Indispensable Technology for the Family Historian

Okay, before we go any further check it out. THIS IS MY HUNDREDTH BLOG POST! Woo-hoo! Par-tay! 

And now back to our regularly scheduled program. Jasia has posed the following topic for our next Carnival of Genealogy: “The topic for the next edition of the Carnival of Genealogy will be: Technology. What technology do you most rely on for your genealogy and family history research? Select one piece of hardware (besides your computer), one piece of software (besides your internet browser), and one web site/blog (besides your own) that are indispensable to you”

Okay, first let me say that I am an “in the moment” kinda girl. So whatever I give as my answer today might not be the same next month, or next week, or tomorrow. I'm currently working on a genealogy where everybody LIED! I don't know if they didn't know the truth, or had something to hide, or if there is some kind of cultural going-on that I just am not getting. In any case, I am really fascinated with this family. As I try to unweave all the strands and figure out all the relationships, I have been making handy use of some pretty powerful tools and those are the ones I am going to give my big thumbs up to in this post. 

INDISPENSABLE WEBSITE: 

And the winner is (okay I really wanted to participate in the iGENE awards so humor me here) - ANCESTRY.COM. Groan if you like, but I went without this little gem of a site for almost a year. Now that I have it back, I am giving it all that pent-up love that it deserves. One of these days, I will make a very lengthy list about all the goodies I have found since my love and I have been reunited, but for my current project, it is MUY BIEN. I open up Ancestry.com on part of my screen, familysearchlabs.org on the other half of my screen and I go from census to Ohio Death Records, working my way through the information and then adding it to my database software, which I have minimized and opened on my laptop. It's efficient and methodical — my logical brain is very impressed. Granted, I am only up to the 1850 census but we are talking a lot of related families here. 

INDISPENSABLE HARDWARE: 

I vote modem, my wonderful cable speed modem. Did I mention I have a wireless router to go with that modem? Downloading all those census files and death record files would be O - H - S - O - S - L - O - W! And with the wireless router, I can sit there with my feet up, and nod companionably at my husband as he works on his own project on his laptop. We are oh so 2008.

INDISPENSABLE SOFTWARE: 

OK, this one is a little tricky. I have always used Family Tree Maker. I am currently using version 16. Family Tree Maker is familiar, it's comfortable and I have basically been happy with it. However, for this project The Master Genealogist is working extremely well. I've opened up a separate project on TMG and as I work my way through the census and the death records, I add the sources into the database as I add the individuals. Now my one criticism of TMG is that the learning curve on it is definitely steeper than on FTM. However, I am adding basically just two sources of info, and once I have each source set up in my own persnickety fashion, it isn't that hard to enter. And that's what I like about TMG, its extreme flexibility when it comes to adding sources and citations. I can do it MY WAY, and the control freak in me is very pleased. 

So there you have it — the technology that makes my research hum.

Until Next Time — Happy Ancestral Digging!

Note this post first published online, February 27, 2008 at Desktop Genealogist Blog at The News-Messenger Online http://www.thenews-messenger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?Category=BLOGS02

© 27 February 2008, Desktop Genealogist Unplugged, Teresa L. Snyder 

What Do You Call Your Grandparents?

Randy Seaver of Genea-Musings asked in a recent post “What did you call your grandparents? What did your children call their grandparents? What do your grandchildren call you?” (http://randysmusings.blogspot.com/2008/02/names-for-your-grandparents.html) 

I called my paternal grandmother and her husband, my step-grandfather, Gramma and Grampa Dick when I was talking about them and they were not there. Just Gramma and Grampa when we were in person. My paternal grandfather — we didn't talk about him as a child. 

My maternal grandmother — Gramma Hoy — even though her last name by the time I came along was Runion, she was always Gramma Hoy. My maternal grandfather — I was 10 when Grampa died. He was known as Grampa Hoy.

My own children followed the same custom using the Gramma and Grampa in front of a diminutive form of their grandparent's last name. When they were very young, they called their maternal grandfather, my dad, Papaw Sonie 

In our own grandchildren, the older ones call me Grandma Terry and their younger brother calls me Maw T-U. The older grandchildren call Al, Grandpa Al and the little one calls him Papa Al. They call their maternal great grandmother Me-maw and their maternal grandparents Maw and Paw. And for Randy's benefit, these are all Northwest Ohio families. 

So how about the rest of you? Is my family typical or do you have your own customs of what grandparents are called? 

Until Next Time — Happy Ancestral Digging! Note this post first published online, February 26, 2008, at Desktop Genealogist Blog at The News-Messenger Online http://www.thenews-messenger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?Category=BLOGS02

© 26 February 2008, Desktop Genealogist Unplugged, Teresa L. Snyder 

The Carnival Came to Town and Other Rants

Terry Thornton posted Friday the round up for his little poetry challenge, which you can read here: http://hillcountryofmonroecountry.blogspot.com/2008/02/anthology-of-blogger-poems-2008.html.

Thanks, guys, for letting me a take a black eye for Northwest Ohio in the poetry category!

Also, the Carnival of Genealogy came to town last week. For this edition of the carnival, the topic was IGENE AWARDS 2007. Each blogger was asked to pick their own favorite post in each of five categories.

Those categories were:

Best Picture
Best Screen Play
Best Documentary
Best Biography
Best Comedy (always my favorite category)

You can read some funny, interesting, touching posts chosen by the bloggers themselves at http://creativegene.blogspot.com/2008/02/carnival-of-genealogy-42nd-edition.html.

Note: Yours truly did not participate in this blog because - well, I don't really have archives to go back and access. The three options I wish my blog had that the other genea-bloggers enjoy are (and in no particular order):

1. ARCHIVES - I mean real honest to goodness archives that could be accessed all year long.

2. AN RSS FEED - Now that's a right purty “Add Feed” button that sits beneath my posts that would make you think you could subscribe to my blog, but alas it's just another pretty button.

3. DIRECT CONTROL OF MY BLOG - Do you know how many times I see my post in actual print and I groan out loud? I wonder why I used that verb, or wow, could I have said that in a MORE awkward manner. Then there is the occasional punctuation error (have I mentioned that I am punctuationally and grammatically challenged?). When those little errors creep into my post I have to send an exclamation marked e-mail to the editor or just suck it up and leave it as it is. Neither appeals to me. I just want to be able to go in and FIX IT!

All righty then - now that I've gotten that off my chest, you all have yourselves a nice day. (Oh, and you just know that I'm definitely going to want to go in and change that last sentence!)

Until Next Time - Happy Ancestral Digging!

Note this post first published online, February 25, 2008, at Desktop Genealogist Blog at The News-Messenger Online http://www.thenews-messenger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?Category=BLOGS02

Squawkers and other regionalisms

I was talking to a lady in Pennsylvania the other day and I was asking about her family’s roofing business. She stopped dead in her tracks and said suspiciously, “Are you from Wisconsin?” Of course, I’m not from Wisconsin. Except for a brief stint in West Virginia during my freshman year of college, I’ve lived in Northwest Ohio all of my life. I’m not bragging, I’m just saying. She told me I said the word “roof” just as her Wisconsin cousins did which according to her was wrong, wrong, wrong.

I had said the “oo” in roof like someone saying the word "foot." She said the sound “oo” like some saying the word "boo." It’s not the first time I’ve been taken to task by a Pennsylvanian on how I said the word roof. A tax teacher, a transplant from Pennsylvania, told me that we locals also say the word “wolf” incorrectly. Our wolf rhymes with our roof, and their wolf rhymes with their roof. Big deal, right? 

I looked the words up in the dictionary, and it turns out their way of pronouncing those words is the preferred way, but our way is listed in the dictionary as well. So take that Pennsylvania! 

I began to think about other regionalisms that we might have. The biggie that I came up with is one that most of us will deny doing, but if we aren’t thinking about it, we do it anyway. Simply put, instead of saying Washington, we add an “r” so it comes out Warshington. I was in sixth grade before someone pointed this extra “r” out to me. We also “warsh” our hands, dishes, and clothing. People who don’t add the “r” get all creeped out by this and take on an oh so superior attitude on this. (See http://ctbob.blogspot.com/2008/02/mccain-please-stop-saying-warshington.html.) 

Like saying, Washington without an “R” adds sixty IQ points automatically. Whatever! Most of us also say the word “aunt” the same way we say the word for the little bug that you squish between your fingers with a Kleenex if you find one in your house, and WARSH out all the cupboards and then spray insecticide if you find more. 

Locally we say the word “creek” two different ways. Some of us say the word so that it rhymes with leak, while others say the word so that it rhymes with brick. I’m not sure which way I say it. I think I do it both ways – I don’t like to be too predictable.

Many of us call the little maple seedlings that blow all over during the spring “squawkers.” It was such a common term with all the people I grew up with that I was startled when I mentioned the word while working in another county and they looked at me as if I was crazy. I was insistent that they needed to look it up in the dictionary. They did. To my chagrin, it wasn’t there.

Why “squawkers” you ask? Because when you pick them up off the ground, put them in your mouth, and blow on them, they make a squawking sound. Okay, put like that I can see why people looked at me incredulously. You know what those people in the other county called them, helicopters. Helicopters? At least we get points for originality. 

If often takes outsiders to show you what your regionalisms are. If you think of any more oddball things that we do in this neck of the woods, please share. You know how odd things appeal to me. 

Until Next Time – Happy Ancestral Digging! Note this post first published online, February 21, 2008, at Desktop Genealogist Blog at The News-Messenger Online http://www.thenews-messenger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?Category=BLOGS02

© 21 February 2008, Desktop Genealogist Unplugged, Teresa L. Snyder 

Confessions of a Three Year Old Descendent

“Papa Al is cwazy,” the three-year-old whispers to me just loud enough for his grandfather in the front seat to hear. 

“Hey!” his grandfather says loudly with mock sternness. 

This starts a giggle fest with the boy in the back seat. “I can’t stop waughing,” he tells me between gasps. “When I keep waughing I get da hiccups and den I frow up!” Um … Papa Al … consider yourself WARNED! 

Note this post first published online, February 21, 2008, at Desktop Genealogist Blog at The News-Messenger Online http://www.thenews-messenger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?Category=BLOGS02

© 21 February 2008, Desktop Genealogist Unplugged, Teresa L. Snyder 

A Question of Race: The U.S. Census - Part 2

Note that the 1930 and 1940 instructions are written in the past tense. All other instructions are given in present tense, indicating that the 1930 and 1940 directions may be a summarization instead of the actual instructions.

1890 census

Whether white, black, mulatto, quadroon, octoroon, Chinese, Japanese, or Indian.

Write white, black, mulatto, quadroon, octoroon, Chinese, Japanese or Indian, according to the color or race of the person enumerated. Be particularly careful to distinguish between blacks, mulattoes, quadroon, and octoroons. The word “black” should be used to describe those persons who have three-fourths or more black blood; “mulatto,” those persons who have from three-eighths to five-eights black blood; “quadroon,” those persons who have one-fourth black blood; and “octoroon,” those persons who have one-eighth or any trace of black blood.

1900 census

Write “W” for white; B for black (negro or negro descent); Ch for Chinese; Jp for Japanese, and In for Indian, as the case may be.

1910 and 1920 census

Write W for white; B for black; Mu for mulatto; Ch for Chinese; Jp for Japanese; In for Indian. For all persons not falling within one of these classes, write OT (for other), and write on the left-hand margin of the schedule the race of the person so indicated.

For census purposes, the term black (B) includes all person who are evidently full blooded negroes, while the term “mulatto” (Mu) includes all other persons having some proportion or perceptible trace of negro blood

1930 census

A person of mixed White and Negro blood was to be returned as Negro, no matter how small the percentage of Negro blood; someone part Indian and part Negro also was to be listed as Negro unless the Indian blood predominated and the person was generally accepted as an Indian in the community.

A person of mixed White and Indian blood was to be returned as an Indian, except where the percentage of Indian blood was very small or where he or she was regarded as White in the community. For persons reported as American Indian in column 12 (color or race), columns 19 and 20 were to be used to indicate the degree of Indian blood and the tribe, instead of the birthplace of the father and mother.

In order to obtain separate figures for Mexicans, it was decided that all persons born in Mexico, or having parents born in Mexico, who were not definitely White, Negro, Indian, Chinese, or Japanese, would be returned as Mexicans (Mex).

Any mixture of White and some other race was to be reported according to the race of the parent who was not white; mixtures of colored races were to be listed according to the father's race, except Negro-Indian (discussed above).

1940 census

All of the same procedures as in 1930 but “With regard to race, the only change from 1930 was that Mexicans were to be listed as White unless they were definitely Indian or some race other than White.”


It's tempting to conclude that our national obsession with race has been fueled in part by the government's obsession with classifying each of us into the appropriate category, all in the name of science and economics. It's also possible that the government has acted as a mirror for what was happening in society at large at any given time. So which came first — the chicken or the egg?

Until Next Time!


Note this post first published online, February 20, 2008, at Desktop Genealogist Blog at The News-Messenger Online http://www.thenews-messenger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?Category=BLOGS02

References:
“The Color Line in Ohio,” Frank U. Quillan, PH.D., (Quillan's Thesis for the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor) 1913.
United States Census Bureau, “Measuring America: The Decennial Censuses From 1790 to 2000,” 2002.
“The Seventh Census of the United States: 1850,” J.D.B. DeBow, Superintendent of the United States Census, 1853
1830 US Fed Census, Ohio, Ross County, Chillicothe, Vincent Curtis, HOH
1840 US Fed Cen, Ohio, Sandusky County, Lower Sandusky, Vincent Curtice, HOH
1850 US Fed Cen, Ohio, Sandusky County, Rice, Vincent Curtis, HOH, Visit 1538.
1860 US Fed Cen, Ohio, Sandusky, Fremont, Thomas Reese, HOH, Visit 96.
1870 US Fed Cen, Ohio, Sandusky, Fremont, Thomas G. Reese, HOH, Visit 133.
1880 US Fed Cen, Ohio, Sandusky, Sandusky Twp, Thomas Reese, HOH, Visit 50.
1900 US Fed Cen, Ohio, Sandusky, Fremont, T.G. Reese, HOH, Visit 151.
1910 US Fed Cen, Ohio, Sandusky, Fremont, T.G. Reese, HOH, Visit 48.
State of Ohio, Bureau of Vital Statistics, Death Certificate, Thomas G. Reese, File 50507

A Question of Race: The U.S. Census - Part 1

Roy Wilhelm wrote a newspaper column the other day called “Slavery Brought Blacks to Area.” It was a nice piece and I enjoyed reading it. I love a good historical story and I was particularly interested in the first African-American born in Sandusky County, Mary Jane Curtis. 

According to Wilhelm, Curtis was born Oct. 2, 1833. Her husband Thomas George Reese voted in 1867 which was three years prior to the 15th Amendment being ratified. The genealogist in me couldn't resist taking a couple quick peeks at the couple in the U.S. Census, so I logged onto Ancestry.com and found Mary J. Curtis listed with her parents in the 1850 census. They were living in Rice Township, family number 1538. 

Vincent Curtis Age 47 

Jane Curtis Age 46 

Charles Curtis Age 23

Mary J. Curtis Age 16

Ellen L. Curtis Age 15 

William E. Curtis Age 8

Peter Thompson Age 7

Vincent was listed as a farmer and his birthplace given as Delaware. His wife, Jane, was born in Pennsylvania. When I searched for them in Sandusky County in the 1840 census, the family was indeed living in Sandusky County but the last name was spelled “Curtice.” 

They were not living in Sandusky County for the 1830 census, but a Vincent Curtis of the correct age and listed under “Free Colored Persons” was found living in Chillicothe, Ohio. I could not locate the family prior to 1830. 

Thomas George Reese is not found in any census until he shows up in the 1860 census in Sandusky County as a barber. Thomas was born in Mississippi and though I looked for him in the 1850 enumeration, I was unable to find him. For the record, in the 1850 census Mississippi enumerated 295,718 whites, 930 “free colored” and 309,878 slaves. 

Mary Jane and her family were listed as mulattoes in the 1850 census, she and Thomas were both listed as such in the 1860 and 1870 census. In the 1880 census, and thereafter until Thomas's death on September 13, 1911 the family is listed as black. (The death certificate, however gives the race as mulatto.) 

The mulatto status was important distinction because two separate cases before the Ohio Supreme Court in 1842 held that if a man was more than 50 percent white and less than 50 percent black, he was considered white and therefore had the right to vote in Ohio. This was repealed in 1859 by a statute that held in part, “That the judge or judges of any election … shall reject the vote of any person offering to vote at such elections, and claiming to be a white male citizen of the United States, whenever it shall appear to such judge or judges that the person so offering to vote has a distinct and visible admixture of African blood.” 

This statute is what makes Thomas Reese's vote in 1867 an impressive occurrence in the state of Ohio. The whole mulatto/black issue made me wonder about the criteria for enumerating race. Below are the instructions given to the enumerators for each census 1850 through 1880. 

1850 and 1860 census Under heading 6, “Color,” in all cases where the person is white, leave the space blank; In all cases where the person is black, insert the letter B; If mulatto, insert M. It is very desirable that these particulars be carefully regarded. 

1870 census “Indians not taxed” are not to be enumerated on schedule 1. Indians out of their tribal relations, and exercising the rights of citizens under state or Territorial laws, will be included. In all cases, write “Ind.” in the column for “Color.” Although no provision is made for the enumeration of “Indians not taxed,” it is highly desirable, for statistical purposes, that the number of such persons not living upon reservations should be known. It must not be assumed that, where nothing is written in this column, “White” is to be understood. The column is always to be filled. Be particularly careful in reporting the class Mulatto. The word is here generic, and includes quadroons, octoroons, and all persons having any perceptible trace of African blood. Important scientific results depend upon the correct determination of this case in schedules 1 and 2. 

1880 census By the phrase “Indians not taxed” is meant Indians living on reservations under the care of Government agents, or roaming individually, or in bands, over unsettled tracts of country. Indians not in tribal relations, whether full-bloods or half-breeds, who are found mingled with the white population, residing in white families, engaged as servants or living in huts or wigwams on the outskirts of towns or settlements are to be regarded as a part of the ordinary population of the country for the constitutional purpose of the apportionment of Representatives among the states, and are to be embraced in the enumeration. It must not be assumed that where nothing is written in this column “white” is to be understood. The column is always to be filled. Be particularly careful in reporting the class mulatto. The word is here generic, and includes quadroons, octoroons, and all persons having any perceptible trace of African blood. Important scientific results dup upon the correct determination of this class schedules 1 and 5. 

Tomorrow's post will have the instructions for enumerators of the 1890 through 1940 census. 

Until Next Time!

Note this post first published online, February 19, 2008, at Desktop Genealogist Blog at The News-Messenger Online http://www.thenews-messenger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?Category=BLOGS02

© 19 February 2008, Desktop Genealogist Unplugged, Teresa L. Snyder