Showing posts with label Census. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Census. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

How I use my Genealogy Software


When I started library school and sat in my first archives class my classmates and professor were appalled when I disclosed that I filed copies of my genealogy records in more than one place. For example, a marriage record was filed in both the groom and the bride’s family’s folders. I simply had not decided upon a standardized methodology for filing my paper records yet. At least not one I could remember and subsequently recall within a few seconds. I’m sure many genealogists have elaborate filing systems and treat brides and grooms as “couples” or a specific “family unit” to which only ONE copy of a marriage record would be attributed. But in my mind, that would require remembering who each bride or groom married, more specifically, the groom’s name and without that, I wouldn’t be able to put my hands on the folder. So early on I decided to treat each person as their own individual and thus, they each got a copy of their marriage record.

So as you can see, redundancy is not new to me, nor is it necessarily a bother or inconvenience. So with that said, I would like to share a little bit about how I use my genealogy database. I have evaluated Family Tree Maker, Legacy Family Tree and RootsMagic and found them to be very similar in what I like to do with my software. I eventually settled on RootsMagic because of the ability to take it with me on a flash drive. The way I use my genealogy software has been evolving and continues to evolve throughout the years. Which is one reason why I have been hesitating to share what I do with everyone. I didn’t want to come across as a mad woman. Because frankly, I still haven’t decided how I want to do things yet. But oh well, you got to start somewhere and I think it’s important to share and to read about what others are doing and how they are doing it.

Speaking of, Susan Clark of the Nolichucky Roots blog originally started this thread with her “Getting Down to Basics” post in which she asked for people to offer their reasons and ideas for using a genealogy database. She got a lot of great responses. Check out the comments to her post to see what others had to say. I have posted links to other blog posts below.

Ok, so here goes my whackamole approach at trying to give you all of the reasons why and how I use my genealogy database:

1.       It’s a database and it’s searchable. So when I need to look someone up, I just type in their name and it finds them. It does it much faster than Ancestry.com’s online family tree.

2.       My  place names are indexed in addition to my last names. So if I am attending a conference or planning a research trip to Oregon County, Missouri, I can run a report that will tell me all of the people I have associated with Oregon County, Missouri or in Missouri, period. Be sure to watch the Legacy Family Tree video or webinar on how to enter your place names in such a way that cities and towns in Oregon County, Missouri will also be captured in the report. This applies to all software packages. I, unfortunately, have not implemented this organization schema yet, have you?

3.       I use it to manage my sources to document each event. Here is a screenshot of a birth fact for my 2nd great-grandfather, James Franklin Lasiter. I have 9 sources for his birth date and place. A lot of people wrote about their wish lists for software. If I had to request a change for RM4, it would be that they include the detailed text in the summary box here at the top where it says “Details.” And for all I know, this may be different in RM5 that was just released. As it is now in RM4 you have to click on the source in order for the detail text to be displayed in the bottom right hand box.



4.       Linda McCauley mentioned Research Notes in her post “How I Use my Genealogy Database” using Legacy Family Tree. We have a similar feature in Rootsmagic 4, which is a report called Research Notes that you can run for each person. It is a breakdown of each source and how it relates to each fact and includes notes and so forth. The only problem I have with it is that it puts the name of the source as a footnote and the report itself lists simply a date and place and then a note. For this to work, you would have to include the name of the source in the actual detailed text of the footnote. So I don’t use this feature. But if it worked the way I would like it to work, it could probably be very powerful. Here is a screenshot of what it looks like:



5.       One thing I’ve started doing is adding census reports as events, in addition to birth, marriage, death, burial, and occasionally occupation. This makes for easily being able to determine when and where my ancestors were enumerated and this event shows up ok on the narrative report. I have tried to add other source-like events such as obituaries, but found they did not display well (or at all) on narrative reports. This could be rectified if I played with my custom settings more. What RM4 lacks in being able to copy and paste citations between family members, it gains in being able to assign a census report to multiple people in a family. I have found this feature to be very helpful and time-saving. I enter the census as an event for the head of house. I then share it with the other members of the household. I enter the information for the census into the census notes and I add a source. When this event is shared with other members of the house, the census note and source citation is automatically entered into their events list. The only difference between the head of house and the rest of the household is that the census note for the head of house is displayed on his or her report, but not on the report of those that the census is shared with. The report simply says “He appeared in the household of John Riley Lasiter in the census in Jun 1880 in Tomlinson, Scott, Arkansas, USA” with a footnote pointing to the citation. Because of this, I make sure to copy the census note information into the general notes of the household members. I usually do this anyways. This is one of the reasons why I say I engage in some redundancy!

6.       Speaking of redundancy. When I first started working with my database back when I was using Family Tree Maker, I used to put all of my information into the citation/footnote, including my analysis and the full text of the item being cited. This is what it used to look like. And unfortunately I still have a LOT of these left in my database:




When I transferred my database over to Rootsmagic, something happened and now I am no longer able to run reports using footnotes that are “that long.” So I have been trying to chop things up a bit more and use the event notes, general notes, and footnotes as separate entities. Unfortunately because I had been doing things for so long and had accumulated so much data, it is very difficult to change it all even if I were to come up with a standardized way of doing things. The two concerns I always had were this: I wanted to be able to easily pull my research notes and analysis out of my database quickly. And if it is scattered between birth notes, death notes, source citation notes, etc., that always seemed like a daunting task. I also wanted to be able to site my sources on my own just in case my footnotes did not work; as was the case when I transferred to RM. So I often built my source citations and then copied them into my notes. But that just cramped the readability of my reports. Especially when the demand to share with others increased. So now I use a hybrid system. I copy everything into my general notes, that way I can easily extract the information and copy and paste into a word document if I have to. Information entered into the rest of the program relies on my program's ability to export to a report. 

7.       Census Reports: When I used FTM, I used to include the entire census report in my citation because it was easier to copy and paste the citation to each member included in that household. Now I only include the line relating to the person being cited. I include information about a census report in the general notes always. This is what my census report looks like:
1910 Big Apple Twp., Oregon Co., MO
Taken 28 Apr 1910, Line 67, dw 130, fm 133
William Peters, head, 35 yo (b. abt 1875), M1 10 yrs (abt 1900), IL Unk IL, educated yes, rents a house, farm laborer, can read and write
Dora Peters, wife, 35 yo (b. abt 1875), M1 10 yrs (abt 1900), 5/7 kids living, AR Unk unk, cannot read or write
Herbert Peters, son, 9 yo (b. abt 1901), MO IL AR, can read, but c/n write
Danie Peters, dau, 5 yo (b. abt 1905), MO IL AR
Vibert Peters, son, 3 yo (b. abt 1907), MO IL IL
Nova Peters, dau 1 8/12 (b. abt 1908), MO IL IL
Mary Peters, dau, <1yr (b. abt 1909), MO IL IL
NARA Film T624, Roll 804, FHL Film 1374817, Page 7B, ED 117
[The last 3 children's mother's place of birth is listed as IL, but this must be a mistake as Dora was born in AR]

This format is easy for me to read. I add the approximate year of birth in parenthesis. Now that I include my census report information in my general notes, I no longer need to include all of the information for each household member in my citations. Now I only include the information pertinent to that household member. 

And this is what my citations look like:


It clearly states her name, age, and place of birth. I can click through each census that is cited to see if there are any differences. If I did not have this information included in this footnote, I would have to go back to this person’s general notes to see what this particular census report said for her name, age, and place of birth.

With regard to redundancy and census reports, the head of house inevitably will have the census report show up twice on his or her narrative report. This is fine by me. I would rather have too much information than not enough.

8.       I’m guessing this post has gone on long enough, so I will summarize here.
·         I add everything I know about a person in the general notes, including transcripts of death certificates and obituaries, census reports, land records, etc.
·         I have just started entering census reports as their own events and I “share” them with household members.
·         I provide source information for items included in my general notes, although the citations are not complete as I leave it up to the footnotes to do that job.
·         I cite every source for every fact.
·         I include my analysis of evidence (ie, review of sources) for each fact’s sources in that fact’s notes. This analysis is usually NOT copied to the person’s general notes.
·         I only enter a fact once. If some sources point to alternate information, I pick the best one, or a range, and I cite them all. 

I do use my database to create narrative reports for myself and to share with others. But I have found that most people I share with do not care about source citations. And the narrative reports give way too much information. So I guess I would have to admit that it is used mostly for me. I think most of the below posters have come to a similar conclusion. 

Another example of how I use my database to cite my sources and use the fact notes can be found in my “Am I an Evidence-Based Genealogist or Conclusion-Based Genealogist?” post.

Here's what other bloggers are saying:

Shelley Bishop’s How I Use Reunion for Mac as my Genealogy Database at A Sense of Family
Randy Seaver's Ten Reasons Why I Use a Genealogy Software Program at Genea-Musings
Linda McCauley’s How I Use in My Genealogy Database at Documenting the Details

Tuesday, September 6, 2011

Family Search Bloggers Reception at FGS


We finally made it to Springfield IL for the FGS genealogy conference which starts tomorrow. 

Tonight I attended the Bloggers Reception put on by Family Search that was held on the 29th floor of the Hilton hotel in downtown Springfield, Illinois. This offers an opportunity for the bloggers to get together and meet each other in person and interact with the members of the Family Search team.  It is also a way in which Family Search can disseminate information about what they have been working on to fellow geneabloggers who can then share with their readers.

Some of the announcements on current Family Search projects:

1)      As many of you know, the 1940 census report images will be released on Ancestry.com on April 2nd, 2012.  Family Search has joined a consortium to index it and make it free “in perpetuity.” They hope to engage the public and local genealogical societies for their help in bringing this project to fruition prior to the April 2nd release date.
2)      David Rencher announced that Family Search did a 4 generation pedigree of the Abraham Lincoln family, framed it and presented it to the Abraham Lincoln Library and Museum this week. Prints of the pedigree will be made available for sale in the museum store.
3)      More news on the Civil War Records being released by Family Search can be found on their website at www.familysearch.org/civilwar. Information about places, regiments, and events can be found on their wiki along with current indexing projects that need your help! One thing that caught my eye was an indexing project of union soldiers’ headstones!
4)      If you are an indexing volunteer or would like to learn more about their volunteering opportunities, stop by the Family Search booth during their Volunteer Appreciation Reception on Thursday night from 6 to 8 pm.
5)      Be sure to check out the white paper on “Preserving Your Family History Digitally” which has been recently updated and discusses the advantages and challenges of preserving your family history records digitally.
6)      We also saw slides of the learning center webpages which have been redesigned and offer over 200 free learning courses for you to choose from.

Two huge announcements released this week include the transition of digital scanning from the field to on-site digital publishing and the replacement of the BYU archive of family history books which goes into beta this week in the Family History labs.

Field Express:
You may have noticed a lot of records being made available “by image only” prior to being indexed by volunteers. This is made possible by over 165 field cameras placed throughout the world which are responsible for capturing digital images and uploading online from the field.  This is much faster, providing a “digital pipeline” directly to the genealogists who used to have to wait years before content was captured, indexed, and delivered to the public. To date, turnaround time is approximately 4 weeks from capture to delivery; the goal is 2 weeks turnaround time.

The BYU Family History Archive will be replaced by the new Family Search Family History Books which can be found in the FamilySearch Labs. Check it out!

They also announced next year's RootsTech2012 conference in Salt Lake City, Utah, Feb 2-4, 2012. All FGS conference attendees receive a discounted $99.00 conference registration fee good for yourself and anyone else you would like to register while here at FGS. This is a $30 discount off of the early bird registration fee of $129 and almost half off the $189 full registration fee. 

Tomorrow is the Focus on Societies Day of the conference. I hope to gain insight into how to manage a genealogy society, provide education and outreach to our members, secure funding and setup fundraising events, and organize volunteers. 



Wednesday, February 25, 2009

HUDSON family census reports, Randolph Co., NC (1790-1840)

Lowndes County Alabama Map
At this time, I do not know of a direct connection between my GODWIN family and the HUDSON Family of Randolph County, North Carolina.

However, the family of Nathan Godwin and Lorena Hudson of Lowndes County, Alabama is an exact match to my Godwin Grandfather's Y-DNA on FamilyTreeDNA.

You can view our DNA results here. We are listed under Group 2.

In an effort to determine who the parents of Lorena HUDSON were, I researched as many HUDSON families as I could from Randolph Co., NC, which is where this family is said to have come from.

I researched land grants, deed records, and census reports primarily; there were no Hudson or Hutson wills or estate files recorded in Randolph Co, NC during this time.

Below is a list of Hudson entries in the census reports for Randolph Co., NC from 1790 to 1840. If you have anything to add, please leave a comment below or email me.

For more information about the Nathan Godwin and Lorena Hudson family of Lowndes Co., AL or about the Hudson Family research I have done, see these posts:

Hudson and Godwin Family Research Goals
Hudson Family Research Update 
Nathan Godwin and Lorena Hudson family of Lowndes Co., AL


HUDSON / HUTSON Family Census Reports of Randolph County, North Carolina
from 1790- 1840


1790 Randolph County, North Carolina
-   There were 6 Hudsons enumerated

1790 Randolph Co., NC Roll M637_7, p. 163
Richard Hudson: 2m > 16 [b. bef 1774]
2m < 16 [b. bet 1774-1790] 4 females; (same page as John Hudson)

1790 Randolph Co., NC Roll M637_7, p. 172
 Joseph Hudson: 1m > 16 [b. bef 1774]
4m < 16 [b. bet 1774-1790] 2 females

1790 Randolph Co., NC Roll M637_7, p. 163
John Hudson: 1m > 16 [b. bef 1774]
(same page as Richard Hudson)

1790 Randolph Co., NC
Roll M637_7, p. 180
Lemuel Hudson: 1m > 16 [b. bef 1774]


1790 Randolph Co., NC
Roll M637_7, p. 161
John Hudson: 1m > 16 [b. bef 1774]
3m < 16 [b. bet 1774-1790] 4 females

1790 Randolph Co., NC Roll M637_7, p. 171
Obediah Hudson: 1m > 16 [b. bef 1774]
2m < 16 [b. bet 1774-1790] 2 females

1800

1800 Randolph Co., NC (Hillsboro)
Roll 32, p. 320
Joseph Hudson: 2m < 10, 2m 10-15, 1m 16-25, 1m 45+; 1f 16-25, 1f 45+ [b. bef 1755]

1800 Randolph Co., NC (Hillsboro) Roll 32, p. 318
John Hudson: 1m < 10, 1m 26-44; 2f < 10, 1f 26-44 [b. bet 1756-1774]
Same page as Nathan and Richard Hudson

1800 Randolph Co., NC (Hillsboro) Roll 32, p. 319
Obediah Hudson: 2m < 10, 1m 26-44, 1f < 10, 1f 10-15, 1f 26-44 [b. bet 1756-1774]

1800 Randolph Co., NC (Hillsboro) Roll 32, p. 318
Nathan Hudson: 1m < 10, 1m 16-25, 1f < 10, 1f 16-25 [b. bet 1775-1784]
Same page as Richard and John Hudson

1800 Randolph Co., NC (Hillsboro) Roll 32, p. 318
Richard Hudson: 1m 10-15, 1m 45+, 1f 10-15, 1f 45+ [b. bef 1755]
Same page as Nathan and John Hudson


1810

1810 Randolph Co., NC
Roll 38, p. 166
Joseph Hutson, 5m 16-25, 1m 45+, 2f 16-25, 1f 45+
[b. bef 1765]
This is the only Hudson family found in 1810

1820
Did not survive for Randolph co., NC

1830

1830 Randolph Co., NC (Regiment 1)
Page 45
Peter Hutson, 1m 5-10, 1m 30-40, 2f < 5, 1f 5-10, 1f 10-15, 1f 20-30 [b. bet 1790-1800]
Same page as Joseph Hutson

1830 Randolph Co., NC (Regiment 2) Page 52
John Hutson Esqrs: 1m 60-70, 3f 15-20, 1f 50-60 [b. bet 1760-1770]

1830 Randolph Co., NC (Regiment 1) Page 45
Joseph Hutson: 1m 40-50, 1m 80-90, 1f 40-50 [b. bet 1740-1750]
Same page as Peter Hutson

1840

1840 Randolph Co., South Division, NC
Roll 369, page 68
John Hutson: 1m 50-60 [b. bet 1780-1790]
Same page as Abel and Peter Hutson


1840 Randolph Co., South Division, NC
Roll 369, page 60
John Hutson, 1m < 5, 2m 10-15, 1m 20-30, 1m 30-40; 1f < 5, 2f 5-10, 1f 20-30, 1f 30-40; [b. bet 1800-1810]

1840 Randolph Co., South Division, NC Roll 369, page 68
Abel Hutson, 1m 70-80, 1f 30-40 [b. bet 1760-1770]
Same page as Peter and John Hutson

1840 Randolph Co., Northern Division, NC Roll 369, p. 87
Lane Hutson, 1m < 5, 2m 10-15, 1m 40-50, 1f < 5, 1f 5-10, 1f 10-15, 2f 15-20, 1f 40-50 [b. bet 1790-1800]

1840 Randolph Co., South Division, NC Roll 369, page 68
Peter Hutson, 1m < 5, 1m 5-10, 1m 10-15, 1m 40-50; 2f 10-15, 1f 15-20, 1f 20-30, 1f 30-40 [b. bet 1790-1800]
Same page as John and Abel Hutson