing.
The receipt that came with the certificate says the “Despatch Date” was July 16th. I double checked my calendar. Yep. Same-day mail.
Now, someone is going to point out that London is six hours ahead of me. But, OK. Let’s say it was 8 am in London, and 2 am here in St. Louis when they mailed it. For it to be sitting in my mailbox at 5 pm when I return from work is STILL BLOODY IMPRESSIVE! There was an ocean to cross!
Saturday, July 14, 2007
Dudelsack
The Dudelsack was once perhaps the most widespread bagpipe in Europe. German-speaking people today still often apply the name generically to all bagpipes, though the correct word is “sackpfife” (literally, sackpipe). An ancient instrument, it is seen - sometimes in considerable detail - in a large number of early paintings including some great masterpieces. At some point, probably in the nineteenth century, it seems to have all but vanished. There exists today only one early specimen, in an Austrian museum, and there is some controversy about how old all or parts of that pipe are. Nevertheless it has been possible to reconstruct the Dudelsack through a combination of study of early paintings and music, and today it enjoys a great revival evidenced by many players and numerous makers. - Source
I have ancestors who were named Dudelsack. They were from Poland/Russia, and not Germany, but as the snippet above indicates, the musical instrument was widespread. I’m not sure if it means they were musicians, instrument makers, or whether someone resembled a bagpipe in a appearance. They changed their name when they entered the US.
It’s a pretty rare name. In the US 1920 census, there were 2 Dudelsacks. Jacob, and his wife, Ida. On the ship manifests from the 1880s-1910s, 30-40 different Dudelsacks arrived in the US. It appears only Jacob kept his name. Jacob must have been extremely proud of his ancestry. I have no idea if I’m related; he appears to have come from Austria, and my Dudelsack ancestor didn’t.
The other possible reason for the ‘disappearance’ is that all the Dudelsacks who arrived in the US suffered massive spelling errors on the various census. It’s not an easy name to spell. At Castlegarden.org, my ancestor is listed under ‘Dudersack’, and a possible brother under ‘Dudelsuck’. In the 1920 census, there is one family of Doodlesseks in Massachussets.
Monday, July 9, 2007
For a Reform Jewish amateur genealogist, this is the ultimate test of one’s religious education:
With the help of this guide, I succeeded.
Line 1: Here is interred
Line 2: Reb Moshe Leyb, son of
Line 3: Ahron Kruvant.
Line 4: Died five days into
Line 5: the month of Tishrei
Line 6: in the year 5672.
Line 7: May his soul be bound in the bonds of life.
5 Tishrei 5672 = Sept 26-27, 1911.
No indication at all of when he was born. Birth dates aren’t as important in the Jewish tradition.
Those of you who have always wondered what my middle initial “C” stood for…the picture above gives you a huge clue.
Friday, July 6, 2007
Friday Five
In a similar vein to the five I came up with last week, here are five more names from various census reports.
1900 Census - Valjean Churchill – Montgomery PA – Age 2
1850 Census – Javert Miller – Stamford CT – Age 9
1870 Census – Cosette Byron – Rome OH – Age 4
1930 Census – Fantine Borges – Tampa Fl – Age 21
1881 Census – Victor Hugo Hitchcock – Leicestershire England – Age 5
Friday, June 29, 2007
Independent Thinking
I leave town early tomorrow morning so I am posting this a little earlier than I normally would.
July 1st is Canadian Independence Day, July 4th is US Independence Day. My great-grandfather Barney, when he entered the US for the first time in 1907, wrote down that his nationality was Canadian. He had likely been living there for 3 years. My suspicion is that he misunderstood the question, but it’s possible that he had officially become a Canadian citizen. This may not have been a complicated process since he was already a British citizen, and Canada wasn’t completely independent yet. On my mother’s side I have several relatives who discovered a need to leave the US and enter Canada in the late 1700s. So there is cause for me to celebrate July 1 as well as July 4.
My ancestral lines have never been shy from taking a stand — but we have often stood separately, from each other, and in some cases, from ourselves.
I am a Son of the Confederacy and of The Union. The Civil War was a war between brothers, and it was common that families split down the middle. (Especially in a border state like Missouri, though my ancestors who wore either blue or grey weren’t living here at the time.) I also have ancestors who fought on both sides of the Revolutionary War - loyalists and revolutionaries (link to a poem I wrote several years ago). One ancestor first went to a revolutionary camp, and after a few weeks, bolted, and joined the loyalist Butler’s Rangers. It’s not clear if it was a change of heart/mind, or if he discovered like the lost student he was in the wrong classroom.
Naturally, the Loyalists are those I mentioned above who found the need to speed over to Canada when the war was over.
We weren’t of divided mind during WWII. Both grandfathers and multiple great-uncles fought with the Allied Powers in various theaters. My father lost an uncle in France, and several relatives of my mother, who had remained in Romania, died in the concentration camps. I expect more relatives died there than we know, it’s just that much of our family genealogy stops on the border of the US, and we don’t know who remained. In my mom’s case, there were two survivors who migrated to Israel and started doing the research themselves to find us.
This first through fourth of July myself, my siblings, my parents, uncles, aunts and first-cousins will all be together, celebrating, in Costa Rica. We may not like the current administration, but this is no protest. We gather every few years for a reunion, in different locales, and we sought an extended-holiday weekend to plan around.
At these reunions, my parents’ generation always leads a discussion of family history. Passing on the stories they’ve been told, or have witnessed. I’m going to be expected to speak this year on my recent research. I shouldn’t be nervous; it’s my family. I’ve recited poetry in front of strangers. But then again — strangers are more forgiving (or at least more forgetful) than family.
Friday (not completely) Random Five
Music? I don’t listen to music at work.
In the past I’ve done five random books.
But this seemed to be appropriate due to my latest obsession.
Five names from various censi. (I’m not completely sure what type of noun the word ‘census’ comes from, and whether the Latin plural would be censi, not all Latin words that end in ‘us’ are declined in that manner, but what the heck, it sounds erudite.)
Belgium Bonn
Born: about 1915
Home in 1920: Syracuse, NY
Switzerland Savage
Born: about 1910
Home in 1910: Shelby, TN
Madrid Jordan
Born: about 1927
Home in 1930: Chicago, IL
Jerusalem Smith
Born: about 1836
Home in 1841: Warwickshire, England
Nagasaki Iataro
Born ? (age not given in this particular census)
Home in 1900: Kauai Island, Hawaii
Update: For those curious, but not curious enough to look it up, Census is a supine noun, which takes a fourth declension form. So the plural would be ‘census’ as well.
Monday, June 25, 2007
Is Genealogy Bunk?
There’s an article in this month’s issue of Smithsonian talking about how ‘genealogy is bunk’. Some bloggers have already talked about it, such as here. Not having read the article, I’m not going to talk about it, except to think about why I have dived so furiously into this activity, and why I enjoy doing this, and why I don’t think it’s silly. (But honestly, being a member of science fiction/fantasy fandom, I am quite used to people thinking my activities are silly. What could possibly be sillier than dressing up as a jester and going to a renaissance festival, or dressing up in a Starfleet Uniform and going to a convention?)
One common accusation is that genealogists are seeking how they are related to Napoleon or Chaucer or Triboulet. Someone reading my blog might assume that is my intent, but actually the ancestral line that might actually tie me to Chaucer if the 20-sided-die rolls an 18 six times in a row is the line I am least interested in researching. I don’t want my mom to be offended by this, but one of her relatives has so researched the heck out of the tree, and has taken it back to the early 1600s, with certainty, there’s nothing left for me to do except try to prove/disprove the line to Chaucer, which is likely impossible, and I would rather just accept it. So if that were my intent, I’d be done.
I’d love to extend the other lines that far, including my maternal grandfather’s line, though it’s not going to happen. In Europe, there was a series of things called Pogroms and one major one called the Holocaust, that among other things destroyed most of the records I would need. And the records that do exist are mostly offline in Europe. I have a relative on my paternal side who has spent fifteen years, and traced one line back to the early 1800s in Lithuania, and it’s a little fuzzy there. She has had to actually go to Lithuania several times and spend weeks researching. In my mind she has set a marker indicating what’s possible with the most extreme effort. And I know I don’t have what it takes to make that effort, so I will just have to do what I can, and see what I find.
Genealogy for me is a puzzle. And one that matters to me personally. I love puzzles, and always have. My paternal grandfather taught/passed on a love for the crossword. As a child I had a subscription to Games magazine. Logic puzzles have always been my favorite though. Drawing the tables, and filling in the Xs from the clues given. No need for any trivial knowledge, just following a series of logical steps until conclusions are reached and the entire table is filled in successfully. That was what I enjoyed most when I was a computer programmer as well – the puzzle of getting the computer to do what you wanted it to do. Figuring out what was going wrong when it always did.
In 1987 my paternal grandfather was interviewed and recorded on his knowledge of family history. He talked about how his father, Barney, would say he was born in England, though my grandfather believed he was really born in Poland, and emigrated to England at 3 or 4. He also ‘knew’ that Barney, a brother, and their father explored North America – visiting Winnipeg, Memphis, and St. Louis before either returning to England, or sending for the rest of the family. There are certainly a lot of details there, but still somewhat fuzzy on particulars. In about a month of research, mostly sitting on my butt in front of a computer terminal, I have found English census records, ship manifests and other records documenting some of their life in England, and the multiple oceancrossings, and of course, raising more questions.
I know now that Barney’s brother Sol didn’t make the initial trip. (Older than Barney, and recently married, I suspect he stayed home as a means of support for the women and children.) The father and son left England in 1904, and were in Winnipeg for 3 years. (That 3 years was one of the bigger surprises; I’m not sure anyone in my family expected that their exploration was that lengthy. Maybe they needed 3 years to earn enough money to make the return trip. [Update: Actually, they were only in Canada for 3 months]) In 1907 they crossed the Canadian border, and that’s how I know how long they’d been in Canada, because the border crossing document includes this information. It also says they’re headed for St. Paul, MN…a surprise…to join a heretofore unknown cousin…and I’m not sure yet if they ever went. I have the ship manifest from 1908 when they returned, with Sol, at Ellis Island. So obviously they weren’t in the US long. And the ship manifest when the wives and children arrived five months later. All the Ellis Island records say they’re headed for Memphis. And the 1909 one includes an address the father and two sons were now allegedly living at in Memphis. However, one month later, Sol’s wife gives birth in St. Louis. And in 1910 (the census) all of them are clearly in St. Louis. So there are a lot of questions I have about the immigration to America, but a lot of the pieces are also falling into place, and my family knows a lot more than it used to.
Does this information matter? Not in the grand scheme of things. But if we want to get philosophical – nothing matters. Nothing at all. The Earth will continue rotating on its axis until the universe comes to an end. Instead of getting all depressed about this, and committing mass suicide – paralleling Disney’s false portrayal of lemmings – cheer up! Real lemmings don’t act that way, and neither should humans! Life is what we make of it. So we should all do what we enjoy. Though it’s nice to do what we enjoy, while also thinking about those that are going to follow us. I know I have an interest in the lives of my ancestors. I consider it likely that one or more of my descendants (either direct if I am lucky, or through my brother/cousins if not) will be grateful for the research and archiving I do now.
One common accusation is that genealogists are seeking how they are related to Napoleon or Chaucer or Triboulet. Someone reading my blog might assume that is my intent, but actually the ancestral line that might actually tie me to Chaucer if the 20-sided-die rolls an 18 six times in a row is the line I am least interested in researching. I don’t want my mom to be offended by this, but one of her relatives has so researched the heck out of the tree, and has taken it back to the early 1600s, with certainty, there’s nothing left for me to do except try to prove/disprove the line to Chaucer, which is likely impossible, and I would rather just accept it. So if that were my intent, I’d be done.
I’d love to extend the other lines that far, including my maternal grandfather’s line, though it’s not going to happen. In Europe, there was a series of things called Pogroms and one major one called the Holocaust, that among other things destroyed most of the records I would need. And the records that do exist are mostly offline in Europe. I have a relative on my paternal side who has spent fifteen years, and traced one line back to the early 1800s in Lithuania, and it’s a little fuzzy there. She has had to actually go to Lithuania several times and spend weeks researching. In my mind she has set a marker indicating what’s possible with the most extreme effort. And I know I don’t have what it takes to make that effort, so I will just have to do what I can, and see what I find.
Genealogy for me is a puzzle. And one that matters to me personally. I love puzzles, and always have. My paternal grandfather taught/passed on a love for the crossword. As a child I had a subscription to Games magazine. Logic puzzles have always been my favorite though. Drawing the tables, and filling in the Xs from the clues given. No need for any trivial knowledge, just following a series of logical steps until conclusions are reached and the entire table is filled in successfully. That was what I enjoyed most when I was a computer programmer as well – the puzzle of getting the computer to do what you wanted it to do. Figuring out what was going wrong when it always did.
In 1987 my paternal grandfather was interviewed and recorded on his knowledge of family history. He talked about how his father, Barney, would say he was born in England, though my grandfather believed he was really born in Poland, and emigrated to England at 3 or 4. He also ‘knew’ that Barney, a brother, and their father explored North America – visiting Winnipeg, Memphis, and St. Louis before either returning to England, or sending for the rest of the family. There are certainly a lot of details there, but still somewhat fuzzy on particulars. In about a month of research, mostly sitting on my butt in front of a computer terminal, I have found English census records, ship manifests and other records documenting some of their life in England, and the multiple oceancrossings, and of course, raising more questions.
I know now that Barney’s brother Sol didn’t make the initial trip. (Older than Barney, and recently married, I suspect he stayed home as a means of support for the women and children.) The father and son left England in 1904, and were in Winnipeg for 3 years. (That 3 years was one of the bigger surprises; I’m not sure anyone in my family expected that their exploration was that lengthy. Maybe they needed 3 years to earn enough money to make the return trip. [Update: Actually, they were only in Canada for 3 months]) In 1907 they crossed the Canadian border, and that’s how I know how long they’d been in Canada, because the border crossing document includes this information. It also says they’re headed for St. Paul, MN…a surprise…to join a heretofore unknown cousin…and I’m not sure yet if they ever went. I have the ship manifest from 1908 when they returned, with Sol, at Ellis Island. So obviously they weren’t in the US long. And the ship manifest when the wives and children arrived five months later. All the Ellis Island records say they’re headed for Memphis. And the 1909 one includes an address the father and two sons were now allegedly living at in Memphis. However, one month later, Sol’s wife gives birth in St. Louis. And in 1910 (the census) all of them are clearly in St. Louis. So there are a lot of questions I have about the immigration to America, but a lot of the pieces are also falling into place, and my family knows a lot more than it used to.
Does this information matter? Not in the grand scheme of things. But if we want to get philosophical – nothing matters. Nothing at all. The Earth will continue rotating on its axis until the universe comes to an end. Instead of getting all depressed about this, and committing mass suicide – paralleling Disney’s false portrayal of lemmings – cheer up! Real lemmings don’t act that way, and neither should humans! Life is what we make of it. So we should all do what we enjoy. Though it’s nice to do what we enjoy, while also thinking about those that are going to follow us. I know I have an interest in the lives of my ancestors. I consider it likely that one or more of my descendants (either direct if I am lucky, or through my brother/cousins if not) will be grateful for the research and archiving I do now.
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
My Great Uncle Mandell
I never knew Mandell, my great-uncle, the youngest son of Barney. He fought in WWII, just like his older two brothers. However, he didn’t return home. I’ve known for awhile that my uncle had Mandell’s war journal. And I’ve mentioned to him I’d like to read it. Last time I said this was a couple years ago when he wrote a poem based on his own reading of the journal, and showed the poem to me. He said sure. My uncle and I have a similar personality in that we are both forgetful, and if you want something from us, you sometimes need to be persistent. And I haven’t been. It was always something I could ask for again later.
In a conversation with my mother Sunday night, I discovered she had a photocopy of the journal. So I went home from Father’s Day dinner with it. Mandell’s handwriting was better than my own. But a chimpanzee’s handwriting is better than my own. Luckily, his was better than a chimpanzee’s too, but it’s still not the most legible at points. Of course, he wasn’t writing under the best of circumstances.
It looks like a journal that was ’standard issue’ because there were predefined spots to write down names/addresses of ‘buddies’ and dates to remember (birthdays/anniversaries) of family back home. Every page has a quote from someone famous on courage or heroism or such. There was a spot in the front that said “The following pages contain the diary of my life in the service. This simple record of my daily experiences and thoughts has given me pleasure in the writing of it. If for any reason it leaves my possession, I would like to have it forwarded to: “. The addressee was “B. Newmark” - which could be either his father Barney, or mother Bertha.
Note: Obviously in the 40s there was no gender-connotation to the word ‘diary’
So far I’ve made two other linguistic notations. The slang term PO’d was already in use in the 1940s (And Mandell thought it was an appropriate term to associate with ‘APO’) and he refers to a beer as “Green Death”. Apparently this term has long been associated with Rainier beer, and one of his buddies was from Seattle Washington, so even if it wasn’t referring to Rainier in particular, its possible the Seattlian introduced him to the term.
I may include some excerpts here I don’t know how many people care about what life was like in the army in the 1940s for a relative of mine, but then again, perhaps more than those who care about my views on George W.
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
How Catherine the Great is the great(19) grandmother of Henry David Thoreau
Here is the direct lineage of Catherine the Great to Henry David Thoreau — according to OneWorldTree
I don’t see any issues with it - do you?
Sure … 19 generations is a lot to go through between 1729 and 1817, but here is how it works:
Catherine the Great
(1729-1796)
Paul I Romanov
(1754-1801)
Marie Pavlovna Romanov
(1786-1859)
Marie Von Saxe Weimar Eisenach
(1808-1877)
Friedrich Karl Hohenzollern
(1828-1885)
Louise Margaret
(1860-1917)
Patricia Helen Windsor
(1886-1974)
Alexander Arthur Ramsey
(1919-2000)
Agnes Ramsay
(1372-)
William Urquhart
(1411-1475)
Alexander Urquhart
(1445-1503)
Agnes Urquhart
(1885-1956)
Hugh Rose
(1505-1597)
Janet Rose
(1537-)
Mark Dunbar
(-1642)
Ninian Dunbar
(1575-1693)
Robert Dunbar
(1630-1693)
Peter Dunbar
(1668-1719)
Samuel Dunbar
(1704-1786)
Asa Dunbar
(1745-1787)
Cynthia Dunbar
(1787-1872)
Henry David Thoreau
(1817-1862)
Of course, as I’ve said before, when discussing the case of Lucy and Desi, this doesn’t mean I’m not descended from Chaucer. Some of the linkages they come up with are bound to be correct — so mine could be one of those.
Saturday, June 9, 2007
Genealogical Research
As I noted a couple months ago I’ve been doing some genealogical research. It’s been fun. Beyond discovering I’m maybe, perhaps, possibly descended from Chaucer.
This past week I added an entire branch to part of the family tree. The brother of a great-great grandmother, and all his descendents. Beforehand all I knew was the name of the brother.
That’s rather exciting, and several of these new cousins live in Chicago, which isn’t too far. I see a possible reunion at a Cards-Cubs game in the future.
Somewhat sadder has been the death certificates I’ve found of great-great aunts and uncles who never made it out of childhood. A common occurrence in the first half of the twentieth century. But either having blocked it from their mind, or not wanting to pass on the painful memories, the parents and siblings never said anything to their children and grandchildren, so the names were completely lost, until uncovered in Missouri’s online archives.
I must say I am really impressed with the archives. They’re scanning in every death certificate from 1910-1956. (And I have the impression that in 2008 they will add 1957, etc) They have some records prior to 1910, but counties weren’t required to keep them prior to 1910, so the archives are a little spotty. Those that aren’t scanned in yet, can be ordered for $1/copy. Compare this to Illinois, where nothing is scanned in, and ordering a copy costs $10. Those copies can add up when you’re doing a lot of research.
It sounds gruesome to be ordering death certificates of your ancestors, but they contain information such as the names of parents, date of birth, and cause of death.
Another great resource has been census forms. In the US they’re available online through 1930. There’s a federal law making them private for 72 years, so 1940s won’t be released until 2012. Genea-Musings has some tips on searching the census databases, since the information was spoken from the individual to the census-taker, and then handwritten, so the indexing of names wasn’t 100% accurate where spelling is concerned. Phonetic spelling of names aren’t uncommon.
One of my most interesting discoveries, I think, is the sister-in-law of my Great-grandfather Barney. The faux-Irish great grandfather I’ve mentioned before. His brother married Sarah Nathan while they were still in England. That was the name in the British Marriage Index. I have every reason to believe that is the name she went by — so lets call it her maiden name. However, her father wasn’t named Nathan. OK, yes, her father’s name was Nathan. First name. She was “Sarah daughter of Nathan” without the “daughter of” which is really confusing for research. And this wouldn’t be all that surprising if we were talking 19th century Europe and not 20th century England. Of course, her parents were 19th century Europe. Luckily her death certificate didn’t ask for her maiden name, but asked for her father’s name. So with that information, I went to the 1901 England census, and found all her brothers and sisters. Because the English census taker, obviously, asked the father for his name, and then assigned the last name to everyone. Why wouldn’t he?
In order to get the right answer, you need to ask the right question.
Friday, May 25, 2007
Relationships
As I mentioned a few weeks ago, I think I'm descended from Chaucer.
I was asked if I’ve verified this, and I admitted, I’m not sure how to. One idea was to find out which of my famous cousins are related to each other according to this website, and then hope others might be intrigued and do the research on them. Because I certainly don’t want to do the legwork when all it can do is disprove the theory, because I already believe it.
So in that regard, according to OneWorldTree:
Emily Dickinson is the 7th great grandchild of Alice Lambert who lived between 1554-1620.
Henry David Thoreau is the 6th great grandchild of Alice Lambert.
Shirley Temple is the 8th-great grandchild of Elizabeth Stoughton, who lived between 1600-1647
Ray Bradbury is the 9th-great grandchild of Elizabeth Stoughton.
I should also mention that Shirley Temple, according to OneWorldTree is the 15th great grandchild of Chaucer, and cousin to O Henry and Walt Whitman, neither of whom are my cousins, so it doesn’t help me or hurt me if you prove or disprove that. I’m not descended from Shirley, but we are supposedly cousins, which makes sense, if we are both directly descended from Chaucer.
Interestingly, their “Famous Relative” script only works it’s way up from the first person, because when I ask for famous relatives of Chaucer, it comes up blank. It should at least list Shirley.
While it doesn’t help me, I’d love to know if Humphry Bogart’s 7th great grandfather is really John Alden of Mayflower fame.
Or if Henry David Thoreau is really descended from Romanovs, and is first cousins (22 times removed) with Empress Anna of Russia
One obvious OneWorldTree FUBAR
Lucille Ball is listed as the grandmother of her husband, Desi.
When you look at the details, it inserts someone inbetween them, and all it says is “Living ___” where ___ is a last name that’s irrelevant, but obviously someone had a little fun and said that Lucille was their mother, and Desi their son. It’s kind of like WikiAncestry, but there’s no one correcting the vandals.
That doesn’t disprove anything though.
Monday, April 16, 2007
Research for my next trip to London
A friend of mine got me interested in researching my genealogy online. My family has actually already been pretty good about this, asking elder members about what they know while they’re still around to tell us. So as many census forms, ship passenger lists, and military records I have found, it hasn’t extended the chart another generation yet. But as my mother told me recently, it’s nice to have the documentation confirming what we thought.
My most recent find was a 1901 census from England containing my great-great grandparents and their children: Barney and his siblings. (Barney - The not-so-Irish great-grandfather born on March 17th.) Because of the census form, next time I’m in London I know what street to walk down.
For those of my readers familiar with London (and I know there are at least a couple) they lived in Marylebone, now part of Westminster, at 56 Wells Street, not too far from Hyde and Regent’s parks. (Yes, I looked it up on Google Maps). Apparently it’s part of the Soho/Noho area. Maybe while I’m walking down the street, I’ll eat some sushi.
Barney claimed in the bio he submitted to Who’s Who in North St. Louis - 1925 that he learned tailoring “at the London Polytechnic” and was “a student at Oxford.”
What is now Westminster University at that time was under the name of Regent Street Polytechnic, and was located at 309 Regent Street. Locals probably just called it Polytechnic, since that was a prior name, and it was at that time part of London. It’s only four to five blocks from where he lived, which got me to research the school a bit more.
My family has chuckled at the idea of him attending college when he probably never finished high school. But as it turns out, I think we may have been unfair. Regent Street Polytechnic’s founder, Quintin Hogg, had a mission “to provide for the athletic, intellectual, social and religious needs of young men, and to this end he provided a range of sporting and social facilities as well as an increasing range of educational and vocational classes.” It appears he received his training from a charitable institution not too much different from the one his great-grandson works for today.
Now, to his claim that he was a “student at Oxford.” He doesn’t say Oxford ‘College’ or ‘University’, which helps more than you might imagine. Oxford England is about sixty miles away, however, a quick look at the maps linked to above, and Wells Street intersects with Oxford Street, a few blocks from where the Oxford Circus underground stop is today, and was in 1901, though then it was part of the Central London Railway.
So it seems likely that Barney was a ’student of life’ on Oxford Street.
My most recent find was a 1901 census from England containing my great-great grandparents and their children: Barney and his siblings. (Barney - The not-so-Irish great-grandfather born on March 17th.) Because of the census form, next time I’m in London I know what street to walk down.
For those of my readers familiar with London (and I know there are at least a couple) they lived in Marylebone, now part of Westminster, at 56 Wells Street, not too far from Hyde and Regent’s parks. (Yes, I looked it up on Google Maps). Apparently it’s part of the Soho/Noho area. Maybe while I’m walking down the street, I’ll eat some sushi.
Barney claimed in the bio he submitted to Who’s Who in North St. Louis - 1925 that he learned tailoring “at the London Polytechnic” and was “a student at Oxford.”
What is now Westminster University at that time was under the name of Regent Street Polytechnic, and was located at 309 Regent Street. Locals probably just called it Polytechnic, since that was a prior name, and it was at that time part of London. It’s only four to five blocks from where he lived, which got me to research the school a bit more.
My family has chuckled at the idea of him attending college when he probably never finished high school. But as it turns out, I think we may have been unfair. Regent Street Polytechnic’s founder, Quintin Hogg, had a mission “to provide for the athletic, intellectual, social and religious needs of young men, and to this end he provided a range of sporting and social facilities as well as an increasing range of educational and vocational classes.” It appears he received his training from a charitable institution not too much different from the one his great-grandson works for today.
Now, to his claim that he was a “student at Oxford.” He doesn’t say Oxford ‘College’ or ‘University’, which helps more than you might imagine. Oxford England is about sixty miles away, however, a quick look at the maps linked to above, and Wells Street intersects with Oxford Street, a few blocks from where the Oxford Circus underground stop is today, and was in 1901, though then it was part of the Central London Railway.
So it seems likely that Barney was a ’student of life’ on Oxford Street.
Direct Descendent of Greatness
Well…having exhausted research on one branch of my family tree (my father’s), I went to my mother’s. Her family, especially the ones that came over from Holland in the 1600-1700s have done a great job of tracking their ancestry.
Ancestry.com has this thing called One-World-Tree, where everyone enters their trees, and thus there’s a chance of trees combining.
I found my mother’s mother on this One-World-Tree and then asked them the question: Any Famous Relatives?
I nearly fainted with the results.
Presidents: Ford, Teddy Roosevelt, Taft, Fillmore
Entertainers: Elvis Presley, Shirley Temple, Humphrey Bogart
Writers: Oliver Wendell Holmes, Emily Dickinson, Mark Twain, Ray Bradbury
But all of these are distant cousins, several times removed. Fun, but not the cherry at the top of this Sundae.
My 18th Great Grandfather (YES! 18th!) lived from 1343 - 1400. He wrote poetry. I’m going to say no more. You can look it up on Google. 1343 1400 poet. Top results. There was only one person living from 1343-1400 writing poetry that I would be this excited about anyway. Yes. Him!
I know this is completely dependent upon the fact that everyone involved entered their family tree correctly. Shush!
I am SO including this in every bio I send to editors from now on!
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Corned Beef and Cabbage on Rye
In a couple days I’ll be in Dogtown, wearing the green, to honor my great-grandfather, who was born on March 17th. (The below is from a 1925 Who’s Who in North St. Louis)
Geographically, the rest of the bio is true. Though the scholastic parts of this curricula vitae are also exaggerated. Fortunately for my grandfather, he lived in a day where it wasn’t very easy to look these things up, so one could get away with a few embellishments.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
