Monthly Archives: December 2010

The Essence of “Blogging”

While I never used to really understood the point of “blogging,”  because in it’s essence, it is something that nobody really cares about  (you just aren’t that important, or most of us least).  But it finally occurred to me, I’m just talking to myself (yes, something I tend to do quite a lot).  It is basically a journal, just one I need to make sure I don’t put anything in that I don’t want others to know about (surely a major problem!  Not).  If somebody eventually DOES care, so much the better.  But being worried about anybody actually reading this?  Pbstpbstpbstpbst! 

I’m off to play the lottery.  Odds are better.  Smile

Advertisements

Official Band of Genealogists

Pink Floyd.

“All in all you’re just another brick in the wall.”


Charles Boyles (1804?-?)

The thing that is the most fun  (I think) about Genealogy is that moment when you finally find the thing you were looking for, and you now know something about your family that nobody else does.  With that said, I think the part that irritates me the most is knowing that information is there, but not able to get to it.  Case in point, Mr. Charles Boyles.  I know other people have been looking for him, I’ve seen the “trail” of messages and posts they have left.  But I cannot for the life of me get in touch with any one of them.  So in the hopes this shows up in a Google search some day (because you are looking for this same guy maybe?), help me!

Charles Boyles was probably born in Kentucky around 1804-1806.  1850 census has him listing his age as “44,” but 10 years later he has apparently aged 12 years to 56 (I didn’t they had invented new math yet?).  I haven’t found him in the 1870 census yet, and the kids I have found have all moved out on their own in some fashion.  I have him marrying Harriet Shavers 0n 6 Feb 1844.  I also show a previous marriage in 1827 to a Rachel Poulson, but that is based solely on an Ancestry.com member tree – I don’t’ have a lot of faith in it, but I don’t want to just discount it out of hand.  They have 4 boys (Frank, Francis Marion, William, and my [assumed] grandfather Sterling, and two girls Ashley and Martha).  That’s pretty much where I run out, at least for Charles and Harriet.  I can’t find them in the 1870 or 1880 census (and 1880 is probably pushing it, that is getting up their in ages).  I have nothing in the way of married names for the girls, so that’s going to be a fishing expedition.  After this, I have Sterling have a son also named Sterling, and then my grandfather, father, and then me.  Its pretty tidy, and almost “defendable.”  But the Boyles line stops dead at Charles right now and I would like to get farther back, so if anybody is reading this, help!