Category Archives: The Family Tree


Is off-world planetary travel far off? Will families residing on Mars or the Moon need to inform and other makers of genealogy software that resident listings will have to change? Are Star Charts just around the Solar System corner? Imagine an ancestry tree from a holistic perspective!  Experience dizzying speed as your window to genealogy is telescopically previewed with a touch of a finger, viewing different branches in a tree spinning slowly before your eyes. Talk about “pop-outs”!? Looking far forward, an ancestral address might include the following: Redman, Iceland County, Phobos, Mars; Settlement One, Desert County, Mars; or perhaps, Base Two, Crater County, Moon. When we get to that point several generations will need to be added to your present family tree. I can see it all now in a note to an ancestral person-“William DeMeetros, father, husband, son, first settler to found a village called Canal City, Mars. Emigrated from Jackson, Mississippi, USA in 2099, who joined a fledgling group of religious protestors known as Starburst Sanctions, a little known Lutheran splinter faction that left Earth and settled on the red planet. As an Engineer, he developed the first expandable and collapsible village anywhere which can easily be moved from place to place. In another era…..
Up until civilization and society developed, everyone lived a nomadic lifestyle. After, historians and that ilk called it a migration and later still as the continents politically fractured we created a series of migration terms as travel and communications increasingly made our planet smaller. In another hundred to two hundred years we will see more frequent space travel to Mars or perhaps the Moon as private and government enterprises work together to develop the technologies to make these journeys possible. In Genesis, a group of worldly professional scientists and civilians will fly, then gather and form a very challenging society as expeditions and explorations are set forth and subsequently new temporary or, maybe, permanent towns are developed to study local conditions on any one of these planets.
As a result we as a society will have a rebirth where colonization will once again establish political muscle as one nation or another gets out into space first and claims a planet or moon for itself. I don’t see much change now in that scenario any more than such situations have developed in the past or when we begin to really see interplanetary movement. In the fifties and sixties Earth’s people saw strong national competition between nations. In the past ten years, privately funded growth has been developed on this planet, but the race speeds towards a destiny it cannot escape. Energy, technology and financing will stir the now brewing pot of competition driving our ideologies upward and outward in an emigration that will explode like we’ve never seen before.
Migration is a tool for self-survival, expanding proportionately as populations increase. This ball of humanity is intellectual, physical and driven on two planes by empirically pushed human nature and free will. So risk, resistance and romance play issue here in one huge tumultuous glob of tension pushing the extremes of our boundaries to more distance alternatives. Can you imagine multi-dimensional comings and goings!? As complicated as all this is, imagine the frustrations our earliest ancestors had in moving from place to place; the risks inherent in such a move, then, is no different than they are today or in the future. The thug, the schemer, the manipulator and planners, movers and shakers will be right alongside us as we march into whatever destiny we choose or may be chosen for us.
Will God intervene?
No matter where we go our burdens and issues will come with the baggage unless the leaders on the planet today commence the steps needed to accomplish historically futuristic movement away from Earth and before we travel the black depths of the Universe’s oceans. If the people within a church cannot resolve whatever issues pop up to fractionalize and divide the congregation into two new groups, then I fear we will not be able to do likewise elsewhere. Perhaps, negotiators will provide a smooth transition from here to there, but what happens there may not necessarily be known here. Will it be a race? Unconditionally. The same pressures that bore upon our earlier immigrant families will exist on an upward plume which trajectories will only hint at what’s to come. Nations are known to be combatant. Friction exists at the borders and God let’s us decide how to handle these situations.
The important aspect, however, is choice. When Europeans crossed the Atlantic, their minds had already been made up. The ingredients of stress placed health and life in jeopardy and for many, it could be resolved by going to a new land to start fresh and unencumbered. As with our forebears, so, too, will future settlers and entrepreneurs find the price high. Yet, the risks afford the opportunity to make incredible gains until the guiding hand of authority slips in to unravel the newly purchased freedoms.
So, yes, we will see interplanetary travel among the stars and not the Hollywood type, either. The new age will be interesting as Family History Library, Ancestry and other software developers will race to accommodate genealogists in their never-ending shifting of the landscape to upturn that devilishly clever little rock we forgot to look under. No doubt in my mind that some distant descendant will actually look under that moon rock and reflect on their own space odyssey, not as a monolithic thought of creation, rather a journey of a lifetime.

© Copyright 2016 The Jameson Perspective(TJP/SMJ)


Who’s Your Daddy



Figure 1: Jamesons of Maine Chart
Figure 2: Family Migration Map

      Last year I was asked to look into the family tree of William and Martha Jameson of the Jamesons of Maine and as a result I deduced some particulars that will probably bring up more questions then answers. But that’s life isn’t it!? We tend to muddle around in the dark until some fresh new insight is exhibited upon the topic we’re interested in. So many of the trees on ancestry are lacking in sources that I focused on research in this area to help clear up some thoughts.

Alexander vs John Alexander
Figure 1

     The question was: Is Alexander Jameson of Appleton, Maine(1) who married Nancy Packard, the son of Alexander and Mercy(Hawthorn) Jameson or of Alexander and Sarah(Blackington) Jameson? In order to decide the relevancy between the two branches I really found myself having to go back into several of the ancestors histories, especially the Blackingtons, Packards, Snows, Bonneys and the Hawthorns. So here are the issues and my determinations:

(1) 1850 ME Census, page 212A, Image 46,

• Alexander Jameson, who married Nancy Packard, was born about 1797 and residing in Appleton, Waldo(2), Maine with the following issue-Mercy A, Abner P., Charles & Sarah E. Jameson. The 1860 census is a repeat of the 1850, so the births are consistent as are the dates from the Find A Grave, Maine for both birth and death & locations. As far as I can determine, he was a son of Alexander & Sarah Jameson for the following reasons:

(2) The counties of Waldo, Knox and Lincoln considerably shifted and overlapped during the early colonial days.

• Right away the first thing you notice are the names: John Alexander Jameson and Alexander Jameson. They are distinct. The second thing you see is that their children were born in different locations. The third difference is the naming of the children. Their names reflect mostly the names of relatives on both sides of their respective families.
• Alexander & Sarah Jameson had a number of children you will notice on the Find A Grave records for Tolman Cemetery of Rockland, Maine that record their dates & ages which is also supplemented with the following “a son of Alexander and Sarah Jameson” or “a daughter of Alexander and Sarah Jameson”. I have put in a request of the photographer to see if this is recorded on the stone, in the official records or added on by some unknown person. Based on research I did, and not everyone may agree, I have concluded this couple had the children listed in the following order and all born in Camden, Maine:
Child Jameson, b.c. 1780(3);
Alexander Jameson, b. 1782, d. Aug. 15, 1792; Tolman Cem(4).
Mark Jameson, b. 1784, d. June 24, 1792; Tolman Cem.
Child Jameson, b. 1785,
Barbara Jameson, b. 1786, d. Aug. 1792; Tolman Cem.
Luke Jameson, b. 1788, d. Sept. 7, 1792; Tolman Cem.
Child Jameson, b. betw. 1790-99,
Chloe Jameson, b. 1791, d. Aug. 15, 1792; Tolman Cem.
Sarah Jameson, b.c. 1793, d. 1850;
Alexander Jameson, b.c. 1797, d. April 19, 1864.
Naming rights: Chloe and Barbara are names on the Blackington side of the family. Mark & Luke are Biblical names and as research has shown not listed in any of the immediate family. Alexander and Sarah after the parents.

(3) Based on the 1790 & 1800 Maine censuses including the number of people in the family group. Indicative for all children listed as “child” with only one overlapping with those of the deceased  named children.

(4) There was indeed illnesses that struck the community in 1791-92; influenza, typhoid & throat distemper struck the Jamesons particularly hard at this time.

• Alexander and Mercy(Hawthorn) Jameson’s only child was John Alexander Jameson(5), who married Elizabeth Bonney. Their children were all born in West Isles, New Brunswick, Canada and later in Washington Co., Maine:
Rebecca Jameson, b. 1793;
Jeremiah Jameson, b. 1795;
Mary Jameson, b. 1797;
Sarah Jameson, b. 1800;
John Jameson, b. 1802;
Ruth Snow Jameson, b. 1805;
Charles Jameson, b. 1808;
Moses Jameson, b. 1810;
Martha Jameson, b. 1814;
George A. Jameson, b. 1818.
• Naming rights: Rebecca in the Bartlett line; George, Sarah, Martha, Charles & John in the Jameson line. Ruth, Charles and Moses in the Bonney line.

(5) It is interesting to note that John Alexander Jameson had no children named Alexander.


The Bonney’s The Bonney’s came out of Plymouth, MA having come to the new colony in the 1600s. They were adventurers and explorers not settling down in any one place for very long. Joel William Bonney, born in Plymouth, MA left Cornwall, CT where his parents had settled and moved north to Scarborough, Maine where he married Lydia Kinney. Bonney was given the opportunity to moved north to Machias, Washington county, Maine up by the Canadian border in 1763(6) from Scarborough. He went with the original 16 Associates who made up the founding settlement and because he was a millwright, he was quite valuable and added as an Associate and given seven acres of land as well.

(6) Town of Machias, Maine, Memorial of the Centennial Anniversary of the Settlement, Machias, Town of, 1863, pages 20-23.


• The Snow Family led by an earlier member of the family from Middlesex County, MA to Nottingham, Rockingham County, NH in the early 1700s left there and a great great grandson, Benjamin Snow, removed to New Brunswick, Nova Scotia prior to 1784, when his first son, Henry was born, and then he finally settled in at Plymouth, Grafton County, NH, in 1787. With his death in 1817, the family moved northeast to Atkinson, Piscataquis county, Maine led by his son, Henry Holland Snow, who married Sarah, daughter of Alexander and Sarah(Blackington) Jameson. By 1836, the family was in Ohio.
• The Camden Jamesons spearheaded by Alexander & Sarah Jameson resided in Camden, Maine in 1810 and some time between 1810 and 1820 moved up to Charleston in Penobscot county, Maine, where presumably they died. The two remaining children of this couple, Sarah, who married Henry Holland Snow, moved on to Atkinson, Maine, and Alexander, who married Nancy Packard, remained in Knox County at Appleton. Their children, Mercy, Abner, Charles and Sarah Jameson all moved out to Minnesota with their mother, Nancy, around 1870, and after their father’s death.
• The Friendship Jamesons led by Samuel Jameson left Falmouth in 1743, to settle in Friendship, Knox County, Maine with his first wife, Sarah Smith. She gave him three children: Jane, Alexander and William Jameson. In an ironic twist of fate, William removed to Bridgewater, MA and married Eunice Packard, who was a living relative of Nancy Packard, several times removed. Jane, Samuel’s first child by Smith, was born in 1740-41 in Arundel, Maine. Mrs. Jameson may have had an additional child after Jane since she had none other until 1744, when Alexander was born and son, William, two years later, who were both born in Friendship.


Maine on the Rocks Map-rev
Figure 2

     Playing devil’s advocate, one could say that the Packard family plays a dominant role in so far as the tendency goes for family relatives to marry family relatives in a more immediate sense. Here, not is there only a distance in localities but in time as well. One can also say, as has been the case in the past, that it seems odd that Alexander and Nancy Jameson would name a child, Mercy, despite the fact no Mercy exists in this branch of the family, so it would be easy to conclude that her father, Alexander, must be the son of Alexander and Mercy(Hawthorn) Jameson. Yet John Alexander Jameson and his wife do not name any of their children after either grandparents or themselves with the exception of the Christian name, John. So, what does that tell us? Well, like many parents around the world and throughout all the ages, they named their children in whatever way felt familiar and by whatever method they used. My wife and I, as an example, decided to list children’s names we each liked. We found overlapping names from which we chose what fitted us emotionally and what we allowed based on our experienced opinions.
“I liked the name, Brian. It’s strong, goes well with Brindle and is the name of my favorite football player.”
“Well, I like Payton. It’s my grandfather’s first name and I associate all sorts of positive things with it.”
“August’s a nice name and it’s the month he was born in.”
“Maybe, but how about naming him George Washington Brindle?”
“What!? Are you crazy!” And on and on it goes. We have our reasons for doing what we do. For the most part those reasons are generally good and healthy just as the bloodlines we mix with.
     The above document is based on fact and circumstances, however, not all sources are included, nor are there a lot of sources to go around in digging up our early past. Please feel free to contact me to discuss this article or make your comments known 

(C) 2016 The Jameson Perspective(TJP/SMJ)


Bartlett 3
Sarah 1, 3
Elizabeth 2
Joel William 3
Mercy 2
Abner P. 2
Alexander 1-3
Barbara 2
Charles 2, 3
Chloe 2
George A. 3
Jane 3
Jeremiah 2
John 2
John Alexander 2
Luke 2
Mark 2
Martha 3
Mary 2
Mercy 3
Mercy A. 2
Moses 2
Rebecca 2
Ruth Snow 2
Samuel 3
Sarah 2
Sarah E. 2
William 1,3
Lydia 3
Packard 3
Eunice 3
Nancy 1, 3
Sarah 3
Benjamin 3
Henry Holland 3

Interested in Jameson and the Other 99 Spellings?

When I first involved myself in genealogy I never thought it would come to the fore in my life like it did. I walked down this path slowly having no idea where the crossroads were, the stop signs, when to yield or be cautious. My grandmother’s death provided the impetus. When I mentioned to my cousin, Ellen, what I was doing she jumped in with both feet. We found ourselves walking these grass-covered paths, highly diminished from the passage of years, and speculated on what our ancestors were like, who they were. In time we came to know. Eventually, my cousin succumbed to a juncture in her own road to life and I found myself on the trail alone again.

But that was a distant time and in the intervening years I’ve come to acknowledge that unlike so many other surnames, ours tended to be more separate and individual. When I read Rev. E.O. Jameson’s 1901 book, THE JAMESONS IN AMERICA, I had no idea of the spelling variations put forth from spelling errors of the vocal name or the special circumstances imbued itself upon our ancestor’s legacies like a brand on a steer. By then, it was too late for me to get off the vanishing trail.

I like history and people and puzzling out the different roads we all take. Not always easy, because like anything else we endeavor to do, a certain amount of effort is required to do it right the first time. Thus my brief on “sources” and the burden of proof.

But Rev. Jameson did us a disservice by eliminating the correct surname from the family branches he researched. Publishing a book is not easy in terms of cost and putting it all together, especially in his day and age when it was done by hand. But Jameson found a way to cut costs, by applying the same spelling to all the Jamesons. So, if you were a Jimmerson or a Jempson or any of the other 98 spelling variants, tough luck for you!

He also did us another disservice; he barely populated his research with references, but I can also appreciate the reasons why. As a traveling minister he had only so much time on his hands to check out the local libraries and town halls. He was spreading the Gospel as was his wont and his mission. Some of the data he had came from other researchers wishing to have their local families published as well. So, what’s a guy or gal to do!?

Because of the world wide web, inroads to genealogy in aspects of software and data are quickly resolved by not having to trek from one town hall to another including the trips to the local FHL(Family History Library). Software allows us to emphasize our surnames. Communications on the Internet allows us to chat away with others any where in the world, almost, and find others with the same family name.

In retrospect, I might have done the same. Try publishing a book with 600 pages and see what it’ll cost you. Back in 2004, I did a manuscript for my mom’s side of the family. Two hundred pages, 8.5″ by 11″, on good 24 pound non-fading paper, 90 pound index stock on the covers with additional visible plastic Mylar covers over the front cover and back to protect it. Ten copies made at the local Staples store for $240.00 without any typesetting, image reproductions and the like. Obviously, the higher the quantity the cheaper per book.

Fortunately, my HP printer does two-sided pages.

© Copyright 2016 The Jameson Perspective(TJP/SMJ)


When I come across a family chart on Ancestry, MyHeritage or any of the genealogy web hosting sites, as a rule I’ll glance at the tree with a certain degree of care and caution. I want to see the supports which holds up all these individuals, to see that the trunk is strong and well engineered and able to tie everyone together. I am more often disappointed when I find a new fact to realize that the reference is another ancestry tree.

IS THIS YOUR TREE!? A bad example of a tree that has three separate and distinct branches tied into it.
IS THIS YOUR TREE!? A bad example of a tree that has three separate and distinct branches tied into it.

Have you ever followed one of these worm hole threads!? My goodness, it can travel endlessly until your fingers tire out and your hopes of something meaningful are dashed against cosmic stones. I swear, I feel I’m being sucked in by the Black Hole of space only to find myself stuck deep beneath the roots of an aging tree. Like mirrors placed in front and behind you-the image goes on forever, lost in a forest of trees all the same and no clear path to your goal.

I like to place comments on some of the populated trees I see on these sites to help stir up the pot, so to speak. I never get a response 99.9% of the time, so it’s ordinary sense that these fellow researchers don’t really want to benefit from my vocal opposition nor to make changes. even with the proof right before them. Reflectively, it’s no different than a person unwilling to change their nutrition and diet in order to add a few more years to their life span. If you won’t change then you won’t survive the circumstance that you’re in.

Above, there is an image of a tree of descent. It seems normal enough and as you can see it has many hint leaves on the people shown. Even when you click on the hints, tie in the sources for each fact, there still appears to be no issue with the family chart. What you don’t see behind that tree is the faulty line of reasoning to back and link these individuals correctly to their rightful lineages. I know. I proved this tree years ago; even commented to the speculate researcher of the tree. Yet, here we are two years later and nothing’s changed.

To those who will see this tree will realize how particular it, as a whole, seems. Hugh, Thomas and Alexander Jameson, for instance, belong all to themselves, a family out of Northern Ireland who sailed to the colonies and established a home in Londonderry, then Dunbarton, NH. Martin, Alexander and Martha Jameson emigrated from Omagh, Tyrone, Ireland and landed in Boston them settled in Cape Elizabeth, Maine. James and Sarah Jameson sailed into Boston very early from Scotland and until there is DNA testing no doubt they won’t be tied into these other families any sooner than necessary.  Not knowing where my William in Windham, NH came from I wonder how this researcher was able to tie my family in.  Then we have William Jameson, real surname, Jennison, and Elizabeth Golding – the marriage is correct, but the children are not.

My impression of these family charts and the individuals who are represented is like picking apples off the apple tree. They may be all related in the scheme of things, but are they grannies, Ambrosia or Tuscan?

© Copyright 2016 The Jameson Perspective(TJP/SMJ)