Comments for a genealogist's sketchbook

Comment on William, Jennings & Bryan Taylor, notorious triplets by a genealogist’s sketchbook › new version of Taylor book — now with triplet photos

Thu, 08 Dec 2011 14:32:01 +0000

[...] been hearing from a steady stream of cousins. Notable among them have been descendants of the media-sensation triplets William9, Jennings9, and Bryan9 Taylor, sons of Frank L.8 Taylor (Joseph W.7, Tarpley6, John [...]

Comment on Simon Taylor’s marriage bond, 1641 by a genealogist’s sketchbook › the triplets — new version of Taylor book

Thu, 08 Dec 2011 14:21:36 +0000

[...] it into the book — the success of our triangulation of a DNA profile for Simon2 Taylor, and the publication of my article on the possible parents of his father Richard — but I’ve been hearing from a steady stream of cousins. Notable among them have been [...]

Comment on Taylor DNA: 67 markers for Simon2 by a genealogist’s sketchbook › the triplets — new version of Taylor book

Thu, 08 Dec 2011 14:20:29 +0000

[...] it forever. Notable things in the last two years still haven’t made it into the book — the success of our triangulation of a DNA profile for Simon2 Taylor, and the publication of my article on the possible parents of his father Richard — but I’ve [...]

Comment on visiting the Prudence Island Allins by Nat Taylor

Nat Taylor — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 12:36:41 +0000

Turns out I got Lyme disease that day.
Drat.
But, still glad we found these Allins.

Comment on update on the Crosbie-Pitcairn pistols by Robert M.

Robert M. — Sat, 30 Jul 2011 01:04:56 +0000

Just a slightly different, but more accurate, Tale of the Spoils of War for licensed Concord & Lexington Tour Guides like myself to tell. (And yes, I’ve told the “traditonal version” more than several times.) I don’t know the provenance of where the pistols were found after the battles, but as captains usually walked, they should most likely have been on Crosbie’s person.

A great clue-hiding-in-plain-sight example, based on actualling “seeing” and then “reading” an artifact. Thanks again for the quick & thorough follow-through.

Comment on Natalie’s people by Robert M.

Robert M. — Sat, 30 Jul 2011 00:19:18 +0000

You haven’t pushed the Slocum/Coggeshall lines back yet? Or just not posted their colonial emmigrant names to your migrants list? A Google search got me to The Sturgis Project which takes its Slocum information directly from Dr. Slocum’s 1880s work, without noticing the Jane Fletcher Fiske corrections of the 1980s & 1990s. I haven’t gone to AmAnc to see what Anderson has up in the GM database for either of the couple’s antecedents.

Might as well fill in those holes in your spare time!

Comment on potential Indiana baronet — Stirling of Glorat by Robert M.

Robert M. — Sat, 30 Jul 2011 00:05:55 +0000

As I recently lived in Stratford CT for 20 months, (but have been familiar with it for far-far-longer), this entry piqued my interest. The Ind. Star link does not now work, of course.

I did a Google search after I found nothing on the subject through the NYT Archives. Google gave me supposed cache links to the Star article but these were simple summaries. A different word search led me to Leigh Raiment’s web-page (leighraiment.com) where, under his baronetage sub-page, I found that he’s recently (7/2011) done an update on Stirling of Glorat–though the information all dates from 1949!

It seems that John C. Stirling, Jr. is not the first Stirling of Indianoplis to consider claiming the title. Raiment excerpts most of The Washington Post article of 1 May 1949 in which JCS’s relation [grandfather?] expresses a disinterest in pursuing the title despite being informed by Debrett’s that he’s the likely claimant. Apparently, according to the 2009 article summary, Debrett’s now lists JCS as the likely claimant. Raiment notes that his sources show no change in the Glorat baronetage status as of 2011.

So, I wonder, what’s the hang-up on these Hoosier Stirlings claiming the title? No property or money? (But according to the 1949 story there was money about which Elizabeth Stirling, the 9th Baronet’s daughter, had some choice words to convey to her “American Cousin”.) Loss of American citizenship? (Apparently not an issue with SCOTTISH titles?) Lack of connecting documents at some point? (Perhaps, but the continuity of the family in Indianapolis seems well established.) Or just what?

Overall, it seems clear that this was never a really “lost” relationship within the Hoosier Stirlings. Just one not paid attention to by the son of the 1949 claimant, and that his son (auctioneer & undertaker) was only now getting around to reconsidering. Nothing on Google since 2009, so the rest of the story…?

Hope he’s found your Royal Descent posting. Nice work.

Comment on Merovingians among us? by Novalis

Novalis — Mon, 20 Jun 2011 21:03:00 +0000

Thank you for the succinct and appropriate insight into the spurious and scurrilous assertions of such rubbish. These pseudo-historical research fringe groups give the fascinating pursuit of genealogy a thoroughly negative image and should be relegated exclusively to the realm of Dungeons and Dragons.

Comment on William, Jennings & Bryan Taylor, notorious triplets by Ty

Ty — Sun, 19 Jun 2011 19:02:58 +0000

Where are the pictures of them posing with gloves? Im e-mailing you the picture now.

Comment on William, Jennings & Bryan Taylor, notorious triplets by Nat Taylor

Nat Taylor — Sun, 19 Jun 2011 00:57:31 +0000

Hi Ty! Back in May Diggy Doug sent me a good newspaper clipping showing the three of them posing with gloves, in an advertisement for an exhibition round in San Francisco, probably in the 1920s. If you’re willing to share your photo I would be delighted if you could send a digital copy of it — I have added Diggy Doug’s photos to my online Taylor book but haven’t uploaded the revised version yet with these photos — probably will in a month or so. You can contact me by e-mail at nltaylor@nltaylor.net. Thanks!

Comment on William, Jennings & Bryan Taylor, notorious triplets by Ty

Ty — Sat, 18 Jun 2011 18:47:58 +0000

Im the great grand-daughter of Bryan Taylor, and i have a picture of the three of them in a boxing gym.

Comment on a house describes itself by a genealogist’s sketchbook › autograph

a genealogist’s sketchbook › autograph — Wed, 18 May 2011 02:13:43 +0000

[...] talk. The night before, fleshing out a slide show, I went back up to the attic to look at the 1798 Federal direct property tax valuation page pasted on the partition wall under the eaves, and took a closeup of what I realize is Thomas [...]

Comment on William, Jennings & Bryan Taylor, notorious triplets by DiggyDoug

DiggyDoug — Thu, 05 May 2011 21:11:17 +0000

Hi Nat,

I found some old pictures that aren’t in the best condition of the Taylor Triplets, but I thought you might be interested nonetheless. If you send me your e-mail address I’ll send what I got to you. If you can pass on any genealogy directly related to William Taylor I’d really appreciate it.
Thank you,

–Diggy Doug
dougericlewis@yahoo.com

Comment on We are all descended from Charlemagne by Wish Gramps a Happy 1,269th Birthday! « Fatherhood Poetic's Roots to Now Family Tree

Sat, 09 Apr 2011 09:19:30 +0000

[...] mean 40th great grandpa (that’s “great-great-great-great-great”…and so on 40 times!) And by “everyone’s” I actually mean merely the ancestor of 90% of Europeans and 70% of [...]

Comment on William, Jennings & Bryan Taylor, notorious triplets by Nat Taylor

Nat Taylor — Wed, 02 Mar 2011 04:48:58 +0000

Hey Doug, glad to hear from you! William, Jennings & Bryan Taylor are in my book, tucked into family 6.45 (current numbering). I have previously corresponded with a great-grandson of Jennings Taylor, so that’s two out of three accounted for. I hope Bryan Taylor left a family to…

Check this page for the current version of the Taylor book:

http://www.nltaylor.net/taylor/