Some people eat, sleep and chew gum, I do genealogy and write...

Monday, November 30, 2015

Buying In to the Revolution -- Part Four -- How must genealogy change

Here are the previous installments of  this series:

Genealogical research has been and always will be limited by the content of the preserved historical records. Inexorably, as we move back into the past with our research, there are fewer records to find and utilize. But for the last two hundred years or so, the number and variety of records is enormous. Today, we live in a virtual avalanche of records. Any one living in a developed country today, can usually trace their ancestry back four to six generations. Of course, there are always exceptions, but they are exceptions.

The Information Revolution is defined as the proliferation of the availability of information and the accompanying changes in its storage and dissemination owing to the use of computers. The key here is the word "availability." This and the fragmentation of the records into various repositories are the two most serious limitations on genealogical research. The large online genealogical records database programs have barely dented the vast accumulation of records.

The barriers to genealogical research go by different names, copyright, privacy, legal restrictions and ownership, but they all have the same effect of limiting our ability to do research. The reason a particular record is not available for research is not as important as the inability to discover our ancestry. For example, during the past hundred years or so, access to records of adoption procedures in the United States have become more and more restricted. There are several social and cultural reasons for these restrictions, but the net effect is that doing genealogical research is made either impossible or much more difficult.

So why am I taking the position that genealogy and genealogists have not yet bought in to the information revolution? The answer involves the issues I have already discussed, but also involves an overwhelmingly pervasive practice of compiling and maintaining separately compiled family files. What I have in my file on my computer and what you have in your file on your computer is no more available than if the information was still locked up in a repository on a paper record. Here are a few of the scenarios that are rampant in the genealogical community:

  • I am not going to share my information with anyone until I am good and ready.
  • It spent all my time and effort compiling this family's record and I want credit for what I have done.
  • I'm not ready to put any of my work online, I am waiting until it is completely done.
  • I don't know much or anything about computers and paper is good enough for me.
  • I am afraid someone will steal my identity and so I can't let those records go online.
  • Something may happen to my children or grandchildren if I put my genealogy on line.
  • I am not going to put my book online until I recoup the publishing cost from sales.
As usual, the list could go on and on. So here we sit. We know there are uncounted billions of records out there but due to the fact that they are scattered all over the world and yet to be digitized or otherwise made available we cannot even know that they exist. In addition, we are restricted from accessing many current records even when they are digitized because of copyright, ownership claims or other restrictions. We realize that there are millions of people around the world looking for and accumulating the same information we are seeking, but we have no adequate way to identify those people and even if we did, many would refuse to cooperate or collaborate. 

In order for genealogy to become part of the Information Revolution, we need to have a proliferation of the availability of the information. You might have the opinion that this is already happening and you would be right. There is certainly a lot more information available today than there ever has been previously. But so far, this availability of information has not resulted in much of a change in the genealogical community. My list above illustrates part of the problem We are also severely limited by the computer programs that have been developed so far to record and share information. Each of the online record repositories is still locked into a unique format and moving information from one program to another is slow and difficult. In this way, we are still missing the dissemination part of the definition of the Information Revolution. 

More to come. 

Sunday, November 29, 2015

Buying In to the Revolution -- Part Three -- Where are we now?

Here are the previous installments of  this series:

In my last post in this series, I mention the insular nature of genealogical software. Years ago, if I were researching paper books in a library and found information about my family, I would have to copy out the information, record a citation to the location, evaluate the information and then incorporate the findings into my records, usually on a family group record. If I were using some type of file system, I might include the notes I made in that family's file folder or notebook or whatever. Years later, if I stumbled across the same information again, in another book or record, I would have go through the same process again, copy, evaluate, then I might discover that I already knew that particular item if I managed to put my notes into the same folder.

I could have used a card file for the notes and then I would be dependent on my ability to characterize the information about my family in a way that was consistent with my earlier characterization or I would have two cards with the same information. Guess what? This happens all the time in libraries across the world. Libraries depend on their catalogers to characterize and organize vast quantities of information so it can later be found and they can prevent the same material to be duplicated in different parts of the library unintentionally.

Genealogists have used all sorts of schemes to prevent this type of duplication. What is even more disconcerting is the fact that individual researchers duplicate a great deal of the same research. Some people estimate that 80% or more of what genealogists do is mere duplication of what someone else has already done. I would place that figure much higher.

The effect of this insularity is that most of what we do as genealogists is wasted effort. The research has already been done, we just do not know where to find it. This issue also arises due to the possessive nature of the average genealogist. The idea that someone can own information creates more problems than just duplication, but the concept and belief in ownership is one of the causes of the insularity.

What is truly amazing is that despite all the duplication, there are still vast areas of genealogical research that remain unorganized and are not incorporated in any kind of organization.'s Family Tree and other similar efforts to consolidate genealogical research are mired down in inaccurate and incomplete information. From my own experience, correcting even one small branch of these massive trees is a monumental undertaking.

So where are we in our efforts to eliminate the insularity? On a scale of one to ten with ten being the goal, we have not made it to one yet. What is preventing our progress? At the core of the problem is our inability to easily and completely transfer genealogical data from one venue to another. Simply put, if I have spent years accumulating information about one of my ancestors, there is no adequate way for me to incorporate all of my information into one place that makes it available to every other person related to the same ancestor. has made a start by creating a unified family tree program, but after years of working on the Family Tree, we are still waiting to have a way to eliminate duplicate entries, even when those entries are obvious duplicates.

If you want to get some idea of the overall scope of the problem, you can look at my family tree in the program. uses advanced programming techniques to match the entries in my family tree with the family trees of all of the other users of the program. Right now, the program is telling me that I have over 100,000 matches. Just imagine the duplication that this figure implies! The details of the matches say that I have 8,815 matching family trees with 60,244 Smart Matches, not quite 100,000 but who is counting. I have no mechanism at all that will allow me to examine all those potential matches and this is only one other program. What about all the trees in all the other programs? Each of those matches is a potential duplication of effort.

Perhaps these examples give you an idea of the challenge faced by the genealogical community. At this point all the technological advances we have available to us have only given us a window to look out on the scope of the problems we face. We have only made the barest beginnings at solving those problems.

Genealogy deals with a specialized type of information, but it is information. We are supposed to be in the information age. So what are we doing with our massive amounts of information. Here is one more example.

My parents are cousins. They share a common ancestor. My mother's great-grandfather was also my father's great-great-grandfather. The same person is in both family lines. This is called pedigree collapse. None of the present genealogical data base programs convey this information in an adequate way. Nothing tells me that by going back in two different lines, I will ultimately be looking at the same people. I happen to know about this particular problem and others, because I recognized the names, but what happens when you get back a few more generations? Can you really keep track of all of the common relationships? The answer is that presently we have no programs or mechanisms that identify common ancestors in the same programs where that information is stored. Yes, I have a utility program that will tell me if I am related to someone and yes the programs will tell me how I am related to another person in the same program, but none of them show me where my lines merge. For example, there is a program called Relative Finder that works with the Family Tree. According to that program, my wife and I are related as 6th cousins 2 times removed. We supposedly share a common ancestor back in the late 1600s. However, absent the suggested link from Relative Finder, we might never had known of that connection. We are only, just now, getting to the point where we can recognize such connections.

Well, it is time to move on to the next installment. Thanks for reading this far. Stay tuned.

Saturday, November 28, 2015

Watch out for specials that aren't special

Like many people around the country, I have been looking at some of the "Black Friday" specials. First of all, there were very, very few things on sale that I really needed or wanted. Second, even those things I might have been interested in were being advertised at prices that I could find any other day of the year. In addition, I found that the really low prices were for either inferior products or products that were well out-of-date. The special discount was often off of an unrealistic "regular price" that was well above the actual sales price for the product even without the discount.

For example, the ads for special sales in our area are full of large screen monitors at or under $200. But if you examine these monitors or TVs closely, you will find that they have none of the new features incorporated in the slightly more expensive models. Of course, it is always possible that something you have been shopping for goes on sale at a reduced price, but the longer you have been looking for that product, the likely it is that the product is at the end of its life cycle.

This life cycle issue is a serious one. With computers, for example, Intel has just recently released its 6th generation chips. But only a very few of the currently sold computers have yet to incorporate the new chip set. This means that whatever the discount price of a "new" computer, it is not "new" in the sense that it has the updated chips. On any electronic purchase, it is important to be well aware of the technical specifications of the product being sold at a "discount."

One very helpful solution to these common problems is to search for the same product at different locations online.

Buying In to the Revolution -- Part Two -- Returning to the Great Divide

Here is the previous installment of  this series:

There are a huge combination of technological advances that had to accumulate before genealogy began to be affected in a revolutionary way. You could consider the development of microfilm as one of the first harbinger of the technological revolution, but it was only until a huge document acquisition and distribution structure was created by FamilySearch and its predecessors, that the benefits of this technological advance could have an impact on the entire genealogical community. But you can hardly equate the availability of rental microfilm with the technological changes that have occurred in the last 50 years.

We visited an historical museum out in the west desert of Utah recently. Back in 1858, under the false belief that the Mormons in Utah were rebelling against the laws of the United States, President James Buchanan sent one third of the troops in the entire U.S. Army to put down the rebellion. When the troops finally arrived in Utah, they discovered that there was no such rebellion, but they established a camp. Here is a quote from the Camp Floyd State Park Museum.
Believing Mormons were rebelling against the laws of the United States, President James Buchanan dispatched 3,500 troops, nearly one-third of the entire U.S. Army, to suppress the rumored rebellion in the Utah Territory. No rebellion or war ever took place in Utah. The army stayed to monitor the Mormons, explore the western frontier, and provide safety for immigrants moving west to California, Oregon, and Washington. 
Camp Floyd, named in honor of Secretary of War John Floyd, was built by the army with the help of local citizens. The Army pumped nearly $200,000 into the local economy to build Camp Floyd. Camp followers soon increased the population of Camp Floyd and Fairfield to 7,000, making it the third largest city in the Utah territory. At their height, Camp Floyd was the largest military installation in the United States.
Camp Floyd only existed for a very short time, the U.S. Army was recalled to the East with the start of the Civil War. I found the Museum interesting because of the artifacts from the mid-1800s. What was even more interesting to me was the fact that many, if not most, of the common everyday objects in the Museum were familiar to me from my childhood in Eastern Arizona. I knew all about cream separators, irons heated on a wood stove, butter churns and other household objects that were still in use when I was a child nearly a hundred years after the Utah War.

The technological changes I have seen in my own lifetime are extensive and dramatic. I certainly remember when both radios and TVs were considered new innovations. But when I began my first incursions into the world of genealogical research, genealogy was still well settled in the 1800s or earlier. I was still seeing handwritten family group records. It was still necessary for me to travel to Salt Lake City, Utah to see the millions of family group records that had been accumulated for over 100 years. If I wanted to view any of the rolls of microfilm, I had to be in Salt Lake City to do so.

From my present perspective, the swirling technological advances I was seeing with the advent of the electronic revolution or the information revolution or whatever, had barely touched the hallowed halls of genealogical research. Now, thirty or so years further on down the revolutionary trail, we are finally seeing the very first vestiges of impact of the those same technological changes on genealogy. Rather than tout how much technology has changed genealogical research, let me point out that most of what we do in genealogy is exactly the same as it was thirty, forty, fifty or even a hundred years ago.

The Great Divide I refer to in my title to this post is not between any sub-section of the genealogical community and another. It is not between the technological haves and have nots, it is between genealogy as a pursuit and the rest of the advancing technological world. It is only now, in the past four or five years that any of the technological advances have really had the potential of impacting genealogy in a basic way. We are still mainly in the butter churn and cream separator level of genealogy while the rest of the world has moved on.

We are not so much focused on genealogy as information processing as we are focused on genealogy as a topic. We are, for the most part, simply electronically reproducing the same forms, the same limited information and the same methodology that has been in place for the past 150 years or so. We are copying what has been done in the past rather than applying the new technology in new ways. Those who are pushing for change are being marginalized in the same way that all technological innovations have been received over the centuries. Rather than being embraced, change is viewed as a threat.

Even for those who characterize themselves as early adopters, genealogy has only now begun the transformation from a study to a manipulation of information with an ever changing and evolving electronic technology.

Let me give you some examples of what I am talking about. Rather than capitalize on the technological advances in the exchange of information, until very recently, it was not possible to completely move information from one genealogical database to another. The existing technology, GEDCOM and other methods, was and are extremely limited.

 If I write a document using my computer in my own office with images, charts, etc. I can transmit that entire document, with all the formatting etc. to almost any device in the world with no loss of information. However, if I make an entry in my local genealogical database program for an individual ancestor and include source citations, notes, copies of documents etc. There is no way to move all of that information intact to any one else unless they are using exactly the same program I am using on the same device. In almost all cases, if I want to share that information, I am limited to sending one field at a time. Even the most extensive file transfers are fraught with limitations on enclosed media. When I have an extensively documented file in any one genealogy program, I am essentially locked into that program just as I would have been had the same information been on paper. There is not PDF file equivalent for genealogy.

The electronic revolution is about moving information from one venue to another. In this, genealogy has yet to be born; it isn't even into the infancy stage.

Well, now I hope you know the direction of this series of posts. What I intend to do, is show where the positive areas of information transfer exist and where they are still only dreams. Stay tuned.

Friday, November 27, 2015

Buying In to the Revolution -- Part One -- Setting the Stage

In 1975, I passed the Arizona State Bar Exam and was sworn in as a new attorney. I was to be an active attorney, on and off, for the next 39 years. Two years later in 1977, my brother got a personal computer. It was a TRS-80. We spent some time working on simple programs. Because of my previous experience with the main frame computer at the University of Utah, I saw the potential of this inexpensive and very limited device.

Our one greatest challenge in operating a law office was the paper work involved. We usually had to make copies of everything we sent out and were using copious amounts of carbon paper. Most of our typewriters were IBM Selectrics. They had a dual ribbon system with a roll of "white out" that allowed for far easier correction than using an eraser or re-typing the entire document. Photocopying machines were huge and very expensive, so we charged for all the copies we made. As attorneys, we relied heavily on our staff to "produce the documents."

By 1982, I was aware of the strides being made in office automation. Some of the larger law firms had complex word processing machines. We heard such names as Vydec, Xerox and Star Information Systems. But the attorneys I worked with were still using the same method of correction using IBM Selectric Typewriters. I began to see that word processing could be done on a computer, but it took another few years before that could happen. When I purchased my first Macintosh computers, I was already in the business of selling Apple computers and other brands. I began using the Macintosh in my office to produce legal documents. The advantage (and disadvantages) were obvious.

Now, we fast forward to the 1990s. By this time, I was fully involved in computers. I did 100% of my word processing on computers. In fact, rather than dictate documents to my assistants, I had taken over the process of creating the documents directly. From there, they would proof read them and make all the copies and send them out. We had stopped charging for copies.

I could go on, but I need to point out that when I left the practice of law in 2014, there were and are still attorneys who did not know how to operate their computers and did not compose documents themselves on the computers.

How does this apply to genealogy? I use the example of word processing as one of the most common computer applications. Of course, by the 1990s, I was also involved in a graphic design business and we were using the most advanced equipment we could purchase to produce posters, banners, and all sorts of documents from hardcover books to advertising flyers. By the time I quit my law practice, the Arizona courts were requiring all pleadings to be filed electronically. I am now creating my documents using voice recognition and other technologies. I am now considering whether using an iPad Pro is going to work for me instead of a laptop.

I am known as an "early adopter," that is, a person who accepts and adopts technology as soon as it becomes available.

Now we come to the great divide. Here we have an ever accelerating and evolving technology that is touching every aspect of our lives and there are segments of our population who are not at all involved and in fact, actively resist that technology. There are a multitude of reasons for this division. Some can be attributed to economic disparity, others are age related. Whatever the reason for the division, it is real and forms a barrier between those who accept the technology and those who either fail to use it or oppose it.

Genealogy is one of the very late adopters of the new technology. This is partially caused by the opposition of the record repositories. Genealogists do not control the rate of technological change adopted by the various entities that control documents. We are basically information consumers. We need information to find our ancestors and other relatives. Much of that information is still locked up in paper copies. Despite the advances in technology allow digital access to billions of documents, the conversion of paper or its paper equivalent, microfilm, to digitized copies is slow and opposed by many entities. A prime example is the U.S. National Archives. The National Archives very likely accumulates paper much faster than it is digitizing it and only a vanishingly small number of its documents are available outside of paper copies.

But focusing on a very personal level, genealogy is finally moving into the technological revolution. However, I still work in a library with 300,000 plus rolls of microfilm that are not digitized. I also have to travel and view some documents on paper, such as books and other records. But more importantly, I still find that the majority of the people I work with day after day, do not recognize the changes that have occurred in the methodology of genealogy. Just as many attorneys were and still are resistant to the changes from paper to electronics such as my father who still wrote everything out by hand until he died, there are many genealogists who resist the technological changes.

I could go on and on with examples of the difficulty genealogists have with technology, but my point here is that the changes are inevitable. We will either embrace them or be run over by them, but genealogy has now begun to participate in the technological revolution. You can either get on the train or be left standing in the station, but you will not change the fact that the train is leaving with or without you.

Thursday, November 26, 2015

Pilgrims, the Mayflower and such

Just in case you want to find out a little more about the Pilgrims, the Mayflower and all that stuff that happened back in the 1600s, I decided to put together a list of some resources. Of course, the General Society of Mayflower Descendants has an entire library dedicated to the Pilgrims (i.e. the term commonly used to wrongly identify the passengers) but we all need to get started somewhere. I might also mention that this was one of few libraries I have visited where I was asked to leave, but that is another story. I might also mention that my initial search turned up over 1,700 books on the subject so I have limited this list considerably. My guess is that at least some of these books are not going to be very helpful since a lot of them are fictionalized accounts.

Addison, A. C. The Romantic Story of the Mayflower Pilgrims, and Its Place in the Life of to-Day,. Boston: L.C. Page, 1911.
Apel, Melanie Ann. The Pilgrims. San Diego: Kidhaven Press, 2003.
Armentrout, David, and Patricia Armentrout. The Mayflower Compact. Vero Beach, Fla.: Rourke Pub., 2004.
Barth, Edna, Ursula Arndt, Carol Basen, and Seabury Press. Turkeys, Pilgrims, and Indian Corn: The Story of the Thanksgiving Symbols. New York: Seabury Press, 1975.
Beale, David O. The Mayflower Pilgrims: Roots of Puritan, Presbyterian, Congregationalist, and Baptist Heritage. Greenville, S.C.; Belfast, Northern Ireland: Ambassador-Emerald International, 2000.
Brooks, Philip. The Mayflower Compact. Minneapolis, Minn.: Compass Point Books, 2005.
Bunker, Nick. Making Haste from Babylon: The Mayflower Pilgrims and Their World : A New History. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2010.
Caffrey, Kate. The Mayflower. New York: Stein and Day, 1974.
Carpenter, Edmund J. The Mayflower Pilgrims,. New York; Cincinnati: Abingdon Press, 1918.
Carter, E. J. The Mayflower Compact. Chicago: Heinemann Library, 2003.
Colloms, Brenda. The Mayflower Pilgrims. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1977.
Conner, Peter, Alan Mumby, Alan Murphy, Barry Coleman, David Collings, PA Communications (Firm), and Janson Media (Firm). The Mayflower Pilgrims. [United States]: Janson Media, 2003.
Crosher, G. R. The Mayflower Pilgrims. London: Chatto & Windus, 1966.
Davis, Kenneth C, and S. D Schindler. Don’t Know Much about the Pilgrims. New York: HarperCollins, 2002.
Dillon, Francis. The Pilgrims. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1975.
Donovan, Frank R, and Hedda Johnson. The Mayflower Compact,. New York: Grosset & Dunlap, 1968.
Fradin, Dennis B. The Mayflower Compact. New York: Benchmark, 2007.
General Society of Mayflower Descendants, and William Alexander McAuslan. Mayflower Index,. [Boston: General Society of Mayflower Descendants, 1932.
Gill, Crispin. Mayflower Remembered: A History of the Plymouth Pilgrims. New York: Taplinger Pub. Co., 1970.
Greenwood, Mark, and Frané Lessac. The Mayflower, 2014.
Hays, Wilma Pitchford, Roger Duvoisin, and Inc Coward-McCann. Christmas on the Mayflower. New York: Coward-McCann Inc., 1956.
Heaton, Vernon. The Mayflower. New York: Mayflower Books, 1980.
Hopkins, Anthony, Donald Pleasence, Richard Crenna, Jenny Agutter, Michael Beck, David Dukes, Trish Van Devere, Inc Syzygy Productions, and HBO Video (Firm). Mayflower the Pilgrims’ Adventure. New York: HBO Home Video, 1999.
Howells, Anne Molloy, and Richard Cuffari. The Years before the Mayflower: The Pilgrims in Holland. New York: Hastings House, 1972.
Jackson, Dave, Neta Jackson, and Julian Jackson. The Mayflower Secret. Minneapolis, Minn.: Bethany House Publishers, 1998.
Jones, Nathan Henry. The Ancestors of My Daughters: Comprising Three Mayflower Pilgrims, One Colonial Governor, over Forty Colonial, Fourteen Revolutionary, and Three War of 1812 Ancestors. Poultney, Vt.: N.H. Jones, 1914.
Kallio, Jamie. The Mayflower Compact, 2013.
Kellogg, Lucy Mary, Edna W Townsend, Robert S Wakefield, and General Society of Mayflower Descendants. Mayflower Families through Five Generations: Descendants of the Pilgrims Who Landed at Plymouth, Mass., December 1620. Plymouth, MA: General Society of Mayflower Descendants, 1975.
Kesteven, G. R. The Mayflower Pilgrims. London: Chatto & Windus, 1966.
Kimball, Sarah Louise. The Mayflower Pilgrims. [Place of publication not identified], 1923.
King, Jonathan. The Mayflower Miracle: The Pilgrims’ Own Story of the Founding of America. Newton Abbot: David & Charles, 1987.
Lasky, Kathryn, and John Manders. Two Bad Pilgrims. New York: Viking, 2009.
Leynse, James P. Preceding the Mayflower: The Pilgrims in England and in the Netherlands. New York: Fountainhead Publishers, 1972.
Limbaugh, Rush H. Rush Revere and the Brave Pilgrims: Time-Travel Adventures with Exceptional Americans, 2013.
Lindsay, David. Mayflower Bastard: A Stranger among the Pilgrims. New York: Thomas Dunne Books/St. Martin’s Press, 2002.
Making Haste from Babylon [the Mayflower Pilgrims and Their World: A New History]. Westminster, Md.: Books on Tape, 2010.
Marshall, Cyril Leek. The Mayflower Destiny. Harrisburg, Pa.: Stackpole Books, 1975.
Massachusetts Society of Mayflower Descendants. “The Mayflower Descendant: A Quarterly Magazine of Pilgrim Genealogy and History.” The Mayflower Descendant : A Quarterly Magazine of Pilgrim Genealogy and History., 1899.
Mathews, Basil. The Argonauts of Faith; the Adventures of the “Mayflower” Pilgrims,. New York: George H. Doran Company, 1920.
Mayflower a Story of Courage, Community, and War. Prince Frederick, Md.: Recorded Books, 2006.
Mayflower Compact. Hoboken, N.J.: BiblioBytes.
Mayflower Compact. Washington, DC: Great Neck Pub., 2009.
McGovern, Ann, and Anna DiVito. --If You Sailed on the Mayflower in 1620. New York: Scholastic Inc., 1991.
McGovern, Ann, and Elroy Freem. The Pilgrims’ First Thanksgiving. New York: Scholastic, 1993.
Noble, Frederick Alphonso. The Pilgrims,. Boston: The Pilgrim Press, 1907.
Osborne, Mary Pope, Natalie Pope Boyce, Sal Murdocca, and Mary Pope Osborne. Pilgrims: A Nonfiction Companion to Thanksgiving on Thursday. New York: Random House, 2005.
Owens, L. L. Pilgrims, 2014.
Philbrick, Nathaniel. Mayflower: A Story of Courage, Community, and War. New York: Viking, 2006.
Philbrick, Nathaniel, and Nathaniel Philbrick. The Mayflower and the Pilgrims’ New World. New York, NY: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 2008.
Plimoth Plantation, Inc, Peter Arenstam, John Kemp, Catherine O’Neill Grace, Sisse Brimberg, and Cotton Coulson. Mayflower 1620: A New Look at a Pilgrim Voyage. Washington, D.C.: National Geographic, 2003.
Poolos, Jamie. The Mayflower: A Primary Source History of the Pilgrims’ Journey to the New World. New York: Rosen Central Primary Sources, 2004.
Pratt, Walter Merriam. The Mayflower Society House, Being the Story of the Edward Winslow House, the Mayflower Society [and] the Pilgrims. Cambridge, Mass.: Priv. Print., University Press, 1950.
Rajczak, Kristen. The Mayflower Compact, 2014.
Raum, Elizabeth. The Mayflower Compact. Chicago, Ill.: Heinemann Library, 2013.
Reece, Colleen L. The Mayflower Adventure. Uhrichsville, Ohio: Barbour Pub., 1997.
Richards, Norman, and Darrell D Wiskur. The Story of the Mayflower Compact. Chicago: Childrens Press, 1967.
Roser, Susan E. Mayflower Increasings. Baltimore, MD: Genealogical Pub. Co., 1995.
Roy, Ron, and John Steven Gurney. Mayflower Treasure Hunt. New York: Random House, 2007.
San Souci, Robert D, N. C Wyeth, Malcolm Varon, Kathy Warinner, and Chronicle Books (Firm). N.C. Wyeth’s Pilgrims. San Francisco: Chronicle Books, 1991.
Schulz, Charles M, Evert Brown, Lee Mendelson, Bill Melendez, Charles M. Schulz Creative Associates, United Media Productions, and United Feature Syndicate. The Mayflower Voyagers. [Hollywood, Calif.]: Paramount, 1994.
Sizer, Kate Thompson. Mayflower Pilgrims. London: Charles H. Kelly, 1898.
Stein, R. Conrad. The Pilgrims. Chicago: Childrens Press, 1995.
Stowe, Harriet Beecher. The Mayflower, Or, Sketches of Scenes and Characters among the Descendants of the Pilgrims. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1843.
Van Leeuwen, Jean, and Thomas B Allen. Across the Wide Dark Sea: The Mayflower Journey. New York: Dial Books for Young Readers, 1995.
Webb, Robert N, and Charles J Andres. We Were There with the Mayflower Pilgrims. New York: Grosset & Dunlap, 1956.
Weygant, Charles H. Biographical Notes and Genealogical Tables Giving Line of Descent of Jonathan J. Rogers and Other Descendants of Ezra Earll and Mary Sabin from the Mayflower Pilgrims Francis Cooke and Richard Warren. Newburgh, N.Y.: Newburgh Journal Print, 1905.
Whitehurst, Susan. The Mayflower. New York: PowerKids Press, 2002.
———. The Pilgrims before the Mayflower. New York: PowerKids Press, 2002.
Wolfinger, Lisa, Rocky Collins, Edward Herrmann, Paul Drinan, Erin Raftery, Sam Redford, Chris K Layman, et al. Desperate Crossing the Untold Story of the Mayflower. [New York]: A & E Home Video : Distributed by New Video, 2007.
Yero, Judith Lloyd, and National Geographic Society (U.S.). The Mayflower Compact. Washington, D.C.: National Geographic Society, 2006.

Wednesday, November 25, 2015

StoryPress offline?

I just checked out a tip about the website and found that it is offline. I don't know if this is temporary or not. I will continue to check to see if I can ascertain its status.