Reflections on a Blog's Two-Month Anniversary

So yesterday, Nov. 4 was the two-month anniversary for this blog. I wish we had a sound-enabled Web site because you would be hearing one toot of a party horn right about NOW (think A over middle C).

It probably will come as no surprise to anyone that I was not exactly blog literate when I undertook this task. I had an idea, a chance to pitch it, and finally the thumbs up to try it. I was particularly pleased that the News-Messenger gave the green light for a blogging newbie over the age of 50 to jump into Weblogging waters. And the water, I must say, is just fine.

I want to take the opportunity to thank all of you who have stopped by and read a post or two along the way. I'm grateful for your time. (And to anyone who had a headache after reading my “First cousins, three times removed?” I heartily apologize — MY BRAIN still hurts from that one.) I also want to thank those of you who take the time to comment. I learn a lot from your posts. Sometimes, your remarks give me direction, and keep me from banging my head on the desk moaning, “What to write, what to write.” (Thanks Dawn, for letting me use your comments in a post — you're a brave one!)

Thanks goes to my editor Eric, who never complains when I send a frantic e-mail — “Change the last sentence!!!!!!” — or something similar. Of course, I suspect that he may mumble something under his breath but hey, you can't hear that kind of thing over the Internet so I remain blissfully unaware.

A big thank you goes to my family for their support and comments. I appreciate that you are all still more or less talking to me. (Cheryl I did read your warning e-mail about going alone to the cemetery to meet with the Michigan and Indiana cousins but it was too late — thanks for worrying. I am meeting another stranger on Thursday, but in a library and my husband has made me promise to ask her if she has any history of ax murdering before I sit down with her.) 

Thanks also to my husband, who lucky for me has a sense of humor. He keeps threatening to get his own blog for rebuttal. Man, would I be in TROUBLE.

So here's hoping I'm around for another two months. Where else could I use my favorite new word, nefarious, twice in the same week? (Okay, I promise — I will give nefarious a rest.) 

Until Next Time — Happy Ancestral Blogging 

Note this post first published online, November 5, 2007, at Desktop Genealogist Blog at The News-Messenger Online http://www.thenews-messenger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?Category=BLOGS02

©5 November 2007, Desktop Genealogist Unplugged, Teresa L. Snyder 

How I Spend My Fridays

I thought you might like to know how I spend my Fridays. I have two very nice bosses (thanks Leslie and Sam) who let me scrunch my workweek into four days so that I can have Fridays free to have a weekly play date with Teddy (the blue bear in the picture) and his friend, my three-year-old grandson.

Teddy actually came to my house when I purchased him 3 years, 2 months and 2 days ago, which happened to be the day that my grandson and I started the first of our weekly play dates. Over the last eight months or so Teddy has been more or less going home with his friend, my grandson, every week. In fact, Teddy has a much richer life than I do. 

He has gone to North Carolina on vacation, taken a train trip, gone grocery shopping, been carried up library steps in search of a good book and spent many a morning at a local park or two swinging in the warm sunlight. I have it on good authority from my daughter-in-law that Teddy is a big bed hog at night and demands more than his share of the bed. The bed in question happens to be her and my stepson's bed, but gets the occasional nightly visit from Teddy and his young friend. 

For a while, the blue bear would even start talking spontaneously — no one being anywhere in his vicinity, saying things like, “Are you sleepy too?” “Tell me a bedtime story.” The first time these unnatural speeches sounded, I was alone in my house. I heard the noise but I couldn't pin point where it was coming from. When I would go and look for the source — silence. It took me about three days to figure out what was going on. It was my own fault — I had put Teddy in the washing machine, because he had been dropped in the dirt — and well, I'm just saying, talking bears don't belong in washing machines. 

When my little buddy and I play cards, Teddy also gets dealt a hand. When I object that Teddy is getting more than his share of cards, my grandson reminds me, “Well, you have to share, Maw T-U.” It's hard to fault that logic. 

Teddy also is the subject of all kinds of photographic attempts. My grandson and I “share” grandma's old Sony camera on Fridays. The three year old is fascinated by anything electronic and the Sony, which I've used to record our moments together, has long held an irresistible lure for the boy. Finally this year, I decided the Sony and the boy were both old enough to take the risk of letting him attempt picture taking.

I think the above picture is one of mine, because it was taken before I showed the boy how to zoom in on his subjects, but I can't be certain. The zoom in feature turned out to be an instant hit. “Awesome!” my young friend proclaimed after he reminded me that, “No, I can do it.”

Awesome seems to be a new favorite phrase - caterpillars are awesome, watching ants through the magnifying glass - awesome. I like this much better than the last phrase he was sprinkling in his conversations - “I farted.” Nice!” 

Naptime comes right after lunch. “Don't forget Teddy.” I'm always reminded. Then, “Cover Teddy up.” “Read to Teddy.” When we read the pigeon books by Mo Williams or “Brown Bear, Brown Bear,” the three year old will “read” the books himself - he loves the page that you yell, “I'M NOT TIRED!” but our naptime book for the last month has been, “My Truck is Stuck,” a book originally found at the library that caused a tearful scene when mean grandma wouldn't let him take it home with him. He loves the book, and when I say, “You read it to Teddy.” He looks at me with big blue eyes and says, “I can't read.” Like Grandma, who you kiddin' here — read the gosh darn book and quit giving me grief!

So I read, then we snuggle in for a nap. (“Why do we have to take a nap?” “Because Grandma gets cranky if we don't.” Long pause. “Oh.” — subject closed.) 

And that, my friends is how I spend my Fridays — no genealogy, no work, no blogging — just lots of Teddy and the grandson to fill up my time. Until Next Time … 

Note this post first published online, November 2, 2007, at Desktop Genealogist Blog at The News-Messenger Online http://www.thenews-messenger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?Category=BLOGS02

© 2 November 2007, The Desktop Genealogist Unplugged, Teresa L. Snyder 

First cousins, three times removed?

The other day I featured a death certificate for Edwin J McQuillin, who died in 1913. At the time, I mentioned I was his first cousin, three times removed. Ever wonder exactly what a first cousin three times removed is? 

Say your name is Joe and your sister's name is Alice. You and Alice have a sibling relationship. Then you, Joe, get married, and have a son and because you have no imagination, you name your son Joe 1. I know, technically it would be Joe Jr. but in this case, you, Joe, love flaunting convention and name the kid, Joe 1. Alice, who adores her older sibling, decides when she has a daughter, to name her Alice 1 in the same tradition as big brother Joe.

Joe 1 and Alice 1 are cousins, or to be more exact, they are FIRST COUSINS. Joe 1 gets married, and has a son naming him Joe 2. (The family is obviously missing an “originality” gene.) Alice 1 has a daughter, and names her; you guessed it, Alice 2. Joe 2 and Alice 2 are SECOND COUSINS. 

Joe 2 marries and has a son, naming him what else, Joe 3. Alice 2 marries and has a daughter that she names Alice 3. Joe 3 and Alice 3 are THIRD COUSINS. 

Joe 3 marries and has a daughter, but stuck in family tradition decides to name her Joe 4. Alice 3 also marries and has a daughter, which she names Alice 4. Joe 4 and Alice 4 are FOURTH COUSINS.

Are you still with me?  

The relationship between Joe 1 and Alice 1 is that of FIRST COUSINS. Joe 1 and Alice 1 are of the same generation. But what is the relationship between Joe 1 and Alice 2 (Alice 1's daughter)? Joe 1 and Alice 2 are not part of the same generation, but rather, of different generations. In this case, there is a difference of one generation, or they are REMOVED by one generation. That is why Joe 1 and Alice 2 are said to be FIRST COUSINS ONCE REMOVED. (Or sometimes written 1st Cousins 1X Removed).

Joe 1 and Alice 3 then would be two generations different or removed, and would be considered FIRST COUSINS TWICE REMOVED. (1st Cousins 2X Removed.)

What would be the relationship between Joe 2 and Alice 3? To determine this, first look to see whom in Alice's family is in the SAME generation as Joe 2 (this is where seeing my little illustration is helpful). The answer is Alice 2. We know from our previous discussion that Joe 2 and Alice 2 are second cousins. But Joe 2 and Alice 3 are not of the same generation. Alice 3 is one generation removed from being Joe 2's second cousin. In other words, Joe 2 and Alice 3 are SECOND COUSINS ONCE REMOVED. (2nd Cousin 1X Removed.)

In the case of Edwin and myself, the generations break down like this. My great-great-grandmother Catherine Good was a sibling of Mary M. Good. Catherine had a son John Perry and Mary's son was Edwin. They were first cousins. 

John Perry had a daughter, my grandmother, named Katheryne. Edwin had a daughter named Olive. Katheryn and Olive were second cousins.

Katheryne had a daughter, my mom, named Phyllis. Olive had a son named Gay. Phyllis and Gay are third cousins. 

Phyllis had a daughter named Terry (me!) and Gay had a son named Francis. Francis and I are fourth cousins. 

So what is the relationship between Edwin and me? Well you have to go back to Edwin's generation and see who in my family tree was of this same generation. In this case, it was my great-grandfather John Perry Lynch. Edwin and John Perry were FIRST COUSINS. Then it's a matter of counting how many generations that I am removed from Edwin  and John Perry — the answer is three. (Kathryne would be one, Phyllis would be two and Terry (me) would be three. This makes Edwin and I FIRST COUSINS THREE TIMES REMOVED. (1st Cousins 3X Removed.)

Don't worry, if you didn't follow all of that. Most genealogy programs have a relationship calculator that will tell you the exact relationship without all that head scratching.

Until Next Time — Happy Ancestral Digging! Note this post first published online, November 1, 2007, at Desktop Genealogist Blog at The News-Messenger Online http://www.thenews-messenger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?Category=BLOGS02

© 1November 2007 and revised 3 Dec 2022, Desktop Genealogist Unplugged, Teresa L. Snyder 

Halloween — Bah Pumpkin!

The thing is I'm not fond of holidays. By not fond, I mean I really don't like them. And of all the holidays that I really don't like, Halloween tops the list. Okay, before anybody decides I should be strung up to the nearest scarecrow post for such a heretical utterance, you should know that I was an extremely awkward, shy child. It was excruciatingly painful for me to go up to a stranger's door and shout “Trick or Treat” even if the payoff was candy.

Just as painful was admitting to anyone that I felt this way. So every year I dreaded the end of October and the annual obligation to dress up in costume, pretend enjoyment and the ritual eating of those orange, yellow and white corn candies that even today, the smell of which makes me nauseous. I know — strange kid, strange adult.

In my defense, I will say that I GET that everyone else loves this holiday. And I am happy to report that none of my children suffers from this odd non-holiday malady. When my youngest son, age 2, finally figured out that if you went up to the door and held out your bag, you get CANDY, I was excited about his excitement.

All of this is my way of letting you know that I don't have any cool Halloween stories of my own to share. However, by coincidence, this month's Carnival of Genealogy has for its topic “Halloween and the Supernatural.” The carnival is a group of Genealogy bloggers who write on a given topic. This edition of the Carnival is being hosted by Jasia at her blog, “Creative Gene.” To read the 20 or so different blogs related to this edition of the Carnival go to http://creativegene.blogspot.com/2007/10/carnival-of-genealogy-34th-edition.html.

Until Next Time — Have a Happy (or if you like, Haunted) Halloween

Note this post first published online, October 31, 2007, at Desktop Genealogist Blog at The News-Messenger Online http://www.thenews-messenger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?Category=BLOGS02

Death Certificates — Sources of Primary & Secondary Information

Since we were talking about death certificates the other day, it seems like a good time to talk about the type of information you can get from a death certificate. For those of you who can view pictures posted with my blogs, I am posting a copy of Edwin J. McQuillin's death certificate. I downloaded this record from the Missouri Archives Web site. Edwin happens to be my first cousin, three times removed (hmm, sounds like a topic for another post). 

A death certificate is a funky little document, in that it can be considered a primary source for some pieces of information and a secondary source for others. A primary source is a document, photocopy, photograph, or written account of an event recorded at the time the event took place or shortly thereafter by a witness to the event.

Edwin's death certificate would be a primary source for the following information: 

1. Full Name 

2. Sex

3. Race or Color

4. Marital Status 

5. Occupation 

6. Place of Death 

7. Date of Death 

8. Cause of Death 

9. Place of Burial 

10. Date of Burial 

 Because this information was taken shortly after Edwin's death (two days later), it is reasonable to assume the information is accurate. Although a written mistake, a slip of the tongue or a miscommunication could cause an error, in most cases this information is correct. 

Secondary sources are those that are not primary sources. In other words, the information given was many months, years or decades after the event. So a death certificate is a secondary source for the following: 

1. Date of Birth 

2. Age 

3. Place of Birth 

4. Father's name 

5. Father's place of birth

6. Mother's name 

7. Mother's place of birth

Secondary information is only as reliable as the person giving the information. In this case, Ada McQuillin is the informant. Ada was Edwin's youngest daughter who was still living at home at the time of his death. A marriage record, census records, and a common pleas court case confirm much of Ada's information. Which brings me to the most important point — it is essential to look at multiple records when reconstructing an individual's life.

 Until Next Time — Happy Ancestral Digging! 

Certificate of Death: Edwin J. McQuillin, Filed 10 Apr 1913. State of Missouri, Dept. of Health, Bureau of Vital Statistics, Reg. Dist. 400, File No. 13431. Digital Record, Missouri State Archives, Jefferson City, Missouri. 

Note this post first published online, October 31, 2007, at Desktop Genealogist Blog at The News-Messenger Online http://www.thenews-messenger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?Category=BLOGS02

© 31 October, Desktop Genealogist Unplugged, Teresa L. Snyder 

For Your Viewing Pleasure — Death Certificates Update

ONLINE GEORGIA DEATH CERTIFICATES 

In my September 8 post titled, “For Your Viewing Pleasure” (http://www.thenews-messenger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070908/BLOGS02/70906026), I listed four states that had death certificate records available online. Add the state of Georgia to that list. On Georgia's archive Web site, you may now search, view and save death certificates dated 1919 to 1927. There are also some death certificates available on the Web site from 1914 to 1918. The Web address for the Georgia death certificates is http://content.sos.state.ga.us/cdm4/gadeaths.php.

ONLINE ORDERING OF OHIO DEATH CERTIFICATES 

The Ohio Historical Society's Web site now offers a link to online ordering of Ohio Death Certificates spanning the years 1909 to 1953. (See http://www.ohiohistory.org/dindex/) Only those deaths occurring from 1913 through 1944 are indexed and available online, but you may request a death certificate for 1909 to 1912 and 1945 to 1953 as long as you provide all of the following:

1. First Name 

2. Last Name 

3. Year of Death 

 AND at least one of the following pieces of information:

1. Month and Day of Death

2. County 

3. Certificate # If they cannot find a close match to the information you have included they will “provide a copy of the original index page showing the names surrounding the name you provided. Your fee covers the cost of this search.” 

The cost of online ordering for each death certificate is $7 plus 6.75% sales tax for Ohio residents.

Until Next Time — Happy Ancestral Digging! 

Note this post first published online, October 29, 2007, at Desktop Genealogist Blog at The News-Messenger Online http://www.thenews-messenger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?Category=BLOGS02

© 29 October 2007, Desktop Genealogist Unplugged, Teresa L. Snyder

Pushing Daisies — A Show that Uses Genealogy as a Plot Point!

There are a number of things I would love to comment about but don't. Without some tie into genealogy, family history or even family I bite my tongue, sit on my typing fingers and remain silent. That's why I was delighted to see one of the new fall TV shows use genealogy as a plot point. 

Last Wednesday on ABC's “Pushing Daisies” a confederate sword from a Southern Chinese gentleman played a role in the convoluted tale. They even did a flash back to 1863 when Fambing Woo, the great-great-great-grandfather of Wilford Woodard, accidentally becomes a Confederate War Hero taking on the family name of Woodard.

A genealogical plot point is not the norm in network TV. But then the whole concept for “Pushing Daisies” is not the norm. Quirky is the most apt description of the show, and I have a hunch the writers never sat at the cool kids table — heck they probably weren't allowed anywhere near it. 

The premise is based on the idea that the hero, Ned, has acquired the ability to bring the dead back to life, once. A second touch by Ned, and they are consigned back to, well, death — forever. If Ned does not touch them a second time within one minute, someone else dies instead. To complicate matters, a shady detective, Emerson has glommed onto Ned's talents and has blackmailed him into partnering with Emerson to solve murder cases. Easy work when the dead person, brought back to life, tells what happened. 

Chuck, whose real name is Charlotte, and who as a young girl captured Ned's heart, is murdered in the show's pilot. When Ned brought her back to life, he couldn't bring himself to touch her again and have her die permanently. Therefore, he and Chuck can never touch and the director of the funeral home, a grave stealing scoundrel, dies instead.

If you have followed all of that, pat yourself on the back. Chi McBride, who plays the semi-shady detective, Emerson Cod is priceless in the role. He can deliver a sarcastic one-liner with the best of them. His discussion with Ned (Lee Pace) about how to pull up a bandage is great. 

Emerson: “I'm rippin' off the bandage.” 

Ned: “I'm not a ripper. I pull up the corner, a little at a time, then I run it under warm water. And pull it up some more. It's a process.” 

Emerson: “Better to rip.” 

Or Chuck's (Anna Friel) worrying, “Do you think dying has made me morbid?”

A show with snappy dialogue, a genealogical plot point, references to Winnie the Pooh, an Asian American with a soft southern accent, a sword fight — well what more could you ask for in an hour? Now is where I normally would be encouraging you to tune into this little novelty tonight at 8, but I'm not going to do that. This is an odd little show that takes an offbeat sense of humor (quirky and I are best friends), a suspension of disbelief, and a taste for tongue in cheek It's definitely not everyone's cup of tea. Instead, I am giving notice to family and friends that Wednesdays from 8 to 9 I won't be answering my phone. I will be cuddled up on my couch, chuckling to myself, hoping enough people are watching to keep the show around for a while. 

Until Next Time! 

Note this post first published online, October 24, 2007, at Desktop Genealogist Blog at The News-Messenger Online http://www.thenews-messenger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?Category=BLOGS02

© 24 Oct 2007, Desktop Genealogist Unplugged, Teresa L. Snyder