The Slovak Yankee

Genealogy Lingers

Last year I downsized from my four bedroom house to a two bedroom condo.  Consequently all things genealogical in nature: books, files, notebooks, etc. were boxed up and put into storage offsite.  I now have a great reason not to answer email questions.  I can't.  All my research is offsite.

Still, that doesn't mean genealogy has stopped.  Just recently I went to Kansas for a visit, making it my 50th state to see.  Michael has Kansas ancestry, so I decided to do some additional research on his lines.  I emailed the records person for Leavenworth County, Kansas and she was delightful.  She took my information and copied three probate files from the 1870s.  I paid $30 for the copies and they were ready when I arrived in person to pick them up.  Each of the files had key documents for Michael's ancestry.  Two were probate administrations and the other was a will.  Quite nice.  Very legible handwriting and the copies were good.  All in all, an A+ for execution to get that information.

Then in Kansas we visited the grave of his great-great-grandmother:

I love this tombstone since it gives so much information.  Mother Jane L. Clark, wife of M.R. Clark born Brown Co., Ohio, on July 22, 1822 died May 13, 1893. 

After our Kansas trip we went to Philadelphia where we found the grave of Michael's great-great-great-great-great-grandfather: Dr. Gerardus Clarkson:

The good people of St. Peter's church in Philadelphia were most helpful finding the stone.   They had an index and gladly looked it up for us on the fly.  Gerardus Clarkson's wife is buried next to him: Mary (Flower) Clarkson.

All in all, some nice genealogical moments.

Paul John Hollick 1937-2017

I have so many dead ancestors I hardly think about it.  But recently I had to add my father to that list and that has been weird.  I did all the genealogist things to do.  I have filed his death certificate in my documents as well as his obituary.  I've added him to Find a Grave.  He's all set now.  My genealogical software has been updated.  He now is in the same category as my great-great-great-grandparents.  But, of course, to me he's not in that category.

The most important ancestors are always your parents.

 

 

Cutting The Ties

As this week meanders from 2016 to 2017, a momentous happening will occur.  As of December 31, 2016, I will let my membership in the New England Historic Genealogical Society lapse.  I've been a member for 26 years.  Over the last ten years, I've not done much research on my own family.  I still used the library at NEHGS and certainly was glad to receive their publications.  But now basic membership is $90 per year.  And all you get for experienced genealogists is 4 issues of the Register and 4 issues of American Ancestors.  I've decided that's not enough anymore.  First of all the Register has changed.  It is no longer a New England journal but a national journal.  So the likelihood of my ancestors appearing in the Register from here on out has collapsed to near zero.  The Great Migration Project is done.  They've published their last original book and any further works are merely derivative based on what's been published already.  I hardly use the library anymore.  And living in Boston that was a big plus for membership.

I've already ended my member in all other genealogical societies except for the New Hampshire Society of Genealogists of which I am a life member.  Some time in 2017 in between world trips, I'll box up my research and books and find a storage rental for them.  It's time to downsize and genealogy is not going to make the cut in my new world.

The Hooker Siblings

There was a time when between the New England Historical & Genealogical Register and The American Genealogist, every other year or every third year there would be an article on my ancestors.  That's not been happening lately.  In fact, I think it's been close to six years since an article appeared on my ancestors.  Well, today was the day.

In the July 2016 issue of The American Genealogist is an article that has the now found baptisms of Mary and John Hooker, children of the Rev. Thomas Hooker.  Mary is my direct ancestor (as is her sister Sarah). 

“Two Children of Rev. Thomas Hooker of Hartford, Connecticut” by Deborah A. Hart Stock and Robert Charles Anderson, The American Genealogist 88 (2016):219-221.

The Burnham Brothers: The Final Word

It's been six years since I posted several things about the Burnham Brothers of Ipswich, Massachusetts.  As I pointed out then, none of them were on the ship Angel Gabriel.  I noticed someone looking at that posting this week and I was reminded that the Great Migration Directory came out last year.  Using that work you can show the following:  assuming that Robert Charles Anderson is an expert on this time period, we can see that John Burnham came in 1637 and his brothers Thomas and Robert arrived after 1640 since they are not in the directory.  Clearly, none of them were on the ship Angel Gabriel which landed in 1635.  Therefore, we can put this trope to bed once and for all.  

But genealogy is never that easy.  This trope will outlive me.  It's in print and that's all that matters to people.  There are too many hack genealogists out there and not enough scholars.

My Burnham descents are here.

The Stranger in my Genes

The Stranger in my Genes by Bill Griffeth (Boston, Mass.: NEHGS, 2016) is a great read.  I got the book and in two days I was done.  It's not long (180 pp.) but a real page turner.  Ostensibly it's about genealogy, but that's not true.  It's about dysfunctional families.  It is true that none of what happens in the book would have happened had it not been for genealogy.  It is because of genealogy that Bill, the author, takes a DNA test which sets in motion the contents of the book.  For those of us involved with genealogy who have already taken a DNA test (I've taken two), we can breathe a sigh of relief that this did not happen to us.  In fact, the NEHGS weekly newsletter recently had a poll about DNA testing and I could truthfully report that my results were boring.  They completely backed up what I knew on paper.  But Bill, gets the surprise of his life to find out his father is not his real father.  And consequentially half his genealogy is wrong.

I also watch Genealogy Roadshow on PBS and I note that 70-80% of the queries on that show revolve around the "I didn't know my parent and/or grandparent."  The researchers then use genealogical tools to fill in the person's knowledge of this very close family member.  Again this is not genealogy, but dysfunctional families.  These people need a genealogist less than a psychologist to help them work out their identity questions.  But with genealogy becoming the number one hobby in the U.S., this is what genealogy has become.  (I would define genealogy as proving relationships in the distant past).  The key there is distant past.  You didn't know Grandpa who was in WWII, then that's a communication problem between Grandpa, your parent, and you.

I must say though that I called my mother up after finishing the book and told her, in no uncertain language, that if my father was not my real father, she could keep that secret to her grave.  I didn't need to know.  But, of course, I already know how I came to be in this world.  There's no family secret about that.

Interrelated Presidents

Did you know that of the 43 men to be president, 30 were related to another president?  That's 70%.  That's a high number.  In Ancestors of American Presidents (AAP), there is an extensive set of charts showing how all the presidents are related.  Now, of course to do this, some rules were broken.  The two most important presidents are Washington and Lincoln.  In order for Washington to be connected to someone else, we have to delve into his gentry English ancestry.  George was born in 1732 (the earliest of any president) and his eight great-grandparents are immigrants to Virginia.  That means there are only 8 possible families for his to connect with others.  (This is not impossible.  Did you see this season of Finding Your Roots with Henry Louis Gates, Jr.? Senator John McCain is a Washington descendant).  Likewise, Lincoln's mother's parents are unknown, so half of his ancestry is blank.  So AAP provides several possible theories of ancestries for Lincoln.

The 13 presidents not related to anyone else are: Jefferson, Monroe, Jackson, Polk, Buchanan, A. Johnson, Arthur, McKinley, Wilson, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Reagan, and Clinton.  And at least, Wilson, Eisenhower and Reagan married women with ancestries that tie to the other presidents.  Most of these non-related presidents are of Scotch, Scotch-Irish, and Irish extraction.  If we could do those genealogies back to 1600 like we can with colonial English ancestry, many of those presidents would be found to be inter-related as well.

The two most related presidents are the Bushes, Sr. and Jr. with 18 different presidential connections between them.  This is not surprising since the Bushes have equal amounts of New England, Middle Atlantic, and Virginian ancestry.  

The closest connection that is non-lineal is between James Madison and Zachary Taylor who were second cousins through the Taylor family.  [Obviously the Adams's and Bushes are the closest related as father/son, then the Harrisons as grandfather/grandson].  The Roosevelts were fifth cousins by blood and nephew/uncle by marriage.

With this election we have the possibility of yet another close connection: husband/wife (if Hillary Clinton is elected).  Neither she nor her husband are related by blood to any other president.

 

 

Royally-Descended Presidents

To my mind there are three ways to be related to a president.  You can share medieval ancestors with them; you can share colonial ancestors with them; or you can be a closer relation than that.  I mean someone is Barack Obama's second cousin.  One of the purposes behind Ancestors of American Presidents (AAP) by Gary Boyd Roberts is to discover how you are related to a given president.

Would it surprise you to find out that 25 of the 43 men to be president was of royal descent?  That's a staggering 58% of presidents.  This goes to show you that up to 2008 we were drawing on a very insular group of people from within our country for two hundred years.  Let's face it one black person out of 43.  One Catholic out of 43.  That's a lot of straight, white, protestant men to talk about.

So, off the bat if you have a valid royal line, you can be related to at least 25 of the men who were presidents.  That involves sharing some medieval ancestor and being 20-30th cousins with the president.

The presidents who are royally-descended are:

George Washington

Thomas Jefferson

James Madison

John Quincy Adams

William Henry Harrison

Benjamin Harrison

Zachary Taylor

Franklin Pierce

James Buchanan

Abraham Lincoln (a very problematic descent.  Nothing is known of his mother Nancy Hanks, so her entire ancestry is complete conjecture)

Rutherford B. Hayes

Grover Cleveland

Theodore Roosevelt

William Howard Taft

Warren G. Harding

Calvin Coolidge

Herbert Hoover

Franklin D. Roosevelt

Harry S Truman

Richard Nixon

Gerald Ford

James E. Carter

George H.W. Bush

George Walker Bush

Barack Obama

 

 

Election 2016

I am a political junkie.  I can't help myself.  I've never missed voting in any election since I was 18 including all local elections.  So, it's an election year without an incumbent president so there's two parties to watch and take in.  In years past I would always dart over to www.wargs.com to see the ancestry of the candidates, but Bill died in 2010, so that's not an option anymore.  Hillary's ancestry is still there since she ran in 2008.  Of the main contestants left, we have Bernie Sanders, of Ashkenazi Jewish descent, Ted Cruz, half-Cuban, half-American with some traceable American ancestry one would presume, Marco Rubio, 100% Cuban, and Donald Trump who is essentially half-German and half-Scottish.  I'm sure  someone will trace all their ancestries at some point.  The interesting thing about Hillary's ancestry is that she has traceable French-Canadian ancestry.   If elected president she would be the first one with such ancestry.  Likewise, Bernie would be the first Jewish president and either Cruz or Rubio, the first with Hispanic ancestry.  This is coming on the heels of someone with African ancestry.

If you like presidents and genealogy, I highly suggest buying Ancestors of the American Presidents by Gary Boyd Roberts (NEHGS, Boston, Mass., 2009).  I have to say I am mentioned in the book since I did some research on Garfield, Taft, and Hayes.  This volume explores the known ancestry of all 43 presidents (Cleveland counts once but served twice).  It shows the sources and the interrelationships of all the presidents among themselves.  There are also sections on the royal descents of presidents, the Mayflower lines of presidents, and their connection with the modern English royal family.  Of course, this is a way for you to find out if you have a president in your family tree.  I always knew we had one since I had a Cleveland line and I was told that it was the same as the president's.  Turned out that this family story was true.

I may take some time in the upcoming weeks to discuss presidential genealogy.  Stay tuned.

Ireland

Ireland is delightful.  It's so enchanting it makes you wonder why your ancestors left in the first place.  Oh yeah--one dreadful famine and 800 years of British oppression.  But you see, those things are over, so Ireland today is a land of friendly people, historical sights, and great food.  Catch the right airline deal like I did and it's a budget saver for going to Europe.

So, the first and most important question is why does Guinness taste so much better in Ireland than here in the states?  Same recipe, I'm guessing, but there is no comparison between a draught of Guinness in Dublin and the bottled version here in the U.S.  So Guinness is added to a long list of delectables that can only be eaten/drunk in situ (including French bread, New York pizza and bagels).

We did spend some time doing genealogy.  I couldn't resist seeing the National Library of Ireland in Dublin.  So we went one afternoon and worked with one of the helpful librarians there.  They have a genealogy room and two helpful attendants you can use.  Of course, everything is online nowadays.  Griffith's Valuation, the Tithe Applotment Book, and most importantly all the catholic parish registers.  We used Michael's family as an example since they are typical Famine immigrants.  We had Dennis Berrigan's parents from his death certificate from 1912 in Michigan.  This gave him a date of birth about 1834 to parents Edmund Berrigan and Mary Doherty.  Using Griffith's valuation we spied two Edmund Berrigans in 1850 in adjacent townlands in Tipperary  County.  We converted the townland names to parish names and have two catholic parish registers to search.  We didn't search, but we are on the right track.

It was fairly easy to accomplish that.  Of course, as the librarian pointed out, we weren't looking for John Kelly and had good information to use (always do all your homework in the U.S. before going to Ireland).  So now we have a new trip to take and see southern Ireland for Michael's Berrigans in Tipperary and my Stacks in Cork.  We went west to Galway and saw the Aran Islands and the Cliffs of Moher in County Clare.  Beautiful sites both.

We managed to rent a car and drive on the left side of the road without killing anybody including ourselves.  The trick is being able to shift with your left hand as you drive a manual car on the left side of the road (upon very narrow roads in County Clare). 

Another trip to be made will be to Northern Ireland where most of my Irish ancestors came from: Donegal, Down, Armagh, and Antrim counties.  But until then, I can content myself that I've now been to all the ancestral homelands of my ancestors (Canada, Scotland, England and Czechoslovakia in 1983).