Brenner Genealogy

I’ve been tidying up my RootsMagic 5 research database.  This is the “full” database, not the pruned one currently displayed on our BrennerFamilyTree website.  Hopefully, as I check through sources and citations, as well as places and facts, I will have the database ready to transfer to the website before too many months pass by.

As I was reviewing the record for my father, Donald George Brenner, I made my first foray into searching the 1940 census.  No! I hadn’t rushed headlong into the NARA images on April 3rd using Steve Morse’s Unified 1940 Census ED Finder. Nor had I breathlessly turned to Ancestry.com or FamilySearch.org as soon as they had completed indexing and publishing the results for Ohio (stalking grounds for most of my 1940 ancestors).  I figured that the information would still be there in 6-8 months so I have been in no hurry to dig into the 1940 census.  Today,however, seemed like a good day to begin…  with the added bonus of distracting me from the detail work of tidying my database.  I easily found records for my parents and Brenner grandparents.  I entered the information into RM5 and, after creating a Master Source for “Census, U.S. – 1940,” I provided source citations for the entries.  I could easily have returned to my tidying at this point, but the Princes of Serendip began to call.

The Three Princes of Serendip is an old Persian fairy tale.  Giaffer, king of the country of Serendip, provides for an excellent education for his three sons, but fearing that they have been too sheltered, sends them out into the world.  The three princes prove themselves to be filled not only with wisdom, but also with remarkable intuitive sense arising from their keen attention to detail.  Our word “serendipity” is coined from the fairy tale.  It refers to the accidental discovery of things not searched for, of finding far more than expected.  I know that a “research plan” is an essential ingredient for many genealogists and family historians; but, unless I am planning a trip to the Family History Center or the Midwest Genealogy Center, I like to “wing it.”  Since I often let my genealogical search take me on rabbit trails and side roads, I am always hopeful that the Princes of Serendip will accompany me.  Today they did.  Things began to get rather interesting when I searched for Mom’s father, Harley Hartman Deeter.

Mom’s mother had died in 1937. Both Mom and her younger brother (Gilbert D. “Pete”) had been married in 1939, the last of the Deeter children to leave home. (To confirm Uncle Pete’s marriage, I did a search on FamilySearch.org.  I found his marriage to Helen Louise Luth (3 August 1939) in a West Virginia marriage index and an image of their marriage application, license, and certificate from the Hancock County Clerk’s record book.  Another gift from the Princes of Serendip.  Mom’s maternal grandparents had been living with the Deeters (found in both the 1920 and 1930 census). Mom’s grandmother (Emma Lavina Barthel) died in 1929. So I expected to find Mom’s dad (Harley Hartman Deeter) and her grandfather (Dayton W. Smith) at their home, 216 South Hazelwood Avenue, Youngstown, Mahoning, Ohio. A search for “Harley Hartman Deeter” (“Youngstown, Mahoning, Ohio, United States”) in the 1940 census on Ancestry.com had not yielded any prioritized results. As I quickly scanned down the page of results, looking for “Youngstown,”  I saw an entry for “Harley Deiter” residing in “Youngstown, Mahoning, Ohio.” That person was born “abt 1882” in “Ohio” and was listed as a “Lodger.”

A quick look at the record for Harley Deiter made it seem possible that this was my grandfather (although he spelled his surname “Deeter”). Harley Deiter was listed as 58 years old (my grandfather was born 15 October 1881…  that fits). The census record had his birthplace listed as Ohio (my grandfather was born in Tennessee… that doesn’t fit, but it is likely that my grandfather was not the informant for this household.  Ohio would be a likely guess…  wrong, but reasonable). The census record listed occupation as a Rail Road Conductor (my great-grandfather was, indeed a conductor for the Eire Railroad).

There was also another interesting name listed as a lodger at the same address (445 Warner Street). The other person was “Lottie Kracker/Krocker.” This caught my eye because within the next year or two, Harley Hartman Deeter was to marry Charlotte Krocker.  “Lottie” / “Charlotte” …  could be!?

Before jumping to a conclusion, however, I had to discover what had happened to Harley’s father-in-law, Dayton W. Smith. A search in Ancestry.com brought the result of a “Dayton Smith,” head of the household, residing alone at 3425 (rear) Mahoning Avenue, Youngstown, Mahoning, Ohio. Dayton was 82 and listed “Dayton” as his birthplace (my great-grandfather was born in Dayton, Montgomery, Ohio, 12 April 1859… it fits). I was pretty sure at this point that I had found both my grandfather and my great-grandfather in the 1940 census.

I was curious about their former residence at 416 South Hazelwood. This time, using Steve Morse’s Unified 1940 Census ED Finder, I quickly found the correct census page which indicated that the “Christine Kazy” family was now residing at that address. The interesting serendipity, however, was to see George Simstad, who would become my uncle, residing at the next enumerated house. He was living with his sister’s family. There was a vague memory, rattling around somewhere in my head, of my Uncle George and Aunt Dorothy talking about Milton. It would have been his brother-in-law (and head of the household), Milton Freshwater, Jr. This was before George married my Dad’s sister, Dorothy.

Earlier, shortly after discovering the Harley Deiter and Dayton Smith entries in the 1940 census, I had called my 97 year-old mother to see if these facts coincided with her memories. I didn’t get an answer at that time. It was now time to try again. When Mom answered, I told her what I had found. She confirmed that her Dad had moved out of the house on South Hazelwood and was boarding in a house “down near the hospital.” When I mentioned Warner Street. She indicated that Warner was the location of her father. She also told me that Charlotte Krocker’s sister Lottie was living in the same area… that was how Harley met Charlotte. I told Mom that Lottie was boarding in the same house. That seems to have cinched it… Yes, “Harley Deiter, “ lodger at 445 Warner Street was Harley Hartman Deeter, my maternal grandfather. As a lodger, Harley was probably not the one who gave information to the census enumerator. It would have been quite easy for the information-giver and/or the enumerator to write down either “Deiter” or “Dieter” instead of Deeter.  As mentioned earlier, the enumerated birthplace (“Ohio”) was probably just a guess by the person providing the information.

When I mentioned that Dayton Smith was residing at the “Rear” of 3425 Mahoning Avenue, Mom informed me that her granddad had noticed an abandoned chicken coop behind one of the houses down the street. He had asked the owners if he might fix it up for a place to live. Dayton W. Smith was a carpenter and a house builder… so, fix it up he did and then he moved in.  Isn’t it nice when all the data seems to gel at once.  The Princes of Serendip were smiling on me today. I had not spent much tine researching Charlotte Krocker / Crocker.  I decided to try this side street next.  I did find a death certificate (on FamilySearch.org) for Charlotte Wickham Deeter, born 3 November 1881 (the same year Harley H. Deeter was born).  This Charlotte Deeter died on 16 Cotober 1961 in a nursing home in Canton, Stark, Ohio.  (My grandfather died in the Mary Day Sanatorium in Massillon .  Canton and Massilon are next door neighbors, about 7-8 miles apart.  Charlotte’s death certificate indicated that she was born in Dayton, Ohio. It named her father as Frank Marshall and her mother as Henrietta Darlington. 

An Ancestry.com search for “Charlotte Wickham Marshall” yielded more interesting data.  First, in the an entry in the “Ohio, Births and Christenings Index, 1800-1962″ a “Lottie Marshall” is listed as being born on 3 November 1881 to Frank and Ettie (nee Darlington) Marshall. The location was Dayton, Ohio.  Just as in the story of the Three Princes of Serendip the pieces are starting to fit together in a consistent whole.  I had not only found my maternal grandfather, but I had also found his third wife.  In addition to a birth record, I found two 1900 census records for Charlotte Marshall in Dayton, Montgomery, Ohio.  Both records indicate an 18 year-old who was born in Ohio in November 1881.  One was living at 307 Perry Street with her mother, Etta Marshall, 5 younger brothers and sisters, and 13 boarders ranging in age from 1 to 57 years old.  The other Charlotte Marshall was a boarder with the Wickham family at 305 S. Perry Street (about a half mile away).  What caught my attention was that both Charlottes were born in Ohio in November 1881.  One is living with her mother Etta (Henrietta?) and the other boarding with a family whose name (Wickham) is listed as the middle name on Charlotte Wickham Deeter’s death certificate.  The two houses are about a half mile apart.   Etta Marshall’s household was enumerated on June 1st; the Wickham’s, June 6th & 7th.  Each was enumerated by a different enumerator.  Is it possible that Charlotte Marshall was enumerated twice in 1900?  Without further data, one cannot say for sure… but it seems as if that might be a possibility.  And, if there were two Charlotte Marshalls,which one would eventually be married to Harley Hartman Deeter?  Did Charlotte Marshall eventually marry a Wickham (most likely Harry who was born in June 1881… both were 18 at the time of the census enumeration).  Lot’s of questions; not so many answers at this time.  Perhaps another trip with the Princes of Serendip at a later time.

Wait a minute!  All this research on Harley H Deeter’s third wife, raises another rabbit trail to pursue…  I am well aware of Harley’s second wife,  Mabel Estelle Smith.  She was my Mom’s mother, my grandmother.  But there has always been a mystery about Harley’s first wife.  We know that they were married for only a short time (2-3 years at most).  She must have died about 1906, because Harley purchased a number of grave sites at the Forest Rose Cemetery in Lancaster, Fairfield, Ohio in 1906.  My Mom and sister visited Forest Rose Cemetery a number of years age. Harley’s parents and a large number of his mother’s relatives are buried at Forest Rose Cemetery or other cemeteries in Fairfield County.  But they could find no records of Harley’s first wife.  I knew from the 1900 Census that Harley H. Deeter was living in Basil Township, Fairfield County.  

I searched for Deeter (no given name), death in Ohio between 1902 and 1908 in FamilySearch.org’s “Ohio Deaths and Burials, 1854-1997″ index. on FamilySearch,org. The sixth entry on the results page was for Sarah E. Deeter, born in 1881 (Cosnachton, O); died 26 March 1906 at Lancaster, Fairfield, Ohio; her residence in 1906 was Lancaster.  Once again, a marvelous gift from the Princes of Serendip.  While acknowledging that there is no mention in the record of the burial place, Sarah E Deeter’s residence and place of death fits with the Deeter/Knepper family connections with the Forest Rose Cemetery in Lancaster and with Harley’s purchase of a plot there in 1906.  I was puzzled by “Cosnachton, O” as Sarah’s birthplace.  I know of Coshocton city and county in Ohio, but have never heard of Cosnachton.  Since I was dealing with an index and not an original image, I was pretty sure that Cosnachton was a mis-reading of Conshocton.  To be sure, however, I did a Google search for “Cosnachton, Ohio.”  All the results were for Coshocton.  I next searched the “Ohio, County Births, 1856-1909″ index and images for Sarah E. (no surname), born in Coshochton County between 1880 and 1882.  Two results look promising:  Sarah Elizabeth Corder, born 22 August 1881 in Virginia Township, Coshocton, Ohio, to J. W. Corder and Mary Bird;  and Sarah E. Didinger, born 21 January 1880 in Clark Township, Coshocton, Ohio, to Jonas Didinger and Lany Wilson. 

There is more work to do here, but I don’t want to over-tax the Princes of Serendip…  and, beside, I’m tired and it’s bedtime…  so my strange odyssey into the land of Serendip must come to an end for the day.  But it was quite a day!  Yes, indeed, quite a day!

  “Ohio, Deaths and Burials, 1854-1997,” index  “Ohio, County Births, 1856-1909,” index and images

I had not spent much time researching Charlotte Krocker / Crocker.  I decided to try this side street next.  I did find a death certificate for Charlotte Wickham Deeter, born 3 November 1881.  This Charlotte Deeter died on 16 October 1961 in a nursing home in Canton, Stark, Ohio.  Massillon and Canton are next door neighbors (7-8 miles apart)

Betsy Sparrow, Jenny Liu, and Daniel M. Wenger (“Google Effects on Memory:Cognitive Consequences of Having Information at our Fingertips”)  suggest that “the Internet has become a primary form of external or transactive memory, where information is stored collectively outside ourselves.”    Their studies, while not specifically about genealogy or family history, indicate what most geneabloggers understand either explicitly or intuitively — namely, that the explosion of available information on the Internet has changed the way we do genealogical research.  No, we still have to go to county court houses and cemeteries for a lot of basic information; but increasingly those court houses and cemeteries are putting their records online.

1. Off-loading memory to the Internet

Because we have off loaded so much data to the internet we tend to be able to spend more brain time for significant thinking.  I no longer have to remember everyone’s phone number because they are all stored in my cell phone’s memory and in my online Contacts file. This all has paved the way for the brain to reorient its memory system from content to process. Now, instead of remembering all the facts, I have learned to remember how to access the facts.

I regularly get feeds from about 85 genealogy blogs. Do I get from them information about members of my family tree? No! Do I read and inwardly digest each post from the 85? No! I scan them looking for interesting information about standards and procedures — that is, about how I can more effectively access information about members of my family tree.  If someone blogs about their family and simply offers an Ahnentafel chart, I am not very interested unless my family connects with theirs.  If, however, they write about developing their research plan for identifying new locations to search for information about their ancestors, I will read their post with great interest.

The Sparrow/Liu/Wenger study reports that “ believing the information was saved externally enhances memory for the fact that the information could be accessed, at least in general.” Blogging, therefore, provides at least two primary services:  1) to publish data from one’s research for a) oneself, b) one’s family, and c) extended family (“cousins”) and 2) to chronicle methods, procedures, clues, hints, learning, etc., that have been a part of one’s research and discovery.  This latter function is a service to the broader genealogical community. Blogging, therefore, tends to enhance our confidence in the general ability to access and retrieve information, much more than it enhances memory of the information that we have reported.

 2. A New Approach to Intimacy,  Friendship, and Collegiality

Stefana Broadbent (digital ethnographer at University College London) speaks about “How The Internet Enables Intimacy.”  Some have suggested that texting, Facebook, IM, etc., are having a negative impact on human intimacy.  Broadbent’s research suggests just the opposite:  contemporary technology has enhanced our capacity to cultivate deeper relationships.  Friends and family members separated by distance or institutional barriers (workplace or school, for example) have the means to be more refularly in contact with one another.  Moreover, the Internet provides a vehicle for broadening the base of contacts (e.g., number of “friends” on Facebook or number of people in “circles” on Google+).  Research shows that we tend to only be actively engaged in regular communication with a very limited number of them, likely only 3-5. That regular communication may be via IM, email, Skype, et al.  The broader base of contacts, however, does provide opportunity to increase our friendships.

Because of my blogging,  l would count Thomas McEntee, Randy Seaver, and Jill Ball as friends.  No, they are not intimate friends, but if we are at a conference together I will seek them out because they are important to me.  Two years ago, at my first genealogy conference, I was on my way seeking out Thomas.  Before I could introduce myself to him, he reached out his hand and said “Bart Brenner, it’s good to meet you.”  At RootsTech 2012 Randy and I encountered one another in the Exhibit Hall.  That lead to a discussion about the Presbyterian Church (Randy’s a Ruling Elder; I’m a Teaching Elder).  Jill and I had corresponded by email a couple of times prior to RootsTech.  What a delight to meet her in person and to have her introduce me (as GeneaPopPop)  to Audrey Collins and Amy Coffin.  Intimates, no: but genea-friends, decidely yes! Also, because of my online presence I have become colleagues with “cousins” that I never knew I had. Arlene and I have worked together to identify our common Brenner 3g and 4g grandparents.  Deb (we are connected through collateral Messeralls) rescued my 2g grandmother’s family Bible from a local historical society museum and provided me with photos of all the inscribed pages.

The website that my son and I maintain has provided my with a genealogical presence in cyberspace; but it is mostly a presence of data.  My blogging, on the other hand, has given my presence personality and character. And, that blogging presence causes me to reflect regularly upon my research and the information generated by that research (and, of course, it gives me a platform to think out loud as I am doing in this post. My relational network has definitely expanded, and all to the best, because of my presence on the Web.

 3. Feeding Our Need for Achievement & Social Recognition

Many bloggers are participating in the Summer Genea-Blogger Group Games (or Genea-Lympics, as Randy Seaver calls them).  I participated in a similar experience during the last Winter Olympics.  A variety of tasks which are central to genealogical research are entered as “contests” (with the caveat that participants are competing against their on expectations and each contestant is his/her own judge) — “Cite Your Sources;” “Back UpYour Data;” Organize Your Data;” “Write, Write, Write;” and “Reach Out & Perform Random Acts of Genealogical Kindness.”  When I participated, I got a lot of basic “catch up” work done.  The “games” provided an opportunity to do those tasks I knew I should be doing (but wasn’t doing as much as I could).  They fed my “need for achievement” and make me accountable to myself for that achievement.  In addition, I was able to award myself Bronze, Silver, Gold, Diamond, and Platinum medals to acknowledge those achievements.  Because this was all done “in the open” — that is, reported in blog posts, the accomplishments and the Badges! Badges! Badges! provided some measure of social recognition.  Likewise, I was able to share in the recognition of the accomplishments of other competitors.

Each of us has a differing level of need for achievement and recognition.  It seems pretty clear to me that all of us geneabloggers have, at some level, acknoweldged those needs by the simple act of creating a blog.  The presence of the “Comment” function in our blogs recognizes the importance of our inter-connections with other genealogists and family historians.

4. Attention

The Sparrow/Liu/Wenger report concludes: ”Finally, the individualized metrics available from computer teaching is what promises to have the greatest impact on the future of learning by keeping us in our seat and paying attention. The frontal cortex and other specific brain regions are active when we pay in attention in ways that help us learn. Our attention is fickle, and the right challenge at the right time helps capture and channel that attention.”

I live in a retirement community that makes available to residents a computerized program for brain fitness. We have learned that old age and decreased brain functioning are not necessarily synonymous.  ”Use it or lose it” is the best motto regarding brain function  for seniors. In some ways geneablogging might be considered analogous to brain fitness programs for seniors.  Geneablogging is one of the tools for keeps us “in our seat and paying attention.”  The previously mentioned Genea-Lympics provide participants with activities that help us “pay attention in ways that help us learn.”  Geneablogging is, at its roots, an activity of attentiveness.

 5. Research Plans, To-Do Lists, Wikis, and Cheat Sheets

Sparrow/Liu/Wenger report that “We are becoming symbiotic with our computer tools, growing into interconnected systems that remember less by knowing information than by knowing where the information can be found.

Some of us will do the vast majority of our genealogical research online and at the local library and the local Family History Center without many having many opportunities to visit county court houses and cemeteries where we could find more information about our ancestors.  Fortunately, more and more data is being brought online; and, if you can get it online, you don’t need to take the time to use it at a repository.  Instead we go to FamilySearch, Ancestry.com, Fold 3, Google Books, BYU online library, … So, we develop tools to assist us in accessing the information. Data storage, once we find the information, has become relatively easy.  There are desktop software packages (Roots Magic, The Master Genealogist, Legacy, Behold, et al) and online sites (WeRelate, WikiTree, MyHeritage, FamilySearch, Ancestry.com, et al) that provide increasingly sophisticated storage systems for genealogical data. Most of us have learned how to maneuver our data through one or more of these systems.  The key, especially for those of us who are not professional genealogists, is the variety of resources we use to help us find and access the information that will eventually be entered into our desktop and/or online software. The key to enhancing genealogical brain functioning is to “become [increasingly] symbiotic with our computer tools” while growing in our ability to understand and access the interconnected systems that are available to us.

Over the past year there have been a couple of discussions including a number of geneabloggers about the genealogical “community” (if, indeed, there is such a community).  I would contend that the” interconnected systems … where [genealogical] information can be found” and the variety of interconnections between those of us who are accessing those information systems (by writing and/or reading blogs) is what the genealogical community is all about.  Like “intimacy, friendship, and collegiality” each of us has a unique set of relationships with the genealogical community and we each value those relationships differently.

So, does geneablogging enhance brain functioning?  I think it does! To paraphrase one initial observation from Sparrow/Liu/Wenger, geneablogging (like the Internet itself) “has become a primary form of external or transactive memory, where information is stored collectively outside ourselves.” I like to think of geneablogging as a function of “transactive” memory — that is, each geneablogger participates in a brain function (i.e., memory) transaction between his/her research, her/himself, other geneabloggers, and readers.  And I think that is rather impressive.

After a couple months working on it, I’ve switched my blog from Blogger to WordPress.  I was having trouble getting the re-direct to work.  All my blog post were ported over, but anyone trying to access “Stardust ‘n’ Roots” ended up on the Blogger site.  Today I finally got it corrected.  If you go to the Blogger site, you are automatically redirected to the new WordPress site.  I am still working out the kinks and haven’t started adding all the widgets and plug-ins that I want to make the site more useable (for me and for you).

One additional benefit, I have the WordPress app installed on my Android tablet and am writing this post in that app.  It appears that I can’t do anything fancy through the app (such as add pictures or change fonts) but that can be easily overcome by drafting a post with the app and than finishing it on the website.

I am still deciding on which WordPress theme to use and will have to make sure that the integration with our BrennerFamilyTree (on TNG) is fully functional.

There will likely be some bumps in the road for the next couple of weeks.  Please be patient as my son and I get this website fully functional.

Since I began researching my 2g-grandparents, John Brenner and Catharine Welk, I have had conflicting information about the location of their marriage.  Records passed on to me indicated that they were married in 1861.  Were they marriage in Columbiana County, Ohio, or Mt. Jackson, Pennsylvania?  Columbiana County would seem to be the logical place since it was the home of Catharine’s family (they lived in New Middletown).  Mt. Jackson is 7-8 miles from New Middletown, just across the state line.  However, I have found no record in the 1860 census for Catharine’s parents.  Her brother Henry is married and living in Springfield Township, Columbiana County, in 1860.  The only Catharine Welk in the 1860 census that I could find in east central Ohio was a 19 year old “domestic” in Ravenna, Ohio — about 50 miles northwest of New Middletown.  Since my 2g-grandmother was born in 1841, she would have been 19 at the time of the 1860 census.  Could that “domestic” be my 2g-grandmother?

I have copies of the various documents in John Brenner’s pension file.  Previously I had skimmed through them, but have not yet analyzed them closely. Among those papers is a General Affidavit from Catharine Brenner, in which she declares the absence of any official records of their marriage and naming Pennsylvania, as the location.  It is clear from her affidavit that, no matter how diligent I am as a researcher, I will not be able to find any official records for their marriage.  She states:  ”I was married in the State of Pennsylvania prior to the year 1885, and prior to said year 1885 no public records of marriages were kept.” Furthermore, “no such [Church Record] exists”  and “the Justice of the Peace who married me to said soldier … is now dead.”  She also states that “I do not know the names of such witness [to the marriage] nor where they can be found, if living.”

Catharine’s affidavit refers to subsequent affidavits by Henry A. Welk (her brother) and Conrad Schroeder.  Since Catharine’s affidavit asserts that she does not know the witnesses who were present when she and John were married by the Justice of the Peace, it is clear that Henry was not present.  And, since his affidavit was not present in the pension records that were turned over to me, we do not know the substance of his affidavit.

Conrad Schroeder’s affidavit consists of the following statements:   “I was well and personally acquainted with John Brenner, the above named soldier, when he was a youth and before he became of marriageable age, and knew him well to the time of his marriage to the claimant, whose maiden name was Catherine Welk; and I know that he was not married to any person prior to the marriage to the claimant.  I also know said soldier well and personally from the time of his marriage to said claimant until he died; and I knew that he lived with her from the time of his marriage to her until he died and was never divorced from her.  My acquaintance wtht him was such that had the facts been otherwise, I have every reason to believe that I would have known it.”

The 1900 census record for John and Catharine indicates that they were married for 40 years. That would indicate that they were married after 5 June 1860.  John Brenner’s obituary in Rundschau (the German language newspaper in Youngstown) listed his marriage date as 1 October 1861.  Catharine’s obituary (English) 5 1/2 years later also lists he marriage date as 1 October 1861. If October 1st is taken as the correct date for their marriage, then they were married in either 1860 (census) or 1861 (two obituaries).  Since we do not know who the informants were for either the census or the obituaries, the year of their marriage must be listed as either 1860 or 1861.

So, it would seem that Catharine Welk and John Brenner eloped across the state line into Pennsylvania (most likely, Mt. Jackson) to be married by a Justice of the Peace.  No friends or family seem to have accompanied them.  It was likely that they were married on the 1st of October in 1860 or 1861.

It has been over two months since my last post.  In those two months I have paid very little attention to genealogy or to this blog.  I have not had the energy for these pursuits due to medical issues.  The best I could offer was to stay reasonably current with reading the blogs of others.  Three random observations are occasioned by the lay-off:

1. Genealogy is a high energy endeavor.  I suspect that this is due to the fact that genealogy is, for so many of us, a passion.  We jokingly talk about the transition that takes genealogy from a hobby to an addiction or a life-style.  And WHY are we so passionate about our genealogical pursuits?  Yes, I like to solve puzzles…    Yes, I find great satisfaction in adding one more generation to my family tree…    Yes, I enjoy the interaction with other genealogists…    Yes, I like the accolades and appreciations that come from family members…   But the truth is, I am passionate about genealogical research because it is part of my quest to learn more about my place in the universe.  We are meaning-seeking and meaning-creating creatures.  Some cosmologists have contended that we humans are the universe’s developing capacity for self-awareness.  So, we ask “Who?” and “What?” and “Where?” and “Why?”  Every time I learn something new about an ancestor in my family tree, I am filling in the gaps about my place in the universe — for “place” is another word for “connection.”  How / Where / To Whom am I connected?  In the answers I begin to catch a glimpse of the remarkable interconnectedness of all of life.  Genealogy is passion!
2. Blogging takes me on a journey farther than I ever dreamed.    Even though I haven’t published a post in 73 days, my blog continues to be accessed.  In the past 24 hours, it has been accessed by one or more readers in United States, Argentina, Ireland, Germany, United Arab Emirates, Portugal, Vietnam, France, Italy, and Russia.   One post written on December 5, 2011, (Location! Location! Location! — A Question Answered) has received over 1100 pageviews, about half of that in the past 2 1/2 months.  That is a lot for this modest blog.   I had guessed that the response was partly due to the three-fold repetition of the word “Location” in the post’s title, suspecting that many may have done an online search for “location location location,” but not intending to see a genealogy blog.  However, when I googled  “location location location” I did not find my blog listed in the first 20 pages of results.  Amy Coffin (The We Tree Genealogy Blog) periodically posts a “Fun with Search Terms” where she reviews interesting terms people enter into search engines which directed them to her blog.  From my own reading of blogs, I am aware that sometimes we come to a blog expecting one thing, but we find another;  sometimes, we don’t know what to expect and are delightfully surprised;  sometimes, we wonder why we even were directed to this particular site.  The amazing thing, however, is that blogging (posting and reading) keeps us connected…    and, in those connections, we can sometimes learn just a little bit more about ourselves and our place in the universe.
3. Some of my best genealogical data gathering has been done by others.  No, I am not referring to on-line family trees.  I am talking about those conversation with family members that often start with words such as, “Hey, I have some papers you might be interested in!”   Two examples —  A little over a year ago, my wife and I were visiting her uncle in Florida.  He is the youngest of the three children born to my wife’s Gregg grandparents, and the last survivor.  During the visit, he went to his garage and brought out a box of materials presumably gathered by his mother over the years.  It was a genealogical treasure trove.  With his permission, I borrowed the box and scanned most of the materials.  I am in the process of organizing the scans and putting them on a CD/DVD for sharing with family members.  This collection included, letters and photos from an uncle’s participation in World War I;  many letters in German; and a copy of the exit permit (from Prussia) given to my wife’s 2g-grandfather in 1854.  About three weeks ago I received a phone call from my sister-in-law in California.  She was getting ready to do some remodeling in her home.  She had found some papers that her mother had collected.  They were obviously genealogy-related.  Would I like to have them?  They are now in my possession as I am sorting through and scanning them.  Included are the names of the grandparents of my wife’s paternal grandmother.  She was orphaned as a teen-ager and we have had precious little information about her family.  While the information I now have is not documented, it gives me some great clues as to my next steps in extending this family line.  Thanks to those extended family members who have become my co-researchers.