Off to Salt Lake City, Utah, for RootsTech 2019

https://www.rootstech.org/why-attend?cid=tp-rt-6517

Well, as I get older time passes more quickly and here we are at another week for RootsTech 2019. it will be a little bit strange for me to go back after missing a whole year while I was in Annapolis, Maryland digitizing records for FamilySearch at the Maryland State Archives. It seems like even though time passes quickly, I have been thinking about and planning for the year's RootsTech Conference for a long time.  I will be just as busy as usual. I will be doing two presentations for the BYU Family History Library on Thursday and Friday, and a presentation for MyHeritage.com on Friday. You can check at the booths for the schedule of presentations including mine at both the BYU Family History Library booth and the MyHeritage.com booth. I will also be helping out at the booth for The Family History Guide #217. You may also find me at the Media Hub with the other RootsTech Ambassadors.

The rest of the time, I will either be in meetings or wandering around the exhibit floor renewing acquaintanceships and finding out about the latest changes and technologies. Please stop me or stop by the booths and say hello.

The weather reports for Salt Lake City don't look too good. As I write this post, it is supposed to be snowing here in Provo but it isn't but it is still cold. Be prepared for cold weather and possible rain or snow. There is a very good video series called the "Road to RootsTech Video Series. " I would strongly recommend watching these videos in preparation for the conference especially if you haven't attended before. If you have attended before, particularly last year, you may wish to watch the series to see all the changes that were made because of difficulties experienced last year.

Hope to see you there. Since I will be at RootsTech, I doubt I will get any blog posts written until after the conference.

Step-by-Step Guide to Using Online Census Indexes: Part Five

The history of indexes for the U.S. Federal Census continued with the development of what was called the Soundex system. However, that system requires its own series of articles in other posts. Eventually, all of the paper-based indexing systems were replaced by the internet and online programs that either reproduced the paper indexes or developed systems where manual indexes were supplemented by computer programs that searched every word in the index list.

Due to the fact that until quite recently all of the entries on the census schedules were handwritten producing an index of those entries still requires human manual indexing.  Computer programs for reading handwriting are now being developed but the technology is still in its infancy. Fortunately, all of that manual indexing work has now been done and online indexes exist for all of the U.S. Federal Censuses that have been released to date through 1940.

Searching online especially of indexes requires a certain amount of experience and strategy. Over time, you'll begin to realize that indexes are not always complete or accurate. The person compiling the index may have misread the handwriting and the information recorded is either inaccurate or incomplete. Despite the existence of a searchable index to the records, manual searching through the census schedules may be necessary if the indexing was incomplete or inaccurate. In this case, a search can be made of a small geographic area such as a town or village fairly quickly by looking at the digital copies of the census schedules for that location. It is also a good idea to search for all possible variations of the names being searched. There is always the remote possibility that the particular person you're searching for was missed by the enumerators for the US Federal Census but this is quite uncommon and usually the reason that a person or family is missing is due to the fact that the person or family moved. The combination of misread records and people who moved makes searching census records a learned skill rather than following a straightforward set of instructions.

As mentioned previously, there are various fully indexed copies of the entire US Federal Census records available on several websites. In addition, partial copies of the censuses are available on additional websites. Some of these are also indexed. Each website will have its particular way of storing and searching its own census records. Successful searching on any particular website usually requires some instruction or experimentation with using the particular website in question. The following is an overview of how to access the various indexes available online.

FamilySearch.org

FamilySearch.org Historical Record Collections

FamilySearch.org is a free website and has a complete set of the US Federal Census records from 1790 to 1940. The records are completely searchable. FamilySearch.org does require a free registration. You can search all of the records on the website which will include a search of the census records if applicable or you can search each of the census years individually. Here is a search screen for searching the 1880 US Census:

Of course, you always have the option of browsing through millions of images looking for your ancestors.

Ancestry.com

Ancestry.com is a subscription website however free access to the program is available in FamilySearch Family History Centers around the world. There are 5000+ search Family History Centers available for free public use. For the location of the nearest Family History Center go to the Help section of FamilySearch.org. The free Family History Center version of the website does not allow you to develop or maintain a personal family tree.

 As with FamilySearch.org, Ancestry.com also provides a way to search individual censuses or do a global search which will include all of the census records. Here is a screenshot of part of the website's search form for the 1880 US Federal Census.

 With so many options for searching, the most efficient strategy mandates that you begin your searches with a minimal amount of information and keep adding information until you begin to see usable results from your searches. Of course, this method of searching implies that you know more than a name or a name and the date. Since census records are geographically compiled knowing the location where your ancestors lived is close to absolutely necessary in order to identify the right person or family.

Findmypast.com

Findmypast.com is primarily a website with records from the British Isles and the former British Empire however during the past few years the website has been accumulating millions of records from the United States (technically a former colony of Great Britain). Subsequently, the website has a very useful and complete collection of the US Federal Census as well as many state censuses from around the United States.

 Findmypast.com is also a subscription website. Many genealogists hesitate to subscribe to more than one large online website, however, even though the records would seem to be cumulative in the case of US censuses the other records on the website certainly merit the price of the subscription. Here is a screenshot of the website's form for searching the 1880 US Census:

As mentioned previously, knowing the general location is helpful in any genealogical search but in many cases, accurate information can only be obtained by knowing the exact location where the ancestors lived.

Findmypast.com is also available for free at FamilySearch Family History Centers around the world. Again, the free Family History Center version of the website does not allow you to develop or maintain a personal family tree.

MyHeritage.com

MyHeritage.com has a technologically advanced search capability called SuperSearch™. Although it is possible to do a manual search on this website, MyHeritage.com works best when the user allows the website's SuperSearch™ technology to search for records in a family tree maintained by the user. With a family tree, the program will provide links to all of the census records available. However, if you choose to do a manual search there are search forms available.

MyHeritage.com is also a subscription website and searching requires a membership. However, it is also available for free at FamilySearch Family History Centers around the world, of course, with the limitation that the free Family History Center version of the website does not allow you to develop or maintain a personal family tree.

MyHeritage.com also has an extensive set of US state census records that are completely searchable.

Each of these four websites has an index list of the census collections available. On FamilySearch.org, the list of available collections is contained in the Historical Record Collections. There is an option to view all collections and search for individual categories of record collections. On the Ancestry.com website, there is a link under the search menu for the Card Catalog which contains filters that allow you to view different sets of collections including census records. On the Findmypast.com website, there is a provision under the search menu item to view the A-to-Z of record sets which can also be filtered to show census records. On the MyHeritage.com website, There is presently a Research tab at the top of the startup page that contains a link to search all recordsAnd there is a way to filter the list to search for census records.

 There are a lot more census records online so stay tuned for the next part of this particular series.

Here are links to the previous posts in this series:

Part One: https://genealogysstar.blogspot.com/2019/01/step-by-step-guide-to-using-online.html
Part Two: https://genealogysstar.blogspot.com/2019/01/step-by-step-guide-to-using-online_25.html
Part Three: https://genealogysstar.blogspot.com/2019/02/step-by-step-guide-to-using-online.html

Part Four: https://genealogysstar.blogspot.com/2019/02/step-by-step-guide-to-using-online_23.html

Dead End Genealogy

I received the following comment from a reader from a post I did more than a year ago:

I refuse to give my my ancient copy of PAF. If you can find the source files, it can be loaded onto any PC and run successfully. I simply copied my files from an old hard drive wthat was no longer in use, and it ran on my windows 10 computer without issue.

We often talk about genealogical brick walls when we can't find a person we are looking for, but this is another more insidious problem. Dead End Genealogy occurs when a person refuses to collaborate with others and continues to use outmoded technology. Dead End Genealogy almost always results in the individual losing all of the information they have accumulated due to the death of the genealogist or to a simple loss of data. Of course, I cannot tell from this comment whether or not the person who is still trying to use Personal Ancestral File has some other venue for compiling genealogical data, but the fact that the comment involves a program that was discontinued raises some serious questions.

This comment prompted me to go back through some of my other older blog posts and see what was actually going on. Here is one quote from a previous blog post also back in 2018.

However, the PAF issue goes much deeper than just that one program. It is symptomatic of a deeper issue with genealogists and technology. I just recently spent almost an hour with two different people trying to retrieve their logins and passwords to FamilySearch.org. You can guess that both of these people are not young. You might not realize it if you are reading this blog post, but most of the younger people I know would not even realize that desktop computer programs for genealogy even exist, much less be interested in using a program that was discontinued before they were born. 

For me, PAF is the genealogical symbol the digital divide; the outward and obvious indication that a huge segment of the genealogical community is simply out of touch with technology. That is the main reason this subject comes up periodically and will continue to be a subject for comment until the program really dies.

I found additional blog posts back in 2017, 2016, and way back in 2010. Here is another quote from a post in 2016.

In 1984, Personal Ancestral File, was a remarkable and innovative program for creating a personal, genealogical database. GEDCOM support was added in 1986 with version 2.0 for DOS, Apple II and CP/M. There were a number of revisions to the program. The Macintosh version was PAF 2.31 released in 1994 and was never upgraded and so ultimately stopped working on the newer Macintosh computers. The PC version of the program was upgraded from DOS to Win9x/NT in 1999. The last upgrade, to version 5.2 occurred in July of 2002. 

When I looked at my calendar today, I saw that this is 2019. I have quite a few grandchildren who were not even born when Personal Ancestral File was last upgraded. At this point, I am not certain whether or not my comments about Personal Ancestral File apply to the program itself or to the Windows operating system. But I am certain that Microsoft discontinued support of Win9x/NT. Checking with the article from Wikipedia entitled Wikipedia: Windows NT I find that Windows 9x/NT was first introduced in 1993 (26 years ago if you do the math). The last version of Windows NT version 4.0 was released in 1996. Since then, there have been almost twenty updated versions of Windows culminating in Windows 10 released in 2015. I sort of looks like Microsoft may be caught in a time warp also.

Part of the motivation for writing again on this subject was that this last week I spent a considerable amount of time trying to help someone who was trying to do some genealogical work on an old computer running Windows Vista which only lasted from 2007 until about 2009. How long will the old DOS-based software continue to run on Windows computers? It looks like it might still be a long time. But does this mean that the old PAF program should continue its Zombie run in the genealogical community? How long will it be before I never have to hear about this program again or offer support to people who are running an operating system that gets constant errors about online programs that will not run on their machine? Here is my conclusion from a post in 2016.

The program will continue to haunt us as long as there are people who do not recognize that the continued use of PAF is a problem not a solution to any problem.

If you find an old PAF file and if you can find a way to read the floppy disk or CD, do not decide you need to upload the program to one of the online family trees. We have enough of that old stuff already. If you still think that the information is valuable, go online to the FamilySearch.org Family Tree and start looking to see if everything in your old PAF file is already on the Family Tree. My experience is that almost everything on old PAF disks has long since been added to the Family Tree.

How well do you know your ancestors?

https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2018/12/americans-grandparents-first-names/578926/

This recent article in The Atlantic for December 28, 2018, got some attention in the genealogical community. The article claimed that one-third of all Americans could not name all of their grandparents. I would guess that this number is possibly low. Except for actively involved genealogists and a few others, most of the people I work with when I am in one of the Family History Center around the world and in the major libraries would be hard pressed to know the complete names of each of their four grandparents and would be completely lost in naming any of their great-grandparents. I have even had a recent experience in helping someone with their family research only to find out that the person did not know his mother's correct or full name. Another instance of this situation is the frequency of incomplete or wrong names entered in online family trees.

By the way, the information about the percentage came from an Ancestry.com Survey that was published back in 2007 so the findings are hardly new news. See "Survey Reveals Americans’ Surprising Lack of Family Knowledge."

Why is this the case? What difference does it make? A number of recent news articles have commented on the fact that Americans generally put family first ahead of country or religion. If we predominately put family first, why do we not know more about our families? I realize that my readership is primarily genealogists who can rattle off generations of ancestors, but what is there about our American culture that values family be doesn't seem to value it enough to remember their names?

Obviously, I am not a test case. I am doubly fortunate that my immediate ancestors had names that are easily remembered. But the issue of knowing the names of ancestors is only a shadow of the greater issue the encompasses the loss of generational traditions and culture. Nationwide, the national marriage rate is going down from 8.2 per 1000 in the year 2000 to 6.9 per 1000 in 2017. At the same time, it is estimated that about half of all the women have cohabited by age 30. See "New Report Sheds Light on Trends and Patterns in Marriage, Divorce, and Cohabitation." The rate of divorce has dropped slightly from 4.0 per 1000 to about 3.2 per 1000. See "Marriages and Divorces, divorcestatistics.org." It is entirely possible that the drop in the divorce rate is due to the rise in cohabitation and the drop in the marriage rate. What does this have to do with genealogy?

Think about the trouble you have had in finding the records of a mobile single person in the United States. How do you track someone who lives with a partner but does not get married especially if they continue to keep their single names and bank accounts etc? Do these statistics seem to indicate that there might be a problem with children from such homes knowing the identity of their grandparents?

As genealogists, we may feel insulated from the disintegration of the American family, but in reality, these statistics translate into a genealogical nightmare. A child raised by an unmarried couple may have no real concept of generational relationships and divorces likely result in separation not only from a parent but also from the separated parent's family.

 One of the things we can do is to try to record the relationships and families of the present time as much as possible even if the participants are not interested in family or ancestral relationships. Remember, a cohabitation arrangement does not produce any marriage or divorce records. It is also possible that the parentage of children born in these relationships will be hard to discover in the future. Perhaps genealogists, rather than be so focused on the past need to look to the future. In the past, there was a strong tradition of preserving family information in a family Bible or other writing and maybe we need to start preserving the memory of these people in our own way.

Step-by-Step Guide to Using Online Census Indexes: Part Four

In all the U.S. Federal Census records for all the years, there are millions upon millions of people named. The process of indexing starts with the selection of terms to include in the index. Obviously, the names of the individuals and some of the other information would be helpful in finding what would otherwise be a needle in a haystack. Without an index, the only way that the records could be searched would be named by name page by page. The U.S. Federalist Census was taken by geographic areas called enumeration districts. If you look closely at the screenshot from the FamilySearch.org website you might see a reference to United States Enumeration District Maps. If you were going to manually search the census without an index you could use the geographic divisions of the Census as a starting point and thereby cut down the number of pages and names that you would have to individually search. With today's digitized and indexed records, it is very difficult to imagine the amount of effort it would take to search through even one enumeration district's records.

It also seems hard to understand in today's world that almost all of the U.S. Census originally existed in only paper copies. Here is a short comment on the paper copies from the United States Census Bureau, History. 

Since the first census in 1790, the U.S. Census Bureau has collected data using a census "schedule," also called a "questionnaire." Between 1790 and 1820, U.S. Marshals conducting the census were responsible for supplying paper and writing-in headings related to the questions asked (i.e., name, age, sex, race, etc.). In 1830, Congress authorized the printing of uniform schedules for use throughout the United States. 

The 1940 Census included separate questionnaires to count the population and collect housing data. The 1960 and later censuses combined population and housing questions onto a single questionnaire mailed to households or completed during a census taker's visit. 

Between 1970 and 2000, the U.S. Census Bureau used two questionnaires. Most households received a short-form questionnaire asking a minimum number of questions. A sample of households received a long-form questionnaire that included additional questions about the household. The 2010 Census had just one questionnaire consisting of ten questions.

Think about it. Until microfilm came along, the only way for someone to search the U.S. Census was to go to the National Archives or other repositories where the records were kept, as look at them page by page. Since the 1930s when microfilming began to be common and with the exception of the 1890 Census, all of the other U.S. Census year's records have been microfilmed. The advantage of the microfilmed copies was that they could be duplicated and distributed around the country making it possible for more people to have access to the records. But the same problem of the need to search page by page still existed. The first level of organization other than the natural geographic division was a catalog arrangement. The schedules were cataloged first chronologically, then by state and county. Some major cities are listed individually. In these early days, the catalogs were on cards in wooden drawers. 

Because of the interest and the need to search through the census records, there were a number of privately printed indexes. Here is a quote from the U.S. National Archives article entitled "1790-1890 Federal Population Censuses -- Part 1."

Privately printed indexes are available for most States or territories from 1790 through 1870 and for the 1890 special schedules. For each state or territory, these indexes typically alphabetize surnames (last names) and then given (first) names or other names and initials of heads of families and specify the county, city, and possibly an MCD. The Microfilm Research Room, regional records services facilities, and numerous libraries or other institutions have many of these indexes, which appear in microfilmed, microfiched, or published form. Many schedules have different kinds of page numbers. Forewards to the indexes, though, usually explain the approach used and may include helpful aids such as census maps, histories, and bibliographies. Some indexes for early censuses also transcribe most census data from the schedules.

If the index was available, it would greatly reduce the time it took to search the census records. But all indexes have their limitations unless they index every word in the documents being indexed, Another problem was that there were few copies of the indexes and searching the census could still involve travel as well as work. Continuing the article from the National Archives, here is a short explanation of some indexes that were prepared by the U.S. Government.

The Microfilm Research room and the 13 Regional Records Services facilities hold microfilmed indexes that the Federal Government prepared for the 1790, 1810, 1820, 1880, and 1890 censuses. 

The Government Printing Office published and indexed the 1790 schedules of 11 States, along with Virginia data that was reconstructed from state enumerations from 1782 to 1785 and was intended to replace the missing 1790 schedules. National Archives Microfilm Publication T498, First Census of the United States, 1790, reproduces these works, which are also commercially reprinted. List of Free Black Heads of Families in the First Census, 1790, Special List 34, compiled by Debra L. Newman (Washington, DC: National Archives and Records Service, rev. 1974), indexes names of free black heads of families nationwide. The 1840 census of Revolutionary War pensioners is reproduced on roll 3 of T498. 

Index to the 1810 Census Schedules for Virginia (T1019) alphabetizes names, references counties, and notes volume, page, and line numbers of the schedules. Volume numbers that the index notes appear within the microfilm rolls, not in this catalog. Compilation of Tennessee Census Reports, 1820, National Archives Microfilm Publication T911, includes alphabetized indexes, partly transcribed data, and copies of an original 1820 schedule. Index to the Eleventh Census of the United States (M496) indexes the remaining 1890 population schedules. Roll 1 covers alphabetized surnames from A through J; roll 2, from K through Z. After the surname, the given or middle names and also initials are alphabetized. The numbers on the right-hand side for the cards refer to those stamped on the schedules.

Stay tuned for more about the indexing of the Census Records.

Here is a link to the previous posts in this series:

Part One: https://genealogysstar.blogspot.com/2019/01/step-by-step-guide-to-using-online.htmlPart Two: https://genealogysstar.blogspot.com/2019/01/step-by-step-guide-to-using-online_25.html
Part Three: https://genealogysstar.blogspot.com/2019/02/step-by-step-guide-to-using-online.html

Our Experience on Internet Radio: Big Blend Radio Interview

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/big-blend-radio

My friend Holly Hansen and I had a singular experience in being interviewed on an Internet Talk Radio Station. At least it was a new experience for me, but I understand that Holly is been on the radio quite frequently lately. We were interviewed on the Big Blend Radio program by Nancy Reid & Lisa D. Smith, the mother-daughter travel team on the 'Love Your Parks Tour' and publishers of the digital Big Blend Radio & TV Magazine and Parks & Travel Magazine. The topic of our interview was genealogy in the state of Arizona. We also talked about traveling around the state and some of the points of interest. This is part of the effort of Family History Expos to reach out to the greater potential genealogical community meaning the rest of the world that doesn't presently do genealogy.

Quoting from a report from Lisa D. Smith, Park Traveler, and Publisher of Radio Host:

The interview podcast is featured with Holly’s article on NationalParkTraveling.com and will be featured in the upcoming April-June issue of Parks & Travel Magazine, and in an upcoming Big Blend e-Newsletter. The podcast is also published on Spreaker.com, Soundcloud.com, Youtube.com, and on BlogTalkRadio.com which syndicates and distributes out to a number of podcast outlets including iTunes.com, TuneIn.com, Stitcher.com, Overcast.fm, MixCloud.com, ListenNotes.com, Spotify, and Player.fm, etc. 

In addition, she supplied me with a number of links to the interview:

Here are the main links (all easy to use on social media): 

- Podcast & Article on NationalParkTraveling.com -  https://nationalparktraveling.com/listing/arizona-family-history-research/
- Podcast on Spreaker.com - https://www.spreaker.com/user/big_blend_radio/arizona-family-history-research
- Podcast on SoundCloud.com - https://soundcloud.com/bigblendradio/arizona-family-history-research-with-holly-t-hansen-and-james-l-tanner
- Show on BlogTalkRadio.com - http://www.blogtalkradio.com/big-blend-radio/2019/02/15/big-blend-radio-arizona-parks-film-and-family-history
- Podcast on YouTube.com -  https://youtu.be/VkNQaLOqORc 

 This was quite an interesting experience and thanks to Holly and Big Blend Radio for the experience.

RootsTech 2019 is Almost Here! Here is your Survival Guide

https://www.rootstech.org/blog/survival-guide-rootstech-2019?et_cid=1304388&et_rid=107108866&linkid=CTA&cid=em-rt-8071

The weather reports for the Salt Lake City area are not very favorable for the week of RootsTech 2019. That looks like cold weather and snow. FamilySearch has been concerned about this and many other things that you should know about the RootsTech 2019 conference. They have published a RootsTech Survival Guide linked above. Some of the things that have changed for the upcoming conference include the following list send out by email. Here is a list of those things that have changed from past years:

Conference Updates 

In addition to increased customer service, here are a few more things we’re doing to make RootsTech 2019 a success for you:

• Free WiFi. We’re testing the Salt Palace’s new system and providing free, high-speed internet to all attendees, courtesy of FamilySearch.
• Increased Staff Support. You’ll notice an increased number of staff positioned throughout the Salt Palace to assist you. They’ll be wearing bright turquoise shirts that say “Ask Me Anything”. They can help you find your classes and assist you with any other needs.
• RootsTech Daily Rundown. Each day when you arrive at the Salt Palace, you’ll be given a printed handout with a summary of the day’s events and most popular classes. These handouts will also be available in the Documents section of the mobile app.
• Larger Classrooms. We’ve increased the size of classrooms and added a new room, the Ruby Room, which seats over 3,000.
• Trace.com Coaches’ Corner. Bring your biggest genealogy roadblocks and find answers at the Trace.com Coaches’ Corner in the Expo Hall. Over 400 slots are available with expert genealogists. Sign up here: https://coaches.trace.com.

If this is your first time attending RootsTech, then I would certainly advise you to review the Survival Guide. Here is the link: A Survival Guide to RootsTech 2019.

I hope to see you there.

Step-by-Step Guide to Using Online Census Indexes: Part Three

Page from the U.S. Federal Census for 1790

There is a 72-year restriction on public access to the census data and so the most recent census records that are available are from 1940. Most people will only see the information from one census become available during their lifetime. All of the main schedules of the U.S. Federal Census are now available online. Here is a list of the main online sources for digitized copies of the U.S. Federal Census records, however, you will need to search for the census records on these websites. This list is not exhaustive and you may find other digital copies on additional websites. Subscription websites are marked with dollar signs.

• The Internet Archive (archive.org) has the unedited copies of the microfilmed originals in the National Archives.
• FamilySearch.org Historical Records Collections
• CensusRecords.com $
• Ancestry.com $
• MyHeritage.com $
• Findmypast.com $
• 1940.Census.archives.gov

You might ask why you would use more than one of the digital copies of the census? The answer is that most of these online copies represent different digital scans of the original National Archives microfilms. The quality of the scans varies from copy to copy and also within the individual scanned copies. For example, here is a screenshot of a page from the census taken from Archive.org. By the way, should you wish to do so, you can download the entire census from 1790 to 1940 to your own computer. If you decided to do this, make sure you have a lot of free memory on your hard drive.

https://archive.org/details/populationschedu0467unix/page/n3

The Archive.org copy of the census records reproduces the original microfilm. All of the other copies of the census have been edited. There is often extra information on the original not visible in the other copies. However, the Archive.org copy cannot be searched by name. You will need to find the page you need first from one of the other online copies and then use that to find the same page on Archive.org. I am sure that very few people will want to do this on the chance that there is a little bit of additional information, but you should be aware that it is possible.

The most commonly used parts of each U.S. Federal Census are the Population Schedules. These are the listings of the individuals and/or households in the entire census area. However, there are are a number of non-population schedules that also contain valuable genealogically useful information. Here are short descriptions of each of these additional non-population schedules. The information about the content of the schedules is as listed on the National Archives website. These non-population schedules may be found online on Ancestry.com and FamilySearch.org. Bear in mind that these schedules may need to be separately searched.

Agricultural Schedules

The U.S. Federal Census Agricultural Schedules were taken in the years 1850, 1860, and 1870 and they provide the following information for each farm.

The name of owner or manager, number of improved and unimproved acres, and the cash value of the farm, farming machinery, livestock, animals slaughtered during the past year, and "homemade manufactures." The schedules also indicate the number of horses, mules, "milch cows," working oxen, other cattle, sheep, and swine owned by the farmer. The amount of oats, rice, tobacco, cotton, wool, peas and beans, Irish potatoes, sweet potatoes, barley, buckwheat, orchard products, wine, butter, cheese, hay, clover seed, other grass seeds, hops, hemp, flax, flaxseed, silk cocoons, maple sugar, cane sugar, molasses, and beeswax and honey produced during the preceding year is also noted. The 1880 schedules provide additional details, such as the amount of acreage used for each kind of crop, the number of poultry, and the number of eggs produced. 

Exclusions--Not every farm was included in these schedules. In 1850, for example, small farms that produced less than $100 worth of products annually were not included. By 1870, farms of less than three acres or which produced less than $500 worth of products were not included.

Manufacturing Schedules

As the United States was transformed from a primarily agricultural country into a manufacturing country, an Act of Congress dated May 1, 1810, mandated that the government make "an account of the several manufacturing establishments and manufactures." However, the Act did not specify the type of information to be collected so the actual information contained in the recorded records varies greatly. From the Archives.gov website:

Manufacturing schedules in 1820, 1850, and 1860 reported the name of the manufacturer; the type of business or product; the amount of capital invested; the quantities, kinds, and value of raw materials used; the quantities, kinds, and value of product produced annually; the kind of power or machinery used; the number of men and women employed; and the average monthly cost of male and female labor. The amount of detail reported in these schedules increased in 1870 and again in 1880. In 1880, supplemental schedules were also used for specific industries, such as for boot and shoemaking, lumber and saw mills, flour and grist mills. 

Exclusions--Small manufacturing operations that produced less than $500 worth of goods were not included on any of the schedules.

Both the Agricultural and Manufacturing Schedules can contain information including details that are not contained in the general population schedules. Both Schedules may also list people who were not residing in the particular area covered by the Population Schedules.

Mortality Schedules

It may seem rather strange, but the 1850, 1860, 1870, and 1880 U.S. Federal Censuses had Mortality Schedules. There are also some mortality schedules from 1885 in some of the state censuses. Fortunately for genealogical researchers, these records often contain information about people that the Census would otherwise have missed. The Mortality Schedules contained deaths in the year preceding the census year. Again from the Archives.gov website:

For each person, the following information is listed: name, age, sex, marital status if married or widowed, state or country of birth, month of death, occupation, cause of death, and the length of the final illness. 

Business Schedules 1935

The U.S. Federal Census Business Schedules contain information relating to advertising agencies, banking and financial institutions, miscellaneous enterprises, motor trucking for hire, public warehousing, and radio broadcasting stations. There were other more limited censuses taken in 1929 and 1933.

Censuses of American Indians

American Indians are not identified in the U.S. Federal Censuses for the years 1790 to 1840. However, the1860 Census began identifying Indians living in the general population. Beginning in 1900, Indians living both on and off the Reservations are included in the Census schedules. A more complete listing of all the specific census records for Indians is contained on the United States Census Bureau website. See History, Censuses of American Indians.

From time to time, it appears that an ancestor or an entire family has suddenly disappeared from the census. This is usually due to the index being inaccurate or the individual or family's movement to a new location but this possibility is relatively rare and searching the census schedules page by page may show the missing family especially when there is an indexing error.

Here is a link to the previous posts in this series:

Part One:  https://genealogysstar.blogspot.com/2019/01/step-by-step-guide-to-using-online.html
Part Two: https://genealogysstar.blogspot.com/2019/01/step-by-step-guide-to-using-online_25.html

Re-inventing Genealogy

There are four major types of genealogy programs: those that store information, those that provide information, those that teach about genealogy and those that assist in doing research. The distinctions between these four types of programs are blurred because there are a few multifunctional programs particularly those that have associated family tree programs and include a large database of digitized genealogical records. There are also a number of utility programs that supplement the activities of the larger online database/family tree programs. There are also a smaller number of games, activity programs, and even a few specialized scanners and other computer associated devices aimed at the larger genealogy market.

Several articles written in 2014 observed that "Genealogy is a 2-plus billion dollar industry that is expected to grow to nearly 3 billion by 2018." See for example this article from Forbes dated 23 November 2014 entitled, "Opportunity Is About To Knock So Get Ready To Open Your Door." This observation was made before the advent of the sale of the presently popular genealogical DNA testing kits. Online estimates of the growth of just the DNA testing market run from about $10 billion to over $22 billion in the next few years. How do these growth estimates compare to other market sectors? Well, reality is sometimes ignored when you start talking about money. For example, the worldwide market for yogurt is expected to be almost $89 billion in 2019 and grow to $107 billion dollars in 2023. In short, the market for yogurt is expected to be about four times the total of the entire genealogical DNA market. By the way, the genealogy DNA market is largely concentrated in four or five very large companies.

So what could possibly drive innovation in the genealogy market? What could happen to grow the market beyond current estimates that are largely based on the growth of DNA testing?

Right now, genealogy is mostly a solitary pursuit that has only begun to be computerized. The initial innovation in genealogy has focused on digitizing paper-based records. However, to liberate the information from their digital surrogates, the indexing process is still highly labor intensive. Granted, some genealogists can use the raw digitized records using time-honored techniques of searching individual records one at a time, but these individuals are not generally very few in number compared with the user base of the large online genealogy companies. Despite advances made in optical character recognition and handwriting recognition, these technologies have gained little traction in the genealogy companies. Automated record search programs rely entirely on indexed records.

Additionally, technological changes even those that measurably increase "genealogical productivity" face stiff resistance from tradition-bound genealogists. Overall, the genealogical community is highly fragmented and exchange of information obtained by individual researchers is, with few exceptions, locked into proprietary formats. The only widely accepted data exchange program for individual users, GEDCOM, is woefully out-of-date.

The small cadre of professional genealogists and those amateurs with similar skills are mostly unconnected with the much larger corpus of both serious and casual family historians. Professional genealogists are almost uniformly prohibited from publically sharing their work with the general genealogical population either by professional restraints or individual contract obligations. The idea of sharing genealogical information is further stifled by reason of the fact that many genealogists of all levels of expertise claim "ownership of their work."

It would appear that this genealogical logjam will prevent any real progress towards data unification and overall technological progress. What is needed is a way to re-invent genealogy. The first step in this direction needs to come from establishing a way to create a uniform data standard for the exchange of genealogical information. However, as long as each company, large or small, has its own proprietary set of data standards, such exchange of information is unlikely to occur. Since about 2012, The Family History Information Standards Organisation, Inc. or FHISO, has been working to implement data exchange standards, but although progress has been made in some areas, quoting from the FHISO.org website:

What file format will this standard generate? 

We believe it is unrealistic to produce an all-encompassing standard with the resources currently at FHISO’s disposal, and were such a standard to be produced, it runs the risk of being ignored, much as other attempts at a new standard such as the GenTech Data Model have been. 

Instead, our intention is to develop a series of standards each covering a narrow area. Over time, these will fit together to form FHISO’s new data model, but at first they are likely to be used in existing data models, in particular GEDCOM and GEDCOM X, which the FHISO Board have identified as the two dominant non-proprietary data models at present.

We have so much of our family history heritage that is lurking in fragments all over the internet and in libraries, historical societies, archives, and myriad other locations that are waiting to be integrated. Presently, genealogists have to individually remake the wheel. We have to individually create our own methods and every generation has to repeat and redo the work done previously. There is one small glimmer of hope in the FamilySearch.org Family Tree, but it will take dedication and years of work to create a reliable and trustworthy Family Tree. Meanwhile, we if we want to re-invent genealogy, we need to encourage and support efforts to integrate the data now scattered in millions of family trees into a workable one-source database that will help to eliminate duplication and help to correct the existing errors.

Inside MyHeritage.com

https://www.myheritage.com/about-myheritage/

What do you get when you combine a powerful social networking program with over 100 million users and an advanced technology database program and an aggressively accurate DNA testing program with over 9.5 billion records? You get MyHeritage.com. The company began in 2003 with the iconic "garage" (actually a living room) startup paradigm. Now after more than 16 years, the company has spread to 196 countries across the globe. The company's headquarters are in Or Yehuda, Israel with additional offices in Tel Aviv, Israel, Orem, Utah, Kyiv, Ukraine, and Burbank, California.

Back in 2016, the MyHeritage blog featured an article entitled, "A Sneak Peek Inside the MyHeritage HQ."  This article provides an idea of the atmosphere which engenders this rapidly growing genealogical website.

 Some of the important technologies developed by the company are outlined in the following list:

• Smart Matching™ -- Finds matching profiles in family trees, enabling users to discover new ancestors and relatives, and connect with other users
• Record Matching -- Automatic matches between people and historical records
• Instant Discoveries™-- Unique technology that allows adding a whole new branch to the family tree in one click
• SuperSearch™-- A Search Engine for exploring billions of historical records
• Record Detective™ -- Automatically extends the paper trail from a single historical record to other related records and family tree connections
• Global Name Translation™ -- Translates names found in historical records and family trees from one language into another, to facilitate matches between names in different languages
• Search Connect™ -- Enables users to easily find others who are looking for the same ancestors or relatives, and get in touch with them

Most recently, MyHeritage.com has expanded by beginning a series of international conferences held in different locations. The first conference was held in Oslo, Norway in 2018. The next conference will be held in Amsterdam, The Netherlands in 2019.

https://live2019.myheritage.com/

MyHeritage.com also has a free powerful desktop genealogy program called Family Tree Builder.

https://www.myheritage.com/family-tree-builder

My fascination with MyHeritage.com began as a result of the fact that I realized that they were the driving force behind genealogical technological innovation. Genealogy is a highly conservative pursuit. Little about genealogical research has changed in the last 100 years. The typical view of a genealogist is still an older person sitting in an archive or a library. MyHeritage.com's focus on innovative technology has been the impetus for changing the way millions of people around the world view researching their ancestors. Because of my interest in the program and my interest in technology, I began investigating the company early in its development. In an almost unbelievable chain of events by writing about MyHeritage developed into a friendship relationship with the company.

Perhaps there are other individuals and companies out there in the greater genealogical community that are as interested in pushing ahead with technological development in genealogy but none of them have accomplished what has been accomplished by MyHeritage.com.

Development and acceptance of the program in the United States has been slow primarily because MyHeritage has not participated in saturation advertising. But with over 100 million users it is hardly necessary for the program to advertise in the media. Word-of-mouth is sufficient.

One example will suffice in this present post. I received a request for help from one of my friends about her Swedish ancestry. The question was quite involved and on its face, would appear to take a lot of time and some serious research. However, in reading through the narrative provided by my friend, I realized that she should make sure her information was in MyHeritage.com family tree. The reason for this conclusion was the huge number of fully indexed records on MyHeritage.com from Sweden. Further, the Record Match technology would very likely provide her with a basis for resolving her questions. In any event, the additional information she would receive from MyHeritage.com would likely make the entire task much easier.

Back to the Issue of Genealogical Standardization of Place Names

Okay, we're back to the issue of standardization of place names. Standardization is exactly that, it is an attempt to establish a uniform method of doing something from manufacturing to genealogical place names. The underlying reason for working towards place name standardization is that we need to have a common way of referring to specific locations that can then be tied to GPS coordinates. This is important because of the rule that genealogically valuable records are created at or near the place that an event occurs by people who have an interest in the event or duty to report it. The duty part of the rule refers to the fact that these genealogically valuable records are created by government entities that exist at the time of the event.

This also brings up another basic rule of genealogical research that place names are recorded as they were, i.e. jurisdictionally, at the time the event occurred. So these two rules concerning the probable location of the records and the recording of the name of the place where the records may have been created are the underpinnings of all genealogical research. Ignorance of or failing to acknowledge accurate place names is the underlying cause of most of the confusion present today and the millions of online family trees. Standardization is an attempt to bring order to this confusion.

Here is a simple example. A baby born in Arizona in 1945 would have a birth certificate created pursuant to the current state statutes. If the baby was born in a hospital, the birth certificate was created by the hospital and then forwarded to the Arizona Department of Health Services which presently has the duty of preserving the record and providing copies to those who need them. Actually, the whole process is much more complicated but the summary suffices. If I wanted to look for a birth certificate for an individual born in 1945 I would have to know that he or she was born in Arizona. If I knew that the person was born in Arizona, I would need to ask the question as to which government agency might have a copy of the birth certificate. But if I did not know the person was born in Arizona where would I go to look for the birth certificate?

If I were doing genealogical research for the person born in 1945 and started looking in New York for the birth record would I find the birth record for a person born in Arizona? This may seem like an extreme example but the underlying principle is the same. Genealogical research is based on identifying a specific location of an event in a person's life. Without this geographic location which includes all of its political ramifications, it is extremely unlikely that we would be searching in the right location for the individual's records.

So why standardization? Because the identity of these political variations in the way that specific geographic locations were named generally identifies the place to start looking for records. For example, an individual farm has a specific geographic (GPS) location on the face of the earth. But over time, that same farm could have been in a number of different political entities. County boundaries could have changed and state boundaries could've changed. Those changes affect the places where records could have been created and presently could be found. So what do we do with this:

• 1284 Wales and England under the name of England
• 1536 Wales and England under the name of Kingdom of England
• 1603 Wales, England, and Scotland under the name of Great Britain
• 1707 Wales, England, and Scotland under the name of Kingdom of Great Britain
• 1801 Wales, England, Scotland, and Ireland under the name of United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland
• 1922 Wales, England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland under the name of United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

In this case, obviously, if a location was in either Wales or England, the name used to designate the political entity is fairly irrelevant. But if a person lived in Scotland or Ireland or Northern Ireland to name changes reflect jurisdictional changes where the records may have been kept. Unfortunately, the changes in the names as illustrated above also come with a log of political baggage. People can become offended if the wrong political designation is used.

There are a significant number of people who assume that if a person were born in Arizona then Arizona should be used as the designation even if the person was born in 1890 when Arizona did not exist as a state. They think that the distinction between Arizona and Arizona Territory is trivial and inconsequential. But here's the question. Where are the early Arizona records currently available? That may seem like a simple question but the answer is more complicated than you might think. Here is another list of dates:

• The 1700s to 1848 Arizona was part of Mexico
• 1848 to 1853 the part of Arizona north of Gila River was part of New Mexico Territory
• 1853 to 1863 the southern part of Arizona was added by the Gadsden Purchase from Mexico
• 1863 to 1912 all of Arizona was Arizona Territory
• 1912 to present all of Arizona is the State of Arizona

There are several factors. First, there is the issue of the exact geographic location. Second, there is the issue of the time period under consideration. Third, there is the issue of the governmental agency administering the geographic area during the time period involved. Fourth, there is a historical question of where any records kept during the time of the event may have been created and where they are presently located. Fifth there is the identity of the person involved in the research.

Standardization eliminates some of the confusion concerning the changes in the geographical locations designations over time. Another factor which is to some extent geographically independent is that certain governmental agencies create records throughout an entire country. For example, United States Census records are maintained by the national government regardless of the location where the census was taken. But even knowing that U.S. Census records are maintained at a national level still requires that the general location of a person be known or a search would have to be made of the entire census. Today, because we have digitized records with search engines that can search the entire country some of the issues have been resolved but how do we tell the difference between people with similar names if we have no idea where they lived? We always come back to the issue of identifying the geographic location.

The main challenge presently with standardization is coming up with accurate designations of the locations reflected by the time periods involved. For example, FamilySearch.org has made some efforts to include time periods in the standardization suggestions. Some genealogical programs, such as RootsMagic, will indicate whether or not a county designation is proper depending on the time frame of the entry. It is certain, that as time passes standardization will become more prevalent and more accurate.

Those who ignore standard place names and think that standardization is trivial or unimportant are missing the entire basis for accurate genealogical research.

Who are the holdouts to digitization?

Digitization of valuable genealogical information has been engulfing us like a gigantic wave. But it always helps to step back and think about the vast number of records still locked up in paper documents. The number of documents waiting to be digitized probably exceeds by many times the number of useful digital images that are already online. After spending time digitizing records at the Maryland State Archives and visiting both the National Archives and Library of Congress, I have an enhanced appreciation for the number of documents that remain unavailable online in digital format.

What remains to be digitized? The list could go on indefinitely. But there are some notable holdouts. I am sure that the same situation exists in most, if not all, the countries of the world, but my focus here in this post is on the United States.

First of all, we have our own U.S. National Archives. I could ask what would seem to be a valid question about the number of records presently in the U.S. National Archives, but persistent research online has shown me that apparently, no one has any idea of the actual number. Estimates begin at about 12 billion but the actual number is probably unimaginably larger. number. With very, very, few exceptions, the number of documents is entirely unknown. The documents are not cataloged individually but are classified in the number of cubic feet of documents or the number of linear feet on the shelves. Here is a screenshot of an example from the following record group:

Reports of Indian Schools, 1941 - 1949
Creator(s): Department of the Interior. Bureau of Indian Affairs. Navajo Service. 1947-1949  (Most Recent)
From: Record Group 75: Records of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1793 - 1999

Here is the screenshot:

This is only one small set of records. Most of the other records are measured in cubic feet of documents. If you spend even a few minutes in the National Archives Catalog you will begin to see the challenge.

Here is the statement about digitization currently on the National Archives website:

With NARA’s strategic plan, 2018-2022, NARA has committed to digitize 500 million pages of records and make them available online to the public through the National Archives Catalog by October 1, 2024. This goal will be accomplished, in part, by integrating digitization into the responsibilities of archival units nationwide and through entering into new public-private digitization partnerships.

Hmm. Let's suppose that the number of documents held by the National Archives is really about 10 billion (a really low estimate) what percentage of the documents does 500 million represent? Additionally, how many documents does the U.S. National Archives receive each year? My guess is that it is somewhere above 500 million. So really, they are getting further and further behind. By the way, 500 million is less than one half of one percent of the estimated total. 

The National Archives actually does almost no digitization of existing records. The strategy of the National Archives is set forth in a rather long discussion on a web page entitled, "Strategy for Digitizing Archival Materials." If you have ever tried to find a document in the National Archives, READ THIS PAGE. As an attorney, I am used to reading all sorts of government stuff. What this page essentially says is that the U.S. National Archives is doing essentially nothing to digitize its holdings. But what about the Partner Programs? There is a page of the "Digitization Partnerships." If you are at all interested in what is going on at the National Archives look at this page.

What is not on the page is that the actual digitization of records is mostly at a standstill. For example, what I have learned by talking to FamilySearch.org volunteers (Missionaries) who served at the National Archives digitizing documents is that because of the current administration's "budget cuts" all digitization has essentially stopped. In addition, because of bureaucratic red tape and outmoded preservation procedures, the process of digitization inside the National Archives is essentially nearly impossible for the volunteers. For example, Ancestry.com has a list of its "New and Updated" collections on its website.

The most recent records added are from October 2018. But look at the list closely and you will see that none of the recent records seem to originate from the U.S. National Archives. If you look at a few categories that likely came from the Archives, you will see that the collections are really quite old and not identified as coming from the National Archives.

This is just one example of the massive number of records that are not only unavailable in digitized copies online, but are not even in the process of being digitized. Despite everything that I do say about what is available online, we all need to remember that genealogists still need to visit these archives and libraries and do the rest of the research that cannot be done without digital copies. 

Revisiting genealogical myths

It has been some time since I wrote about genealogical myths. I even did a webinar on the topic back in 2016.

I continue to see a consistent stream of people who have asked me questions that indicate that they have "bought in" to a genealogical myth or two or three. But rather than rehash the usual list of genealogical myths, such as the Cherokee Princess and the Three Brothers myths, I decided to look at some of the less visible and obvious myths.

Many family traditions have been believed for so long by so many people that they have taken on mythic qualities. Few, if any, of those who tell and retell these traditional stories, have any idea of the origin or the veracity of the narrative, but so many people have told the story and believed the story that it can no longer be doubted as the absolute truth. How and when does a traditional story become a myth?

Traditional stories exist both in the written and oral genres. There are societies around the world who have established cultural support for oral histories. In the United States, transmission of oral histories is haphazard at best. Many traditional stories have been reduced to writing. The genealogical literature is full of instructions and suggestions concerning the preservation of family traditions and stories in particular. From a research standpoint, traditional stories may be key and understanding and discovering an individual's ancestors. But in some cases, traditional stories either block or mislead research. This is especially true when the traditional story has taken on mythic characteristics.

A traditional story becomes a myth when careful research discloses that the basic facts in the story are either unsupported by any contemporary sources or inaccurate when compared to contemporary sources. The traditional story does not need to be an extensive narrative it can merely be the identification of an individual with a particular artifact or event. For example, a family tradition may be that a remote ancestor fought in the American Revolutionary War. When subsequent genealogical research conclusively shows that the ancestor did not participate in the Revolutionary War, when the persistent tradition that the ancestor was a participant continues to be reported and believed, the traditional story has become a myth. By the way, one definition of a myth is a widely held but false belief or idea.

In my own genealogical research experience, I have encountered several extremely persistent myths in my own family lines. One example is the "photograph of John Tanner." This myth concerns and obviously old daguerreotype. Family tradition identifies the image as that of our prominent ancestor, John Tanner who was born in 1778 in Rhode Island and died in Cottonwood, Utah in 1850. I am not going to reproduce an image of the daguerreotype for the simple reason that it is being copied as an actual image of John Tanner despite careful research which shows the actual identity of the individual assumed to be John Tanner. Reproducing the image would simply add to the proliferation of the myth. For a detailed explanation of the historical analysis of the image see the following: "The Tanner Family Daguerreotype: Man at Left — Options."  This blog post contains links to a nine-part series analyzing the photograph.

Despite almost heroic efforts to publicize and debunk the mythic origin of the photograph, individuals still continue to attach the photo as an actual image of John Tanner.

Another of the Tanner family myths also revolves around the conversion of John Tanner to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The story has been published in several books and has also been represented in a movie made about the life of John Tanner. There are essentially multiple versions of the story. The most cited version is contained in the following book:

Tanner, Maurice. 1942. Descendants of John Tanner: born August 15,1778, at Hopkintown R.I., died April 15,1850, at South Cottonwood, Salt Lake County, Utah. [Place of publication not identified]: Tanner Family Association.

The account as contained in this particular book has been republished dozens of times in different books and articles. What is interesting, is that at the end of the biography of John Tanner in the book there is the following statement:

This sketch was written by Nathan Tanner, Jr., Son of Nathan Tanner, who was the son of John Tanner, the subject of this sketch.

Since there are no citations other than the statement, the facts contained in any "biography" are unsupported. The events purporting to relate to John Tanner's conversion date from 1832. At the time of the events, his son Nathan Tanner would have been approximately 17 years old. Nathan Tanner's son, also named Nathan Tanner Jr., was born in 1845 and was about five years old when John Tanner died. Unfortunately, there is no date associated with the writing of the account printed in the book but Nathan Tanner Jr. died in 1919. If someone has the original manuscript that information has not been disclosed in the book or in a subsequent publication. In short, what appears to be the only and original story was possibly written as long as 87 years after the event. However, it should be noted that Nathan Tanner Sr. died in 1910. But there is no reference in the story that Nathan Tanner Sr. witnessed or participated in the event.

Two of the individuals who could possibly provide additional details about the event have only recorded brief references to being present at the event. No details have been provided.

One of the key factors in creating a mythic tradition is that the basic facts cannot be either proven or disproven. Essentially, we have to take the word of the originator of the story as to the accuracy of the details. Notwithstanding the lack of substantiation, I am certain that there are hundreds perhaps thousands of Tanner descendants that can relate this story and others from memory. The oral recitals of the story often omit many details but also include conclusions that are not contained in the original story.

My purpose in using these two examples is not to cast any doubt or aspersions on the contributions of John Tanner but to illustrate how a historical event can become a myth. In the case of the photograph, there never was any basis in fact for the conclusion that the individual was John Tanner. In the case of the book, many of the incidents are collaborated by contemporary historical sources but those stories which have been passed down through oral history have lost some of the historical context and details.

What part do these traditional stories play? The answer to this is that they are fundamental to creating the connections between the researcher and the ancestor. The researcher can learn from the stories how the life of the ancestor affected all of his or her descendants. The damage comes when the myth competes with the reality as supported by historical records and becomes the reality to the denigration and refusal to accept the historical records.

The Family History Guide Booth at RootsTech 2019

This is a computer rendering of the booth

Yes, The Family History Guide will front and center on the Exhibit Floor of RootsTech 2019. Our booth will be located just behind the new Coaches Corner and diagonally across from the FamilySearch booth. The booth is #217. Here is a map of the exhibit floor showing the booth location.

Here is a look at the back of the tower structure in the booth. The graphics were provided by the Queen of Wraps company.

Both my wife and I will be helping to teach during the Mini-Class schedule. Here is an outline of the classes to be taught. The instructors for the classes will vary according to our availability and the number of people needing help.

Time	Thursday, 2/28	Friday, 3/1	Saturday, 3/2
9:00a	Inside The Family History Guide	Inside The Family History Guide	Inside The Family History Guide
9:30a	Research with TFHG	Come Follow Me Companion Overview	Family History Activities
10:00a	Family History Activities	TFHG for Trainers & Consultants	Online Tracker and Reporting
10:30a	TFHG for Trainers & Consultants	Research with TFHG	Family History Activities
12:00p	Online Tracker and Reporting	Family History Activities	Research with TFHG
12:30p	Research with TFHG	Online Tracker and Reporting	Come Follow Me Companion
1:00p	Family History Activities	TFHG for Trainers & Consultants	Family History Activities
1:30p	Inside The Family History Guide	Inside The Family History Guide	Online Tracker and Reporting
2:00p	Come Follow Me Companion	Research with TFHG	(no class)
2:30p	(no class)	Family History Activities
3:00p	(no class)	Online Tracker and Reporting	(no class)
3:30p		Question/Answer Session
4:00p	TFHG for Trainers & Consultants	TFHG for Trainers & Consultants	(no class)
4:30p	Family History Activities	Research with TFHG
5:00p	Inside The Family History Guide	Question/Answer Session
5:30p	Online Tracker and Reporting	Inside The Family History Guide

Remember that we have three full-length presentations this year at RootsTech. For details, see our previous blog post RootsTech Presentations from The Family History Guide.