GenealogyandFamilyHistory.com

By:  Carolyn L. Barkley

When I began my genealogical research many years ago, like many other beginners, I focused on marriage records, birth and death records when they were available, as well as wills. With experience came more knowledge and I began to use deeds and other land records. As I started research in Virginia I attended various workshops and seminars in order to become more knowledgeable about the specific records available in that state. One of my educational goals was to learn about those things called “chancery records” that I kept hearing my colleagues discuss. By doing so, I was able to add depth and detail to my research, learning to piece together information about individuals who might have otherwise gone unknown and their stories untold.

To understand these records, a definition of chancery, or chancery courts, is necessary. Not all courts judge cases in the same manner. Some courts decide cases based on the written laws that either specifically allow or specifically proscribe various actions in certain circumstances. There is no latitude for judicial interpretation in these cases; there is no “grey area” as the legal requirements are defined quite clearly.

Other courts, however, deal with issues of equity or fairness and these courts are called Chancery Courts (in Virginia and Tennessee, for example), Courts of Pleas and Quarter Sessions (in North Carolina, for example), or some other name or distinction. According to Black’s Law Dictionary, justice in these courts is “administered according to fairness, as contrasted with strictly formulated rules of common law.” In other words, codified law cannot decide these cases readily and a judge must weigh all the elements and decide what a fair resolution is for the complainants and defendants. Chancery Courts handle such types of suits as divisions of estates, land disputes, divorce petitions, and business partnership issues.

Chancery suits are initiated by a bill (bill of complaint or injunction) which outlines the plaintiff’s grievances against the defendant. The defendant then responds to the complaint and, after consideration of all the evidence presented, a judge issues a final decree or decision. The case file may include subpoenas, depositions of witnesses, affidavits, reports of court-appointed commissioners, a docket listing plaintiff and defendant names, and dates of court actions. In land disputes, a plat or survey may be attached; in other instances wills, deeds, receipts, accounts, and other types of records necessary to fully document the case are also included. By identifying a pertinent chancery case and reading the entire record for the suit, you may discover biographical, genealogical, and historical information that will further your research.

The Library of Virginia in Richmond makes a wonderful resource available through its Virginia Memory site, namely, the Chancery Record Index, an ongoing archival processing and indexing project covering cases from the early eighteenth century through World War I. The database indexes 188,000 cases with four million associated images.

Since I live in Nelson County, Virginia, I decided to search that county for a chancery suit to use as an example for this article. As I did not have a specific individual or case in mind, I decided to search for the surname “Rose,” one of the historical names in the county. First, however, I searched the “what’s available” link to see if Nelson County chancery cases had been completed. Since Nelson County was not included, I decided to search its parent county of Amherst. I found an 1803 complaint (numbered 1803-18) by Robert H. Rose, son of Hugh Rose of Amherst County, brought against the executors of his father’s will, Patrick Rose and William Cabell, as well as Caroline M. Rose, his mother and the widow of Hugh Rose, who was added to the list of defendants during the course of the case.

In his suit, Robert indicated that his father’s will specified that land owned in Henry County was to be sold and the proceeds used to pay his debts. In addition, Robert also noted that his father, in addition to land, left him a negro, Joshua. Although the executors had sold Hugh’s personal property and applied the proceeds to the outstanding debts of the estate, they had also sold Robert’s legacy – Joshua. Moreover, they had not sold the Henry County lands “refusing to do so unless compelled by legal action,” i.e., a decree from a court of equity. Robert requested that the court compel the executors to sell the land as per the conditions of the will and to reimburse him for the value of Joshua when sold, or the sale price plus interest from the time of the sale.

In an undated entry, Carolina Matilda Rose, who held life estate in the Henry County land under the terms of the will, answered the complaint by indicating that she had no objection to the sale of the land in Henry County and that she would “cheerfully join in any instrument of writing for conveying her right and interest in the same” as long as she received a part of the sale equal to her interests in the property. She would rely on the court to decide the proper proportion and indicated that she was free of any fraud in the matter.

Patrick Rose and William Cabell, the executors, answered the complaint in a document sworn in court on  21 June 1803. They agreed with the major points of the complaint, specifically the sale of personal property and the application of the proceeds to Hugh Rose’s debts and the sale of Joshua and the application of the proceeds to the estate’s debts. However, with regard to the Henry County land, they stated that it had remained unsold because Caroline Rose, the widow, refused to join in the sale. They went on to state that the she had now agreed to the sale and that the land had since been sold for £800 which they believed sufficient to pay all debts. They agreed to repay Robert the sum of Joshua’s sale of £125 that had occurred about 12 September 1797. However, they outlined several credits they expected to receive against that amount including £33/7/3 that Patrick Rose had lent to Robert on 29 November1794 and which remained unpaid plus interest; £4/6 which Robert had spent at the sale of his father’s personal property on 30 November 1795, but that also remained unpaid plus interest; and £60 which the executors had paid Robert in 1801. They noted that they held Robert’s bond of £15 for the hire of Joshua before his sale. Patrick and William felt “doubt as to the propriety of compelling the complainant to pay the bond,” but wished “to act properly and correctly” leaving it to the Court to decide.

In addition to these documents, the case file also includes various summonses for the parties to appear in court, receipts, several accounts of Hugh Rose’s estate and Robert’s payments and receipts, and a copy of Hugh Rose’s will, dated 16 October 1794 and probated 19 January 1795. Various court actions and hearings were held in November/December 1802, January/February 1803, and March/April 1803. In June 1803 [specific date is illegible], the court issued a final decree in which Robert would recover £4/5/1 from the executors, which represented the balance owed him. Caroline initially was apportioned one-fifth of the value of the sale of the Henry County land, or £160. This decree was later revised on 24 June with the consent of all parties, and Caroline received one-quarter of the value, or £200.

An in-depth reading of this case provides several pieces of useful information and suggests other information to be pursued in further research:

• Relationship between Robert Henry Rose and his father Hugh
• Name of Hugh Rose’s wife, Caroline Matilda Rose
• Death of Hugh Rose between 26 October 1794, and 19 January 1795
• Will of Hugh Rose, including notation of land owned and the names of  his children:
  • Judy
  • Nancy
  • Robert Henry
  • Caroline, married to ____ Turpin
  • Sukey
  • Polly
• Information for further research:
  • Other undefined names from Hugh Rose’s will: Henry Rose (no relationship given), Gustavus (no last name or relationship given)
  • Henry County deeds
  • Deeds for Harris Creek land in Amherst County (previously given to Robert)
• Relationship of Robert Henry Rose and Patrick Rose

Clearly, this suit contains considerable information about the Rose family and poses potential avenues for research.

In conducting chancery or equity research, you will want to determine the correct court and location of such suits for the state and county appropriate to your research. You should then ascertain if suits have been digitized and made available online, or if you will need to visit the courthouse in person. Regardless of method of access, chancery records will prove very helpful in your research.

There are many published indices and abstracts of chancery suits. Some of these include William Ronald Cocke’s Hanover County [Virginia] Chancery Wills and Note: a Compendium of Genealogical, Biographical and Historical Material… (Genealogical Publishing Company, 2005) and Thomas E. Partlow’s Wilson County, Tennessee Chancery Court Records 1842-1892 (Genealogical Publishing Company, 1997). You will also want to search Google for chancery court records your counties of interest and check for possible links on Cyndi’s List.

By Carolyn L. Barkley

I think that genealogical minds sometimes work together in a type of mystical synergy. As I was working on background research for this article, I found the latest issue (December 2009) of the National Genealogical Society Quarterly in my mailbox. Scanning the table of contents, I noted an article by Willis H. White, Ph.D., CG, entitled Using Vessel Documentation to Identify Nineteenth-Century Captains: The Mott Coastal Captains of Long Island Sound. Mr. White’s article is a case study in identifying the ships of a group of captains in a specific locality, but I discovered that several of the sources he cited were already on my growing list of resources for this article. I read his article appreciatively as a part of my preparation.

In our research, most of us probably have focused on information that may be gleaned from passenger arrival records and ship manifests. Unfortunately, the microfilm copies of these records can be some of the ugliest looking records known to man. Compounding the problem is that fact that we often have to know the very information we are seeking (date of arrival, port, and ship’s name) before we have any success, thus making the process very frustrating.

I would like to suggest that in addition to these conventional records, you consider adding to your understanding of your immigrant ancestor’s experience by learning something about the ship itself. In addition, if you have an ancestor who was a captain of a vessel or a member of a ship’s crew, such information is even more important in telling the full story of your ancestor’s life. (For the purposes of this article, I will be talking about resources for nineteenth and twentieth century ships.)

When you have determined the name of a specific ship, you may be able to locate an illustration in Michael J. Anuta’s Ships of Our Ancestors (Genealogical Publishing Co., 2006). For example, this book includes an 1870 photograph of the S. S. Caspian (Allan line). A list of all the ships included in Anuta’s Ships of Our Ancestors can be found at http://germanroots.hom.att.net/ships.html.

By Googling this ship’s name, you will find a Wikipedia entry on the Allan Line Royal Mail Steamers that lists the Caspian and its sister ships (although a note indicates that original information in the entry needs further research and documentation). In addition, you will find a Rootsweb page that reproduces the Anuta photograph and includes the information that “The CASPIAN was a 2,728 gross ton steam ship owned by the Allan Line of Liverpool. She was built by the London & Glasgow Co., Glasgow and was launched on 1 February 1870. Her details were – length 349.6 ft x beam 38 ft, clipper stem, one funnel, three masts (rigged for sail), iron construction, single screw and a speed of 11 knots. There was capacity for 80-1st and 600-3rd class passengers. She started her maiden voyage on 5 November 1870 when she sailed from Liverpool for Quebec and Montreal. On 8 December 1870 she made her first Liverpool – Baltimore sailing and in 1882 was fitted with compound engines by Laird Bros, Birkenhead. In 1882 she was used as a troopship for the Egyptian Expedition and then returned to the North Atlantic trade. She started her last Liverpool – Baltimore voyage on 27 September 1892 and was then laid up until 1896 when she made a single round voyage between Glasgow and Boston (commencing on 11 December 1896). On 20 March 1897 she commenced a single round voyage between Glasgow and Portland and was scrapped later the same year.”

The Caspian’s descriptive information was taken from the website, The Ships List. This important source provides a wealth of information about ships, along with information about passenger lists. In addition to the detailed description of the Caspian, The Ships List includes a photograph (also dated 1870). This site also includes fleet lists and ship wreck information. This latter category provides detailed information about ships lost at sea. If your ancestor sailed on the City of Boston, for example, there are newspaper and telegram transcriptions detailing her presumed loss at sea in March 1870, as well as the ship’s passenger list. The Ship’s List provides free access to over 140,000 entries, but for a subscription of $9.95, “it is possible to access over a million citations from books, magazines, CDs, websites, online databases and more.”

As you continue your search for ship information, you will want to investigate the following resources:

1. The Mariner’s Museum Library in Newport News, Virginia, makes some information accessible online, but it is well worth visiting the library in person. It is located on the campus of Christopher Newport University in Newport News, Virginia. Their collections include books, periodicals, over 10,000 vessel plans and drawings, maps, manuscripts and registers, steamship ephemera, and more. During a visit I was able to locate descriptive information on the May Flower (no, not that one!), a spice merchant ship from New Haven, Connecticut, captained by Aaron Lanfair, the recently discovered brother of my maternal third great-grandmother. I had learned from his wife’s Civil War pension application fie that Aaron had been lost at sea along with his ship in the late 1870s. Using the information from the pension application, during my visit to the museum library, I discovered a notice of his ship’s departure from New York in the “Shipping News” section of a contemporary New York newspaper. By scanning successive day’s newspapers, I was able to trace his vessel from its departure from New York City to its arrival in Nassau and then its departure from Nassau bound for New York (or perhaps New Haven).  It was on the trip homeward, then, that the ship was lost.

Other collections include the Elwin M. Eldredge Collection of “images, artifacts, and archival material about the rise of steamship transportation [and] extensive documentation of the history of American steamship companies. With thousands of photographs, extensive notes, ephemera, and clippings from nautical publications, newspapers, and other media, this collection chronicles an important era in our maritime and economic history.” The steamship ephemera collection includes baggage tags, ships plans, menus, advertisements, etc. for a large number of ships.

2.  G. W. Blunt White Library at Mystic Seaport in Mystic, Connecticut, provides online access to the “Ship Register (1857-1900)” database. By searching for the bark May Flower, I was able to obtain digitized images of the 1871, 1872, 1873, 1875, 1876 and 1877 Record of Foreign and American Shipping indicating that the ship was owned by H. Trowbridge’s Sons of New Haven, Connecticut, and was built in 1852 in Scarboro, Maine. Although the ship’s master was listed in the first three listings, no name was provided for 1875-1877. As there are many ships by the same name, it is important to know the type of vessel (bark, for example) in order to find the correct entry.

3.  The National Archives Record Group 41 contains a collection of vessel documents. One of the most important sections of this record group includes certificates of enrollment or registration for coastal vessels over twenty-tons. These documents usually include the certificate number; the vessel’s official number and call letters; the name and address of the owners; name of the vessel and its home port; name of the master on the date the certificate was issued; the date and place of constructions; name of builder; number, place,  and date of issue of any previous certificate; number of decks and masts; dimensions and tonnage; type of  stern, gallery, figurehead, and rig; and place and date of issue of certificate. The finding aid notes that the reverse side of the certificate included “an endorsement giving the place, date, and reason for surrender of certificate. Sometimes, endorsements of changes of master, renewal of license, or other information.” By researching these registers, it is possible to document a vessel’s service history.

4.  Cyndi’s List includes 743 links to sites in the category of “Ships and Passenger Lists.” While numerous sites contain passenger list information, many others include historical information about specific ships or shipping lines, photographs and images. Links to libraries and archives include the Guildhall Library Manuscripts Collection in London that houses Indexes to Lloyd’s Captains Registers. The Maritime History Virtual Archives includes many informative listings of ships, rigging, etc.

It is well worth your time to work through all the various links to see what might be pertinent to your research. Finally, you may wish to subscribe to US-SHIPSLISTS-POST1820, a mailing list for the “posting of information and queries regarding all aspects of the ships that carried our ancestors from place to place after 1820, including ship descriptions, ports of arrival and departure, passenger lists, fleet lists, shipping schedules, and wreck data.”

I hope this brief overview of ship information resources will prompt you to move beyond passenger lists and add detail to your ancestor’s story by researching the interesting world of transatlantic vessels.

by Jean L. Cooper

University Library, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Va.

Having worked for twenty-six years in a variety of positions at the University Library, Ms. Cooper currently serves as Library Grants Officer and University Library Genealogical Resources Specialist.  She is the author of Virginia Genealogy; a Guide to Genealogical Resources at the University of Virginia and A Guide to Historic Charlottesville and Albemarle County, Virginia. The second edition of her Index to Records of Ante-Bellum Southern Plantations was recently published by McFarland Publishing.  Ms. Cooper has a B.A. from Alma College, Alma, Michigan, and an M.L. from the University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina.

I’ve been asked the question “What Do I Do With My Research?” frequently over the past few months.

Genealogists tend to take a long view of history, and with that comes a long view of the future. It’s no surprise, then, that sooner or later, genealogists start wondering about what to do with their research files and books when that inevitable day comes. The perfect solution would be to pass one’s research on to the next generation, but there isn’t always someone younger who is interested in the family history. So what does one do? Many times we offer our material, the results of our hard work, to a library nearby, and then are disappointed when the offer is declined. Why would a library refuse a free gift?

Everything Has a Cost

In the library world, a free gift is never truly free. There are significant costs involved in sorting, listing, preserving, and cataloging every single item acquired by a library.

All libraries have a space problem. If a library accepted each gift that was offered, there would be no space to shelve everything. Also problematical, library materials require appropriate space for storage that will allow the library not merely to shelve the materials, but to preserve them as well. Paper items must be stored at a specific humidity and temperature or they will crumble into pieces.

Because each item in the library involves a cost, every library has a collection policy, whether it’s codified in writing, or exists only in the librarian’s head. These collection policies define what the purpose of the library is and what it will collect. Some libraries even have very detailed collection policies that specifically list the subdivisions of each subject that will be collected. For instance, a public library’s policy might be to collect materials strictly related to its community, while a special library might collect only those materials having to do with a specific area or a particular time period of interest to the organization that it serves.

Most libraries, therefore, find themselves limited in what they can accept due to their collection policies, finite storage space, and lack of funds.

Improving the Odds

How can we improve the odds that we’ll find an appropriate home for our research?

1. Inventory your materials. If your research includes published books, list each one individually. Organize your manuscript materials in folders by topic. Consider the possibility that you may have to offer different types of materials to different libraries depending on the nature of collection they have.

2.  List the family names, locations, and time periods covered by your research. Your goal is to discover the areas in which your material can help other researchers.

3. Locate appropriate libraries that might be interested in your research. Begin with libraries in the area your research covers, as they are more likely to be able to use such a gift. There are not many individual libraries dedicated to genealogy in the United States, but there are a few, including the Allen County Public Library in Fort Wayne, Indiana; the Family History Library in Salt Lake City, Utah; and the DAR Library in Washington, D.C.

In general, public libraries do not have large genealogical research collections, although there are some that do. For instance, the Fairfax County (Virginia) Public Library’s Virginia Room in its Main Library, contains extensive materials on regional history and genealogy, and the Virginia Beach (Virginia) Public Library has a large genealogy collection in its Meyera E. Oberndorf Central Library.  Publiclibraries.com can be helpful in finding which libraries are located in your area of interest. This website not only provides links to public libraries, but also to state libraries and university libraries.

Usually, the primary mission of a university library is to collect materials in areas that support the curriculum and degree programs of the university. Many universities and colleges have special collection libraries, but their collection policies are often quite restrictive. Study these policies carefully before deciding to offer your research to an academic institution.

Remember that local historical societies, and sometimes genealogical societies, also have libraries that might be receptive to a carefully placed gift. In addition, include state and private entities on your list, such as a state library or an historical or genealogical society. For instance, in Virginia, you should consider the Library of Virginia (state) and the Virginia Historical Society (private). It’s more difficult to find one site that lists historical and genealogical societies, but usually a state library will have this information somewhere on its site, such as the list of state societies found on the Library of Virginia site.

Study your chosen libraries. Find out what their collection policies include – you can usually find this information on their websites, but you might need to write to the library for this information. Look at their current collections and note areas of strength and weakness. This information will be useful as you consider your approach. Before you’re done, you should be able to rank the potential libraries for your donation from your preferred library to your least preferred.

Approaching the Library

Once you have done the legwork, it is time to consider your approach carefully. Your materials probably comprise what is called a “special collection.” It’s important to be able to give a concise description of your research collection, so spend some time writing a “punchy” description, the shorter the better. For instance, a fictional family collection centered around a historic house in the area could be described as

The papers of the Smith family of Smithton House in Essex County, Virginia, collected by John Smith. This collection contains 4 legal file boxes of manuscript papers (handwritten and typed) of the Smith family, dating from 1770 to 1950, plus 100 published books about Essex County, 20 volumes of manuscript diaries of Percy Smith (1770-1810), a postcard collection of Essex County scenes from 1900-1915, and 2 legal file boxes of genealogical research by John Smith.

In this sample description, 1) I was specific about the size, dates, and geographic coverage of the collection, and 2) I featured specific contents that might peak interest in the collection, i.e., reasons why the “target” library would want this collection.

So, you’ve identified the library, or a small group of libraries, that would be an appropriate home for your collection. You’ve described what’s in the collection. Now you have to sell it!

At this point in the process, you will want to make personal contact with the librarian in charge of the special collections library or library acquisitions. You might start by calling the librarian for an introduction, then following up with a letter giving your brief descriptive paragraph and explaining in more detail why your collection would be valuable to the library. Do not expect instant results. Libraries have hierarchical governing structures, so there are a lot of people who might have to sign off on your gift.

Don’t Be Discouraged

Don’t be discouraged when a library turns down your gift. That’s why you identified more than one possible home for your research collection. If possible, ask the librarian why her library made the negative decision, and if she can recommend another potential recipient. You may learn that the librarian didn’t think she had the physical storage resources necessary to house your gift collection, or that there was some other constraint on the library’s part that made accepting the gift impossible. If you are in a position to afford it and wish to “sweeten the pot,” you might ask if a donation of funds to support the collection would change the librarian’s mind. At the very least, you will know more than you did when you started out and will be able to apply your new knowledge to your offer of a gift collection to the next library on your list.

Finally your life’s research is too important to leave to chance (or to relatives who may not understand its value). So, if you don’t get around to donating your research in your lifetime, by all means be sure to furnish the name of an appropriate repository in your estate documents which represent your last chance to preserve your efforts and make your work accessible to others.

By:  Carolyn L. Barkely

I recently completed a client project which included information about the author’s family members from the Kovno area of Lithuania who died during the Holocaust of 1933-1945. In several instances, the author was able to document the ultimate fate of his relatives using resources – new to me – termed “Shoah documents” by the author, but actually “Pages of Testimony” submitted to the Yad Vashem organization by a survivor or acquaintance of an individual. These records are essential in tracing one’s ancestors if it is possible that they may have been caught up in the enormity of the death or disappearance of entire families and communities that occurred during that twelve-year period. As these resources may be unknown to many researchers, this article shares several opportunities to access their contents.

Shoah is the Hebrew word meaning “catastrophe” and is used to refer to the Holocaust of the World War II era. The term is becoming more widely used outside of Israel, where the Knesset previously designated the 27^th day of the Hebrew calendar month of Nisan (the anniversary of the Warsaw ghetto uprising) as Yom ha-Shoah (Holocaust Remembrance Day), an official day of commemoration. In 2010, Yom ha-Shoah falls on Sunday, 11 April. (When the actual date falls on a Sunday, it is observed on the following Monday.)

Three major repositories offer access to information about Shoah victims and, in some cases, survivors:

1.  Yad Vashem. Located in Jerusalem, Yad Vashem, the Holocaust Martyrs’ and Heroes’ Remembrance Authority, was established in 1953 as the “world center for documentation, research, education and commemoration of the Holocaust.” It remains committed to what it terms the “four pillars of remembrance: commemoration, documentation, research, and education.” In partnership with other organizations, it has collected and recorded names and biographical information for approximately half of the six million Jews who perished.

This site provides access to “The Central Database of Shoah Victims’ Names.” Entering the name Shmuel Girshowitz and his location (Kovno), I was able to retrieve a page of testimony submitted by his son Nekhemia in 1955. The page was translated into English from Hebrew, but the original image was accessible to the left of the translated information. From this page of testimony, I learned variant spellings of both the individual’s given name (Szmuel, Shmuel) and surname (Girszowitz, Girshovitz), his father’s given name (Ber), his mother’s first name (Badana/Bohdana), his date of birth (1862), his place of birth (Kelm, Raseiniai, Lithuania), his spouse’s given name (Roza) and surname (Epshtein), his permanent residence (Wilna, Poland), his profession (merchant), his place during the war (Kovno), his place of death (Kovno Ghetto), date of death (1943), and the name and relationship of the individual providing the information. What a wealth of information this record provides for someone searching for Shmuel Girshowitz! Similar information is provided for Naphtali Vaintraub (Waintraub), who was born in 1878 in Kovno where he died in 1943. He was a textile merchant and his wife’s given name was Friedel (Frida). This testimony was provided in 1957 by Zahava Saker, an acquaintance.

A good rule of thumb would be to analyze the relationship between the individual providing the information and the person(s) to whom it refers. Like death certificates, the closer the relationship, the more accurate the data may be. As seen in the Vaintraub entry, the “informant” is unable to provide Friedel’s maiden name.

Be sure to check out other sections of this easy-to-use site in order to search for possible photographs (my search for Kovno yielded over 1000 photographs), access user guides, search library collections (a keyword search for Kovno yielded 263 resources), and explore the various educational opportunities provided. If you are aware of a Holocaust victim who has not been included in the database, you may submit pages of testimony (forms are available in Hebrew, English, Russian, French, German, Spanish, Portuguese, Romanian, Hungarian, Dutch and Yiddish) and send related photographs. In addition, survivors’ registration forms are also available.

2. United States Holocaust Memorial Museum (USHMM).  This museum, dedicated in 1993, is located in Washington, D.C. Its web site is described as “the world’s leading online authority on the Holocaust.” The Museum’s Center for Advanced Holocaust Studies promotes research into the ever-growing body of Holocaust resources.

I found the Museum’s web site more difficult to use and less rewarding than the Yad Vashem site. The USHMM offers access to a Name List Catalog. Please be aware that searching this catalog does not immediately provide specific information about an individual, nor is it a comprehensive listing. None of the specific names I entered (even just surnames) provided matches. In addition, the online version contains only a small portion of the names that are available in the version used at the museum.

My research was most productive when I searched first for a specific geographic location such as, Kovno. That geographic search yielded a list of 111 names, but I was unable to locate either of the Girshowitz or Vaintraub individuals whom I was using as examples. I did, however, locate an entry for a Sophie Hirschovitz (a variant spelling of Girshowitz), who was born in Kovno on 15 December 1884 and who died on 25 January 1944. The entry indicated that the information came from a list of Jews born in Russia who were deported from France to Nazi camps between 1942 and 1945 and provided additional source information as well. When I checked for Sophie at the Yad Vashem site, I found additional information from the same list of deportees (but no Page of Testimony) indicating that she was transported from Drancy (an internment camp outside of Paris) to Auschwitz on 20 January 1944, only five days before her death. In addition, the title page of the list was available in digitized format on the site. From my limited search on the USHMM site, it appeared to be a useful locator, but its partner site, Yad Vashem, would be my first choice in searching for Shoah information about an individual.

The USHMM also provides information about the Benjamin and Vladka Meed Registry of Holocaust Survivors that “honors as survivors any persons, Jewish or non-Jewish, who were displaced, persecuted, or discriminated against due to the racial, religious, ethnic, social, and political policies of the Nazis and their collaborators between 1933 and 1945. In addition to former inmates of concentration camps, ghettos, and prisons, this definition includes, among others, people who were refugees or were in hiding.” Inclusion in this list is voluntary and focuses on those individuals who survived the Holocaust and who came to the United States after World War II. Registration forms are available online. One of the specific goals of the registry is to assist survivors and their families to trace missing relatives and the registry may be visited on the second floor of the Museum where the database can be accessed.

3.  The International Tracing Service. The International Tracing Service (ITS), located in Bad Arolsen, Germany, is an “internationally governed archive which is tasked to document the fate of millions of civilian victims of Nazi Germany.” Its collection includes “original records from concentration camps, details of forced labour, and files on displaced persons.” Formed in 1943 to find missing persons, it operates under administrative oversight by the International Committee of the Red Cross and is funded by the German government. Its archives have been accessible to researchers since late 2007. In addition, the USHMM provides access to the International Tracing Service Archives and has been providing archival information to survivors and/or their families since 2008. Further information about how to access this information is available both at the USHMM site and the ITS site.

Genealogical research into families affected by Shoah events will be difficult, but careful research in such locations as those described above may locate much-needed information.

Other Shoah resources include CyndisList which provides a Holocaust section under the heading of Military-World War II. Of particular interest to researchers is Gary Mokotoff’s How to Document Victims and Locate Survivors of the Holocaust (Avotaynu, 1995). In addition, you will also want to refer to Dan Rottenberg’s Finding Our Fathers: a Guidebook to Jewish Genealogy (Genealogical Publishing Co., 1977, reprinted 1998) and the three-volume Encyclopedia of Jewish Life Before and During the Holocaust, edited by Shmuel Spector and Geoffrey Wigoder, and published in conjunction with Yad Vashem.

By: Carolyn L. Barkley

I hope each of you has had a wonderful holiday season. Nevertheless, it’s once again that time of year when our minds make plans for the coming new year of genealogical work. Because of our well-intended resolution thoughts, this article has become an annual feature of GenealogyandFamilyHistory.com. We can’t receive too many reminders about how important it is to be organized in our research activities.

Did you make a New Year’s resolution last January to organize your research files and piles?  How successful were you in keeping your promise to clean up the piles of papers on the floor, and best of all, organize, label, and use those file folders?

I know I have made a similar resolution every year for many years, and the piles are still there under the eaves calling to me in the wee hours of the morning. Unfortunately, I have new piles on the office floor as well. That is not to say that I haven’t done some filing and organizing in energetic moments during the year (probably when I had some deadline I was ignoring), so I am feeling virtuous enough to share the following tips with you (again!) as you also begin to fulfill your 2009 resolutions  - in 2010!

1. Before you file the first piece of paper, develop a clear and easily understandable organizational scheme for your file folders. How you file them should be based on what best supports your research and your work methods. You might choose to file by surname, by generation, by geographical location, or by time period. In addition to labeling the hanging file folder, clear labeling of individual file folders within hanging files will allow you to make adjustments in your filing scheme as your retrieval needs increase or become more sophisticated.
2. Take time for some fun. Visit your local office supply store to see what types of folders and storage systems are available. While at the store invest in a good label maker to produce consistent, readable labels. If you do not need a filing cabinet, or do not have space for one, look for stackable containers that will accommodate your folders and that will fit under your desk or table, on book shelves, or in your closet
3. Set up your new file container and folders based on the organizational scheme you have chosen.
4. Pace yourself over several sessions. In order to keep from being discouraged, set yourself an attainable goal for each “cleanup” session. Tackle one pile at a time and place each document in its appropriate folder. IMPORTANT: Handle each document ONCE. Do NOT separate the pile into separate piles and then even more separate files until you have no more floor space and can’t reach the file container. To repeat – pick up the document ONCE. Place it in its appropriate file, adding new file folders and folder labels as necessary. Repeat these actions until you have completed all of the piled-up papers and the carpet/chair/desk/table you forgot you owned can be seen once again
5. When you are finished, congratulate yourself on a job well done, admire the new sense of spaciousness. Treat yourself to chocolate. BUT…
6. Make a new resolution to prevent the dreaded piles from returning. This resolution will not be as difficult to accomplish as you might think if you employ one strategy in the future. As soon as possible after every research trip, write a research report “for the file.” In the report, set out your research findings, analyze their impact on your project, and set new goals for any future research on this person or topic. Attach to the report all the documents that pertain to the research just completed and immediately file in the appropriate folder. Voila! No piles of stray documents on the floor, no lost documents. Instead you have an easily retrievable report that will provide you with all of the information what you need for future research.

I invite each of you to comment on these tips and to share your successes in keeping the dreaded document pile-ups from taking over your workspace.

To help you in your organization of documents and research project materials as well add to your knowledge of research methodologies, you may want to consider the following titles available from genealogical.com:

• William Dollarhide. Managing a Genealogical Project. Updated and Revised Edition (1999, reprinted 2001)
• Handybook for Genealogists. 11^th ed. (2006). A book and CD combination version of this title is currently out-of-print.
• Val Greenwood. The Researcher’s Guide to American Genealogy. 3^rd ed. (2000, reprinted 2005).
• Elizabeth Shown Mills. Professional Genealogy: A Manual for Researchers, Writers, Editors, Lecturers, and Librarians. (currently out0of-print).
• Elizabeth Shown Mills. Evidence Explained. Citing History Sources from Artifacts to Cyberspace. (2009).
• Harriet Stryker-Rodda. How to Climb Your Family Tree: Genealogy for Beginners. (1977, reprinted 1995).

Happy Holidays from GenealogyandFamilyHistory.com, Genealogical Publishing Company and Clearfield Company. As a holiday gift for 2009, we hope you’ll enjoy this article, originally published in the Genealogical Pointers issue for October 14, 2008. If you don’t currently receive the weekly Genealogical Pointers e-mail, you can subscribe at genealogical.com.

by Brent H. Holcomb

One of the biggest disappointments to researchers is the lack of marriage records for South Carolina. At least several times a week, persons arrive at the South Carolina Archives asking for marriage records. South Carolina does not have regular marriage records prior to 1911, the marriage license law having taken effect on July 1 of that year. There is no clear reason for this lack of early marriage records, except that in the colonial period the parishes of the Church of England were supposed to record all marriages within the parish (whether the parties were members of the Church or not). Whether this was done is a moot point; however, it is a fact that after the Revolution no state marriage license statute was passed until 1911.

Nevertheless, some counties or districts did issue marriage licenses. We find a handful from the 1780s in Camden District and Ninety Six District records. Additionally, the following counties or districts issued some marriage licenses or bonds, of which we have either recorded copies or originals: Charleston, Chester, Darlington, Fairfield, Horry, Marion, Marlboro, Newberry, Pendleton, Spartanburg, Sumter, and York. There is extant one marriage return for Pickens District for the years 1859 and 1860, which I published in my periodical, South Carolina Magazine of Ancestral Research (SCMAR).

In some church records, marriage references can be gleaned from the membership lists. Baptist records often contain separate male and female lists. You might find an entry in a female list, such as “Mary Jones, now Smith.” The manual of the Second Presbyterian Church in Charleston, which I am publishing in part in my quarterly, SCMAR), shows such examples. There are entries such as “Miss E. H. Simonon, now Mrs. Geo Moffett,” “Miss Louisa Burdell, now Mrs. Agnew,” “Miss Quintana Smith, now Mrs. Paxton,” and others.

South Carolina does have a number of marriage settlements, which are usually pre-marital agreements concerning property. Frequently, these marriage settlements are second marriages for one or both parties. Quite often, family information is found among these in statements of the origins of the property (inherited from a relative or obtained in some other way). These marriage settlements are found in Miscellaneous Records, Main Series for the Colonial Period, and for 1787-1885 in a separate series titled Marriage Settlements at the South Carolina Archives. Additionally, some marriage settlements are recorded in Miscellaneous Records (Columbia series) after 1787, for some unknown reason. Supposedly, these marriage settlements (after 1787) were also recorded in the deed books for the counties where the couples resided. However, this recording does not appear to have been consistent. Conversely, some marriage settlements are found recorded in the deed books of various counties and are not recorded in the Marriage Settlement volumes.

Eleven marriage settlements prior to 1821 have been abstracted and published within my two volumes available from Genealogical Publishing Company (GPC), South Carolina Marriages, 1688-1799 and South Carolina Marriages, 1800-1820. Genealogical Publishing Company has also released my supplement to these volumes. These three books also contain marriages from other sources: church records (including the colonial parish registers), diaries, the above-mentioned marriage licenses and bonds, etc.

The aforementioned volumes, on the other hand, do not include any marriages reported in newspapers, which probably represent the best source for 19th-century marriage records in South Carolina. Marriage notices from newspapers are found in several volumes published by myself and several other persons. Prior to the Civil War, newspapers were regional in scope, covering several counties or districts. A marriage from Fairfield District might be reported in a newspaper of Columbia, Newberry, or Camden, for example. The Greenville newspapers covered most of the upper part of South Carolina, 1826-1863.

Religious newspapers should also be consulted. The religious newspaper of the appropriate denomination may have been published outside of South Carolina, such as The Lutheran Observer (Baltimore, Maryland) and The Southern Christian Advocate (the Methodist newspaper, sometimes published in Augusta or Macon, Georgia). Presbyterian newspapers included the Charleston Observer, The Watchman and Observer (published in Richmond, Virginia, but contains South Carolina notices), and the Southern Presbyterian. I have published the marriage records from the first two of these. Lowry Ware and I have published notices from the Association of Reformed Presbyterian newspapers in two volumes. The South Carolina Temperance Advocate was a quasi-religious newspaper that published notices from all over South Carolina. Because it was published in Columbia, for the most part, researchers can access its notices in my Marriage and Death Notices from Columbia, South Carolina, Newspapers 1838-1860 (Southern Historical Press, 1981).

Such marriage notices are NOT limited to prominent persons. Consider the following example from the Southern Times and State Gazette (Columbia, South Carolina) of 6 January 1831:

Economical Marrying. Married on Thursday evening, the 23d ult., by Thomas Johns Esq., Mr. John Hendrix to Miss Mary Marbut; Mr. Joshua Hendrix to Miss Sarah Mills, and Mr. Euclidus Hog to Miss Kisiah Marbut, all at the same place, and all of Newberry District. Four of the persons married are the grandchildren of Mrs. Sarah Marbut, who was present and participated in the festivities of the evening.

Now, what does this tell us? If four of the persons who were married (out of six) were grandchildren of Mrs. Sarah Marbut, then one couple being married had to be first cousins. Such was not at all unusual at the time. Double cousins, first cousins, second cousins, etc., often married, but it was not legal for closer relatives to marry. One could not marry his niece or aunt, her uncle or nephew, for example.

Odd marriages were often reported in the newspaper. The following notice was abstracted from the Columbia Telescope of 25 February 1837:

Married in Fairfield District, near Twenty Five Mile Creek, on Thursday evening, 23d inst., by Mr. Jonathan Watts, Esq., Mr. Jacob Blizard aged 17 years, to Mrs. Wilson aged about 75.

Interracial marriage in South Carolina was not prohibited until 1895. Therefore, willing parties could be married, no matter what their race. We have examples of whites and blacks marrying, Indians and whites (though not often documented), etc. Many people have a “tradition” of Indian ancestry, but this is fairly rare, or at least it cannot be proved. The reasons are fairly obvious. Indians had already been removed from a given area, allowing whites to occupy the abandoned land.

Before 1872, divorce in South Carolina was not possible except by an act of the legislature. There are a dozen petitions for divorce on file prior to 1872, but all were denied. The 1872 statute was repealed in 1878, and the next divorce law was not instituted until the mid-20th century.

Ms. Barbara Langdon has begun to publish a series of South Carolina marriage records that can be inferred from various records. There are volumes available from her on Barnwell, Spartanburg, Edgefield, York, Chester, Fairfield, and some state-wide reference works. These are excellent sources, but you must understand what they are. They are records that prove that a marriage took place; however, the date of the record might be many years after the marriage took place. Ms. Langdon will provide a list of her works by request with a SASE. Her address is 132 Langdon Road, Aiken, SC 29801.

Sometimes we find proof of marriages in court cases, especially the quit court, and in obituary notices. Also, death certificates (which begin in South Carolina on January 1, 1915) might prove a marriage, as the name of the father and the maiden name of the mother of the decedent are often included. However, such information is subject to question and should be verified through other sources.

Don’t forget records of various wars and pension applications for participants and their widows–not only the Revolution but also the War of 1812, the Mexican War, and various Indian and “old wars.” There are published indices to most of these pension applications now. Additionally, the pension applications for Confederate widows are supposed to contain marriage dates inasmuch as the widow’s pension applications asked for a date of marriage if it could be supplied. Sometimes only a year is given, and rarely is the maiden name of the widow included. Often, these widows submitted depositions from persons who had attended their marriage or from persons who had known that she and her husband had lived as husband and wife for so many years. Sometimes, Bible records are included in such applications.

Deed Records: It is not unusual to find deeds of gift from a mother or father to children, frequently married daughters. In this way, some people avoided probate. Such records are to be found in the deed books of the individual counties in South Carolina. Therefore, there are numerous sources to find proof of a South Carolina marriage.

The titles in this article plus several others are available at genealogical.com.

By:  Carolyn L. Barkley

I have written on several occasions about the exhilaration of moving beyond names and dates and adding detail about the lives of our ancestors. One of the best ways to accomplish this is to put their feet on the ground in a specific place and time. A significant resource in that effort can be found in Sanborn fire insurance maps.

The Sanborn Map Company’s historic collection includes maps of 12,000 American towns and cities between 1867 and 1970 (as well as some maps for Canada and Mexico). These maps, like many other resources, were created for fire insurance companies whose agents needed to determine the degree of risk represented by specific properties. The maps have also proved useful to social historians, architects, and local historians. More to the point, the content of these maps offers the genealogical researcher a wealth of detail.

Sanborn maps illustrate the physical footprint of a property as well as note its method of construction, height, number of stories, function, location of doors and windows, street name and number, street and sidewalk widths, and property boundaries. Symbols denote generic buildings such as stables, garages and warehouses. For example, “A” denotes “Auto, house or private garage;” “D” indicates “Dwelling;” and “Loft” identifies a “Tenant building occupied by various manufacturing or occupancies.” In some cases the names of factory owners and details on manufactures are included. This latter information can prove important when used in combination with the manufacturing non-population censuses available. Keys to the various symbols used can be found online: a black and white key at http://sanborn.umi.com/HelpFiles/bwkey.pdf and a color key at http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/EART/images/sandkey.jpg. In addition, a list of Sanborn map abbreviations can be found at http://fisher.lib.virginia.edu/collections/maps/sanborn/sanbornabbrv.pdf. Researching a specific address and its surroundings through all maps available for its location can suggest aspects of the life-style of an individual, the development of the property, the socio-economic level of its neighborhood, and the growth of the town or city over time.

The original printed Sanborn fire insurance maps can sometimes be found in local and state libraries as well as in historical societies. You will also want to check the holdings of the state library in the area of your research. R. Phillip Hoehn’s Union List of Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps Held by Institutions in the United States and Canada (Western Association of Map Libraries, 1976-77) is a good source for locating these maps. The Library of Congress holds a collection of maps from copyright deposits and, in addition, has a set that was transferred from the Bureau of the Census. These latter maps may differ from the original in the deposit collections as the Bureau pasted corrections issued by the Sanborn Company over the original map sheets. When possible, both versions should be consulted. The Library of Congress collection is detailed in Fire Insurance Maps in the Library of Congress: Plans of North American Cities and Towns Produced by the Sanborn Map Company (Library of Congress, 1981) or online at http://www.loc.gov/rr/geogmap/sanborn/. This site is particularly important and convenient as you can choose a state and locality and identify the date and number of sheets available in addition to other geographical names that might be included, comments about the maps, and a URL if available.

Sanborn maps are available on microfilm in libraries and other research locations. For example, the Family History Library in Salt Lake City has the Sanborn fire insurance maps for St. Louis, Missouri, and the Boston Public Library holds maps for Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

ProQuest has created an electronic database, Digital Sanborn Maps 1867-1970 that includes images of 660,000 large-scale maps for over 12,000 American towns and cities, reproduced from the Library of Congress’s collection. This collection is available only through academic and public libraries. As the collection is expensive, the scope of access may vary among institutions. Checking locally, I found that the Library of Virginia in Richmond provides electronic access to maps pertaining to Virginia localities only (to users visiting the library), while the Virginia Beach Public Library provides library card holders with electronic access to the full database (in-library and remotely). ProQuest indicates that the online version offers flexibility of use and improved viewing possibilities with images that can be easily manipulated and printed. A recent attempt to locate maps for a specific address, however, convinced me that using this resource is not for the uninitiated.

Initial steps were not difficult. I selected “Browse Maps” and the database prompted me to choose a state from a drop-down menu. I then chose a city (counties are also listed as choices). In my search, I chose Virginia and then Norfolk. A drop-down menu showed the years of available maps. I chose the earliest year, April 1887. I already had a specific street address (31 James Street) found in the 1880 census for the individual I was researching. I looked in the index to the 1887 map set and found that only James Street properties listed were located at numbers 140-161. The index referred me to map sheet 18 where I easily located the buildings at 140 through 161 James Street. However, the end of the street that would have included 31 James Street was not on sheet 18. I checked the bird’s-eye view map showing the entire city and illustrating where the various numbered map sheets were located. I could see the section of James Street that would include No. 31, but could not locate a relevant map sheet for that portion of the street. Luckily, I know Norfolk fairly well and could browse through the other available sheets with some sense of “too far west” or “too far south,” but could not (nor could staff who assisted me) locate a map for this particular street address. Cutting my losses, I chose a different year (1898) and was able to locate the appropriate map. Feeling a bit more successful, I selected “print current view.” Unfortunately, only the portion of the map image shown printed, and the quality of the print was not the best. I would recommend using this print selection only for a zoomed-in section of a map. Instead (and your ability to do this version may depend on the library’s rules about using thumb-drives), select “download map.” This choice will create a pdf map, in a new browser window, that you can then save or print.

My search illustrated that the mapping was not necessarily complete for some years and that it is very important to devote time to learning the various capabilities of the database. A good user’s guide to the Proquest database is provided online by the Geostat Center at the University of Virginia. This exercise illustrates, once again, that due diligence in planning a research trip is essential and well-worth your time beforehand.

Today, the Sanborn Map Company is based in Colorado. Its historical fire insurance maps, however, are available from Environmental Data Resources Inc., from whom individual maps may be ordered.

You may wish to read more about these fascinating maps. An extensive article is available online from the UC Berkeley Library and several links exist on Cyndi’s List. Diane L. Oswald’s Fire Insurance Maps: Their History and Applications (Lacewing Press, 1997) provides an in-depth discussion of not only the Sanborn maps, but the entire history and application of fire insurance maps.

Fire insurance maps are an often overlooked resource for genealogists. Make a New Year’s resolution to learn more about them and make use of them in your on-going research.

By Carolyn L. Barkley

The advent of winter and the holiday season turns our thoughts to family, both our current family and our ancestral families whom we have discovered through our research. Their observance of the winter holidays may have differed significantly from our current observances. Let’s explore the history and observances of three of the major holidays, Hanukkah, Christmas, and Kwanzaa, and also think about our individual family traditions and how they might be passed on to our descendants.

Hanukkah, or Chanukah, is a festival that falls on the 25^th day of the Hebrew calendar’s month of Kislev. Its history is ancient. In 168 B.C., Antiochus IV Epiphanes, King of Syria and overlord of Palestine, forbade the practice of Judaism. He rededicated the Temple of Jerusalem to the worship of Zeus. Judas Maccabee recaptured Jerusalem three years later, and a new altar was erected to replace the previous one, considered by the Jews to have been defiled. The rededication of the altar included eight days of celebration. It is said that only a one-day supply of undefiled oil was available with which to light the golden menorah in the Temple but miraculously, that small amount burned for the entire eight days. Today Jewish families light one additional candle on each day of the Hanukkah observance until all eight are burning in a menorah. The Hanukkah celebration also includes special foods such as latkes (potato pancakes) and doughnuts that are prepared to commemorate the miracle of the oil. Small gifts or money may be given to children on each of the eight nights and songs also play a part in the observance.

The observance of Christmas probably began in Rome about 336 A.D. Because the Christmas holiday had absorbed many elements of pagan religious beliefs, the Protestant Reformation, seeking to purge pagan practices, brought an end to its observance. Oliver Cromwell banned its celebration as did the Puritans in New England. Christmas, however, did not disappear. The Dutch brought gift-giving practices with them to New York in the early 1800s, and Christmas continued as an anticipated holiday event particularly in the American South. The often raucous celebrations disturbed many of the more sober-minded individuals; however, and efforts were undertaken to turn the holiday into a more family-oriented observance. Probably one of the first really successful efforts to change the public’s perceptions of the holiday was Clement C. Moore’s 1822 poem originally entitled “A Visit from St. Nicholas,” now known universally as “The Night Before Christmas.” Alabama (1836), and Louisiana and Arkansas (1838) were the first states to make Christmas a legal holiday. In 1841 a Philadelphia merchant, J. W. Parkinson, hired a man to dress in a “Criscringle” outfit and climb the chimney of his store. Thomas Nast’s illustrations for “The Night Before Christmas,”drawn in the mid-1860s, created the image of Santa Claus that has endured to the present day. There are many variations of Christmas observances depending upon the specific country. Two web sites will provide you with information about how the holiday season is celebrated around the world. Holiday Traditions, by the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago, explains how fifty-one countries observe Christmas. Zuzu.org, a website that offers young people a place to publish stories and other creative efforts, includes brief essays by children on holiday experiences in their countries.

Kwanzaa is the newest celebration, occuring at approximately the same time as Hanukkah and Christmas. It was begun in 1966 by Dr. Maulana Karenga, professor and chairman of Black Studies at California State University, Long Beach. His goal was to bring African-Americans together as a community following the 1965?? Watts’ riots. Although each family may celebrate the holiday in a different way, the basic festival concept is derived from African “first fruit” celebrations, blending many different African harvest celebrations into one observance. The family is the focal point of Kwanzaa, with family members participating in dancing or  storytelling in addition to a traditional meal. Kwanzaa lasts for seven nights and children light a candle each of the seven nights. A different African culture-based principal (unity, self-determination, collective work and responsibility, cooperative economics, purpose, creativity, and faith) may be discussed by family members each night. Nuts, fruits and vegetables symbolize Kwanzaa’s harvest festival based origins. Other symbols of Kwanzaa include the place mat (history, culture and tradition), an ear of corn (fertility and, through one’s children, the future hopes of a family), seven candles (the sun’s power and the provision of light), the candleholder (our shared ancestry), the unity cup (promoting unity among family members and guests and honoring one’s ancestors) and gifts (encouraging growth, achievement, and success).

Holiday traditions can evidence strong ties between ourselves and the previous generations of our families. During this holiday season, take an opportunity to talk with your family about your family’s traditions and where or with whom they might have originated. These traditions may include special food prepared for Christmas dinner, antique ornaments or customary music, or stories. You may want to write down stories told by the older members of your family – and your stories too – as well a list of the traditions you have identified together. A cookbook with special family recipes is a wonderful way to share traditions and can provide the perfect opportunity to include family stories and pictures among the recipes. You may also want to consider creating a scrapbook with pictures of past holidays, along with journal entries about the people and events shown in the pictures. Keeping the scrapbook updated each year will continue this tradition for future generations.

The holidays, often the only time during the year when the entire family is together, are also a time to establish new traditions. When my grandchildren were born, my husband began a tradition of reading “Twas the Night Before Christmas” every Christmas Eve before their bedtime. Although the girls now claim that they’re getting “too old,” on Christmas Eve, they still enjoy this quiet time with our family while the story is told. I hope it is a tradition they will continue when they have families of their own.

The winter holidays are indeed a time for families to come together and honor the traditions of the past while they create new ones for the future. During all our celebrations, we will experience a direct link to our ancestors and their holiday traditions.

By Carolyn L. Barkley

The Civil War is one of my favorite subjects, and Civil War military research has become my favorite genealogical research area. I can happily invest hours investigating an individual’s or family’s experiences during that time period, whether the work pertains to my family or to a client’s family. Until recently, the majority of my research has dealt with soldiers and land battles. My current project, however, involves researching an individual who served in the Confederate Navy, and I have discovered that such research is an entirely different kettle of fish.

If you are researching a Confederate soldier, the basic work is relatively straightforward. First, there are compiled service records (CSRs) created by the War Department between 1903 and 1927 and placed in Record Group 109. These records, for the most part, bring together into one set of abstract cards all records for an individual soldier. Not only is there a consolidated index to the CSRs (Record Group 109; National Archives microfilm publication M253) that is arranged alphabetically by the soldier’s surname, but there are also indices to the compiled service records of Confederate soldiers who served in organizations from a specific state or territory (for example, Alabama soldiers are included in M374), organizational indices by unit (M861), and “Unfiled Papers and Slips Belonging to Confederate Compiled Service Records” (M347) which provides surname access to records that could not be confidently matched to a specific soldier’s CSR. In addition, footnote.com, in partnership with the National Archives, has digitized and made CSRs available online (much better quality than microfilm prints) and therefore accessible from your home (by subscription), or perhaps at your local library. Such convenient access can spoil us.

The records of naval personnel, however, pose a challenge to researchers.

Naval records in Record Group 109 (War Department Collection of Confederate Records) are very incomplete and consist mainly of registers of naval personnel, letters sent by the Bureau of Ordinance and Hydrography, items related to the Confederate naval academy (aboard the CSS Patrick Henry), and papers relating to specific vessels. It is generally believed that naval records were removed from Richmond, Virginia, to Charlotte, North Carolina, and then destroyed when the Confederate Navy Yard there was abandoned in 1865. A collection of manuscript items was later brought together and is now located at the National Archives in Record Group 45 (Naval Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library). These include such items as logs and journals of naval vessels and privateers, muster rolls and payrolls for naval vessels and marine detachments, some correspondence, and a collection of shipping articles signed by Confederate seamen.

More important for researchers, however, is the fact that there are no compiled service records for naval personnel and no consolidated index to those who served in the Confederate Navy – a significant impediment to access to an individual’s service information. A research rule of thumb for an individual in the navy is that if you can place him on a ship, you can follow him throughout his career. Unfortunately, the name of the ship may be exactly the piece of information that you are trying to uncover while at the same time it is exactly the piece of information you need in order to locate records pertaining to your seaman. Catch-22!

Let’s look at the case of J. W. Pugh of Norfolk, Virginia, to illustrate what can be found. I must confess to start, that the client knew that Joseph W. Pugh had served as a temporary pilot on the CSS Patrick Henry beginning in August 1861, but wanted documentation and any further information that might be available. This preliminary knowledge allowed direct access to a number of records that were located in NARA microfilm publication M1091 “Subject File of the Confederate States Navy, 1861-1865” (Record Group 45). This group of records is arranged in seventeen separate subject categories including naval ship design, construction, etc.; ordnance; communications; engineering; battles and casualties to ships; instructions; nautical technology and science; medical; personnel; operations of naval ships and fleet units; naval bases including navy yards and stations; prisoners and prisons; merchant ships and commerce; governmental relationships; supplies; pensions; and history. I was able to locate J. W. Pugh in records pertaining to CSS Patrick Henry in the complements, rolls, and lists of persons serving in or with vessels or stations section within personnel. These records documented Pugh’s service with the CSS Patrick Henry between September 1861 and May 1862. Further information on Pugh was found in the personnel subsection on pilots. The name of the ship and the information about Pugh’s responsibilities onboard obviated a frame-by-frame review of the personnel section in the hope of locating him aboard a vessel. However, no mention of J. W. Pugh was found in M260, “Records Relating to Confederate Naval and Marine Personnel,” so given his temporary pilot designation in several of the records, he may not have served as a formal member of the naval service.

While the National Archives does hold a significant proportion of Confederate Naval records, I decided to consult staff at the Museum of the Confederacy Library in Richmond, Virginia, to see if I could learn more about J. W. Pugh and document additional information provided by the client. While at the Museum Library, I read a copy of a letter in a collection of correspondence from George Weber, who served on the Patrick Henry, and his brother Lewis. In the letter, dated September 6, 1861 and written from the ship’s location about twelve miles above Newport News, Virginia, George described the Yankee blockade on the James River. “We sometimes send out spying expeditions to examine them [the Union vessels]. They [the expeditions] consist of one of the Lieutenants, the pilot and a sailor, and go out in our small canoe. They make quite a romantic appearance on setting out, dressed like fishermen.” The pilot to which George Weber referred was J. W. Pugh and the letter provides anecdotal information about Pugh’s activities aboard the Patrick Henry.

Secondary resources provide information that enriches the documentation found in original records, but careful analysis of their content is essential. For example, Robert Driver’s Confederate Sailors, Marines and Signalmen from Virginia and Maryland (Heritage Books, 2007) includes a J. W. Pugh and a Jn^o W. Pugh, but lists John W. Pugh as the pilot on the Patrick Henry and indicates that J. W. Pugh was noted only in postwar records. My research suggests that this information is incorrect and that information pertaining to J. W. Pugh and Jn^o W. Pugh has become confused. After some research into the issue, I located the June 30-August 31, 1862 muster roll of Brooke’s Battery (held by the Museum of the Confederacy Library) that lists John W. Pugh as having enlisted from Fauquier County and as serving at Drewry’s Bluff on the James River. While the Patrick Henry was anchored off the bluff and its crew assisted the battery during the battle at Drewry’s Bluff (May 1862), it would appear that John W. Pugh was not J. W. Pugh, the pilot from Norfolk. Comparison of several documents indicates that Joseph W. Pugh was always noted as J. W. Pugh, and that John W. Pugh was always noted as Jn^o W. Pugh. Ongoing research will investigate the identity issue further, but this example underscores the importance of original record research and the need for analysis of all findings. A Google search for the CSS Patrick Henry provided several sites with historical information and pictures on the vessel. John M. Coski’s Capital Navy, The Men, Ships and Operations of the James River Squadron (Savas Beatie, 2005) provides an excellent discussion of the battle between the USS Monitor and the CSS Virginia in which the CSS Patrick Henry participated, as well as the battle at Drewry’s Bluff, and the later conversion of the Patrick Henry into the Confederacy’s naval academy. Manuscript resources include Capt. J. H. Rochelle’s (former Executive Officer on the Patrick Henry) first-hand account of the battle off Hampton Roads in Volume XIV of the Southern Historical Society Papers.

A significant source for Confederate naval research is Cornell University’s online version of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies. Finding aids include the National Archives and Records Administration’s printed flier RR#919, “Military Service in the Confederate Navy and Marine Corps, 1861-1865;” Henry Putney Beers’ The Confederacy: A Guide to the Archives of the Government of the Confederate States of America (NARA, 1986); the Preliminary Inventory of the War Department Collection of Confederate Records (Record Group 109) (Iberian, 1994); and the Guide to Federal Records in the National Archives (NARA, 1995).

Web sites of interest include Cyndi’s List and the Confederate States Navy Museum, Library and Research Institute in Mobile, Alabama.

Confederate naval research can be very challenging, but very rewarding when needed information is located. Anyone want to create a consolidated index?

By: Carolyn L. Barkley

The U.S. Federal Census Mortality Schedules are another of the non-population enumerations that are often not used by genealogists. Like the agricultural enumerations discussed in an earlier article, mortality data can prove very useful in your research.

Mortality schedules are extant for 1850, 1860, 1870 and 1880. Unfortunately, the 1890 schedules were destroyed by fire. The 1900 schedules were destroyed by an act of Congress following the compilation of statistical reports.

Enumerators were asked to record information about individuals who died in the year previous to the census. The 1850 schedule, for example, includes information about individuals who died between 1 June 1849 and 31 May 1850. In 1850 and 1860, entries included the name of the deceased, their age at death, sex, color, status (free or slave), marital status (married or widowed), place of birth (state, territory or county), the month of death, occupation, disease or cause of death, and the number of days the individual was ill. In 1870, a new question asked if the father and/or mother were of foreign birth, but no longer included how many days the individual was ill. The 1880 census added categories for the place of birth of the deceased’s mother and father, how long the deceased had been a resident of the county, where the disease was contracted if not at the place of death, and the name of the attending physician. In both 1870 and 1880, a family number is included which ties the entry back to a specific entry in the population enumeration (and vice versa). It is important to remember that the information is available only for the year immediately preceding the census, and even then, the information was probably under-reported. One estimate, frequently repeated, is that 20 to 40 percent of deaths were not included.

Why are these schedules important to your research?

• You may be interested in an individual that you know died in the year before the census, but for whom you do not have a month of death or  cause of death.
• You may be researching an individual for whom you do not have a death date, but who you have located in the 1850 census, but not in the 1860 enumeration. A quick check of the 1860 mortality schedule might locate him or her if death occurred in the twelve months prior to the 1860 census.
• The mortality schedules may predate official death records in the state in which you are researching. North Carolina, for example, did not require death records until 1913. In this case, if you are able to locate an individual in a mortality schedule, that may be the only record that documents a death date and any supporting information.
• The burial records you are after may not exist or existing headstones may not be legible.
• Information may be available, particularly in the 1850 and 1860 census, for individuals not listed in the 1840 census because they were not heads of households.
• Interest in researching a family’s health history has risen in recent years. Information in mortality schedules may provide documentation of a genetic disease, document death due to specific epidemics in the community at the time, or include causes of death that suggest derive from specific occupations.
• Cause of death information may suggest other avenues of research in additional records. A murder might well be documented in newspaper articles, as might accidents, or other unusual events. When I was indexing many of the Massachusetts death records for the familysearch.org indexing project and was struck by the number of often fatal railroad track accidents (no pun intended) and the deaths that resulted from gas lighting in homes. Such events, if discovered through a mortality schedule entry, might have been documented further in newspapers, police blotters, or coroner’s reports.

Unlike the agricultural censuses, the mortality schedules are readily available from several sources.

• Ancestry.com released its first online mortality schedules in April 2005 and continues to add to its collection. Ancestry has posted (in some cases, may be about to post) Arkansas (1850-1880), Colorado (1870-1880), District of Columbia (1850-1880), Georgia (1850-1880), Illinois (1850-1880), Iowa (1850-1880), Kansas (1860-1880), Kentucky (1850-1870), Louisiana (1850-1880), Massachusetts (1850-1880), Michigan (1850-1880), Minnesota (1860-1880), Montana (1870-1880), Nebraska (1860-1880), New Hampshire (1850-1870), New Jersey (1850-1880), North Carolina (1850-1880), North Dakota (1860, 1880), Ohio (1850-1860, 1880, selected counties), South Carolina (1850-1880), Tennessee (1850-1860, 1880), Texas (1850-1880), Utah (1870), Vermont (1870-1880), Virginia (1850-1870), and Washington (1860-1880), West Virginia (1850-1860, as part of Virginia), and Wisconsin (1850-1870). If you do not have a personal subscription that includes the U. S. census collection, you will want to use Ancestry online database at your local library.

I decided to look for Mary Isabella Barkley, who I knew died in 1859 in Nash County, North Carolina. My search for her was hampered by the fact that she had been indexed as Van Isabella Barkley. (I submitted a correction to the transcribed name and you now can find her by searching for Mary Isabella, although the initial records page still shows “Van.” Remember to be creative in your searches and send in corrections if you are sure about the error.) The 1860 mortality schedule for Nash County, North Carolina, reported that Mary had died of pneumonia in November 1859, aged about 17 (therefore born about 1843).

As I browsed for other Barkley entries, I noted that if I searched the database entitled “U.S. Federal Census Mortality Schedules, 1850-1880” for all individuals with the surname of Barkley, the search yielded 956 results, only about 146 of which were Barkley or variant spelling (Barclay, etc.). It is in that database that Mary Isabella was indexed as Van Isabella. If, however, I conducted the same search in the database entitled “U.S. Federal Census Mortality Schedules Index,” my search resulted in 404 entries, only about 93 of which were Barkley or a variant spelling. In this database Mary was indexed correctly as Mary Isabella. In both cases, the remaining entries were names with the same Soundex code, but unrelated to my Barkley (or variant) search. Given this disparity (146 versus 93 entries), you will want to search both databases.

• The National Archives has microfilm schedules for twenty-two states and territories (but not necessarily for all years) including Arizona, Colorado, District of Columbia, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington (state).

• Familysearch.org. The FamilySearch Record Site’s Pilot Site provides a free Internet index and images for the 1850 mortality schedules.

• Other sources: You will also want to search the catalogs of the Family History Library, the DAR Library, the Allen County Public Library in Fort Wayne, as well as in state libraries/archives and other major libraries in your locations of interest. You will also want to search publisher’s websites or catalogs for specific abstracted schedules such as Linda L. Green’s Delaware Mortality Schedules, 1850-1880, Delaware Insanity Schedule, 1880 Only (Heritage Books, 2006) or Katharine Kerr Kendall and Mary Frances Kerr Donaldson’s Caswell County, North Carolina Will Books, 1777-1814; 1784 Tax List; and Guardian’s Accounts 1794-1819… (Clearfield, reprinted 2005) which includes abstracts from census mortality schedules.

Mortality schedules are another of those often seldom-used resources that you will find very helpful in documenting the vital records of your family as well as providing anecdotal information about their lives and experiences.