Church Records

I was preparing a presentation for a recent Genealogy Conference and wanted to demonstrate how to “begin with what you know” entry into a new Genealogy database. I talked about entering myself and my parents into that database and my next slide, in the presentation was STOP. Why stop? To talk about Citing your Source and to create a Research Log on what I had just done.

I added that I wanted to add a new Fact / Event for my father and described my dad’s baptism, on a specific date, in  a specific church. The kicker was that I had First Hand Knowledge of that event. My dad, brother, and I were all Baptized on the same day. My purpose was to expand the information for the three people in this new database, while crafting a First Hand Knowledge Citation.

Because my genealogy program has a Fact, Citation, Rating system, as described in the book, Evidence Explained, by Elizabeth Shown Mills, I demonstrated that as well.

I walked through the 4 Quality measures for Rating a Source and the Justification for the rating I chose. The Justification being “Was present at the event, age 6, but will need other documents to prove this fact”.

I then proceeded to upload and sync this small database (52 people) to Ancestry to start to receive hints from their records. This is where the fun began.

The first Hint I followed, keeping in mind I am trying to prepare for a presentation and not doing research, I found this record.

It was a Quaker Record where my Grandfather is listed, along with my Dad and his siblings. The date was 30 June 1927. Rotating the image to see what was written on this “blue line” page in a record book, it read Certified from the Chester Monthly Meeting. The 3rd column was labeled “Gains”.

I had not seen this record before, I knew that my Grandfather should have been a member of the Chester Monthly Meeting (in New Jersey), but had figured that his membership would have been moved much earlier. He and my Grandmother were married in the Birmingham-Lafayette Monthly Meeting in 1915, so was surprised to see the official transfer in 1927.

What I hadn’t realized was the my Dad and is siblings were also part of the Chester Monthly Meeting, I guess by default, with their father. Just never thought about that. For a time line, for my Dad, this was where the Church Records start.

The very next hint was:

A typed document, same date as the earlier one, but a document from Quaker Records, showing who was part of the committee that visited my grandfather, my dad and his siblings. Of interest were two surnames that I recognize, and will look at later (FAN Club).

The next Hint, was a record from Holy Trinity Episcopal Church, receiving my Dad into that church. It was dated well after his Baptism. Timeline is not out of line, consistent with what I knew.

Seeing that this page was really two pages, the next image was this.

That was the indication what my Dad was transferred, in church records from the church in Pennsylvania, to the church in New Jersey. Again, the timeline is correct in sequence, but the timeliness of the event is delayed a lot (couple of years). I guess it takes time for the Church Paperwork to catch up with the reality of the surrounding events.

I should note, that these images do not have citations on them, because I have not entered this information into my genealogy database program yet. These records are from hints, so I can keep track of these hints.

I do not know that last time that my grandfather went to the Quaker Meeting in Moorestown, NJ, nor to I know if my dad and his siblings ever attended there. I do know that my Dad has been to that Quaker Meeting, because I took him there.

And, he died in an Adult Care Center within 5 miles of this Quaker Meeting.

Lesson Learned: Be a little loose at Dates when looking at Church Records, as the dates when the records were created may be several years off from the dates you may search for. I had enough information in my database, so that the Ancestry Shaky Leaf Hints found these church records. I was NOT looking for these records, but these were the first four Hints that I saw and followed.

Genealogical Proof Standard–Chapter 3 Homework

 

Christine Rose, Genealogical Proof Standard: Building a Solid Case 4th Edition Revised, (San Jose, California: CR Publications) 2014.

https://www.amazon.com/Genealogical-Proof-Standard-Christine-Rose/dp/0929626214

Chapter 3 of this book, Evaluating the Records, is something we need to do, for everything we might consider putting into our genealogy database. I do this several times, during the process of my data entry.

1. Looking at the description of the item in question. For example: the description of an online database. Who created the record group, what was it’s purpose, what am I looking at
2. When crafting a Citation (I do this up front) I need to determine what I need for the Citation, but that also makes me think and evaluate why I want to use this record
3. Evaluate this “new” record as it is entered in relationship with other records for a specific Event or Fact
4. Does it make sense in context with the other information or does it present conflicting information

The best example I can think about is a profile I have in an Online Tree.

It looks straight forward, the information is cited appropriately. But, this view is only showing my “current thinking” or some might call it my conclusions. But, if I were to look at the Alternate Facts (ALT Facts), I have a different view.

As each of these entries were entered and cited, they were evaluated, made sense as stand alone entries and entered, but when I put the Census Records in context of the other records, there is conflicting information.

Although my current thinking, is that this person was born in Indiana, but I need to resolve the conflicting information. The “current thinking” is that this person was born 11 Mar 1824 in Indiana, based on an email from the family researcher and a Find-A-Grave entry. There were 7 other records that indicated this person was born about 1825, 1828 in Ohio or 1829, in Indiana.

There is conflicting information, as far as I am concerned. a year or two difference in the same place from Census Records, may be OK, but in this case, after evaluating the Birth Fact, I am not so sure.

Further evaluation of the data at hand, I find that the Contributor for the Find-A-Grave Memorial is the author of the Email that I had received for this profile.

Bottom line on this one, I am not sure that my “current thinking” is correct. I am not disagreeing with the family researchers, but I know that I must find a more reliable record, original if possible, to resolve this conflicting information. I have not completed my Reasonably Exhaustive Research.

Homework: ESM QuickLesson 6

The Research Plan: Two-step Next Steps?

Elizabeth Shown Mills, “The Research Plan: Two-step Next Steps?” Evidence Explained: Historical Analysis, Citation & Source Usage(https://www.evidenceexplained.com/quicktips/research-plan-two-step-next-steps : accessed 30 Sept 2015).

Two-Step Next Steps, was an interest question, based on a project I am working on, in a Class I am teaching.

The basis for the class is a chart I created based on a number of other resources. Mostly from Cyndis’ List, but also from the Genealogy Class that DearMYRTLE Study Group did.

I like the image of going in circles. Starting with ONE Question and trying to find the answer.

A student presented her question. It was a very simple question, where was this person born.

Using the Google Sheet we used with DearMYRTLE: bit.ly/CousinRussResearchSheets we did a search for a Census Record for this person, using the search feature on FamilySearch.org. We were successful.

The next day, I ran into my student and she was all excited that she FOUND the ANSWER to her question.

The problem was that she has jumped based a couple of steps along the way. We in fact had a 3 times “around the circle” plan to find her answer. The problem is that she Jumped to a Conclusion too quickly or she skipped “Evaluate Sources” step.

She did find AN answer, or the answer she was looking for, but not THE answer.

What she will learn in the next class is that she ran into the Genealogical Iceberg. That record isn’t only (yet) according to Family Search.

With the circle approach, for me at least, is that the Question needs to be changed a bit. Not the Town he was born, but was he born At Home or in a Local Hospital.

We. as a class. are developing a Research Plan, but need to make adjustments based on the “new information” that we find as we go along.

The QuickLesson told me, that a revision in THE PLAN may change, based on the current findings. But my caution to the class will be Don’t Jump to a Conclusion too quickly.

Lesson Learned: Stick to the plan and make adjustments as you go, as required.

QuickLesson 2: Sources vs. Information vs. Evidence vs. Proof

QuickLesson 2: Sources vs. Information vs. Evidence vs. Proof

Elizabeth Shown Mills, “QuickLesson 2: Sources vs. Information vs. Evidence vs. Proof,” Evidence Explained: Historical Analysis, Citation & Source Usage(https://www.evidenceexplained.com/content/quicklesson-2-sources-vs-information-vs-evidence-vs-proof : accessed 20 Mar 2015)

Have spent the past day or two, spending time NOT researching but really looking at my Citations in my Genealogy Database. This QuickLessoin is very timely for this review.

For a very long time, I learned that I really, really, don’t like the term “Source Citation”. My software uses that term on some of the labels on the screen. I can NOT use those words together. In my mind, I can’t have a Citation, without a Source, but I can of a Source without a Citation.

To me, a source without a Citation is like a couple of the books in my Genealogy Library that I haven’t look at yet.

A Citation without a Source, is that loose piece of paper in a research paper in a folder without a label. Where on earth did I get that one from.

The two terms work TOGETHER, but they are two separate items. I have a Source with Many citations. A Book (source), with many pages where I took information from are reflected in the Citation.

This lesson, for me, starts with the Source. It has in it, INFORMATION that I might want to use in my research. I have learned, that IF there is a possibility that the Information is about my research Question, I am going to start to Craft a Citation. Why do that up front, you might ask, for me is slows me down to really make me LOOK at the information that I might use.

Starting the citation process early, for me, puts me into an evaluation mode, not gathering up the pieces and getting them into my database. My first part of the evaluation is to determine what the Source is, or the Container is. A Source being a Book, it different from a Source that is an Official Document. By putting the Source into the Primary Source of a Secondary Source category, will help me down the road, especially if I run into conflicting or information items.

There is Information in the Source that I might use, but how did that information get into that Source and who provided that information.

In my evaluation of a Marriage Record, that I have in my hands, I might consider it a Primary Source. The information says that the parents of one of the individuals was born on a specific date and place. The document was signed by the party whose parent has been recorded, so that specific piece of information is NOR Primary Information, but Secondary, as the person was not there with his or her parents were born.

At this point, using this example, I have to cycle back to what was my question that made me look at the Record (Source). If my question was about a couple’s marriage, that Birth Information would be just that Information. Now, I am going to record it, but it does NOT prove when and where that parent was born.

Then I need to understand where in the marriage paperwork process that Marriage Record is. Was it a license to get married or an official return from the appropriate authority that signed the document that I am looking at. The license would be evidence that the person was going to get married, but the officially signed an returned might be proof that the person / couple did get married.

But, I know that I can’t stop there, with one piece of information, which may be proof, but I know I need other documents, difference sources to really prove the answer to my question.

If I am trying to prove that tis couple actually did get married, I would see if I could find a record for the person to preformed the marriage. In the state of New Jersey, several groups of people have the authority do perform a marriage. Being part of their normal business, the will probably had to have some record that they officiated at that marriage. A Marriage book in a Church, if it was a Church wedding, is where I would look. In the Church records that I have seen in my research, a copy of that document that I first had in my hands would be stapled on the page that was filled out, at the time of the wedding, signed by the persons present at the wedding.

Bottom line, for me in this lesson is that I would need at least two sources, containing information, that are helping be develop the evidence that proves that the person really did get married.

The Citations (more than one) for a simple Marriage Fact or Event would have to be clear enough to let someone else reading or using my  information could find the same information that I used.

The Citations would be to lead the reader back to the Sources but not to tell the story about that Sources and where in the sources might I find that information.

Example:

This image is with the Marriage Record I have on file.

This is to Marriage Applicants with information about what the person needs to do. In this case, the parish priest needs a Marriage License for the marriage, and in the State of New Jersey, they are acting on behalf of the state, so they have the authority.

At the time of the marriage, copies of this multiple copy license is stapled into the Church Records, as as the instructions say, a Pink Copy will be returned to those being married.

This is just a part of the pick piece of paper. Interesting that this License has the date and time of the application, the date and time of the license being issued, and a time when it would expire. The instructions clearly say “The copy is NOT a Certified Copy, but merely a copy for your records. If the instructions were followed, this would have been provided Post Marriage.

The top part of THE Certified copy of the marriage certificate.

Just below the above part of the one page is this. The Certificate of Marriage.

and below that the Marriage License

Did the marriage happen? Yes, but what isn’t in these images is the signature line just above the Marriage License section of this one page document. It has a Date and Signature of the “state” official. In this case a township

The Pick Copy, received at the ceremony did NOT have that signature but Certificated copy did.

This example is a 21st century document, that would probably equal to a number of documents for our ancestors.

The other copy of this multiple page form, is stapled and signed by all parties in the parish register. (sorry, no scan for that one)

There is no information on this form that would not have been secondary information.

FINALLY Get Organized–5 Generation Status

I started out in one direction, but changed, base on the FINALLY Get Organized project from DearMYRTLE. My project started by trying to prove or disprove a Mayflower connection. It didn’t take to long that the information suggested by the Mayflower Society at Roots Tech was not going to work. RelativeFinder.org and the FamilySearch Family Tree results had issues. Did a straight line back 17 generations and knew there were issues.

So I decided to change that project to a more worthwhile and meaningful use of my time. Just focusing on 5 Generations.

I have had other status reports and events as the project has moved along.

Because I am giving a presentation at the Fairfax (VA) Genealogy Society in April, I wanted to capture some real data on how the research process I use for Information Overload really works, when I use that process and follow those Shaky Leaf Hints.

Fairfax Genealogical Society: DearMYRTLE and Cousin Russ’ presentation topics

Here is an update on a fresh database that I created on 08 Feb 2016:

People	231
Generations	17
Surnames	68
Facts	2,525
Places	253
Sources	96
Citations	339
Media Files	294

I have followed 228 Hints and have successfully used 156 of them. Having worked those 155 hints, 57 other hints disappeared, as expected. 14 Hints I have ignored based on the reliability of those hints. They are on my ToDo list if I need hint for those individuals. 2 were not for my person. That was due to limited data on that person in my file at the time I ignored that hint.

107 of the Media files were pictures that I had taken or scanned images that I have in my files. An additional 15 Media files were from the linked Ancestry Member Tree that had Photo Hints. As it turned out many of them were from may main file with 9,000 plus people in it.

All of my Citations are in the Template format, meaning that they are very close to the Evidence Explained format. (that is a work in progress). I have no undocumented Facts. Each of those 2,545 facts have at least one citation linked to them.

Research Log for each person and a ToDo list with 448 items. 235 Items on my ToDo list, of which 15 are notes about the file in general, not work items.

The fun is the stories that are starting to develop. For example, my Great Grandfather and Great Grandmother had 10 Children. At no time was there a census record that found the entire family at the same place at the same time. However, one census record did have a child who only lived a couple of months. Another of the children who died early had a Shaky Leaf Hint that was an Index hint, that actually let to the record that the hint was base on. I had blogged about that From an Index to an Image.

Lesson Learned: Having some organization in how I named my files, made my finding those images, specifically, very easy. I knew where to look and new what the filename should be.

I have added some of the data learned from the Finally Getting Organized project to my upcoming presentation.