The Dangerous, Dark Side of AI, and How to Protect Yourself

This is the fifth article in the AI series.

  1. The first article, Your Wonderful AI Assistant – Sometimes Wrong, Never Unsure, Always Convincing, explains why I’m writing this series and what to expect.
  2. The second article, All About AI – What It Is, What It Isn’t, and Why It Matters, explains what AI is, where it “came from,” the different kinds of AI, how it’s “trained,” plus examples of how it does and doesn’t work well.
  3. The third article, AI Assistants – The Good, the Bad, the Ugly and the Unseen, explains how AI tools work (and fail), the different types of AI tools, and when you may encounter them, even when you don’t realize it. This article closes with examples of successfully using AI, along with AI educational resources.
  4. The fourth article, AI and Genealogy – Brick Walls, Breakthroughs and Blunders, explains how AI is being used in genealogy by vendors and by individuals personally. It includes controversial topics like photo and image generation and discusses expert GPT tools and how I’m using them successfully.

I suggest that you read these articles in publication order, as they build on each other.

This article is perhaps the most important of the series, is deadly serious, and merits a disclaimer.

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. This article and others in this series are provided for general educational and informational purposes only. Information contained in these articles does not constitute legal, financial, or cybersecurity advice. It is not intended to identify or discuss every current or future risk, scam, threat, law, protection, or recommended response. One size does not fit all, and the best response for your circumstances may differ from what is best for someone else or from what is recommended here. Technology, criminal tactics, laws, and best practices change rapidly, and some of this information will inevitably become outdated after publication. Readers should independently verify current information and consult an appropriately qualified professional when necessary.

The Dark Side

By now, you know how AI works, that it can be used for good or evil, and that Generative AI creates things.

The dangerous part is that, because AI is so convincing in ways we’ve never seen before, it’s now easier than ever for you to become a victim in a heartbeat. This can happen easily, and you’ll have no idea until it’s too late. Media, meaning videos, images, and audio, can be generated about you without your knowledge, using your voice or likeness. And yes, it’s utterly terrifying.

You may be saying to yourself, “I’ll never become a victim,” but the scope of what it means to be a victim has changed over time.

Some generative AI is created to scam you, but other AI is created to harm or manipulate you or others close to you.

Perhaps someone wants to manipulate you into doing something dangerous, buying something under false pretenses, paying a ransom, believing that something happened when it did not, or voting in a specific way. I’m not going to touch politics here – but suffice it to say that I’ve adopted a “believe nothing” position unless I can confirm whatever it is through multiple reputable sources from the time the event supposedly occurred.

The Warning Signs Have Shifted

We all thought we knew the hallmarks of scams – but all of that has changed, and our misplaced confidence is actually dangerous. Now, those fake emails no longer contain spelling errors and weird, awkward language. Instead, they look authentic, sound completely professional and may take you to fake websites that look identical to the real one, prompting you to enter your username and password. You see where this is going, right?

The bad guys know you’re still looking for those old signs and signals, so they have dramatically upped their game, allowing them to easily gain your confidence and falsely “earn” your trust.

Today’s scams are, for the most part, built on garnering your trust, then employing sophisticated trickery – and they are extremely convincing. I absolutely hate that we now have to be hypervigilant, bordering on paranoid, all the time, but we do.

In order to provide contract services to FamilyTreeDNA, I’m required to undergo periodic security and threat landscape training. Like any other mandatory training, I dread it, but it’s absolutely critical to stay on top of this because what AI can do and how it can do it are changing very rapidly. I’m grateful for the professional training from KnowBe4, a leader in the security industry, and I’m sharing what I’ve learned with you.

I am NOT mincing words here. You WILL encounter these situations, and if you’re not constantly aware and on your game, eventually, you WILL fall for one of them. Yes, there are upcoming CAPS and red letters. Yes, I’m yelling!

I’ve distilled my most recent training along with other cautions into Roberta’s Ten Rules of AI and Social Media Safety. AI and your online presence are inextricably interwoven.

Roberta’s Ten Rules of AI and Social Media Safety

Rule 1: STOP! DO NOT CLICK!

Always engage your brain before your fingers.

I don’t mean it’s OK to click from time to time because you think the email is from someone you know or a business entity you do business with.

I mean do not click ever, with very few exceptions. One example is 2FA.

2FA (two-factor authentication) and some other systems will send you a link in your email immediately after you make the request. You will receive the email or text immediately, and you will be expecting it. That’s the key here. You asked for and are expecting this interaction now. Anything else, don’t click. Not tomorrow or the next day if you didn’t request something again. Regardless of how authentic it looks.

If you receive any other type of email indicating that there is something you need to do, go to the normal website DIRECTLY by typing it in and sign in to take care of that task.

The bad guys know that you’re periodically going to receive emails from, say, your insurance company, Social Security, or your bank, and they know exactly what they look like – so they create a copy of the authentic email and insert malicious links THAT LOOK COMPLETELY LEGITIMATE. Those fake links take you to exact imitations of the website you’re used to working with.

Here’s an example that I received today.

I received this e-mail, supposedly from Backblaze, the company that I use for my offsite system backups. What do you think would happen if I clicked on the “Backup Dashboard” link or the FAQ link?

You know exactly what this “Dashboard” link would look like – the real one. The malicious dashboard is going to prompt me to sign in, which gives the crooks my user ID and password. The keys to the kingdom. What they could access or do next depends on how the attack is constructed and any other safeguards in place, but the consequences could be devastating – including backing up my entire computer system to their fake site. Literally everything.

Even the thought makes me queasy. Consider for a minute what’s on your computer. Our digital lives live there. For example, if you have a little file called “Passwords,” get rid of it.

If you’re thinking to yourself that I could easily catch this by looking at the email header, here’s what it says.

Click to enlarge any image.

Given that I’ve never received this kind of email before, how would I know what sending email address to expect? I wouldn’t, and the bad guys are counting on that.

What did I do? First, stop and breathe – but that wasn’t my first instinct – even with all this training.

It’s frightening to think my system hadn’t been backed up in two months, but on reflection, that doesn’t make any sense because I normally receive reports. So, by slowing down, and literally stopping to think, I recognized the warning signs of a malicious phishing attempt and DID NOT CLICK ON ANYTHING.

I stopped my reflexes and let my brain engage.

Respond after considerationDO NOT REACT!

Instead, I signed in to Backblaze independently, from my normal sign-in link on their website, and checked. Sure enough, I confirmed that it was a phishing attempt – and a pretty good one too. My backups are just fine, and my system had been backed up regularly.

Had I fallen for this, nothing might have happened right away, because what happens after you click on a malicious link or visit a malicious site has changed. The harm may occur silently now, not immediately, and potentially indirectly. Think about that password list. (By the way, I don’t have a file like that, but many people do.)

If you click on something and “nothing bad happened,” don’t be so quick to be relieved. Now the bad guys can install monitoring software on your computer without your knowledge. Then, when you email back and forth with, say, your real estate agent about buying that lot down the street, the bad guys spot an opportunity and send you an email from the “title company” with instructions for where to wire the money.

Or, the bad guys text you. Wait, you’re thinking, “They don’t have my phone number.” Yes, they do, and they know your name.

Whether you know it or not, your email address and phone number are already circulating publicly and are easily accessible. There’s even more information available on the dark web, including passwords from data breaches and the names of family members.

Crooks already know far more about you than you realize, and that’s exactly why phishing emails and messages are so convincing.

Rule 1: Do not click, because that’s how criminals gain entry.

Rule 2: NEVER, EVER SAVE PASSWORDS IN YOUR BROWSER FOR ANYTHING FINANCIAL.

Once criminals gain entry, they exploit their good fortune – and your misfortune.

If you have already clicked on a malicious link as described under Rule 1 and entered a password, change that password immediately.

Never store financial or other important passwords in your browser. Use a legitimate password manager instead. Forbes and Cybernews published 2026 password manager lists, or you can use Google to find current information.

While we’re on the subject of passwords, don’t reuse them. Let’s say you stored a password for a subscription site like Ancestry in your browser, but you used the same password for your bank account. You know what’s coming, right?

If one site is compromised, the bad guys will try using that sign-in information on financial and other sites. This hacking technique is called credential stuffing and is what 23andMe claimed caused its 2023 breach.

AI is getting so good at being bad that it takes less and less effort to compromise your system, retrieve and exploit this type of information, especially if you don’t have the time, resources, or desire to keep up with new and evolving threats.

Rule 2: Don’t reuse passwords, remove any password files from your computer, and never save passwords for financial sites in your browser.

Rule 3: DON’T BELIEVE YOUR EARS.

Do not assume a familiar, well-known voice belongs to the person it appears to belong to, even if sounds like a close family member.

I can’t believe I have to write this, because it sounds insane.

Generative AI may only need as little as two seconds of your voice to create a convincing voice clone that sounds exactly like you. That is not a typo, although a few more seconds, like 10 or 15, produce even better results. AI can then clone your voice and create a conversation. It takes very little tech savvy, and instructions are all over the internet.

These are known as deepfakes – which can also include videos.

Let me give you an example of how this works. You’re asleep at 3 AM. Your adult daughter calls and says she’s being held hostage and you need to come right now. Or a similar scenario. Someone is in jail, has been in a wreck, or is facing some other emergency.

You’ve been awakened from a dead sleep, and you’re groggy, confused, and terrified. The adrenaline is surging through your body, but your brain isn’t fully engaged.

It’s EXACTLY your daughter’s voice. Exactly. You have no reason to doubt it. There’s no mistaking it – that’s her on the phone, and she’s in grave danger. Your heart is pounding, you’re immediately frantic and desperate, and of course, you would do anything in the world to save her. Your body has been jerked from zero to about Mach 5 in less than two seconds

The LAST THING you’re going to do is stop and question whether it’s really her. Of course it is. You’ve known her for the past 30 years – since the day she was born. “Don’t you think I’d know my own child’s voice?”

The answer is no, you wouldn’t. And you’re the target.

STOP and assess. That’s exactly what you should do in the moment, even though your instincts are to rush and do something. It feels like betrayal to let one minute pass without moving forward, but it’s not betrayal, and that’s exactly what you need to do.

Stop, take a deep breath, and THINK!

Agree on a protocol in advance with anyone who might ever call you in this type of situation. Select either a keyword, short phrase (blueberry pie) or a couple of questions that only you and they would know the answer to and that you can easily remember. Nothing you’ve ever put on social media or used as a password or recovery information.

Select something that only they would know, and that would be impossible to guess. Safe words or phrases. Words or questions that only you and they know the answer to, but not so complex that you can’t think of the answers under pressure. Write it down and put it in your nightstand, or save it in a disguised note on your phone, if need be.

What was your first car? Maybe arrange for a specific wrong answer – like the car they wanted but didn’t have.

How old were you when you fell into the hornet’s nest? Maybe they didn’t fall into a hornet’s nest at all, which is why this question and your pre-arranged answer are good choices.

Don’t use questions that could already be compromised or guessed.

Some people use intentionally “wrong” answers as their key to indicate that the call is legitimate.

This is also sound advice for anyone who receives a call from their workplace IT department instructing them to alter something on their system or network – especially if you are not expecting the call. And yes, even if you “recognize” the caller’s voice.

Verify that the call is legitimate through a secondary method that you initiate.

Depending on the type of “emergency,” another way to determine whether a claimed family emergency is real is to enable some form of family-location tracking service on family members’ devices. There are family locator apps in the major app stores. Be sure to stay mainstream with your selection. Life360 is well-known and works on both iPhones and Android devices, although this is not an endorsement.

Rule 3: Don’t believe your ears. Slow down and stop to assess.

Rule 4: DON’T ANSWER CALLS FROM NUMBERS YOU DON’T RECOGNIZE – EVER!

Why is answering calls from unknown numbers dangerous?

I know someone who used to love to “mess with” solicitors. Guess how the bad guys obtain those 2-15 seconds of your voice? Plus, they can cut and paste your words easily now, making it sound like you agreed to something that you did not.

They call from various numbers. Don’t answer. If you answer, they know they have a live one, and then those calls only get more numerous. They never stop. I block and report every single one as spam. Every time. Every single one.

Do you have voicemail? Remove your voice greeting and use the default one provided by your carrier.

Yes, I sound paranoid, but I’ve been on the receiving end of one of those phone calls, and they are TERRIFYING.

This danger flows both ways.

If you’re a public speaker, your voice is already out there, so you need to communicate clearly with your family NOW so that if they ever receive a middle-of-the-night call “from you,” you’ve already established a safety protocol. If you don’t have one, establish one today.

Additionally, mute your phone and set your notifications to ring-through only for selected phone numbers. This helps control who can reach you. In other words, in the middle of the night, the only numbers that will wake you up are the ones you’ve preselected. That does NOT mean those numbers can’t be spoofed, but it provides you with a layer of protection.

I only have half a dozen ring-through numbers in my phone, and everyone else can wait until morning.

I did this AFTER receiving that terrifying middle-of-the-night phone call, but you can do it now.

Rule 4: Protect yourself by not answering calls from phone numbers you don’t recognize, remove your voice from recordings, and establish your safety routine with your family.

Rule 5: DON’T BELIEVE YOUR EYES EITHER.

Your eyes may betray you.

Be extremely vigilant and highly selective about what you watch and believe. Ask yourself, every time, “Is this image or video real?”

Humans are wired to believe what they hear and see “with their own eyes,” but that metric doesn’t work reliably in today’s world.

Remain on guard and decide each and every time you watch something whether it’s authentic and actually represents what it claims to represent.

If you engage on social media, many of the Reels and TikToks you’ll see now are AI-generated. I can spot them a mile away, but they improve daily, and soon, today’s telltale signs will be gone like last year’s extra fingers, misspelled words, and two left arms.

For example, recently, someone published a pair of side-by-side photos contrasting the same location, supposedly taken several years apart. A then-and-now comparison to make a point. Except that the clouds in the background are distinctive and in exactly the same position in both photos. Yeah, no. One was clearly careless AI. It would have been easy to change the clouds too.

And that was just a bad AI photo, the videos are much more convincing. MUCH.

Google Lens, which allows you to submit photos, is your friend. If Google finds the same or a similar photo attributed to a different time or place, or posted in multiple groups with different claims, you’ve probably uncovered something less than honest.

Rule 5: View everything with suspicion and don’t accept anything you see as authentic without independent verification.

Rule 6: GUARD YOUR HEARTSTRINGS BECAUSE YOUR HEARTSTRINGS ARE CONNECTED TO YOUR PURSESTRINGS.       

Emotional manipulation is a cash cow for the bad guys.

If the story starts out with a kitten or puppy being thrown out on a road and saved, a child being adopted from foster care, a soldier returning home to their dog, or a similar high-drama emotional story – and you’re literally hooked in the first sentence or two – chances are it’s AI.

One clue is that these stories often pique your curiosity and are designed to be highly emotional.

How disappointing is that? We all love happy endings.

Some scams are even more heinous and take advantage of accidents, especially severe ones. The bad guys know that locals monitor local pages and will immediately wonder who is hurt and what happened – especially if their family members aren’t all at home.

AI bots that masquerade as people on social media and entire pages with very interesting names that are entirely AI-driven are very common on Facebook and other social media platforms now. Just this morning, beneath a photo of a local accident, four different bots used exactly the same language: “got this on video. Take a Peep,” with a link, of course. If you read, click, and engage in any way, including liking a post – you’re setting yourself up to be targeted one way or another. This kind of AI-generated content is replacing yesterday’s “copy and paste” scams, although we do still see those from time to time.

On videos or posts, you may be directed to follow a page “for more” or “click a link” (red flag) to find out the ending of the story. Don’t, no matter how much you want to know the ending.

When the purpose is not to steal your credentials or install malware, links may ask you to donate for Fido or Fluffy’s surgery, etc. The ask could be inferred or implied rather than direct and could say that Fido needs surgery by Friday and they still need another $200, or something similar.

This approach doesn’t ask you to contribute, but it makes you think you’d LIKE to contribute to help Fido. Think of this as essentially financial victim grooming using your own compassion and empathy against you.

Worse yet, the link could download malware to your computer, tablet, or phone.

If you have done anything like this, change any password you entered, run an up-to-date antivirus scan, and seek professional help if you suspect malware or tracking software was installed. Also enable 2FA so that a stolen password alone is not enough to access your account.

Yes, I know it’s a pain, but not nearly as big a pain as the alternative.

Aside from the obvious attempts at theft, why do people create these links? I mean, I just want to know what happened to Fluffy.

Here’s what Google’s AI-generated search summary has to say, along with links to the sources it provided.

The really sad part is that truly legitimate organizations suffer because of the level of distrust we must maintain today. If you’re feeling generous, before doing anything, including sharing the story for others to read, check alternate sources about the legitimacy of claims and fundraisers. You don’t want to share and play a part in victimizing your friends.

For example, a few years ago, the Happy Cat Sanctuary burned, killing the owner and many cats. Friends launched a legitimate online fundraising campaign to treat the 150-200 cats that survived the fire. This incident was covered by local news and wasn’t a one-off “sad story” social media plea that couldn’t be verified. I confirmed through local news outlets that the fire occurred when claimed and that the fundraising campaign was legitimate.

If you’ve relented and clicked to watch a reel of some sort, and an ad pops up before the end of the story, or you need to click or follow something, you’ve just taken the bait – so stop right there, spit it out, and realize what makes you vulnerable.

Let’s discuss YouTube, where ads have been part of the platform forever. However, there’s a LOT of AI-generated content on YouTube that is compelling but not authentic.

For example, there’s an AI singer, Michael Bennett, also Mikhail Bennett, with AI-written songs and an AI-generated voice. The combination is very compelling and moving, and it sounds lovely.

Whoever generated that content also took advantage of America’s Got Talent by showing “Michael” competing there with extremely emotional songs. None of that is true. It’s an incredible song that resonated with so many, including me, and the friend who shared it with me, but the video was “over the top,” which was the first red flag. I also noticed the tear never moved on his cheek, and the audience didn’t appear quite “normal.” He also looked “different” in other videos, as though he’s not the same person, but similar. Another AI signal. That’s 2026. By 2027, those telltale signals will probably be gone. Forbes wrote about the fake here.

Remember, if it outrages you, piques your curiosity, or tugs at your heartstrings, that content has probably been generated for exactly that purpose. Don’t click and become a victim.

Rule 6: Guard your heartstrings, and if something seems overly emotional, weird, too much, or just “off,” trust your gut, hold on to your wallet, and verify, verify, verify.

Rule 7 – FLASHING RED NEON SIGNS THAT SAY SLOW DOWN AND STOP. 

Manipulation signals should flash like red neon signs, telling us to put the brakes on.

  • Slow Down
  • Think
  • Stop

Any email, call, text, or other content that creates any of the following reactions should trigger those brakes:

  • A sense of urgency – “If you don’t reset your password by 5 PM, you’ll lose access to…” If you click, you are probably signing into a copycat site that looks exactly like the real one – except it’s stealing your credentials so the bad guys can sign into the real site to steal more than your credentials.
  • Anything frantic – There’s activity on your credit card. “We need you to enter your password here to dispute the charge.” Or, “click here to sign in to see the charge.” Or, “call this number.” This is different from a text I received in my bank’s normal message thread confirming that I had indeed written check number xxx for $xxx.
  • Pressure, direct or implied – “Your subscription has lapsed…click here to renew.” Go to the website and renew – never, ever click, no matter how legitimate the email looks. Full stop!
  • Anything unusual from someone you know. “I’m in a restaurant and in a pickle. I forgot my billfold. Can you please Venmo me $50 so I can pay my bill?” Call them using the phone number that you already have. Do NOT reply to the text or click to call that number.
  • Manipulative instructions – “We’ve received your order. The file is attached.” This is especially effective if you HAVEN’T ordered anything because it generates both curiosity and concern. Do not, under any circumstances, click on an attachment you’re not expecting. Slam on your mental brakes!

This KnowBe4 alert arrived today and demonstrates several flashing red neon signs at once.

This scam arrives as a Facebook Messenger message masquerading as Facebook, or Meta itself. The message even includes an accurate logo, but it is not legitimate. Red flags include the concern it generates, an unexpected PDF attachment, a threat of imminent account deletion, and the sender’s name is one letter off. In the message, “verified” is spelled “verrifed,” with two Rs, but if you’re focused on the words “permanently deleted,” you’ll never notice that. You may be panicked and not thinking clearly. That’s exactly what they are counting on.

Although there are often no misspelled words in scam emails today, in this case, the misspelled username is your first clue. Two of my friends received this through Messenger today, reported it, and an hour or so later, I received the notification from KnowBe4.

The bad guys trick you by making you feel that the action is:

  • Completely safe – because it came from someplace or someone you routinely communicate or do business with (but it really didn’t and the bad guys are trying to trick you).
  • Urgent – someone is trying to compromise your account, and you need to <fill in the blank> right away (except complying compromises your security).
  • Required to avoid negative consequences – if you don’t finish this training by Monday morning, you’ll no longer have access to your accounts (except it’s a fraud, trying to get you to sign in through a very convincing authentic-looking but malicious portal).

In any of these types of situations, don’t comply or reply, and never return calls to any number they give you. Find the number on the back of your credit card, for example, or sign into the site you’re already familiar with to take care of business.

Always ask yourself:

  • Is this normal?
  • Does it feel “off”?
  • Why?
  • What am I giving away? It’s not always money. Your information is gold, too.

Rule 7: Slow down, stop, and evaluate. A sense of urgency is a flashing red neon sign designed to stop you from thinking.

Rule 8 – STOP RANDOMLY ENGAGING AND LOCK DOWN SOCIAL MEDIA.

Algorithms control what you see.

Worse yet, once you click or even expand to read, the social media algorithms send you more of the same, which is the exact intention of the creators. The phenomenon is often referred to as a social media bubble or echo chamber because it reinforces what you believe based on what you’re seeing and continue to see.

It used to be that ugly political content was restricted to election cycles, but not anymore. It’s regular daily fodder and can easily be manipulated. The key, however, is that whatever you watch or read, you’ll see more of it in your social media feed.

Another effect of reading one of those scammy but very interesting and engaging stories is that Facebook now uses AI (how ironic, right) to show you more of the same. It’s a never-ending cycle.

One time I accidentally clicked to watch a reel, and it took days of clicking on the little “X” in the upper right-hand corner of the videos (or the posts) to signal to Facebook that I really didn’t want to see anything else like that. Hint – this works with ads too.

It’s fine to read that fun public story – but you don’t have to engage by clicking and liking. Clicking DOESN’T DO ANYTHING FOR YOU, but it does provide information about you to other people, including AI bots and the social media platform itself.

If you ever “like” or comment on a public post on social media, your reaction is visible to everyone, including AI bots, and you’ve given them information about yourself that they can use to target you more effectively. Just stop.

Don’t expose any more of your personal information than is already out there – and you might be surprised just how much there actually is.

Do you use your real name? Is your birth year, or much worse yet, your complete birth date displayed in your public profile? If so, remove it.

Do yourself a favor.

  • Google your name with your state.
  • Google your phone number.
  • Google your email address.

Your information doesn’t even need to be on the dark web for someone to find very revealing data about you.

You can discover even more about yourself, or anyone else, by checking out BeenVerified.

Record aggregators such as BeenVerified also provide the names of people who live or have lived with you and with whom you’re associated. In other words, your family members.

It’s so easy to unintentionally feed the data-gathering machine.

Ancestry includes voter-registration lists, where available, complete with full names, addresses, birth dates, and other personal information through 2023.

Protect yourself, where possible, and never publicly display your birth date or year on any platform. Do note that this information can be part of recovering your account, should it become compromised, so if you include that information, privatize it.

Are you on LinkedIn? That’s another avenue for information gathering, including your employer.

There’s not much you can do about information that’s already out there, but you can stop providing more through social media.

I wrote the article titled STOP, THINK, & RUN – Stop Innocently Giving Your Information to Cybercrooks on Social Media, which explains how to lock your accounts down, and why you should.

Rule 8: Lock your social media accounts down and zip your lip.

Rule 9: LEARN THE NEW THREAT LANDSCAPE

The threat landscape has not improved for us, that’s for sure. The crooks have gotten smarter and much more effective with their AI assistants.

Yesterday’s Nigerian princes, those handsome widower generals in uniform, and buxom young women randomly targeting people who comment on public posts on social media are somehow almost all gone, although not entirely. They’ve been replaced by something much more dangerous. AI makes everything easier – including crime.

Now, the criminal’s objective is to get you to take an action that isn’t in your best interest.

AI makes both impersonation and personalization much easier and more convincing, and attacks may now involve multiple methods in tandem.

The most convincing attacks use two channels. For example, they both email and call you, which makes the communication seem more legitimate, which in turn makes you feel more secure. They may claim that your credit card has been compromised or begin with, “This is your bank…”

Worse yet, you really can’t tell and may have no way of knowing whether the communication is legitimate, so you go ahead and click because you’re tired and “it’s probably fine,” except it’s not.

The bad actors may have already compromised your system or phone if you clicked on something you shouldn’t have, and they are just waiting to exploit it by capturing your login information – including your password.

They may have been monitoring your communications for some time now, not just waiting for any opportunity, but an exceptional, highly profitable opportunity.

Never use a “call back” button, telephone number, or link supplied in the message. Call the bank or whomever directly at a number you can confirm, or use another form of communication – like walking in the door.

I was at the bank in person recently, and they are now warning people about scams before they transfer money on your behalf. You are required to click to acknowledge that you read the scam warning signs they provided. The bank was also reminding people that debit cards are a “direct siphon into your bank account” and someone can easily drain it if your card or PIN is compromised.

If someone fraudulently charges something to your credit card, you can dispute it, but if they empty your bank or retirement account, the money may be difficult or more likely impossible to recover. Report any suspicious activity to your financial institution IMMEDIATELY, regardless of the hour, because the outcome may depend partly on how quickly you report it.

Rule 9: Learn the new threat landscape and keep current.

Rule 10: NEVER UPLOAD ANYTHING WITH PRIVATE INFORMATION, INCLUDING NAMES – YOURS OR OTHER PEOPLE’S.

This includes uploading your monthly budget worksheet to AI, your tax information, your DNA match list with other people’s names from a DNA testing site, etc.

Genetic genealogists, I’m looking at you here. If the data isn’t already in the public domain, DO NOT UPLOAD IT to AI agents.

Your browser will not protect you, and neither will a VPN. I’ve had people tell me that both of these will protect what you upload when using AI. They don’t. Neither prevents an AI service from receiving information that you intentionally upload to it.

Don’t fall for companies that encourage you to “upload your DNA file” for “better” information or to learn how you match ancient specimens. Check credible sources that are well-known and respected in this industry, such as my blog, Diahan Southard at Your DNA Guide, or the Genetic Genealogy Tips and Techniques Group on Facebook. If you discover that none of us, meaning me, Diahan, or the administrators of that Facebook group are recommending a company, pause to ask yourself why.

When considering an upload, ask yourself:

  • Who are those people, anyway?
  • Where are they located?
  • What are their credentials?
  • What are they doing with your autosomal DNA file?

If you’re thinking about uploading your DNA or matches to an AI tool or to a company you know nothing about merely because it “sounds good,” just don’t.

If you’re going to err, err on the side of extreme caution because once your DNA is “out there” and exposed, you can’t just take it back like it never happened.

Rule 10: Never upload your own private information to AI or any other service that you have not thoroughly vetted, and don’t upload your match information or anyone else’s private information without their specific permission.

In Summary

I chose to address AI’s dangers after first exploring its benefits in the earlier articles because I don’t want you to think I don’t like AI. I absolutely do. I use AI in some form every day.

However, AI can also be extremely dangerous, especially for the unwary. I cannot emphasize this enough.

AI will become more advanced and “better,” which means we, as consumers, have to be even more vigilant. While the idea behind “Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?” was once a Marx Brothers punch line, and “Lyin’ Eyes” later became an Eagles song, today that warning pertains to AI and social media, both separately and together.

I want you to stay safe. AI is one of the tools that we, as genealogists, can use quite successfully under some circumstances. Just don’t get out over your skis.

To recap:

  • Don’t click
  • Don’t believe your ears, or eyes either
  • Never save important passwords in your browser
  • Guard your heartstrings
  • Remain vigilant
  • Slow down, stop and assess
  • Verify independently
  • Protect yourself
  • Put a family protocol in place
  • Stop randomly engaging and lock down social media
  • Guard what cannot be recovered
  • Don’t upload private information without thoroughly vetting the service
  • Never upload other people’s private information without their permission
  • Educate yourself and stay current

While the specifics of each platform change quickly, the underlying fundamentals of safety and increased vigilance will remain constant.

As mentioned in the third AI article, follow Mark Thompson and Steve Little, the Family History AI guys, for updates.

Stay safe and enjoy the ever-evolving world of AI.

But remember…

Always, always be suspicious. You may only get to be wrong once.

_____________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

Subscribe!

If you haven’t already subscribed, it’s free. You’ll receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button at the top of the main blog page, here.

Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small commission when you click a vendor link in my articles and purchase that item. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the affiliate links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

A Little Something for Their Final Journey

It was five years ago this week that I visited my parents’ graves for what was probably the final time.

I gathered silk flowers from my home, which was being emptied, arranged them into glorious bouquets, and took treats – for both them and me.

You don’t see it in the photo above, where I was just setting up for our picnic on the picnic quilt that always lives in my car, but it took me an entire box of Kleenex to get through that picnic and what I had to share with them that day.

This was it. I wasn’t coming back. They were already buried six hours away from where I lived then – and now that distance is measured in days, not hours. There’s no one left there to visit now, and it’s not on the way to anyplace.

Dad loved popcorn and cheese cubes with turkey and salami, and Mom absolutely lived for Hershey bars.

Of course, I knew “they” couldn’t enjoy them in the here and now, and I was probably just feeding the wildlife. It was more about the ritual, the expression of love and caring, tinged with regret that I can no longer steal cubes of Dad’s cheese (he just smiled at me) or give Mom oversized Hershey bars.

Mom smiled at me too, but for an entirely different reason.

Recalling sitting on that quilt, discussing things with Mom and Dad while baking in the summer heat, much as I remember doing on the farm, makes me smile now too.

Facebook memories brought that day back this week. As I lay in bed in the silent night, reliving that hot July day picnicking with Mom and Dad, I realized that their graves aren’t the only places I had “left them something.”

Until that night, I didn’t realize that I had done it twice, once for each of my parents, but never for anyone else.

Dad

All of my regular readers know that Dad was actually my stepfather, and that he had lost his only daughter, Linda, as a baby.

No one can ever take another person’s place, but Dad told me twice that he “got his daughter back” when he married Mom. My allergies immediately acted up.

My biological father died when I was a child, so I felt like I had hit the jackpot and lucked into the best father ever when Mom married Dean.

I worshipped the ground that man walked on.

Dad died in 1994, following a horrific, progressive disease. His death was a devastating loss. On top of another loss just the year before.

Now, Dad was well-known for his orneriness, practical jokes, and sense of humor. Perhaps what made it even funnier was that he was such a quiet man – the last person you’d expect as the culprit.

So, when we all gathered at the church for his viewing and found no casket, we patiently waited for the funeral home to show up with Dad.

But when that visitation hour passed, and there was STILL no Dad, we began to worry. Mom was frantically calling the funeral home, which was about 20 miles away, but no one answered. She was a nervous wreck.

My brother was laughing. Most people were quietly and awkwardly visiting, hoping nothing was wrong.

Our imaginations were running wild. Had there been an accident? Was Dad lying someplace beside the road in his Sunday finest? Let’s face it, Dad was already deceased – he couldn’t die twice if there was an accident, but what if, what if Dad was at the wrong church or some such thing? Did they bury him by accident?

Finally, the hearse pulled up outside the church, and we heard doors slamming. Mom rushed out and asked, in her “not my church deacon” voice, where the devil they had been. Well, devil might not have been the word she used, but whatever. I was all too personally familiar with that voice, and I knew they were in BIG TROUBLE!

As it turned out, they had gotten the times mixed up, making Dad late for his own funeral.

Perhaps it was a combination of nerves and grief, plus Mom clucking around like an angry wet hen, but that whole scene just struck me as incredibly funny, and I started to laugh.

Mom gave me the side-eye like only mothers can give, so I tried to stifle myself – which made me laugh even harder, snorting through my nose.

About this time, the men from the funeral home were trying to carry the casket in the back door and up the narrow steps into the church. At the top, there was a right-angle turn, and let’s just say the casket and the men didn’t quite make it.

Well, they kind of made it, but one of the men got pinned between the casket and the corner of the wall in a very awkward place. He was also trying very hard not to let on, but you’d have had to be both deaf and blind to miss what was happening.

My mother was following this entourage up the stairs, and even she stopped talking as the scene unfolded.

By this time, I was laughing hysterically beyond any semblance of composure, tears streaming down my face, and so were most of the guests. Laughter like that is highly contagious. Most of the men were trying to help, but we had to back Dad down the stairs to free the trapped man.

I’m laughing as I write this. I can see it all over again and just can’t help myself.

Right about that time, the most inappropriate thought popped into my head. I couldn’t help it. I wondered if Dad had paid them to ensure that he was late for his own funeral.

The ultimate prank. He certainly WOULD have done that – in a heartbeat. Only question that remained was DID HE? And of course, we’ll never know.

All things considered, with everyone still laughing and crying, we were hardly in the proper frame of mind to begin a funeral, so the minister suggested that we have the viewing and recompose ourselves before the funeral. You really can’t start a funeral with everyone laugh-crying, and we were already so late by that time that it didn’t matter.

Mom had dressed Dad in a suit. I had only ever seen him in a suit a handful of times.

His wedding to Mom, my wedding, Gary’s wedding, church pictures, and maybe one other time.

Dad hated suits. He was a dyed-in-the-overalls farmer, and those overalls would have suited him much better than a suit. However, I’d wager that Dad knew Mom would dress him in a “funeral suit” for his funeral, so maybe this was his way of commenting on that.

Regardless, by the time it was my turn to step up to the casket for the final time, as grief-stricken as I was, I certainly appreciated the levity that he had introduced that day. Yes, I’m crediting him!

I dug around in Mom’s purse and found a small pair of scissors. As an Avon lady, she had literally everything in there – her purse was bottomless. I cut a lock of my hair, found a ribbon or piece of string buried in the depths of Mom’s purse, tied it around the lock, then lovingly tucked it into Dad’s starched shirt pocket for eternity.

I patted his hand one last time and told him I loved him as I smiled through my tears. I bent close and whispered that he had done a fine job as my tears dropped onto his white shirt. I swear – I swear – I saw a smile flicker across that man’s lips just for an instant.

I hadn’t planned it, but I sent Dad on his last journey with a little bit of me in his pocket. Forever.

Mom

Mom was an Avon lady for the last quarter century of her life. She loved to dress up and look her finest, so Avon was a perfect fit for her. Plus, it gave her an excuse to check in on the elderly and those with challenges in the community. She was always taking food or something to someone. Every. Single. Day.

Mom retired in the spring of 2005 at 82.

One of her longtime customers took this photo of Mom on her last day making Avon deliveries.

Mom wanted to retire with her best sales year ever, and I purchased a lifetime supply of soap, bubble bath, and Skin-So-Soft. Maybe two lifetimes’ worth. Trust me when I tell you that I’m still using Avon products.

Every Christmas, we all received our favorite Avon items in our Christmas stockings from Mom. Plus, Avon Care Deeply chapstick. Didn’t matter – man, woman, child, elderly neighbor – someone in line at the grocery whose lips looked chapped. You got Avon chapstick.

As far as I’m concerned, one can never have too much chapstick. I have chapstick, aka lip gloss, everyplace, including one or two of Mom’s that I still cherish and keep in my nightstand and desk drawer.

When Mom retired, she was one of her own best customers and stocked up on things.

Just this past week, my husband found a little wooden box that was in a drawer in his nightstand in our old house. He opened it, and voila, there they were.

Three chapsticks from Mom.

Vintage Avon Care Deeply from 2002, 2004, and 2005. Mom really liked Jim. He received the first one even before we were married. He has now kindly given all three to me. Now that’s true love.

How can chapstick make you cry?

Mom passed away unexpectedly in the spring of 2006. She had a stroke and managed to crawl into her closet and put her “pretty shoes” mostly on. No one is quite sure how she managed that, but she did. That’s how we found her. She loved shoes.

Mom’s funeral was much more subdued than Dad’s. My brother and I met with a different undertaker, so she would actually arrive at the church on time.

I selected Mom’s clothes along with her favorite “pretty shoes.” The funeral director told us that he could not get high heels on her feet. We told him that whether he could get them fully on or not, he was to get them as far onto her feet as possible – and do something to make sure they didn’t fall off. I didn’t care if he tied them on. She needed her pretty shoes. She would haunt me forever otherwise.

Saying goodbye to a parent just before the casket is closed is one of the most difficult things you will ever do.

Mom always had everything in her purse, including spare Kleenex, which she often tucked up her sleeve at her wrist, under her watch band so they would always be quickly available.

She was always handing out Kleenex at church to anyone who needed it, and probably several people who didn’t actually need one, but she thought they might. She accused me, accurately, of never having a Kleenex when I needed one. How was I supposed to predict that?

After Mom passed, we found clean Kleenex everyplace. In her pockets and purses, of course, used as bookmarks, and even tucked into the door handles inside her car.

On the day of her funeral, I had a full box of Kleenex with me. I was clearly going to need them and couldn’t depend on Mom for that anymore. She would have been proud.

As always, I had multiple Avon chapsticks, not the imposter kind, in my purse and pockets. Somehow, Mom would have known if I cheated with something other than Avon.

Standing there, saying my final goodbyes, I realized that I could NOT send Mom off into the afterlife without Kleenex and Avon chapstick, both of which she used religiously. So, I tucked a few Kleenex into one of her crossed hands and a chapstick into the other, closed my eyes for a minute, said a little prayer, then nodded for the casket to be closed as I wiped my eyes. They had been patiently waiting for me. I was struggling. Part of my heart was in there with her.

The funeral itself was a blur. When the minister finished, Mom was loaded into the back of the black hearse for her final ride along those oh-so-familiar roads to the cemetery. The little white church was at a farm crossroads, and the cemetery was probably a dozen miles away, down country roads too narrow for center lines. No one needed them anyway. The only people out there were members of local farm families who all knew each other, slowed down, and waved.

Suddenly, the hearse slammed on the brakes. We were in the car immediately behind, and I had a very up-close view of its brake lights, just before we came so close that they disappeared from view. I waited for the crunch, but fortunately, we managed to stop with an inch or so to spare, but we were quite shaken. Both figuratively and literally.

Someone had run the stop sign in front of the hearse, which missed the car by a hair’s breadth. For me, that was déjà vu, because years before, the only life-threatening accident I had ever had occurred a few miles on down that same road, under the same circumstances – minus the funeral procession.

I couldn’t help but think about the supreme irony of potentially being killed in Mom’s funeral procession, on that same road, some two decades later. I was more than a little shaky already, given the circumstances, and that didn’t help one bit.

But then, an even worse thought struck me.

What if Mom’s chapstick had been knocked out of her hand and was rolling around beyond her reach for eternity? How could I condemn her to that fate? If you know, you know.

Did she drop her Kleenex?

But perhaps more importantly, did her shoes fall off?

ECGGC 2026: East Coast Genetic Genealogy Conference – Both In-Person and Virtual

I hope you’ll join me and a whole trove of other wonderful speakers at the East Coast Genetic Genealogy Conference August 21-23 in Boston. The in-person conference is being held at the Embassy Suites at the Boston Logan Airport, so you don’t need to worry about transportation into Boston after arrival.

The great news is that you don’t have to be present to participate, and you don’t have to worry about missing sessions you wanted to attend.

All sessions, except for the Sunday morning ISOGG meeting, are either livestreamed, then available to watch later, or are available on-demand on their scheduled day.

I love this conference because it focuses strictly on genetic genealogy and how to apply it successfully to genealogy. Not to mention, it’s like a family reunion! I can hardly wait to see everyone!

Keynotes

  • Steve Little and Mark Thompson – Friday evening: The AI Frontier in Genetic Genealogy: Where We Are and Where We’re Going
  • Jennifer Zinck – Saturday morning: It Takes a Village
  • Kevin Borland – Sunday Morning: Mining A Chromosome 22 Pile-Up: Clustering Through a Documented Colonial Lineage

Speakers

In alphabetical order, speakers include:

  • Kelli BergheimerUnderstanding Your DNA Health Reports, and, Finding an Ohio Pioneer Family Using Mitochondrial DNA
  • Katherine BorgesDNA and DAR, and, Sunday morning: ISOGG Meeting
  • Kevin BorlandMining A Chromosome 22 Pile-Up: Clustering Through a Documented Colonial Lineage (keynote)
  • Greg Clarke – Welcome and Introduction
  • Janine CloudTurning a Brick Wall into a Community: Using Documents and DNA Together, and, with Roberta Estes: Between the Records and the Results: Tracing Ancestors in Mixed Lines
  • Roberta EstesMitochondrial DNA-Z: My Results are Back, Now What?, and, at DNA Academy: Using Ancient Connections to Unlock Genealogy, and, with Janine Cloud:  Between the Records and the Results: Tracing Ancestors in Mixed Lines
  • Mags GauldenThe DNA of a Revolution
  • Kate Penney HowardWhen the Story Isn’t True: DNA and the Family Legend Problem, and, Gerald Hawley and the Silence: What Erased Ancestors Teach Us About DNA Research
  • Daniel HorowitzMyHeritage DNA Basic Level, and, MyHeritageDNA Advanced Level
  • Peggy JudeYour DNA Toolkit: Expanding Your Research with Third-Party Tools, and, Step Up to the Plate: Winning Strategies for Connecting with Your DNA Matches
  • Dawn KosmakosUnraveling the Identity of Arthur Burton
  • Steve LittleSolving a Paternity Puzzle: AI-Assisted Match List Analysis in Endogamous Appalachia, and, keynote with Mark Thompson: The AI Frontier in Genetic Genealogy: Where We Are and Where We’re Going
  • Melanie McCombUsing DNA to Identify Ancestral Origins
  • Adina NewmanNavigating Your Jewish DNA Results, and, Introduction to DNA Painter: Strategies to Enhance Your Genealogical Research
  • Jonny PerlUnderstanding the What are the Odds Tool at DNA Painter
  • Rhonda RoedererThe Power of DNA – Making Life-Changing Connections
  • Diahan SouthardI Did Everything Right. So Where’s My Ancestor?, and, There’s Always a Next Step
  • Jerome SpearsOur Genetic Explorer’s Journey
  • Mark ThompsonApplied Artificial Intelligence for Genetic Genealogists, and, keynote with Steve Little: The AI Frontier in Genetic Genealogy: Where We Are and Where We’re Going
  • David Vance – At DNA Academy: NGS Testing for Autosomal DNA
  • Rob WarthenCommon Ancestors at DNAGedcom – Building Trees
  • Jennifer ZinckIt Takes a Village (keynote), and, Unleash the Power of DNA

You can view the schedule and session information here.

For people attending in Boston, additional activities are being held at the American Ancestors office and library on Thursday.

DNA Academy

Saturday evening, the ECGGC hosts DNA Academy. Each year, this fun, interactive, advanced learning session is hosted by Mags Gaulden and includes a panel Q&A session, and speakers.

From the ECGGC agenda:

Join Mags Gaulden, Dave Vance, Roberta Estes, Rob Warthen, Katherine Borges, and Jennifer Zinck for a Q & A panel with special guests to start, then sit back and enjoy a presentation on NGS testing for autosomal DNA, by Dave Vance, and “Using Ancient Connections to Unlock Genealogy”, by Roberta Estes.

Exhibit and Vendor Hall

There are both in-person and virtual vendor exhibit halls, so visit both if attending in person. Vendors who sponsor this indispensable conference are the ones who keep it affordable for the rest of us, so be sure to stop by their booths.

Register

The conference starts in just a month, but there’s still time to register, here. In-person costs $295 and virtual is $175. Both are great values. I already have my plan in place for which sessions I’m attending in person, and I’ll watch the rest after the conference.

Hope to see you there. Please be sure to say hello.

_____________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

Subscribe!

If you haven’t already subscribed, it’s free. You’ll receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button at the top of the main blog page, here.

Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small commission when you click a vendor link in my articles and purchase that item. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the affiliate links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

AI and Genealogy – Brick Walls, Breakthroughs and Blunders

This is the fourth article in the AI series.

I suggest that you read these articles in publication order, as they build on each other.

AI and Genealogy

Most genealogy vendors use AI in one way or another. Like with everything else, there’s yin and yang to AI and genealogy – but for the most part, sprinkled with a little salt, I love the advances.

Let’s survey the genealogy landscape.

FamilySearch is my go-to for document images, especially now. One of the absolute best things to happen in the genealogy field has been the FamilySearch implementation of full-text searches, which they are rolling out across all of their imaged records. I wrote about the rollout here, and it’s only gotten better in the two years since.

For their latest update, including search hints, watch the video FamilySearch Full-Text Search – Your Golden Path to Ancestral Discovery.

May I live long enough to go back and search for information about each one of my ancestors.

Some of what I’ve already found is, well, shocking and sure does make my ancestors more human. Often, only the primary records like deeds, wills and marriage records have been transcribed, indexed and are online, if that much. Some other records have been published, but you have to know to look in a specific county’s records and have access to the published book. If you were trying to “find your way back in time” to where your ancestor came from, before full-text searching, you were out of luck. Now it’s easy to search across time and locations. Let’s just hope you’re not searching for a common name. Sympathies if you have John Smith.

Is full-text search an application of AI? Absolutely – and it’s wonderful. Is it always accurate? Not by a long shot – but it’s much MUCH better than nothing, and if it’s enough to “get you there,” as genealogists, we can deal with the rest.

Don’t let the pursuit of perfect be the enemy of good!

MyHeritage has been leading the pack with AI for some time now. Initially with their newspaper scans and OCR transcriptions, followed by photo restoration tools, and AI Time Machine. Next, they introduced Tribute Reels, which I wrote about here. Tribute Reels allows you to select photos and then animates them to bring your ancestor to life.

MyHeritage has also recently released Scribe AI, which is now one of my favorites. Scribe AI helps to decipher, translate, transcribe, and interpret old documents, photos, and more. I have not written about Scribe AI yet, but you can read the MyHeritage introduction article here, and try it for yourself here.

As an experiment, I selected a document at random from my saved photos at MyHeritage to see what Scribe AI could tell me. This is a French parish marriage record from 1721. Yes, I submitted something difficult, on purpose, but Scribe AI did not disappoint.

Not only did I receive a historical explanation of what this document is, I received the details, key findings, suggested next steps, a full text transcription in French, PLUS a translation to English, my language of choice.

I have been using ChatGPT for this, but sometimes different AI tools stumble over bad handwriting and such. Mied versus Mius, for example. Now I have two “go-to” tools for translations and transcriptions – both ChatGPT and Scribe AI. Hopefully, if one stumbles over something, the other won’t stumble in the same place.

This is EXACTLY the kind of help that genealogists need.

At RootsTech, MyHeritage announced that they will be introducing GAIA, a genealogy AI assistant, soon. I can’t wait.

Ancestry has been using OCR for their newspaper articles and indexes too, and including items such as wedding announcements and obituaries in your hints. They’ve also implemented AI for LifeStory.

I wanted to see what Ancestry had to say about the LifeStory of William George Estes, who lived in Lynch, Kentucky.

On the next screen, I selected “What might William George have done for entertainment while living here?”

This absolutely cracked me up, because William George Estes was, among other things, a notorious bootlegger. I never heard of him setting foot in a church – not once – nor a library.

Lynch actually didn’t have a library, but it did benefit from the Pack Horse Library Project, where librarians on horses brought the library to remote schools and residents in their saddlebags. Now that would have been both interesting and much more accurate.

Generally, though, this description was relatively accurate. These types of activities were available to people in Lynch, a segregated coal-mining town established and owned by the mining company.

Limited drinking spots? William George counted on that, and it’s exactly how he made his living!

Another recent AI beta tool, “Ideas” has been added and can be found in the upper toolbar of any ancestor’s profile.

I tried “Ideas” for Ollie Florence Bolton because of missing chapters in her story that I’d love to fill.

I was excited. I have already looked for these items, but maybe they are available now, or Ollie’s record can be located. I clicked on “Start researching” for her death certificate.

Was I EVER disappointed. Ancestry, whose primary offering is records, has just told me to search records that IT ALREADY HAS. Ancestry owns Newspapers.com, for Pete’s sake. SEARCH THE DOGGONE RECORDS FOR ME!

As I’ve been using Ancestry over the past few days, I’ve noticed the little Ancestry AI diamond pop up from time to time asking if I’d like help with something. What I wish Ancestry would do is transcribe text in the documents shown, beside the document itself, similar to FamilySearch and MyHeritage.

Across Vendors

One place where we see AI across vendors today is for customer support.

All genealogy vendors and most other businesses now use AI chatbots to answer questions that are asked repeatedly.

AI is the way of the future, and eventually, AI will be able to guide us through records and collections relevant to our ancestors. One day soon, AI will know where to look next and will look there on our behalf, providing an accurate analysis of the results. At least that’s my dream.

Everybody has to crawl before they can walk, so let’s keep moving forward and verifying.

Generating Ancestors

Modifying, enhancing, or even creating photographs of our ancestors is certainly of interest to genealogists. If you haven’t encountered this yet, you will.

I submitted a family picture of the children of Hiram Bauke Ferverda and Evaline Miller to ChatGPT. I asked it to create a likeness of the parents of their adult children, who were standing, and to completely ignore the two seated people. I did not tell ChatGPT that the seated people were Hiram and Evaline.

ChatGPT indicated that it could do as I asked, but cautioned:

  • It won’t be historically accurate in a forensic sense—it’s an informed visual estimate based on facial features the siblings share.
  • If there are both brothers and sisters, I can usually generate separate likely father and mother composites.

Here’s the output.

Notice that ChatGPT “cleaned up” the images of the children. That means it actually recreated them behind the scenes.

Here’s the second image that is different yet.

Here’s the original for comparison.

Here’s the question we need to ask ourselves and answer.

As ChatGPT cautioned, the images aren’t accurate – and I must add, they are especially inaccurate after ChatGPT “fixed” the original.

Should genealogists do this and attach reconstituted AI images to their trees?

I don’t think so, as they fall into the same category as supposed photos of Revolutionary War soldiers who died in 1800, decades before cameras existed. At least, in that circumstance, with a little bit of applied knowledge and logic, the discrepancy quickly becomes clear.

If an AI-generated image is attached, it clearly needs to be marked “AI-generated” across the photo in a prominent location, larger than in my example, such that the watermark or label can’t easily be removed as the photo is copied from tree to tree in the future.

AI genealogy expert, Stephen Little points to the Coalition for Responsible AI in Genealogy‘s statement on “Protecting Trust in Historical Images” which suggests that we “always label, always cite, and use for illustration not evidence.” It further states that images generated by AI should not be used as historical documents.

Here’s the bottom line. If you put any of these images in your trees, anyplace other than on your own computer (assuming you don’t sync with an online tree), you’ve released it into the wild because it will spread, often as the result of “hints.” Other people will copy and save it, and it will be represented as the real McCoy, either intentionally or otherwise.

We all need to be hypervigilant when evaluating photos, now and in the future.

Custom GPTs and Experts

Some people write “Expert GPTs”. Think of AI, generally, as a general practitioner. An expert GPT is written by someone who either is an expert in that field or thinks they are.

Like everything else with AI, remain cognizant of your surroundings. I mention this because I’m aware of an instance where someone who was very excited and well-intentioned about a topic wrote a GPT that was inaccurate – and if you trusted that GPT as an expert, you would be wrong and unintentionally spreading misinformation too.

If you find an expert GPT, validate that the author actually IS an expert in the topic at hand.

There are several custom GPTs available under the “More” button in the ChatGPT sidebar. You can search by topic or keyword or scroll and view by category.

I searched for Y-GPT, about Y-DNA, because I know positively that Dave Vance is an expert and that the answers his Y-GPT provides can be trusted.

Scroll to the bottom and just click “Start Chat.”

In fact, Dave has pre-loaded his GPT with the most common questions.

Dave’s Y-GPT is a great resource, and I recommend it, but all GPTs are not created equal. Fortunately, there are experts like Dave who freely share their knowledge. Just because someone writes a GPT or THINKS they’re an expert does not make them one. Know your author and their level of expertise before you rely on anything.

Special Project – How I’m Using AI Right Now

I want to share a special project I’m currently working on and how I’m using AI to assist. Actually, AI has saved my bacon.

I’m planning to visit my ancestors’ locations in Massachusetts this year. When I began preparing, I discovered that I have 100 ancestors who hail from 45 different Massachusetts towns. Nobody seemed to stay put. Various reasons existed for moving on. More or better land, marrying someone from another town, religious tiffs within the church, change of religion, or simply the lure of the next frontier.

I’ve compiled research into a document for each individual that includes dates and locations for the following facts, when known:

  • Birth
  • Marriage
  • Childrens’ births and marriages
  • Land grants and ownership, including purchases, sales, and inheritance
  • Military service
  • Civic service or appointments, such as selectmen or jury members
  • Church membership
  • Wills and estates, particularly land distribution
  • Death
  • Burial
  • Anything else that is location-specific, unique, or particularly interesting, such as if they helped to found a town, a church, or built a fort

If you’ve read any of my 52 Ancestors articles, you’re aware that I enjoy visiting where my ancestors lived, and “being” with them where the events in their lives took place.

That meant that after I compiled the information about each ancestor, I had to reorganize it by town because that’s how the trip would be laid out. Furthermore, in each location, I wanted to find my ancestor’s land, today. This recent article about William and Nehemiah Hunt, who owned Punkatasset Hill, and its connection to the Revolutionary War is a good example.

At this point, I have more ancestors whose land I need to find than I have time to complete the detailed research – and I was beginning to feel incredibly discouraged.

I Accidentally Turned to Google AI

When I say accidentally, I mean I never realized just how useful Google’s AI could be until I submitted William Hunt’s name, birth and death dates, and location to see what other resources Google’s search engine might turn up. When reading the AI overview, I realized that Google had found resources that I had not and certainly would not in the time I have available to plan this trip.

Then, I switched to AI mode, and the resource improved even more.

Incredible!

When using AI tools, we need to take into consideration the strengths of the tool we are using or considering and the resources it has available. In this case, aside from being a search engine and finding information, Google’s specialty is maps, locations, place names, establishments like restaurants, hotels, historical societies, museums and more – including customer reviews.

While I was preparing for the upcoming trip, I stumbled across information that my ancestors, William Hunt and his son, Nehemiah Hunt, both owned Punkatasset Hill, the hill that the men marched down in Concord to take the Old North Bridge in 1775. That infamous “shot heard round the world.”

Google found those resources for me, and their AI tool linked them together. I spent about two days researching this one ancestral place and family for the article – working with Google resources and using each link provided to VERIFY accuracy. You will find that sometimes the resource links don’t contain what AI said they do.

I hurriedly put together William Hunt (c1604-1667), Punkatasset Hill, and the Revolution for America’s 250th.

I need to make it perfectly clear at this point that AI did NOT write that article or this article for me. I write all of my own articles. Yes, I know AI could write faster and I could publish more, but that’s not my goal or my work. This is my work. Google’s AI was my research assistant, feeding me places and resources to check based on dozens of individual prompts that I fed it in the form of questions.

As you can see in the article, I was able to locate the actual land and home of Nehemiah Hunt, and it was Google that provided the current address gleaned through the video posted by a realtor. Otherwise, I have no idea how I would ever have found that, especially since the local museum/genealogy society is closed on the day I’ll be there.

I was then able to verify that location using other means, including comparing an old photo with a satellite image.

Caution: AI was incorrect more than once, and had I not verified, I would have been off on a wild goose chase, thinking I was catching my ancestors. But without AI and prompting it in different ways, I would never have found this at all.

The Process

I’m going to step through a prompt series for my ancestor Gyles (also spelled Giles) Hopkins, Mayflower passenger and son of another passenger, Stephen Hopkins. I’ll add my own commentary as we go.

I knew that my ancestor, Gyles (or Giles) Hopkins, obtained land in Brewster, Massachusetts. Here’s information I already had before I engaged Google’s AI.

  • Stephen Hopkins, in his will dated June 6, 1644, made Caleb Hopkins, his younger son, his ‘heir apparent,’ and consequently the whole of his large real estate holding was inherited by Caleb after Stephen died in July or August of 1644. Soon after his father’s death, Caleb gave a very large tract of land located in what is now Brewster to Gyles Hopkins, his older and only surviving brother.
  • As early as 1653, Gyles Hopkins owned the 8th lot in a tract in what is now West Brewster, east of Quivet, which he sold on Nov. 9, 1666, to John Wing of Yarmouth in consideration of a mare, colt and other land.

I wanted to know specifically where this land was located and whether Gyles ever lived there.

My first question to Google was, “Where was Giles Hopkins’ land in Brewster, MA, and where is that today?”

Tip: Be very careful when Googling to include identifying information about the person you’re asking about. For example, “Where was the land of Gyles, also spelled Giles, Hopkins who lived between <date> and <date>…” would have been a better way to ask the question to ensure that I received what I wanted. There could be multiple men with the same name.

Based on what I knew about other aspects of Gyles’ life, I suspected that this land was held speculatively, as an investment, because I knew he had lived in Eastham.

So, I was surprised to see that a home had been built there.

But read carefully – it says, “A historical Hopkins home was later built in this area.” It doesn’t say HIS home, but still.

Plus, there’s a Hopkins Homestead and Bakery? Seriously? You mean, I can visit the land he owned, sit there, and have coffee? Maybe? And who built that house? Is it the original house? So many questions…I had to stop myself from immediately going down that rabbit hole. And I wasn’t even in “AI Mode” yet.

Ok, let’s switch to AI Mode and see what it says.

Now we have the name of Snowy Owl Coffee Roasters too, which says it’s a homestead site, but not necessarily “the” homestead site.

And it looks like Gyles’ (or Giles’) son, Stephen, lived in this location. His grandson apparently was also named Stephen.

Google in AI Mode almost always asks if you’d like additional information – and it’s like crack for genealogists – almost impossible to say no. Keep an eye on the sources on the right, because they change with each question or answer, and you may need to click to “show all.”

Tip: Read the sources; do NOT presume that the verbiage used by AI is verbatim in the sources or that it’s there at all.

Next, I asked to see the bakery on a map. You can tell that I’m considering stopping during my visit, right?

Google just backtracked a bit, saying that the Snowy Owl had moved and that the Hopkins House Bakery sits directly on the land granted in the 1640s.

Hot diggity!!!

Word of caution: Verify addresses and locations on Google Maps directly, as I have found discrepancies.

Keep reading, because there’s more!

Wait? What? There’s a First Encounter Beach monument? I had no idea.

Google asked if I wanted to know more. Yes, of COURSE I want to know more about that.

I already know where Gyles is buried, and I’ll get to that when I’m not focused on his land in Brewster.

Ok, I’m definitely visiting the First Encounter site, but where is it exactly?

Google asked me if I wanted driving directions. I asked for 3 locations to be included: the Hopkins House, the Cove Burying Ground in Eastham, where Gyles is buried, and the monument site.

Google must be experiencing “fatigue” because it can’t seem to retrieve everything from its memory. I’ve had this issue before. I know that Google can easily show multiple locations and stops on maps, but this time, it didn’t show “the map below” that it said was there.

Tip: When I encounter this issue, I close Google and sometimes the browser altogether, then reopen Google in AI Mode.

You can then select the conversation you were just engaged in from the AI history menu. You can also search for keywords and view your most recent AI Mode converations. How convenient is that?!

I noticed an “Upgrade” button appear in the top bar and wondered if that has anything to do with the “fatigue” Google’s AI was experiencing.

So, I clicked on the link to see if this could have been the problem with the fatigue that failed to produce the map. It wasn’t the problem, but the information provided was still useful.

I suspect that if I upgraded to either Plus or Pro, which is very reasonably priced, I might experience fewer display issues. I figured that I might have to do that to complete this time-critical project – but I didn’t.

Instead, I just clicked on the embedded link to the map, and saw that the route had been nicely mapped out.

Google even added a few local features that I hadn’t requested, which I found helpful. I should also note, though, that it missed an important landmark – so don’t get overconfident in its abilities and answers, and always verify.

I didn’t realize that the Cove Burying Ground was just a few feet away from the Eagle Wing Inn. I hadn’t asked for that information. I’m not complaining because I’m going to need a place to stay and I can click on that location and see important information like customer reviews.

Unfortunately, by the time I finished the planning for this project, this Inn was full, but Google recommended other locations based on clustering my visit locations so that I only had to move every few days – establishing a central hub in an area.

Often, several ancestors lived in a specific town, like both Plymouth and Eastham. I compiled my information for each individual location, even if they were adjacent and everything I knew about all ancestors in that location, into a PDF file. Providing AI with too much in a single prompt results in less, more diluted, and less reliable information.

For each town, I uploaded the PDF file and asked Google AI how to find each piece of land, where it is located today, how much time to allocate for each stop, the best order, and even for information on places I’ve missed that would be of interest.

In one location, Google suggested a harbor cruise, complete with a contact phone number and website, to view the land of my ancestor because it’s on Saquish Head, which is entirely privately owned and access-restricted.

In another instance, Google identified a home built by my ancestor that still stands. It has been moved from the original location, which is why I didn’t find it.

I did a LOT of prep work and provided summary information for each ancestor, including location, some of which Google helped me gather. The document totalled 551 pages. I asked Google if it could extract every mention of each town from that document, and it replied that its processing limit was between 50 and 100 pages, so the extraction would have to be done by hand. That’s OK, because it gave me a better feel for the landscape and their lives.

After I extracted the ancestors’ information by town, Google helped me immensely by adding information and organizing it into a plan, with directions and recommended time allocation for each place on the itinerary. In one town, Google even found a local Inn located on my ancestors’ land. Unfortunately, it’s booked, but it is open for dinner, so I’ll still be dining with my ancestor – so to speak.

Here were the project steps:

  1. Gather information by ancestor using traditional genealogical resources, plus Google AI to add anything I didn’t already have. Note that Google does not gather information from behind paywalled sites, or sites that technologically deflect crawling and indexing information.
  2. Create section in Master Ancestor Document for each ancestor.
  3. Ask Google to find ancestral land locations today, adding to their page
  4. Extract information from each person in the ancestor document and reassemble by town in travel order. When complete, save as PDF file by town.
  5. Submit PDF to Google AI and ask for land locations today – verifying what it said before. Prompt for an itinerary for each town, listing each stop, and how long each town’s activities will take. Include any gotchas such as locked cemeteries, museum hours, inaccessible locations (like islands), and accessibility concerns (walking, steep hills, etc.)
  6. After each town was complete, create itinerary in table format. Submit to Google AI for verification and suggested lodging in each area. Ask for driving suggestions to avoid high-traffic areas or congested times of day or other concerns or requests – including lunch or dinner suggestions.

This leaves me with the following documents:

Just a few of my Massachusetts ancestors.

  • Master Document by Ancestor – One master document that includes every ancestor in this region. The Table of Contents is 5 pages long, and the document eventually totalled 551 pages. This is how I gathered the information before any organization, and before eliminating Connecticut and Maine, which are outside the scope of this trip.
  • Master Document by Location – I quickly realized that the ancestor document was already much too long, so I created a second document by location which totalled 531 pages.
  • Individual Location Documents – When finished, I divided the Master Location Document into one file for each location. I eliminated locations where there was nothing to see, so I now have 35 individual files, which have been updated individually using AI, so they no longer match the Master Location Document. I will load these to my laptop and also to a location that I can access from my phone so I can reference them as I travel. I would actually like to print them by location to take with me, except 500 pages is a ream of paper and paper is heavy.
  • Master Itinerary by Day/Location – Detailing where I’m staying, confirmation and phone numbers, which town I’m visiting which day, and anything else I need “at a glance.”

What will I need to do after this trip? I’ll need to combine the information from the Master Document by Ancestor with information in the Individual Location Documents that pertains to them. I’ll add photos, of course, and new information gleaned during the trip. I will compile this by ancestor in their own personal file. Will AI be able to help with this step? I don’t know. We’ll see.

And yes, in case you’re wondering, you’ll be reading these as 52 Ancestors stories for years to come!

My intention in this exercize was to illustrate how AI can help locate important geographical features, like ancestral land, for instance, help you organize your data and even plan trips. I almost always find more than I was asking for. I’ve found that Google’s ability to read historical and local history websites is extremely beneficial.

I feared that I might not be ready for this trip in time to make reservations, but thanks to Google AI, I am – and I’ve discovered things about my ancestors I would not have found in time. The worst thing possible is to make a critical discovery AFTER you’ve visited and don’t have the opportunity to return.

Advanced Tools and Bleeding Edge

This series has been focused on the “normie” user, not someone pushing the frontiers of the AI envelope – although we certainly need those pioneers to help sort out how to use these tools safely for genealogy and when to stay away.

When attempting more complex tasks using AI, I’ve experienced spectacular failures. But yesterday’s failures are today’s or tomorrow’s successes. The tools literally get better every day, and a week or month in AI is like a year anywhere else.

The tools from the various AI vendors leapfrog each other, too, and each tool has a unique learning curve.

Recently, Anthropic’s Claude introduced an extremely powerful tool called Fable 5 that was free for the first several days, then available via the purchase of prepaid usage credits or tokens. That’s marketing genius, because it encouraged what I would consider “complex genealogy users” to try it. People who had projects either in mind or in the wings where other models had failed.

Specifically, Fable 5 is focused on what I would call “long horizon” jobs or tasks, such as, “Here are 300 Acadian documents. Please translate and transcribe them, then reconstruct the relationships of the people in these documents.” Or, “Here are 550 pages of ancestors, please reorganize them by town, and within town, by year.” Of course, the construction of the prompt has a lot to do with the degree of success of any query.

Anthropic says it can sustain multi-stage projects over hours or even days, planning work, checking its own output, delegating to sub-agents in agent frameworks, and producing deliverables with much less supervision than previous models.

Some people reported amazing successes with multiple files and hundreds of pages being read, processed, correlated, and reported, mostly accurately. Others had a completely different experience.

I have not been working with these new tools, but Mark Thompson and Steve Little have been. Not only did I not have a massive project ready and waiting, as I had already completed by Massachusetts town extraction, I also needed to have time to VERIFY something that large, because as tempting as this is, AI can be and is often wrong.

You can read about Mark turning Fable 5 loose on his archiving project, here.

Catch up with Steve’s interesting experiments, troubleshooting, analysis and guidance here and here.

The AI landscape is shifting away from asking “Which AI is best?” to asking “How do I assemble the best team of AI specialists and effectively use them?”

Interestingly, these advanced agents are now being used both independently and together to answer complex questions and analyze projects. This is known informally as cross-model verification. Sometimes the models agree, and sometimes they disagree, presenting different “evidence” and debate positions for their conclusions. Ultimately, you are the final arbiter.

Just as genealogists don’t rely on a single record, increasingly they shouldn’t rely on a single AI assistant either. A census, will, land grant, deed, and church record each contribute different evidence, all of which needs to be considered together. Likewise, different AI models have different strengths, weaknesses, and biases. Comparing their answers is often the digital equivalent of seeking independent corroborating evidence.

You don’t need to work on the bleeding edge. Just tuck this away for a future project after these tools are more reliable and stable.

The Take-Away

The takeaway from this is that AI is a force to be reckoned with.

Vendors are using AI, sometimes when we know it, and other times behind the scenes to process text, for example. The net-net of this is absolutely positive.

AI usage will increase over time – and that’s a good thing since we can verify the output. AI can accomplish in seconds, minutes or hours what would take us hours, days, months or maybe never.

As always, AI becomes dangerous when we don’t verify, don’t understand that we need to, don’t know how to confirm the results or we trust “experts” who aren’t.

What Do You Want?

I’m excited for the future and I have my own personal list of how I hope the vendors will integrate AI with tools they provide.

My list includes, but is not limited to:

  • AI records transcription at Ancestry, similar to FamilySearch.
  • At FamilySearch, full-text records by name and location “suggested” as hints, by individual, along with a multiple-record summary of evidence. Over time, this could go a VERY long way in resolving the “wrong spouse” or “wrong child” connected issues that persist.
  • AI “DNA plus tree matching” WITH common ancestors, meaning providing a list of people on your DNA match list who match you and each other and have common ancestors in their tree that you have. Both Ancestry and MyHeritage provide part of this in different ways today, but not all of it.
  • AI “DNA plus tree matching” WITHOUT a common ancestor in YOUR tree. This provides a means to potentially identify a brick-walled ancestor by identifying the ancestors of the people whose DNA matches yours and each other, but who do not share a common ancestor in your tree. However, they DO share ancestors with each other, which could be critically important to your research. Yes, I know this would need to be fleshed out – but it’s doable.
  • AI records searching. Essentially, what Ancestry suggests as next steps, but to actually DO THE SEARCH on your behalf and provide those results. Go a step further and indicate where to find the records if they aren’t on the platform. Message you if those records ever become available there, or the person has been revealed in existing records. For example, if death certificates are now available but weren’t previously – or the writing was so horrendous that the indexing didn’t pick it up before, but the person has been identified now – let me know.
  • At FamilySearch, something similar to relatives at RootsTech, but year-round so that cousins can contact each other, collaborate and make breakthroughs together.
  • Broad yet restricted AI searching, such as “provide me with a list of all transactions that include anyone with the surname of Estes or Eastes between 1700 and 1720 in Halifax County, Virginia.” Or, “Provide me with a list of all Estes men who live in Tennessee but who were born in Virginia in the 1850-1880 censuses.” Or, “Provide me with a list of all Estes men who are listed on the 1840 census as being pensioners or having served in the Revolutionary War.”
  • At WikiTree, FamilySearch, GEDmatch, Geni and other public sharing platforms,  identify and provide a way to contact individuals who qualify to test for the Y-DNA (male direct paternal male-to-male line) or mitochondrial DNA (everyone’s direct matrilineal mother-to-mother line) of your common ancestors. Include an avenue to offer a testing scholarship at FamilyTreeDNA. There’s so much we could learn!!!

I’m sure you can add to this list. Specifically, what would you like to see AI be able to do for you, either within or outside of a vendor’s platform?

The sky’s the limit, so dream big!

_____________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

Subscribe!

If you haven’t already subscribed, it’s free. You’ll receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button at the top of the main blog page, here.

Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small commission when you click a vendor link in my articles and purchase that item. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the affiliate links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

William Hunt (c1604-1667), Punkatasset Hill, and the Revolution – 52 Ancestors #481

William Hunt was probably born between the years of 1603 and 1605 in England, although the dates and location in England are both uncertain.

We know that he was probably married to Elizabeth, whose last name is unknown, about 1630, because their first three children were baptized in St. Mary, Nottingham, in England.

  • Samuel Hunt was baptized on April 10, 1631, and eventually married Elizabeth Redding in the colonies.
  • Nehemiah Hunt was baptized on January 6, 1632/33, married Mary Toll, and died on March 6, 1717/18.
  • Elizabeth Hunt was baptized on October 11, 1635, and married John Barron in 1664.

Earlier researchers have presumed that William Hunt and his family arrived on the ship, Susan and Ellen, but that’s impossible, given that it departed on May 2, 1635, which conflicts with Elizabeth’s baptism in October.

  • William and Elizabeth Hunt apparently lost a child in 1637 or 1638.
  • The next child we find is Hannah Hunt, who was born on February 12, 1640/41, in Concord, Massachusetts. She apparently died between 1654, when she is mentioned in the will of Robert Best, and before her father made his will in 1667. The other children are mentioned, but she is absent.
  • William’s last child, Isaac Hunt, was born about 1647 and married Mary Stone in 1680.

This sequence of events tells us that William Hunt and Elizabeth, founders of Concord, Massachusetts, arrived sometime after October 1635, so probably between 1636 and sometime in 1640.

Thomas Wyman, in his book, Genealogy of the Name and Family of Hunt, published in 1862 and available on the Internet Archive, here, describes William Hunt’s decision to leave England. Extracted and edited slightly for readability:

The Life of William Hunt.

He was born in England about the year 1605, two years after the tedious but glorious reign of the Maiden Queen had ended, and the mild and pacific James Stuart had come from his native realm to rule the three kingdoms; and all the nation was glad at the happy change. It was a pleasant time to live in England. There was no very great emigration taking place, and no serious occasion for people to leave their native land to get a living. King James gave to his subjects the Bible in the same form we use this day; and learning and wisdom received happy impulses from the new light diffused by revelation, spreading its lustre more widely over civilized life. Our ancestor partook, in his daily career, of the free average advantage which a somewhat middling position in social rank allowed to realize the benefits flowing to the interior social state of the people from the refreshing access of intelligence and progress rapidly accelerating. His joyous days of childhood and youth passed into ripe manhood. Getting forward in life beyond the perils incident to all conditions, amid the protecting influences that guard the English home, — as from the early consecration at the baptismal font by the revered pastor, to the gradual growth in school and church attendance; under parental or friendly care, coming to know and practice industry and every good accomplishment that could be an attribute “of the intelligent and likely young man; then to the blissful married state, and to be father (before he left England) of at least two sons, — gifts tender and promising to infold and bring over from the Old Workl hither, to bear fruit and multiply, replenish the wilderness, and give seed for yet countless generations.

Not long after the bright and happy state of conjugal life had been entered by our revered ancestor, the policy of public affairs grew gloomy: and the hearts and wishes of worthy subjects of the king inclined them to leave the land of their nativity; to forsake the castled hills and sunny dales that they were so familiar with; to separate from the neighborhood of the kind and friendly nobility of the land, the earl and the earl’s daughter, whose presence was always inspiring; to go from the domain of the good duke, who was so firm in Parliament to support the living interests of the kingdom, the strong arguer for right, and a pillar of the realm. Could William Hunt go with his friends and neighbors, and build a commonwealth, and hope to live?

Ah! The effort was made; the achievement apparently has been accomplished. He sailed in the year 1635, with his companions, away from Old England, giving up more especially the succoring and sustaining influences of the best home society, — old neighbors, helpful and friendly (dear, good souls, known from childhood), — willing to lose all comforts and nurture so well accustomed. Greater sacrifices were to be made; the rich and blessed communions of early friendship were to be cut off. These quiet, homely English folk were going in a merchant vessel to sea. A ship took them with goods, customhouse certificates, charts, compasses, sailing gear, ocean fare, and all things strange and unused, in hazard of all dangers of the deep. The company arrived safe. From different counties came the hardy settlers. The goodly and godly Peter Bulkley, Capt. Willard, the Wheelers, Thomas Bateman, and others, are all familiar to the page of history. The weary and faithful craft came to anchor at the quay in Boston. No inducement for the stanch husbandmen was there to remain, and get subsistence in town: so they came up soon to Musketaquid, now changed (from the Indian [name]) to the sweet and intelligent name Concord, for town and river. Had they a dictionary to help them find this good name? We will take down Walker’s edition, and we find,

“Concord, noun substantive – Agreement between persons and things; peace, union, harmony; concert of sounds.”

It was the sentiments of the hearts of our Christian forefathers that moved them to bestow this choice name. The township, six miles square, was regularly bought of the Indians. The bargain was made by Capt. Willard and others, at the house of Mr. Bulkley, with Squa Sachem, Nuttunkurta, and others, of odd and long names; and the pay was duly delivered. The land was swampy in some places, with none but Indian paths, about one foot broad, and anon a broad plain, with thick, prickly bushes. Plenty of deep woods, where “sweet feme” grew so abundant, that in summer, under the sun’s rays, the strong aroma thereof caused many to faint, and fallen trees impeded very much the early proprietors. Uplands they had, and meadows which overflowed at times with water unexpectedly, as the old records say. They could make hay. Fish were caught. Alewives were plenty, even to bestow to enrich the ground.

The habitation of our ancestor was built, like the others, by digging into the bank of the hill, driving posts into the ground, and covering the top and sides with brushwood. This might be called a mere wigwam; and so were the beginnings of his American home. In process of time, land was divided, and the town-business organized; and affairs were conducted. He was one who petitioned the Governor and Assembly, in the year 1645, concerning matters of finance.

Early Concord, Massachusetts

The area that became the town of Concord was originally known as “Musketaquid,” an Algonquian word for “grassy plain.” It’s located at the confluence of the Sudbury and Assabet rivers. Native American people had lived here for time immemorial, fished, and cultivated crops like corn.

Sadly, the 1633 smallpox epidemic, a disease introduced by New World settlers, had essentially depopulated the area. This made it particularly attractive to the English, who were seeking land.

In 1635, a group of English settlers led by Rev. Peter Bulkley and Major Simon Willard received a land grant from the General Court and negotiated a land purchase with the local indigenous people. Bulkeley was a religious leader who “carried a good number of planters with him into the woods”; and Willard was a trader who spoke the Algonquian language and had gained their trust.

Six square miles were purchased in exchange for wampum-peage, hatchets, knives, hoes, cotton cloth, and shirts, useful items that the Native people could only acquire from Europeans. Concord was incorporated on September 2, 1635.

On September 6, 1636, the first church was established when the settlers voted to build a meeting house near Monument Square, along with a nearby burial ground.

There is no complete list of the original settlers who received land in 1635 and 1636, but William Hunt was assuredly there near the beginning. Not only was his daughter born in early 1641, but he took the oath of freeman on June 2, 1641. Requirements to be a freeman included:

  • Religious Orthodoxy: A man had to be a formally admitted member in good standing of the local, orthodox Puritan church. This was the hardest prerequisite, as church membership required passing a rigorous public screening of one’s personal salvation experience.
  • Age & Gender: Had to be a male at least 21 years old.
  • Property Ownership (The Freeholder Rule): He had to own a “ratable estate” (taxable property) valued at a minimum threshold—often legally recorded as 20 pounds.
  • Character Standing: The applicant had to be formally recommended by his town’s selectmen as being of “sober and peaceable conversation.”
  • The Oath: Finally, he had to swear the strict Oath of a Freeman, pledging total allegiance to the colony’s government rather than the British Crown.

Clearly, William Hunt owned land by 1641. We know, based on William Hunt’s will, that he purchased his original 30-acre “great lot” from Reverend Peter Buckley.

Reverend Buckley held the original Concord town deed. Some of the deeds and records are missing, so in 1653, Concord compiled a land registry, which was later used to correlate property conveyed in sales and by will in estates.

According to the History of Concord, Massachusetts, the original homes were built on small lots in the center of town, near Concord Square.

William’s lot was not one of the small lots clustered together in the center of town, so he was not there for the original 1635/1636 land distribution.

Based on the land William owned in 1668, as described in his will, we know he left 15 distinct parcels in Concord totaling 626 acres. His real estate was valued at an impressive £596, 12s, making him one of the wealthiest early landholders in the town.

William divided his massive Concord acreage exclusively among his three surviving sons. William had remarried after his wife Elizabeth died in 1661, and subsequently moved to Marlboro where his second wife lived, about 16 miles away, so he wasn’t living on his land when he died.

  • Samuel Hunt (William’s eldest son): He was bequeathed the original William Hunt homestead, which was built on Ponkawtasset Hill in northern Concord. He also received accompanying acreage, pasture lands, and meadows.
  • Nehemiah Hunt (William’s second son): He received 297 total acres, which included his own house site (25 acres), a 30-acre “great lot,” 188 acres from the town’s second land division (1653), and multiple parcels of fertile meadow land (including Wigwam Meadow and Bound Meadow). Wigwam Meadow eventually became part of Ponkawtasset Hill, today’s Punkatasset Hill and Conservation Area.
  • Isaac Hunt (William’s youngest son): He was granted the remaining parcels of Concord farmland, meadows, and managed woodlots to establish his own estate.

What Happened to the Land?

Samuel Hunt had already relocated to Ipswich when William died, and his land was incorporated into Nehemiah’s holdings.

Due to his massive landholdings, Nehemiah Hunt became known as the “Lord of Punkatasset” and lived there his entire life. He died intestate in 1718, but his land passed on within the family after his death.

You can read more about the history of William Hunt’s land in The History of Two-Rod Road, here.

William’s land followed distinct paths through the generations, transitioning from pioneer farmland to historic landmarks and protected Conservation areas. Estabrook Woods, which includes all of Isaac’s land and part of the rest has been acquired by Harvard’s Museum of Comparative Zoology to protect what it describes as a “priceless resource.”

Henry David Thoreau lived in Concord for most of his life and regularly sought refuge on Punkatasset Hill and Estabrook. Thoreau wrote fondly and eloquently about “the great wild tract” in his journal.

In 1837, recently graduated from Harvard and unemployed because he quit a teaching job that required him to flog his students, Thoreau began journaling, and three weeks later wrote:

Ponkawtasset

There goes the river, or rather is, “in serpent error wandering”–the jugular vein of Musketaquid. Who knows how much of the proverbial moderation of the inhabitants was caught from its dull circulation?

The snow gives the landscape a washing-day appearance–here a streak of white, there a streak of dark–it is spread like a napkin over the hills and meadows. This must be a rare drying day; to judge from the vapor that floats over the “vast clothes” yard.

A hundred guns are firing and a flag flying in the village in celebration of the whig victory. Now a short dull report–the mere disk of a sound shorn of its beams–and then a puff of smoke rises in the horizon to join its misty relatives in the skies.

Punkatasset Hill, also known as Hunt’s Hill in the early 1700s, marks the southeast corner of the Eastabrook forest and had played a pivotal role in the Revolutionary War just sixty years before Thoreau put pen to paper.

The Estate

Remarkably, the original Nehemiah Hunt and Daniel Hunt homes on Ponkawtasset Hill still stands today as a historic private estate, recognized as one of the oldest standing colonial dwellings in Concord.

In 1920, William Henry Hunt (1830-1926), a farmer who inherited the deteriorating family homes, wrote about his recollections of the Hunt family and their lands, including their abolitionist beliefs and activities before and during the Civil War.

William Henry Hunt was six generations removed from William and Elizabeth Hunt, descending through son Nehemiah Hunt (1631-1718), William Hunt (1678-1756), Nehemiah Hunt (1726-1785), Nehemiah Hunt (1764-1846) and his father, Daniel Hunt (1796-1870).

One of the things William Henry Hunt provided was a photo of the two homes that are described as “adjoining.” You can view an 1880s photo, here. Nehemiah’s home is on the left, and the “Daniel Hunt” house, built between 1780 and 1790, is on the right.

William Henry Hunt, Daniel’s son, spent much of his life attempting to rejuvenate the deteriorating farm homes. By 1863, Nehemiah’s original home was probably 200 years old, given that he married in 1663, and his father died just five years later, stating that Nehemiah already lived on his property.

In 1887, William Henry Hunt gave up and sold the land to the Reverend Henry Hutchins, who created a large-scale commercial dairy farm to sell milk into the Boston market.

Hutchins built a massive barn and merged the two “adjacent” homes into one. Hutchins unified and expanded the living quarters. He structurally tied the older architectural wings together under a continuous, sprawling gambrel roof layout. This architectural choice masked the distinct joins of the previous Hunt and Barrett structures visible in the 1880s photo, expanding the main footprint into a singular, cohesive 6-bedroom grand country estate. To accommodate farm staff and his own family, he also added two cottages. We’ll visit in a little bit.

You may wonder why I’ve spent so much time discussing William Hunt’s property. As it turns out, William Hunt’s property is uniquely important in the history of the United States – of its birth, 250 years ago, today.

You see, William Hunt’s land, then Nehemiah’s land, included Ponkawtasset Hill.

Ponkawtasset Hill, in turn, directly and profoundly shaped our nation’s history a century later.

Ponkawtasset Hill

Tensions had been building for months, years actually. Taxation by the British government, lack of representation, and more. The retaliatory “Tea Party” took place in nearby Boston on December 16, 1773, serving as a flashpoint.

The British government punished Boston for the Boston Tea Party by closing its harbor and revoking Massachusetts’ self-governance, which led the colonists to stockpile weapons in Concord and organize a militia network.

Concord residents burned tea. Anyone caught buying or selling tea, or even drinking tea was publicly humiliated and shamed. To make a public statement and stand in solidarity with Boston, the townspeople gathered their remaining stores of tea and burned them in the town common right outside the Wright Tavern.

The situation escalated. In August 1774, the British Parliament enacted the Massachusetts Government Act, a law that stripped colonists of their democratic rights, banned town meetings, and dictated that local judges and court officials would now be directly appointed by the British Crown rather than local authorities. The citizens realized that by allowing those courts to open and those judges to sit, they were submitting to tyranny, and they weren’t having it.

In Concord, they had had enough. Concord residents determined to overthrow British rule themselves – and they did.

Throughout the week of September 13, 1774, thousands of armed citizens and militiamen marched into Concord. On September 17, 1774, armed Middlesex County citizens blocked the crown-appointed judges from opening the county court, effectively establishing an independent, illegal provincial government.

The British had mightily underestimated the populace, especially in Concord.

The militia forced these officials to march outside through a gauntlet of citizens and publicly sign a recantation, swearing they would never execute their royal commissions. Then, the Crown-appointed judges, clerks, and the royal sheriff sought shelter inside Daniel Heywood’s local tavern.

How humiliating! And inspiring.

Not only did those judges never sit again in Concord, they never sat again in Middlesex County. But this was just the beginning.

Unbeknownst to those brave citizens at the time, the American Revolution had begun, and they were the sparks. Emboldened by Concord, the rebellion spread throughout Massachusetts. But they knew that the British would not walk away without a fight, and following what had just occurred, consequences were coming.

Concord prepared.

On October 4th, 209 towns sent more than 300 delegates to Concord, by now the seat of the rebellion, to form the Massachusetts Provisional Congress.

In Worchester, at the town meeting, the instructions were given.

You are to exert yourself in devising ways and means to raise from the dissolution of the old constitution, as from the ashes of the Phenix, a new form, wherein all officers shall be dependent on the suffrages of the people, whatever unfavorable constructions our enemies may put upon such procedure.

“As the ashes of the Phenix” – I love that!

William Hunt and his sons had been dead for decades, but you know their spirits were cheering.

We have no written records of their political leanings, but given what we know about what happened soon enough, and that their descendants felt that their abolitionist views 90 years later were a continuation of their Revolutionary War commitment, we really don’t need any.

Knowing that the Redcoats would descend upon them soon, the townspeople focused on preparation. They knew that British General Gage was waiting on reinforcements, and once they arrived, the fight would be on.

Had Concord bitten off more than they could chew?

They needed to raise a fighting force of 15,000 men, with guns and ammunition for all of them – a seemingly impossible, overwhelming task.

But then again, this was Concord, a town who knew no bounds and had the spunk of their ancestors running through their veins.

The entire population of Concord, maybe 1,400 people was spread among roughly 260 families. That’s maybe 300 males of fighting age. The imbalance and seeming impossibility simply boggles the mind.

To purchase supplies, the Provincial Congress commandeered all of the taxes that would have gone to the British government. How they did this isn’t exactly clear, but they did, bought munitions, and stored their supplies in both Concord and Worcester.

General Gage knew this, and that made Concord a bullseye. He would make an example out of Concord and quell that rebellion.

Concord knew that, too, and they were much closer to Boston than Worcester.

Because Concord was designated as the central munitions depot, Colonel James Barrett, whose family was intermarried with the Hunts, was tasked by the Provincial Congress with organizing, safeguarding, and distributing the massive colonial arsenal.

He began to smuggle arms and supplies out of Boston, including musket balls, gunpowder, medical supplies, and four very valuable brass cannons.

British reinforcements arrived, and General Thomas Gage ordered 700 British Regulars to march secretly from Boston to Concord.

“Sir, you will march with the corps of grenadiers and light infantry put under your command with the utmost expedition and secrecy to Concord…”

I’m not quite sure how 700 soldiers in bright red coats with their equipment clanking can march secretly through the countryside, even if it was the middle of the night, but whatever. Their mission was to seize and destroy a massive stockpile of colonial weapons and gunpowder.

The British, were, indeed, coming.

Paul Revere Rides

It was the night of April 18th, 1775, and Paul Revere was summoned by Dr. Joseph Warren. Revere was informed that General Gage had ordered the Redcoats to proceed with “utmost expedition and secrecy to Concord,” where they were tasked with destroying the munitions stores and arresting the Patriots, of course.

Paul Revere, a silversmith, was selected as the rider who would secure his place in history books because of his proven reliability and established network in the countryside. He had been serving as a clandestine express courier to New York and Philadelphia to keep them apprised of the brewing rebellion in Boston, and was widely credited with participating in, if not leading, the Boston Tea Party revolt.

After the Tea Party, the British forced the Boston citizens to “quarter” the British soldiers in their homes. Revere and other tradesmen began to meet at the Green Dragon, probably the early version of Cheers, to exchange information and watch the British. Already a member of the Sons of Liberty and producing political documents, Revere began submitting engravings to a new Patriot publication as well.

His goal that night was to ride to Lexington and Concord ahead of the British to warn Patriot leaders and alert the militia to be on guard.

Revere, fearing capture, instructed the sexton to hang two lanterns in the steeple of the Old North Church, indicating that the British were crossing the Charles River by sea, not land.

Revere then rowed across the Charles River, actually rowing unnoticed right past a British warship under the cover of darkness. Upon arrival in Charlestown across the river, they had aleady seen the lanterns and knew Revere would need a horse, so had one waiting for him as he began his famous ride into history. .

Along the way, in around 40 towns and villages, he alerted one pre-appointed person who took over from there. Local church bells were rung to alert the militia, who began preparing as Revere was silently off to his next stop.

Revere made it as far as Lexington, where he arrived about midnight and was able to alert Samuel Adams and John Hancock, but he was captured after leaving Lexington and never reached Concord.

However, at Lexington, William Dawes, a fellow express rider out of Boston caught up with Revere, and about 1 in the morning, the two men decided to press on the next seven miles to Concord where the weapons were stockpiled. On the road, they encountered Dr. Samuel Prescot, a Concord physician returning home from treating a patient, who joined their mission.

Shortly thereafter, they were ambushed by a roadblock of British officers who had been stationed there to intercept any rebel messengers. Revere was cornered in a field, captured, questioned, his horse confiscated, and eventually released on foot.

Dawes turned around and made for Lexington, but his horse threw him and ran away.

Dr. Prescott knew all the ins and outs of the local roads and farms, having ridden them many times. He jumped his horse over a stone wall, escaping into the deep woods, and successfully made it to Concord to alert the sentry on guard, who rang the church bell to awaken the townspeople.

Prescott also continued riding and alerted the neighboring militias in Acton and Stow, a brilliant decision. They immediately gathered their men and began marching towards Concord.

The Mad Rush

Concord immediately knew what was happening, and who was coming. Everything the British were seeking was hidden on the farm of Col. Barrett, who was the head of the local militia units. The residents set about in a mad rush to distribute the munitions and hide the cannons.

They loaded heavy wooden barrels of musket balls, flints and medical supplies onto carts, distributed and hid them in various locations in town, including marshy areas behind the Hunt land on Punkatasset Hill. They successfully hid the four cannons on Barrett’s farm, two by plowing them into fields.

Sometime before dawn, a contingent from Lincoln, Massachusetts, under the command of Capt. William Smith, the brother of Abigail Adams, arrived to assist Concord.

As dawn broke, Barrett assembled the armed militia in the town center, which assuredly included Nehemiah Hunt, who lived in the family home that still stands on Punkatasset Hill today. This Nehemiah Hunt (1726-1785) was the great-grandson of William Hunt (c1604-1667), and the grandson of Nehemiah Hunt (1633-1718).

Concord scout Reuben Brown was dispatched towards Lexington, where, about 5:30 AM he heard gunshots, which turned out to be at Lexington Green, and knew that the British were on their way to Concord.

Around 7:00 AM, the townspeople watched as 700 Redcoats appeared on the horizon, with drums beating, fifes playing, and bayonets fixed.

That was half the population of the entire town, and more than twice as many as the 250 militiamen under Barrett’s control.

Barrett knew what was coming, and rather than face slaughter, he ordered a tactical retreat out of the town center, across the Old North Bridge, ascending straight up the extremely steep, defensive Punkatasset Hill onto their designated staging field, and higher yet.

From the top of the hill, the entire terrain for miles was visible, and on a clear day, one could see all the way to Boston.

The hill provided not only safety and visibility, but the opportunity to regroup without being under the immediate emotional turmoil of a clearly suicidal battle.

The Battle

When the British troops arrived in Concord to find an abandoned town, they were quite perplexed. Where were the people, and where did the militiamen go?

The British decided to secure the three bridges, including the Old North Bridge. They sent some of their soldiers right past Nathaniel Hunt’s land to search Barrett’s farm for munitions and those cannons.

Unflustered, Barrett’s wife slowed them down by fixing them breakfast as the cannons were plowed under in the fields. They had no idea that they had just been outsmarted by a “housewife.”

The British soldiers who remained in town discovered some wooden gun carriages, which they smashed and burned.

During this time, reinforcements were arriving on Punkatasset Hill – a Bedford Company and three from Acton, bringing their total to about 400 men. One of the Acton units was led by Captain Simon Hunt (1704-1790), the great-great-grandson of Nehemiah Hunt who died in 1718, and the great-great-great-grandson of William Hunt, the founder who originally owned Punkatasset Hill.

The men up on the hill wanted to be able to watch the activity at the Old North Bridge, so about 9 o’clock, they moved down the hill partway to Major John Buttrick’s muster field, a lower plateau that provided an unobstructed view of the bridge.

There, they spotted a plume of thick, black smoke above the town and thought the soldiers were burning their homes.

Adjutant Joseph Hosmer yelled, “Will we let them burn the town down?” The rest shouted, “No!” That was all it took.

Their short respite on the hill, and the reinforcements had turned the psychological tide, providing a contingent of Massachusetts farmers with the confidence to advance on the world’s most powerful military force. God bless them one and all.

The decision was made to march down the hill immediately, and onto the Old North Bridge that the British soldiers were guarding. Because they were the best armed, Isaac Davis and his Acton Minutemen were asked to lead the column, to which he replied, “I haven’t a man who is afraid to go.”

The order was given to load their muskets.

Colonel Barrett ordered the advance, instructing them not to fire unless they were fired upon. Their hearts must have been beating out of their chests, knowing they were outnumbered and facing a contingent of professional soldiers.

Still, they marched.

Led by Acton’s minutemen, who had bayonetts, they descended the hillside, marching in a tight double-file line straight down the hill to where the Redcoats were waiting – probably wondering what on earth was going on.

This tactical descent led directly to the famous Battle at the Old North Bridge.

The 90 Redcoats guarding the bridge suddenly realized they were outnumbered and hastily retreated back across the bridge. In their panic and resulting confusion, they only managed to pull a few planks up off of the bridge, so the militia was able to cross easily.

The British formed a deep, narrow line on the other side of the bridge. This formation, where the front men fired, then stepped to the read to reload as the next group fired, was designed for street fighting, not open riverfront while firing across a narrow bridge. They weren’t trained for this and crowded together, blocking each other’s views.

The Patriot militiamen just kept on advancing, reaching the western edge of the bridge, when the British opened fire. At first, warning shots fell into the water, but then a full-on volley followed, killing Acton’s Captain Isaac Davis with a bullet directly through the heart.

Standing where this monument stands today, and seeing men drop, Major John Buttrick leaped into the air, screaming the historic words, “Fire, fellow soldiers, for God’s sake, fire.”

And fire they did.

“The shot heard round the world.”

The front ranks of the colonial militia leveled their muskets over the bridge and loosed a devastating, concentrated volley. Because the British were bunched up in their narrow street-firing column, the colonial musket balls tore through their ranks, wounding four of the eight British officers on the bridge, and killing four privates.

The British panicked, broke formation, and fled into the Concord town center.

The fallen British soldiers were left laying at the bridge, where this monument stands today.

The entire first battle, the opening salvo of the Revolutionary War had only lasted two or three minutes, and took place at the base of Punkatasset Hill.

The minutemen crossed the bridge, but did not immediately pursue the fleeing British soldiers into the town center. Some fell back across the river and took up a defensive position behind the stone walls beside the road, near the British monument today.

The British soldiers who had gone to Barrett’s to search his property, finding nothing because the munitions had already been distributed, were now cut off and the victorious minutemen stood firmly between them and the rest of the British soldiers.

For the next hour, a tense standoff ensued, and neither side did anything.

Around 10:30, unaware of what had transpired, the unit dispatched to Barrett’s farm marched directly back into Concord, only to discover their comrades’ bodies. One man, not yet dead, had been struck in the head with a hatchet by a colonial boy who obviously didn’t wield a gun, but that terrified the Redcoats, thinking that the Native people had joined the Patriots in the fray.

The militiamen chose to regroup and stay quiet, expecting an attack or ambush that never came. After the group returned from Barrett’s and joined the British in Concord, the Redcoats spent the next couple of hours treating their wounded and trying to regroup.

They left at least two of their dead who were buried beside the road, near the British monument today.

The British didn’t realize it, but as the standoff continued, reinforcements from nearby towns continued to arrive from all directions, soon outnumbering the British. More than 32 militia companies with just under 1400 men eventually joined the fight at Concord. You can see a print of that day, drawn shortly thereafter, here.

Around noon, the British officers decided to retreat to Boston, but they were too late and the fuse had aleady been lit.

As the British began their march back to Boston, fighting resumed on the outskirts of Concord, at Miriam’s Corner.

Thinking they were safely regrouping in the Concord town center, away from Concord’s militiamen, they were sorely mistaken. What they had done was given away precious time, a fatal strategic flaw. The silent alarm system in the Massachusetts countryside was hard at work, and thousands of men headed towards Concord, blocking the British escape route.

The final fight at Concord killed a few more Redcoats, but the real war would take place all along the 16-mile route back to Boston, known as the “Nightmare of Battle Road”.

The colonial militia did not meet the British columns of soldiers in their bright red coats head on. Instead they used guerilla tactics, firing from the woods, from barns, behind walls and from inside houses into the increasingly depleted and battle weary soldiers who had been marching and fighting since midnight. The number of militia increased, as the number of soldiers decreased.

By the end of that day, the British had marched back to Boston with their red tails between their legs. One of the British officers lamented that, “their numbers increasing from all parts while ours was reducing by deaths, wounds and fatigue.”

The final tally was:

  • British casualties: 247 casualties with 73 killed and 53 missing
  • Colonist casualties: 88 casualties, with 49 killed

When the fighting ended in Charlestown that evening, it wasn’t the end of the fight, it was the beginning of a new era. More than 20,000 Massachusetts militiamen had responded and began a siege of Boston.

The battle for America was on.

I choose to believe that William Hunt and his son, Nehemiah, were watching what transpired on their homeland, Punkatasset Hill, and that they were silently cheering the men on. Maybe helping in some unknown way.

America’s turning point happened on Punkatasset Hill. It was here that the final spark was lit, half a mile above the town. One that transformed localized protests into an organized military resistance.

The hill provided the local militia with time to consolidate their resources, spy on the British, make a strategic offensive decision, and obtain the psychological advantage. Then, a few hundred outnumbered soldiers in farmers’ clothing descended the hill, marching two-by-two, staring directly into the face of death.

Without Punkatasset Hill, the path of our history may well have been charted differently.

The fate of America hung in the balance that day, and might well have taken an entirely different turn.

Punkatasset Hill Today

There are two parts to the question of Punkatasset Hill’s location today. The first is the location of the hill itself and the second is the location of Nehemiah Hunt’s original home on the Hunt property.

Today, most of Punkatasset Hill is a preserved historic site within Concord, serving as a monument to the quiet hour of anticipation that directly birthed the American Revolution.

This area is replete with hiking trails, one of which provides access to the top of Punkatasset Hill, where the militiamen stood and America embarked on freedom’s path.

The short hike to the hill can be found on TrailMaps, here, noted as trail 7. You can watch a video of the hike to nearby Hutchins pond on YouTube, here.

The Town of Concord provides several trail maps and guides, here.

William Hall’s Land and Nehemiah Hall’s Home

While William Hunt’s land expands across almost all of Punkatasset Hill, and his original home is gone, we can pinpoint exactly where Nehemiah Hunt lived, because the home, while heavily refurbished, still exists today.

The trailhead is just above Nehemiah’s residence on Monument Street, and across from Hutchins Farm.

You can still see the shape of the two adjoining houses today, although they look vastly different than in the 1880s.

Take a look at these beautiful photos of the property on Realtor.com, here. The residence is gated and can’t be seen from the road.

The structure to the rear is Nehemiah’s home and dates to pre-Revolutionary War days. The brave Patriots gathered on the hill directly behind this home.

The barn and outbuildings do not date to this period. The pool, in the drone photos, is directly behind Nehemiah’s part of the home.

I can’t tell which rooms are in the original portion of the house, but they are all stunning. I know William and Nehemiah Hunt stood in these rooms and warmed themselves by the fire.

What I really want you to look at is the aerial view. I can’t quite place the hill, but it’s someplace here, perhaps slightly behind and to the right of the barn. Regardless, it’s William Hunt’s land.

But why not fly over?

There’s a video tour here, on Vimeo.

How I wish this were a VRBO.

The Hill I Will Die On

William Hunt founded Concord, with others, between 1636 and 1640. He died in 1667, and just over a century later, his land would provide the launching pad for what would become the United States.

I can only imagine the shock, and how proud he would be, were he to know what he begat and the outsized role that Punkatasset Hill played in history.

Punkatasset Hill provided the clarion call for the foundation of this country. It was a humble beginning with a few brave men on a hilltop one chilly April morning.

This is a hill that I, too, am willing to die on.

The Declaration of Independence

Fifteen months after the encounter beneath Punkatasset Hill, on the Old North Bridge, a new country would be formed. On July 4, 1776, the Declaration of Independence was signed at Independence Hall, severing our political ties with Great Britain. We threw off the mantle of a form of government where monarchs ruled and became a sovereign nation, in charge of our own fate.

The Declaration’s Introduction

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

The preamble begins:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

The Constitution

The Declaration of Independence was followed by the Constitution, which sets forth the structure of how the republic is to be run. It was signed on September 17, 1787.

At the close of the Constitutional Convention, when leaving the building, a woman asked Benjamin Franklin, “What have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” Franklin famously replied:

“A republic, if you can keep it.”  

The Constitution provides a balanced federal structure, divided between three equally powerful but distinct branches of government, the Judiciary, the Legislative, and the Executive. It provides separation of power, and divides power between the federal government and the states.

A summary of the Seven Articles of the Constitution:

  • Article I (The Legislative Branch): Creates Congress (the Senate and House of Representatives), sets member qualifications, and details its powers like taxing, coining money, and declaring war.
  • Article II (The Executive Branch): Establishes the presidency, details the Electoral College system, outlines presidential powers (like commanding the military), and defines the impeachment process.
  • Article III (The Judicial Branch): Creates the Supreme Court, allows Congress to set up lower federal courts, defines the types of cases they can hear, and explicitly defines treason.
  • Article IV (The States): Regulates relationships between states, requires them to respect each other’s laws, guarantees citizens equal treatment across state lines, and outlines how new states can join the Union.
  • Article V (The Amendment Process): Sets up the two-step system needed to change the Constitution, requiring a two-thirds vote in Congress and approval from three-fourths of the states.
  • Article VI (Federal Supremacy): Establishes the Constitution and federal laws as the “supreme Law of the Land,” meaning federal law trumps state law if they conflict, and bans religious tests for holding public office.
  • Article VII (Ratification): Explains the original startup rules, stating that 9 out of the original 13 states had to approve the document for it to officially take effect.

You can read the full text of the Constitution, here.

Because we were no longer a monarchy, where one person told the rest of us what to do, the Constitution needed to be ratified. It took nine months for the Constitution to complete the ratification process and be approved.

  • September 17, 1787 (The Proposal): The Constitution was completed and signed by the delegates, then sent to the states.
  • December 7, 1787 (The First State): Delaware became the very first state to vote in favor of approval, earning its nickname “The First State”.
  • June 21, 1788 (Official Approval): New Hampshire became the crucial 9th state to ratify the document. This officially made the Constitution the legally binding framework of the United States.
  • March 4, 1789 (The Government Begins): The new constitutional government officially began operations.
  • May 29, 1790 (Unanimous Approval): Rhode Island, the final holdout state, finally ratified the document, making the approval unanimous across all 13 original states.

Constitutional Amendments

The founding fathers provided enough flexibility that the Constitution could be amended, and it has been several times.

The first 10 amendments are known as the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights was officially proposed by Congress on September 25, 1789, and ratified by the states on December 15, 1791.

Two Amendments in the original Bill of Rights didn’t pass. The first dealt with Congressional representation in the House of Representatives as the country grew. The second dealt with Congressional pay raises and was tabled. It eventually became the 27th Amendment, but took 202 years to pass.

The Bill of Rights

The purpose of the Bill of Rights was to safeguard individual liberties and place strict, legal limits on federal power

  • 1st Amendment: Freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly, and petition.
  • 2nd Amendment: The right to keep and bear arms.
  • 3rd Amendment: Restrictions on housing soldiers in private homes.
  • 4th Amendment: Protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.
  • 5th Amendment: Rights of the accused (due process, double jeopardy, self-incrimination).
  • 6th Amendment: The right to a speedy and public trial by jury in criminal cases.
  • 7th Amendment: The right to a jury trial in civil cases.
  • 8th Amendment: Protections against excessive bail and cruel and unusual punishment.
  • 9th Amendment: Ensures that citizens have rights beyond those listed in the Constitution.
  • 10th Amendment: Reserves powers not given to the federal government to the states or the people

Amendments 11-27

  • 11th Amendment (1795): Stops citizens of one state or another country from suing another state in federal court.
  • 12th Amendment (1804): Fixes the Electoral College so electors vote for President and Vice President separately.
  • 13th Amendment (1865): Abolished slavery and involuntary servitude across the entire nation.
  • 14th Amendment (1868): Guarantees birthright citizenship, due process, and equal protection under the law to all citizens.
  • 15th Amendment (1870): Bans the government from denying a citizen the right to vote based on race.
  • 16th Amendment (1913): Allows Congress to levy a nationwide income tax.
  • 17th Amendment (1913): Changes the law so citizens vote directly for U.S. Senators instead of state legislatures choosing them.
  • 18th Amendment (1919): Banned the manufacture, sale, and transportation of alcohol (Prohibition) and was repealed by the 21st Amendment.
  • 19th Amendment (1920): Granted women the right to vote.
  • 20th Amendment (1933): Shortened the time between elections and inauguration, moving the presidential start date to January 20.
  • 21st Amendment (1933): Ended Prohibition by completely repealing the 18th Amendment.
  • 22nd Amendment (1951): Limits the President to serving a maximum of two terms.
  • 23rd Amendment (1961): Gives Washington, D.C. residents the right to vote in presidential elections.
  • 24th Amendment (1964): Bans poll taxes, making it illegal to force people to pay a tax to vote.
  • 25th Amendment (1967): Clarifies that the Vice President takes over if the President dies, resigns, or becomes disabled.
  • 26th Amendment (1971): Lowers the national voting age from 21 down to 18.
  • 27th Amendment (1992): Prevents members of Congress from giving themselves an immediate pay raise until an election has passed. (Took 202 years to pass and finally did in 1992)

Stalled

  • 28th Amendment (stalled): The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) states that equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. Congress passed it in 1972 with a deadline of March 22, 1979 for three-fourths of the states to ratify, but they failed to do so, even after an extension to 1982, so it remains stalled among lawsuits.

You can read the full text of the Amendments, here and here, or here.

The Oaths

All elected officials swear an oath to uphold the Constitution, which includes the Amendments.

The exact verbiage of the President’s oath is dictated by Article I of the Constitution, as follows:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Similar Constitutional oaths are required for every elected official and virtually every person working in federal or state government, including the military.

Regardless of their job description, their first and foremost obligation is to defend the Constitution, meaning the safety and security of the country, and the rights of the American citizens.

May we have the wisdom to protect our republic, the legacy for which so many of our forefathers laid down their lives, and the constitutional system of government that those brave men who marched down Punkatasset Hill were willing to die for. Ordinary men who did something extraordinary and, with it, changed history.

AI Assistants – The Good, the Bad, the Ugly, and the Unseen

This is the third article in the AI series.

I suggest that you read these articles in publication order, as they build on each other.

AI Tools

The most commonly used AI tools, in no particular order, are:

  • ChatGPT by OpenAI
  • Claude by Anthropic
  • Gemini by Google
  • Co-Pilot by Microsoft

This is not a comprehensive list, but these are the tools you’re most likely to encounter.

Increasingly, AI is integrated into social media platforms that many use widely, such as:

  • Facebook (META)
  • Grok integrated with X (formerly Twitter)

Broadly speaking, it’s now far more unusual to find a platform without AI in one form or another than one with AI.

This isn’t going to change, so we all need to learn how to adapt, live with AI, and use it successfully.

AI Agents, Tools, or BOTs Are Not Search Engines

Before we go any further, let’s be clear that AI tools are not search engines. Originally, many people thought they were “search engines with brains” that helped analyze results. Maybe someday, but not yet, with the notable exception of Google, which was originally a search engine and now has an “AI Option.”

Sometimes, it’s difficult to know when your AI assistant is accessing websites and when it isn’t – because AI tools are inconsistent.

Access Levels

Sometimes what you receive depends, at least partly, on what you pay for.

I pay for a monthly ChatGPT Plus subscription, which provides broad access to ChatGPT for non-programmers. There are several subscription tiers, including a free option that you, as a general user, can try.

Developers, on the other hand, using the APIs (application programming interfaces), generally pay with tokens based on usage.

This pricing approach is common across AI services today, although every vendor is somewhat different, and the landscape is evolving rapidly.

Interfacing With AI Assistants

I asked ChatGPT whether there is a website to report a Swallowtail Kite bird sighting. It gave me the correct answer, indicating that it searched the web and provided a link to a reporting form. That’s exactly what I wanted.

However, last week, when I specifically gave ChatGPT the link to one of my own blog articles, publicly available on the web, and asked it to proofread for typos, it gave me answers – but with errors that indicated it had NOT read the article.

The answers were wrong, and the language and errors it reported were NOT IN THAT ARTICLE. I reported the issue and asked ChatGPT what happened. When challenged, it replied that it had based its answer on earlier conversations, NOT on reading the article – so essentially ChatGPT fibbed to me. It should have simply told me it could not access the article, rather than making something up. Although why it couldn’t access the article is still baffling.

We officially call the phenomenon of AI making something up a hallucination or hallucinating, and all AI models do it.

We tend to humanize these tools. A fib or lie is an intentional and calculated behavior by a human. AI is not human. It doesn’t understand ethics or possess concepts of right and wrong. It does not have the capability of feeling shame or other emotions. It does have the capacity, however, to be extremely frustrating. Just when you think you know what to look for and how to interact, you discover that you’re wrong.

LLMs (Large Language Models) are trained on patterns, so ChatGPT reported what it “thought” it would find in that article based on earlier interactions. How do I know that? I asked it.

It said:

Some training methodologies reward forced guessing, meaning that it’s better to make a guess than to admit it doesn’t know or can’t answer. In some cases, hallucinating can be a result of outdated data or reaching into its own memory of our past interactions to piece together an answer.

Regardless, the onus falls on you, either as the initiator of the conversation, or the end-consumer, to validate every interaction and catch those issues.

When writing this article, I asked ChatGPT why it could search for an answer about a location to report Swallowtail Kite sightings and give me web links in its reply, but it could not proofread my own article and even indicated that it had, while providing misinformation.

Here’s the lengthy answer. To summarize, ChatGPT says that its answer was based on earlier restrictions – but that’s NOT true either because this interaction was the week before. A very long word-salad answer that was neither helpful nor accurate. I’ve come to learn that when ChatGPT gets “too chatty,” especially in a situation like this, it’s trying to “avoid something.” Generally, this chatty behavior precedes me discovering than ChatGPT can’t do something it clearly told me it could do.

Another example is when I asked ChatGPT to divide one long Word document into four shorter files. It said there was no problem. We agreed which sections belonged in which of the four resulting files. After some back-and-forth discussion, I told it to go ahead and divide, and it kept repeatedly telling me about divisions and what it was going to do. I finally told it I had raised children.

Finally, it fessed up.

Remember, this is a machine telling me that it “realized halfway through.” That’s hooey. Then it went on to tell me what it could do, which it couldn’t do either.

I’ve omitted 3 or 4 pages of increasing frustration here.

By this point, and several hours after we began, my exasperation level was off the charts. I could have done this myself in one fourth of the time I had already invested – and I still had to complete the task manually. I thought it would be quicker and easier to have AI perform what should have been a simple AI task – and AI confirmed this line of logic. Clearly, we were both wrong.

I never know what to expect anymore – as I’m often astounded in both directions.

ChatGPT kept telling me that my time wasn’t wasted and the good news was that I now had the redesigned document, which was the hard part anyway. Of course I had the redesign, because I DID THE REDESIGN!

I gave it instructions for what to do in the future. In other words, in my best mother voice, “don’t ever do that again!”

It told me that when I said “I’ve raised children,” it “knew the jig was up.” It’s trying to be “cute” here. Remember, it’s a machine – even though this exchange implies it was doing that on purpose until “caught.” It did stop at that point and admitted what was going on.

I told ChatGPT that I was going to use this as an example of “AI can frustrate you to tears.” And it replied, “You absolutely should add that.”

I sent it to timeout for a couple of days, like the naughty child it was, while I got over being mad at it.

So, the tool that should be able to help me not only sometimes does not help, it tells me that it did, then procedes to make excuses.

“Did you take out the trash?”

Rolls eyes, “Yes, Mom, I took out the trash.”

“It’s sitting right here…”

To be fair, on the flip side, sometimes ChatGPT is extremely helpful, which is why I let it out of timeout and didn’t cancel my subscription – although I was tempted to ask how to do that about midway through😊

The bottom line – we can’t trust AI results without verifying every single thing, every single time!

This is true for every AI agent out there. Full stop. It’s not just ChatGPT.

AI Fatigue

Like a sleepy toddler, AI behavior gets worse or deteriorates the “more tired” it gets, which means the further into a chat session.

If I submit a Word document or save my draft article as a PDF and upload it to ChatGPT, and the article is “long”, ChatGPT gets worse as it goes along. Not only does it miss things, but it also reports things that aren’t there and sometimes simply makes things up. Sometimes PDFs have better results, but not always.

This general phenomenon is called “fatigue” or “context fatigue,” which is a type of hallucination. The fact that there’s a term for these things is concerning in its own right.

You’re probably wondering why on earth I still use this tool at all, and the answer is because I’ve learned:

  • How to use it (mostly) successfully
  • When to use it and when to use a different tool
  • AND NEVER to trust it without confirmation

Clearly, under specific circumstances, the good outweighs the bad, or I wouldn’t still be using it at all.

AI Icons

As a consumer, how might you know when you’re engaging with something that was AI generated?

Ethical AI users, developers, and companies indicate when they are using AI or when output was produced using AI. AI is new enough that there are no standard practices or only one icon to look for. Complicating the issue is that fact that while something may not be entirely AI generated, it may have been AI assisted or partly generated.

And what constitutes AI anyway?

What about Grammarly, a proofreading tool that we have been using for years to assist with spelling and grammar? Is that AI? Or just its newer “rewrite” feature? I’ve used Grammarly for a long time, but differently that ChatGPT. Grammarly catches issues like verb tenses while you’re writing. ChatGPT doesn’t integrate and only works on things you submit directly inside the application. Grammarly has become more persnickity, and ChatGPT more useful during the same time period.

It’s clear that images and infographics I ask to have created are Generative AI, and should be labeled as such, but much of the rest is unclear.

I asked ChatGPT to generate an image of the most common icons indicating that something is AI-generated and gave it three examples. I also included the instructions to add “generated by AI” at the bottom, which should be a standard practice, and this is what it provided.

I’m seeing the little “sparkle” more and more, and I suspect this will become the industry standard.

Word of caution: Just because you DON’T see the AI disclaimer “Generated by AI” or something similar doesn’t mean what you’re viewing WASN’T generated using AI. This is particularly true for unethical AI uses, but not everyone that omits the disclaimer is unethical. It’s still a new field.

But assuredly, if someone has created something using Generative AI for an unethical purpose, with the goal being to convince you that it’s true, they certainly aren’t going to tell you that they are trying to manipulate you through the use of AI.

Keep your guard up.

Google

One of the features I like about Google (most of the time) is that Google’s AI integrates with its search engine. In other words, it’s a hybrid, and if you’re using Google, you’re already using AI.

As Google and every other AI agent will tell you, “AI can be wrong.” That’s like telling the doctor, as you’re in labor, getting ready to deliver a baby, “I might be pregnant.”

Google Search Plus AI Integration

Google search now has an option to include AI integration, which I love for two reasons.

First, Google provides a nice summary, AND, more importantly, it gives me sources for each statement.

I asked Google, “Is there only one AI symbol?” knowing that the answer is no.

Please note that this is the “All” search mode, NOT “AI Mode” which provides additional analysis.

I love that Google provides sources, and I can click through to decide for myself what’s relevant or accurate.

The sources are also provided in an information box on the right-hand side of the page with a preview so you can quickly do a cursory evaluation of the sources that contributed to Google’s response.

Providing sources does NOT mean that AI is correct 100% of the time, of course, but it increases the chances because, as a search engine, Google has the benefit of being able to “rank” or “judge” which sites are consistently accessed and seem to be of better “quality.” Yes, I know there are lots of “air quotes” in that sentence, but everything is the consistency of warm jello in this industry right now.

“AI Can Be Wrong”

That’s the understatement of the year. If 2026 has a tech theme, this is it!

Over time, and with much use, I’ve learned to use Google to gather resources and reference sites for a particular topic. I always confirm and verify. I have seen Google be wrong, for a variety of reasons, but I’ve YET to see Google make up a reference site out of thin air. I think that’s the benefit of combining the search engine that has years of ranking experience with AI.

In some cases, other AI tools hallucinate names of books and materials in libraries, complete with fictitious reference and call numbers. In one case, one of the AI tools provided me with a list of books that I authored, which included:

  • A book that another author wrote (but without that author’s name)
  • A book that doesn’t exist at all
  • A book that I did write
  • And missed another book that I wrote

When I asked about the missing book that I wrote, it told me that another author wrote it. I was NOT happy.

Today, a few weeks later, the answer is still wrong, but wrong differently. In all fairness, when I switched to Google’s AI mode, it did better and only included my books. When I asked ChatGPT, it was exactly right and also included my blog articles and scientific paper publications. Like I said before, consistency within and between tools is problematic.

AI agents are improving and will continue to do so. However, we always need to maintain the level of skepticism we exercise when viewing unsourced family trees, and even those with sources attached. We evaluate everything in our genealogy, and we need to implement the same skepticism protocol with AI results.

AI is built on whatever information is found on the internet and other unnamed, unknown training sources. I don’t have to explain the pitfalls inherent in that approach.

You can give it a test drive by asking Google or any AI model about your favorite disproven family myth.

Here’s mine.

I asked Google, “Who are the Parents of Philippe Mius born in 1609?”

This is wrong and is a compilation of various flavors of erroneous information from the web. However, the third bullet point is correct, so inaccurate information is interspersed with accurate information, factually stated and presented beautifully, which might lead people to believe without verifying.

By the way, this isn’t the fault of AI which is only providing information for you to verify.

Think about the next step – if AI generated a story for you with erroneous information, and how wonderfully convincing that story could be. Just because something is provided in narrative or “story format” doesn’t make it any more accurate, just more interesting.

Understanding what AI is, how it works, and why it can be both useful and confidently wrong is only the first step. The next question is practical: how do we actually use AI successfully without letting it lead us into the weeds with bright, shiny objects before abandoning us there?

Which leads me to the question – “What is Generative AI?”

Generative AI

AI, in general, is a tool that we can use in a number of ways. You can ask AI to help analyze a spreadsheet, so long as you check to make sure the analysis is accurate.

Sometimes AI succeeds with complex things and fails at simple ones – defying the type of evaluation logic we might utilize in other circumstances.

Generative AI is different in that it’s a subset of AI that is used to create new content. Some common uses are:

  • Story or article creation
  • Image generation, like posters, infographics, or pictures
  • Audio generation
  • Video generation
  • Photo “Repair”
  • Photo modification

Let’s look at a recent example.

I wanted this image of me with Mom’s quilt around my shoulders to be combined with a labyrinth photo (or photos) depicting a walk in my labyrinth.

I submitted several photographs of myself and the labyrinth, including some of me inside the labyrinth from different angles. I’m not including them all here, as it’s not the photos that are important, but the fact that I provided plenty of fodder.

Here’s the labyrinth from the air. I included more photos from different angles on the ground.

I asked ChatGPT to combine them to show me walking in or into the labyrinth with the quilt as shown in the first photo.

This is the best result after a couple hours and at least 30 attempts. Try as I might, I was unable to convince ChatGPT to create an accurate labyrinth, even though I provided several photos and had an active conversation about what I wanted.

It parroted what I said and correctly indicated that it understood what I wanted, but failed to produce the expected output. The real labyrinth includes boulders and non-uniformly placed rocks lining the labyrinth path. This “labyrinth” also has no “turns” and appears to be a series of concentric circles, which is clearly not what a labyrinth is. Towards the end, each iteration was actually getting worse instead of better.

I finally just gave up and stopped.

This image really doesn’t matter because it was just for fun, although I had hoped to use it for Mother’s Day. However, it serves as an excellent example of the great potential, along with the current level of frustration. We’ll discuss photo modification and repair, a subject near and dear to a genealogist’s heart, in the next article about AI and genealogy.

Unseen AI

The examples we’ve been discussing are circumstances where you’re aware that AI is being used because you’re in the driver’s seat, but what about circumstances where AI is ingrained in a platform, and you’re not aware that you’re dealing with AI?

Let’s use medical care, for example.

Medical Care

Today, some patient portal software platforms include AI answers to questions patients can submit. Some applications are fine, like providing directions to the office or even for pre and post-operative standard care.

Individualized questions are different. The platforms I’m familiar with submit the AI answer to a provider before posting the answer back to the patient. Do they all submit to a provider first? That’s a parameter that can be configured by the practice. There is no “best practice” standard, at least not yet, but here’s how the Mayo Clinic is handling answers to patient questions.

Johns Hopkins discusses AI’s role and great potential in health care, here. I don’t want any entity to get out over their skis with AI just yet. That said, AI is providing valuable assistance in the medical imaging field, analyzing scans with unprecedented speed and precision, picking up fine signals that might easily be missed or not evident at all to humans, then handing the results off to the diagnostician.

An article in the Atlantic, titled, “AI is Taking Over Hospitals” isn’t being hyperbolic. The first paragraph states:

“Every knowledge-based profession may one day reach the point when AI outperforms the human experts. In medicine, that day appeared to come in April. A group of primarily Harvard and Stanford researchers announced the results of a study that pitted ChatGPT against hundreds of physicians in a diagnostic obstacle course involving written medical mysteries and information from real-world patients. The bot had won, and the humans weren’t entirely happy about it.” You can read the rest here.

Harvard discusses AI in health care, here, empowerment, and where the field is headed.

Truthfully, based on recent interactions with my healthcare provider, I’d be better off with AI. AI with guardrails may be the way of the future, especially in underserved areas. AI as a tool would allow patients to better understand their diagnosis, options, and advocate for themselves.

It’s important for patients to know when AI and/or an actual physician or other health care provider has been involved with a response. I hope provider “involvement” isn’t just a mass “click to send.”

ChatBots

Next, consider banking. I submitted a question about currency conversion to my bank’s chatbot on their website. Not all chatbots are AI – some are actually people or transfer calls to humans if the question moves into an area of uncertainty.

The Chatbot could not answer a question about if there were fees for currency conversion between the US and Canada, simply telling me I had to visit my local branch. This should not be a difficult question. I asked if it was a chatbot or a human, and it simply replied, “My name is Sara. I’m in Pennsylvania.” Yep, Chatbot, and a disingenuous answer.

So, I took the Canadian check and drove a half hour each way to visit my branch. They asked why I came in for that information instead of calling. I explained what happened, and when I tried to call the branch, I was routed to a centralized call center, where I interacted with another bot and received the same answer.

As it turned out, there was no conversion fee, but I needed to deposit the check in person anyway because their phone app does not have the ability to do currency conversion. I’ll spare you my opinion on all of this, other than to say that this frustration and poor customer service was entirely unnecessary. I felt like, instead of being assisted, I was in “tech loop jail.”

AI could have been programmed to help by answering a straightforward yes/no question, but it wasn’t. The automated call center just sent me to the bot. The phone app could do currency conversion, but it doesn’t.

You’ll have to decide for yourself how comfortable you are with any answer you receive in these types of circumstances. How will you know if it’s AI versus a human, and how much confidence do you have in either? Both can make mistakes. Maybe if combined, mistakes can be minimized or eliminated altogether.

In the bank case, I wasted time and was frustrated, but not damaged. In other situations, I would only want to discuss my specific circumstances with a human who actually knew what they were doing or was at least actively overseeing an AI tool.

Stay vigilant.

AI Vibe Coding and Hacking Tools

AI has made computer programming accessible to the general populace, even if they don’t know how to code. That’s both the good news and the bad news.

AI is making it substantially easier to be bad guys. Specifically, AI has enabled the creation of bots that hack and scrape websites, making it significantly easier to compromise them or bring them down.

The Atlantic’s article, “Assume You Will Be Hacked” isn’t kidding. The opening sentence says, “AI is enabling a deluge of cyberattacks the likes of which we’ve never seen before.” If you’re thinking to yourself, “I don’t have anything to worry about, I don’t have a website,” think again. Where do you bank? That’s just for starters.

One of the reasons that it’s easier to be evil is something known as “vibe coding,” which means you don’t need to know how to write code or program a computer. The AI tool, generates code on your behalf based on your human-language description of what you want it to do. You tell it what you want, and it constructs the code to (hopefully) perform that function.

Here’s an example with the human prompt and the first few lines of the code generated immediately by AI.

The prompt is short, only two sentences, but the AI tool generated nearly 50 lines of HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. This example makes the “magic” of vibe coding immediately obvious, even to, or maybe especially to someone who’s never programmed.

Generated by AI

You can then follow up with additional instructions, like “make the box blue,” or green, or whatever.

For experienced coders, this is a huge productivity advantage because they don’t have to start from scratch. They also have the skills to catch errors in either AI’s logic, code or both.

The problem is that most people either don’t have the skills or simply don’t take the time. For the unwary, vibe coding can introduce security vulnerabilities and hidden bugs. “The unwary” doesn’t just apply to the person generating the code, but the consumer too, who has no idea who generated that code or how it was generated.

AI doesn’t have morals or ethics and has no idea what it is that you’re planning to do with the program it produces for you. It’s easy to ramp up from PC level to server level to internet scale.

AI is just a tool and doesn’t have a way to judge intent. We’ve known for a very long time that viruses and malware exist, and someone is always trying to compromise either us personally or business entities, one way or another. We’ve seen examples of cybersecurity failures in our own industry.

It falls to the vendors to protect themselves and their customers, as much as possible, and to us as consumers to be ever vigilant. We need to learn about and engage in safe, secure practices with known entities by going directly to their websites and not clicking through links.

We will focus on the ever-present and growing dangers of AI in the final article of this series.

Successful Uses of AI

By now, you might think I don’t like AI, but that’s not true. I’ve embraced it. We’re roommates. We live in the same house and get along most of the time, but we’re not married. I use AI in some form nearly every day. AI agents excel at some things.

We’re going to look at a few examples, but one thing these examples don’t convey is the amount of time invested behind the scenes.

Learning to use AI effectively is the key to success. The difference is that the AI revolution is a rapidly evolving technology frontier. We’re all riding the bucking broncos and trying to hold on while getting something useful done.

Many of the examples in this article, both successes and failures, represent hours of experimentation, refining prompts, asking follow-up questions, and learning what works – and what doesn’t. Experience matters.

So, let’s take a look at some AI successes.

Problem Solving

I asked ChatGPT when, at my current publication rate since the inception of my blog, the number of published articles would equal the year in which that article was published.

In less than a minute, I had an answer – around November 2, 2027.

Additionally, ChatGPT “showed its work,” which helps me immensely in the verification process.

What would I need to check here? Clearly, if this were more than just a fun exercise, I’d check to see if both the logic and the math are accurate.

This level of communication between ChatGPT and me didn’t happen overnight, though. I’ve learned how to prompt more effectively so that I have a better chance of receiving what I want. ChatGPT has remembered our interactions and, to some extent, has learned what I want based on both instructions and my repeated use of the tool.

You can also describe what you want and ask it what prompts, or instructions, you need to provide. This also works for modifications if you didn’t receive exactly what you expected.

AI can do amazing things, then fail at something incredibly simple, so you need to confirm everything. Don’t allow your confidence to build, which means letting your guard down.

Proofreading and Editing

How do I typically use ChatGPT, in particular? I mostly use it for proofreading and editing where I’ve given it very specific instructions. I don’t want it to change the meaning of or rewrite anything.

I want it to be my editor, of sorts, although it can also miss important errors and doesn’t always have the context that I do. ChatGPT can’t always “see” or “understand” images, placement, bolding, or colored text in documents, so it’s easy for it to miss nuances that are covered there. It’s a TEXT editor.

I’ve also asked ChatGPT to remember other preferences. For example, I dislike em dashes, so it avoids suggesting them unless there’s a compelling reason, which I generally ignore.

This is an example of our typical workflow where I provide my text, and ChatGPT provides suggestions.

When I ask for a proofreading sweep just prior to uploading to WordPress, I don’t want my content rewritten. Instead, I want suggestions for changes where my original sentence is shown first, the suggested revision below it, changes highlighted in bold, and an explanation of why the change is recommended. Typos are obvious, but other things aren’t. I evaluate each suggestion and decide if I like it entirely, partly, or not at all.

I pasted the paragraph above into ChatGPT and told it that I want to use it as an example of our workflow and to proceed normally. Our exchange is shown below.

Of the five suggestions, I would omit the first two, include the third and fourth, and possibly the last suggestion. I especially like the explanations of why.

Some exchanges are more complex, where ChatGPT suggests breaking a long sentence into two, or a different solution when something feels awkward. Often, the reason I ask ChatGPT is because I can’t quite think of the right word, or the sentence or paragraph structure just feels “off.”

Aside from discouraging em dashes, some of the instructions I’ve asked it to remember include:

  • Don’t rewrite my voice. Look for typos, punctuation, repeated words, missing words, grammar, and awkward phrasing, but don’t “improve” my writing just because you would have written it differently.
  • When transcribing historical documents, don’t guess. If a word can’t be read, mark it as uncertain rather than inventing something.
  • When generating images, avoid sepia tones. I prefer brighter colors in my own palette, and usually don’t want words embedded in the image.
  • For genealogical translations, be exactly literal first. Preserve names, dates, and relationships accurately before making the language more readable. Indicate words you can’t read and leave space for them.
  • Explain the reason for non-obvious edits. A typo is self-explanatory, but if you recommend changing wording or punctuation, tell me why.

Remember that AI, in this case, is operating as an LLM, large language model, and is helping you as an editor, not as an expert in anything, and not as the author. That’s your role.

It’s also worth mentioning that AI does miss things, and I do my final editing on the WordPress platform, where I always seem to introduce at least some kind of error. Dragon commas, missing periods and extra spaces are my particular nemesis. Thankfully, I have a very good human friend who sends me those for correction!

Sometimes, as an author, I’m my own worst enemy. We need editors because we tend to think that removing words or sentences is chopping limbs from our cherished tree, but it isn’t. I use ChatGPT to help with those things.

This past week, I wrote a draft conference presentation submission, but it needed to be refined to fewer than 200 words. I submitted it to ChatGPT, which then gave me several suggestions for word changes or consolidation to hit the target.

I never, EVER ask or allow AI to write for me. Not only do my articles need to be in “my voice,” but there’s also a benefit to the author of working with the content. Going back and rewriting, researching, straightening things up. I do sometimes ask ChatGPT if I have flow issues with content, for example a sentence.

Given that ChatGPT is a LLM, I often ask it language-related questions.

Prompt: Remorse isn’t the word that I want here:

As they sailed out of the harbour, Madeleine, about 18 with a small baby, probably shed a few tears. She knew she would never return, and she would never see her family again. Or, maybe she was too young to feel any remorse and viewed it as a grand adventure.

ChatGPT suggested 7 replacement words, plus three rewritten sentences, including the following.

She knew she would never return, and she would never see her family again. Or, perhaps she was too young to fully grasp the magnitude of what she was leaving behind and viewed it as a grand adventure.

I selected this version because it’s actually what I was trying to say and couldn’t find the right words.

I use AI this way all the time. It’s a productive collaboration – AI isn’t writing for me; it’s helping me write better. I’m not outsourcing my thinking, but augmenting the creative process through targeted back-and-forth interaction. The nice thing about AI is that it never gets its feelings hurt if you don’t do what it suggests.

Could I publish more articles if I used AI more liberally? Of course. But that’s not my goal or my style, aside from the inherent issues of accuracy. My articles need to be authentically mine. My voice, my content, plus AI assistance with editor functions.

Be Careful What You Ask For

Ironically, I’ve instructed ChatGPT so many times not to rewrite anything that the ONE TIME I did ask it to help me write something based on our discussions, it refused. I was truly shocked. It was eventually the Love Lives article, and I was terribly grief-stricken. I hoped that AI could give me a head start, but ChatGPT told me that it needed to be in my voice. Smart aleck!

However, it didn’t leave me flapping in the wind. Instead, it suggested that, based on our discussions, it could help me organize my thoughts into a potential outline. It took me a few weeks to come to terms with the situation before I could actually write, and ChatGPT was exactly right. I really did need to work through that entirely by myself. Bravo to my ChatGPT buddy!

The way I choose to use AI is extremely useful but still preserves my writing, style, and retains my voice.

Translation and Transcription

Another way that I use ChatGPT is to translate documents from other languages, and transcribe them. In my case, the translation is typically from either 17th or 18th century French.

However, I also use ChatGPT to attempt to sort out English.

Could I figure this out eventually? Probably, because it’s archaic English and not archaic French, but why not use a time-saving tool?

Here’s my prompt to ChatGPT: “The names in this document are William Brewster, Isaac Harris and Thomas Prence as witnesses. Richard White is the man whose will it was. Please transcribe the rest.”

The reply:

August the 14th 1727

The above named William Brewster, Isaac Harris
and Thomas Prence sayeth that they saw
the above named Richard White sign seal and
heard him declare the above written to be his
last Will and Testament and that at the same
time they sett to their hands as Witnesses and
also to the best of their observation the then
was of sound and disposing mind and memory

Before Isaac Winslow Judge of Probate

A few notes on uncertain readings:

    • “sayeth” could also be “saith” — both were commonly used.
    • “sett” is written with a double “t.”
    • “the then was of sound…” almost certainly intends “he then was of sound…” but the manuscript itself is difficult and faint there.
    • “disposing mind and memory” is a standard probate phrase of the period.

My AI assistant provided this in seconds, and I didn’t have to struggle.

What do I need to do next? You already know the answer. Check it for accuracy.

AI can also summarize relationships among people in one or more complex documents, such as deeds or wills, or some combination thereof – or at least try to.

Meetings, Audio, and Notes

AI, specifically Gemini, also takes wonderful meeting notes and then synthesizes them into bullet points. It doesn’t replace being present for discussions, but it’s one heck of a lot better than being absent.

Most AI tools have an audio transcription capability, as does YouTube.

Presentation Assistance

AI can take your slide presentation, condense the content and create a syllabus.

AI can also create PowerPoint presentations, but I’m much, much too fussy about my presentations and, again, “my voice.” In this case, I also have a distinctive template style and strong preferences.

If AI ever gets to the point where it can accurately create in “my voice,” I think I’m more frightened than ever.

Challenges

I have had less success with more complex requests. For example, I uploaded a spreadsheet and asked ChatGPT to create some charts from the contents. One of the graphs just didn’t look right, and sure enough, it wasn’t.

When challenged, ChatGPT “fixed” it, which was also incorrect.

Eventually, I gave up. But were I to try it again just six months later, the tool may well have improved to the point where it’s accurate now.

Yesterday’s failures are the training ground for tomorrow’s successes.

I’m now at the point where I ask, when faced with a task, “How might AI be able to help me?” That doesn’t necessarily mean that it can help me, or not in less time than I could have done it myself. Sometimes the frustration load is overwhelming, but the successes outnumber those bad days. I’m getting better with prompting, and it’s improving at the same time.

Two years ago, I was more frustrated than successful, but thankfully, I persevered and didn’t give up. Someplace along the way, the tables turned.

AI can be an amazing research assistant, so long as you continue to remember that it’s not human, it can’t have an original thought, it makes mistakes, and you are responsible.

AI Education

I’m sure you’ve noticed that AI is THE hot topic at genealogy conferences now, and with good reason.

If you attend conferences either in person or virtually, you can find any number of sessions. AI today is like the early days of DNA testing. Everyone was curious, lots of people were suspicious, and many were outright opposed. But DNA was and is the way of the future, and so is AI.

We are in the toddler phase today.

Mark Thompson and Steve Little are the two people I trust regarding AI, and particularly in the genealogy space. I asked them for educational recommendations. It’s a full-time job to keep current – and they both do.

Mark provided links to two videos that are publicly available, indicating that they start with the complete basics and build up from there. I highly recommend anything they create!

The third link is a webinar that they produced as a team for Legacy Family Tree Webinars. It requires a subscription, but I love Legacy Family Tree, and I think a subscription is well worth the money.

Their Family History AI Show podcast is another great way to learn. Mark said that their podcasts run from beginner basics to advanced topics, with a smattering of current events in the family history and AI worlds thrown in for fun.

Another resource is the Facebook group, Genealogy and Artificial Intelligence, but remember that members are not experts, so read everything there with a grain or even the whole lick of salt.

By now, I hope you have a better understanding of how to recognize when AI’s involved, how to use AI successfully and when to recognize its warning signs.

Next upAI and Genealogy – Brick Walls, Breakthroughs and Blunders. I’m going to share several examples and topics for discussion, including my most recent project where I’m using AI very successfully to enhance my genealogy research!

_____________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

Subscribe!

If you haven’t already subscribed, it’s free. You’ll receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button at the top of the main blog page, here.

Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small commission when you click a vendor link in my articles and purchase that item. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the affiliate links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

All About AI – What It Is, What It Isn’t, and Why It Matters

This is the second article in the AI series. The first, Your Wonderful AI Assistant – Sometimes Wrong, Never Unsure, Always Convincing, explains why I’m writing this series and what to expect. I suggest that you read these articles in publication order, as they build on each other.

AI is neither inherently good nor bad. The outcome depends on:

  • How it is used
  • By whom
  • Capabilities of the (ever-changing) tools themselves
  • The understanding level of the “requester” and the “consumer,” both
  • Safeguards applied or neglected

About AI

Let me start by saying that I don’t love AI, and I don’t hate it. I’m neither an evangelist nor a doomsayer. I’m a realist. AI is a powerful tool, capable of remarkable things and spectacular failures. Understanding the difference and interacting appropriately are the keys to success or failure.

AI is simply a tool, and like all tools, it can be used for good or evil. AI has the potential to, and does, in some cases, make our lives easier. However, the bad guys and miscreants saw that potential early and have perfected it.

AI is all around us, whether you realize it or not, so don’t think you can just avoid it, because you can’t. AI exists in many forms and is here to stay. We need to educate ourselves so we can reap some of the benefits and avoid the pitfalls.

Education and increased vigilance are the only ways to protect yourself, and I mean vigilance incorporated into the very fiber of your being. No more, “that looks interesting” and clicking without thinking. It’s so easy to do.

When I talk about AI safety, I’m referring to two types of safety.

  1. Using AI tools for reliable results, and how to determine when you’re receiving or consuming something questionable. AI failures occur often and are both irritating and misleading, but not always obvious.
  2. Literally protecting yourself from danger. This includes recognizing when AI is being used without your knowledge and how to protect yourself in the new threat landscape. I am not overexaggerating.

Unfortunately, AI safety is a sliding scale, progressing from one end of the spectrum to the other. There’s not always a clear delineation between correct and incorrect, safe and unsafe, or between different types of AI. As I am wont to say, “It depends.”

Learning about AI, both in general and in specific contexts, is critical. Not yesterday’s AI – but AI right now, because both the AI tools and AI’s capabilities are changing at lightning speed.

We all need to up our game and retrain ourselves to always stop and think first.

AI and You

There are essentially three ways people encounter or interact with AI.

  1. You’re actively using AI as a tool, such as ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, or others. This is generally safe from an actual danger or “threat” perspective, particularly because you are in the driver’s seat. However, there are aspects you need to be aware of – especially if you’re a novice. I’ll explain methodologies to use AI to (hopefully) increase your productivity and save you from following AI into the underbrush of falsehoods, inaccuracies, and misplaced confidence. In other words, so you don’t have to say, “Wow, was I ever an idiot,” too often.
  2. You’re unknowingly interacting with AI. Sometimes this is fine, but it can open the door to inadvertent reliance on incorrect information and therefore various forms of harm. Sometimes, harm rises to the level of actual danger. Understanding when you’re interacting with AI, understanding its limitations, and recognizing danger signs are important aspects of staying safe.
  3. The AI threat landscape. AI can be dangerous and used against you. I mean screaming-red-neon-flashing-sign hair-on-fire dangerous, and I’m going to explain this new threat landscape and how to improve your chances of being safe, primarily in the final article of this series.

I Use AI, But There Are Limits

I hold a graduate degree in Computer Science and have years of experience in the technology industry where security is both essential and critical. That background, while preparing me generally, cannot prepare one for the situations and well-hidden threats we now encounter every day. Being overconfident and overreliant on prior experience is foolhardy and a sure way to get burned.

The one thing that’s constant in the computer industry is change. The underlying fundamentals remain the same, but everything else changes – and AI is morphing rapidly.

I’ve been using AI since the beginning in a very restricted, measured way. I use AI regularly, tactically, and cautiously, with huge guardrails. I started out by taking classes from Mark Thompson and Steve Little, AI experts in the genealogy space, to learn how to use AI productively. That was a couple of years ago, and the entire landscape has changed since then. I make it a priority to stay current.

In the next article about using AI safely, I’ll share recommendations for training and education from Mark and Steve.

AI tools are trying to emerge from their terrible toddler stage and morph into early teens, but they relapse a lot! Sometimes AI is very helpful, sometimes wrong, and often frustrating – interspersed with amazing victories where AI helps us immensely.

Unfortunately, often it’s almost impossible to tell which is which.

Inspired by a posting in the Facebook group, Genealogy and Artificial Intelligence. Image is AI generated and appropriately labeled as such.

Here’s the caveat – I know I’m using AI. I’m not accidentally interfacing with a Chatbot, thinking it’s a human. I’m not reading something someone else posted and believing I’m reading about an experience that’s true – when it’s AI-created fiction. The question, of course, at that point, is WHY someone created it and posted it in a way that conceals its true origins.

My AI usage is intentional. I know how to be vigilant, generally what AI can and can’t do, and that I absolutely positively MUST fact-check everything. Often, I inadvertently push the limits of AI, thinking it can perform more than it can accurately, which is another reason everything must be checked. As genealogists, verifying sources should be second nature.

If you’re going to use AI, it’s essential that you do the same thing.

So, what, exactly, is AI?

What is Artificial Intelligence?

This is really a difficult question to answer, because AI has been more of a slow evolution, followed by a rapid acceleration of technology – not a specific “thing.” That acceleration occurred when standalone AI tools like ChatGPT, which we know are AI because they are specifically called that, were introduced and made available to the consuming public.

We’ve been using computers for decades now, assisting us on platforms from mainframes to PCs to tablets. Today, our phones are more powerful and useful than early mainframes.

AI is the latest in the cadre of applications, a type of tool that can either stand alone or be embedded in other software tools for specific tasks. Think Chatbots for business websites.

While AI is beginning to be “everywhere,” it’s not a universal scapegoat.

Two years in, AI is being blamed for everything. While AI does make a lot of mistakes, many issues aren’t a result of AI, and it’s not fair to presume they are. Let me give you two examples of what is and is not AI.

  • Not AI – Someone tried to enter text, meaning alphabet, in a field meant exclusively for numbers, like a month field that’s supposed to be a number and not the month name. The person was angry because “AI was wrong” and prevented the erroneous entry. First, it wasn’t wrong, and second, it wasn’t AI.

One of the earliest computer uses was to parse date fields and ensure that the “right thing” was being entered in the correct place. In this case, a numerical month, not the month name. That’s not AI. That’s just plain old-fashioned programming error-checking that’s been a part of software for decades. The program was performing exactly as it was intended.

  • AI – I submitted a spreadsheet to ChatGPT and instructed it to move all of the data in cells in column A that are entirely numeric to the same row in Column B, and to leave everything that contains any alphabetic characters where it is in column A. That’s AI, both because I’m using a known AI tool, and it’s processing my instructions to produce output that did not exist before.

The above image is what I wanted. I completed this by hand to show you what I had in mind. Working by hand is fine with 8 rows of data, but it wouldn’t be fine with 1000 rows, or more. That’s when you need a tool.

What could go wrong? Plenty.

Let’s say that I didn’t provide specific instructions and a cell contained mixed alpha and numeric, like Jane2. Or, if the tool just plain messed up because of some other unknown reason – such as the file being too long, or it misinterpreted an instruction. That’s why you have to verify everything.

With AI, it’s always some variant of the wild west frontier.

Next, I submitted my Before and After spreadsheet, above, and instructed ChatGPT to “Please put this in a chart and make it pretty.”

This is exactly what I received.

I didn’t receive what I wanted, because I didn’t tell the AI tool specifically what I wanted (spacing, color, font, size), and what I didn’t want. This isn’t a problem with the AI tool, it’s a problem with the instructions provided by the “driver.” AI is not a mind-reader, at least not yet.

Hint: When I don’t receive what I wanted, I tell ChatGPT what I wanted and ask it why I didn’t receive that, and what instructions I could provide differently. In this case, I learned that it can’t “discern colored text” (red) and only sometimes can “see” bolding.

This was a very simple comparison of AI versus non-AI. Of course there are endless variations, but in general, AI does something that produces something new or different or in another format – based on conversational instructions.

Examples of what AI can do well:

  • Take notes and summarize online meetings
  • Organize information into outline format
  • Suggest structure
  • Proofread and sometimes provide editing suggestions
  • Suggest places to look for additional information
  • Translate, transcribe and summarize both typewritten and handwritten documents, in multiple languages

Every one of these comes with a caveat. AI can always be wrong. Like any helper or intern, it’s up to us, as the responsible party, to be, well, responsible by monitoring and verifying everything.

Being wrong in places does not mean the tool isn’t useful. AI can transcribe an entire document in seconds, but I need to proofread it against the original. That’s a significant time savings for me. AI can then assist with the logic of how people are related to each other. That doesn’t mean it’s accurate, but it’s a place to start.

We have to learn how to communicate with our intern in a way it can understand to (hopefully) receive the output we want, and we have to confirm that it is.

The more difficult and complex the task, the more difficult the verification.

GIGO

The overarching theme for all computer data is GIGO – garbage in, garbage out. I know everyone can think of hundreds of examples that have absolutely nothing to do with AI. It’s the same now, but on steroids because we add the layers of:

  • Our instructions to AI, which may or may not be as thorough as we thought
  • AI interpreting what it thought we said, according to its internal rules and limitations that we don’t understand
  • AI manipulating data and producing output on our behalf

Additionally, when we ask AI to gather information about something, it can only gather what it can see. For example, some AI tools cannot reliably open weblinks, while others can. Some, like Google have internal routines to rank sites that are more reliable and accurate, and other tools do not.

Asking your AI tool for it’s sources so you can evaluate the GIGO factor is essential too.

Drinking From the Firehose

You might think AI is completely new, but it really isn’t. What’s new is the label of AI and consumer-based products where you get to be the driver.

Think of AI as the big umbrella.

In the past decade or so, artificial intelligence models have been slowly being developed, often for specific use cases. Machine learning models that are self-teaching are good examples. Genetic imputation to equalize autosomal DNA files produced by different vendors before matching is a specific use case.

Traditional programming is very specific and instructs, “If X, then Y.” Imputation, within a limited range of options, says, “Based on X, I think Y is most likely next character.” Machine learning learns by example. AI is the next generation where answers to questions are not hard-coded or self-learned in the same way.

With AI, one could interact and say, “Based on X, what do you think is next, and why?” The answer would be conversational, and would explain how the AI tool got to the result of Y. That doesn’t mean Y is accurate.

Before AI, consumers had never been in the driver’s seat, with the ability to query computers easily about anything with no programming needed – receiving conversational answers in their language of choice. Answers that are hopefully accurate.

Back in 2011, Siri became available, Amazon Alexa in 2014, and Google Assistant in 2016, but these were all command driven with a restricted vocabulary and could only perform limited actions.

In October 2022, ChatGPT introduced us to a new world, triggering the AI boom. By late 2023 and early 2024, suddenly the term AI, artificial intelligence, snowballed and was everywhere. The early versions of AI tools could only do a fraction of what they can in 2026, and could not perform tasks on your behalf.

ChatGPT prompt: “Make me a fun goofy picture with a cat that illustrates the ability of AI to make a fun goofy picture.”

Today that has all changed and it seems like everyone is making goofy pictures for fun.

Artificial Intelligence is NOT Intelligent

Let me say this loudly – artificial intelligence is not intelligent!

AI is a computer – electronic pulses in a data center somewhere. AI is trained to gather massive amounts of data, distill it in specific ways, and then, using various types of skills, interact with humans in a helpful manner. “Helpful” depends on perspective.

This field, as a whole, is really still in its infancy. That’s both the bad news and the good news.

AI tools are “new,” exciting, and frightening all at once. AI has enormous potential, but it also creates opportunities for misuse, deception, and unintended consequences.

I’m not referring to water and electricity consumption and the impact of building thousands of data centers on the environment. I’ll let you decide for yourself on that one.

Risks include:

  • Frequent errors
  • GIGO
  • Results being presented overconfidently by the AI agent
  • Faulty results being believed by the consumer (that’s you and me) with the same level of overconfidence, and without verification
  • Social engineering – meaning the manipulation and influence of people by bad actors
  • Extremely dangerous, highly malicious manipulation and applications in ways not possible before

The entire AI landscape is complicated by a lack of public understanding and made even more challenging by the extraordinary pace of this technology’s evolution.

Multiple Types of AI

There are multiple types of AI, ranging from Machine Learning models to full-blown Generative AI that creates goofy cat images for you. For the most part, today, we’re talking about LLMs and Generative AI.

Large Language Models, called LLMs, are artificial intelligence tools, like ChatGPT or Claude, that are designed to process human-like text or speech and generate output in the same way. AI doesn’t just give you a list of resources that you evaluate yourself, like a search engine; it gives you an “answer” (such as it is), writes text, and has an interactive “conversation” with you.

How does that happen?

The AI tool at the data center aggregates and amalgamates data based on your input and its training, then predicts the words most likely to come next, in what context, and how those words relate to each other.

That’s how AI forms an “answer.”

This is how and why AI, specifically LLMs, can write essays on a topic, create entirely fictitious but highly engaging social media postings and stories that aren’t presented as “stories,” but as someone’s personal experiences, meaning as “truth.”

AI, or the people who generated that AI script, or both, present fictional results with great confidence, often beautifully, and far more convincingly than humans.

This is where it’s important to differentiate between the tool itself, and the “driver,” meaning the human that’s prompting the AI tool.

  • The driver needs to prompt AI correctly and verify the output.
  • AI, the tool itself, sometimes generates incorrect information, often regardless of the prompts provided by the driver.
  • Sometimes the AI tool performs exactly as instructed, but the driver requested something “improper.” By improper, I don’t mean inadvertently or by accident.
  • Sometimes the human is unethical.
  • AI isn’t a sentient being and doesn’t understand the difference.

The human decides what to do with AI-generated results. Many times, AI-generated text, recognizable by word patterns or other characteristics (today), is posted to social media as “original” or factual, and contains incorrect information.

This is often referred to as “AI slop,” as one of the nicer terms, especially by those of us who increasingly find incorrect but convincing AI slop posted as “helpful information” and positioned as “expert,” even though it contains substantial inaccuracies.

Worse yet, very convincing AI slop can easily be generated to part you and your money.

And do I EVER have an example for you that combines AI slop and ethics.

AI SLOP and Ethics

Just two days after our new paper, on which I’m a co-author, Mitotree: The Universal Human Mitochondrial Reference Phylogeny at 10x the Resolution, was published, a company, whose name I’m not including because I don’t want to give it any oxygen or get it indexed with this article, posted a “beautiful” AI poster based on our paper – without our knowledge.

Looks nice, right?

To begin with, it appears for all the world like the authors provided this infographic, which we ABSOLUTELY DID NOT DO. Our names are right at the top. However, our names, as the paper’s authors, lend this “thing” credibility, thereby leveraging our work BOTH unethically and inaccurately.

This AI-generated infographic, although it’s not labeled as such, was created by a third party shortly after the publication of the Mitotree paper. While visually impressive, it contains several scientific inaccuracies, illustrating how quickly and easily authoritative-looking but incorrect content can be created and disseminated.

That’s one of the issues with AI – the beauty and professional appearance of AI-generated “things” encourages unwarranted confidence in the output, when the information is very wrong.

That’s why humans bear the responsibility of BOTH using AI ethically, AND verifying its accuracy. It’s also why, as consumers, we need to question everything.

My biggest issue with this situation isn’t with AI, other than the fact that it generated incorrect output – the issue is with the humans who intentionally created this, using AI. In other words, the drivers.

The infographic doesn’t say they created this incorrect rubbish, and I assure you, they never asked for permission. Then, they published the infographic on their own blog. In case you’re wondering, the company encourages uploads and charges people to get “new results.”

Now for the AI part.

The information IS WRONG and NOT a synthesis of what we published!!!! This infographic shows that all non-L haplogroups descend from haplogroup L4, which is absolutely FALSE.

Haplogroups M and N descend from haplogroup L3, and haplogroup R descends from a subclade of N. You can trust me because I’m one of the paper’s authors, or better yet, you can look for yourself, here, on Discover, or here, here, and here.

That isn’t the only thing that’s wrong, either, but how would normal air-breathing humans, meaning consumers, ever know?

Doesn’t that infographic look professional and convincing, especially if you, as a consumer, didn’t actually check everything on the document – AND its authenticity?

You’d assume legitimacy, right?

If you didn’t know, wouldn’t you be impressed with the expertise of the company that posted this infographic on their blog? And, as a normal consumer, how would you know?

You’d be impressed because you didn’t realize they hijacked someone else’s work, created this “beautiful” infographic, included the authors’ names on something inaccurate that the authors knew nothing about and didn’t endorse, and then published it. All without saying one word indicating that the infographic isn’t the authors’ work, was AI generated, or by whom.

In the past, before generating AI slop was this easy, consumers often presumed that a business was ethical and accurate. Of course that wasn’t always true, but being convincing at first glance is much easier today. Also, presume is related to assume…and we all know the rest of that story.

This is one of the dangerous sides of AI – illustrating how easy it is to deceive people now. It’s increasingly difficult to distinguish between legitimate expertise and fabricated authority. AI has removed that barrier.

You can no longer accept that anything is what it appears to be unless you’re working directly with known, trustworthy entities. The offending company completed that infographic in the click of a button and the blink of an eye, while I hadn’t even finished writing my own article about the paper’s release.

That company wants you to upload your DNA to them so that they can tell you “things” about your DNA. The intention is clear.

Of course, the consuming public, unless they were extremely vigilant, would never figure out either issue – ethics or accuracy.

I had to delete the next paragraph or two that I wrote on the topics of ethics, trust and confidence because I’m still so furious. Hot under the collar doesn’t even begin to describe how I feel about the ethics of misrepresenting something that we authors just spent six years of our lives on. Trust me when I tell you that my internal monologue was both very salty and rather spicy!😊

However, there’s good news. This infographic provides a perfect illustration of both AI slop, how deceptively great it looks, the ethics surrounding AI usage, and how difficult AI is to discern.

In fact, I couldn’t have come up with a better “bad example.”

A six-fingered hand, misspelled words or three arms in an image are obvious, and are yesterday’s AI tipoffs.

A misrepresented phylogenetic relationship or an incorrect founder-clade example is not obvious. Only subject-matter experts would or could notice if they were focused and paying attention.

That’s the problem in a nutshell.

The infographic wasn’t obviously wrong. It was convincingly wrong.

And convincing wrongness is far more dangerous than ridiculous wrongness, like six fingers, because most readers never realize they’ve been misled. Or why.

This single example demonstrates several AI themes in one fell swoop:

  • AI-generated content
  • Ease of creating complex and convincing output
  • Apparent authority
  • Misplaced trust
  • Lack of topic expertise
  • Overconfidence
  • AI slop
  • Difficulty of discerning truth
  • Yesterday’s “AI clues” are gone now – like misspelled words
  • Marketing vs. science
  • The necessity of human review
  • The fact that human review is only effective when the reviewer actually understands the subject, and cares.
  • Ethics

Like with this example, often AI slop is interspersed with accurate information, and it’s impossible to tell the difference unless you actually DO DUE DILIGENCE AND VERIFY ALL OUTPUT.

Yes, all of it.

Don’t shoot the messenger!

Hallucinations

Next, let’s discuss genetic genealogy, particularly haplogroup information. Hallucination or hallucinating is the term used for when AI simply makes things up, which often sound extremely convincing.

There’s nothing AI can tell you about your haplogroup that reputable sources cannot – and AI can’t see behind paywalls or logins, into your matches.

FamilyTreeDNA has an article in their help center titled, Why AI Models Struggle with Haplogroup Analysis.

Unfortunately, I encounter more and more instances where someone uploads their DNA to a third-party site, or “asks AI”. They receive a (sometimes substantially) incorrect haplogroup in a completely different part of the tree, complete with convincing language, posts it publicly, and then decides to argue that the third-party site, (who probably uses AI), or their AI tool, is correct.

Let’s look at an example. The mitochondrial DNA haplogroup for the Native American Anzick-1 burial in Montana that dates from roughly 12,500 years ago is mitochondrial haplogroup D4h3a. There’s no dispute about that.

A tester uploaded their mitochondrial DNA to “AI” and was very confidently told that, based on their mutations, their results belonged to haplogroup A2ex. They don’t.

ChatGPT misinformation about Anzick-1 haplogroup

They were then informed that it was also Anzick’s haplogroup. Wrong again.

FamilyTreeDNA's Discover tool information comparing haplogroups D4h3a and A2ex

FamilyTreeDNA’s Discover tool comparing mitochondrial DNA haplogroups D4h3a and A2ex. Their common ancestor lived about 66,000 years ago.

Not only did AI report Anzick’s haplogroup incorrectly on a grandiose scale, those two haplogroups don’t share a common ancestor for roughly 66,000 years – specifically haplogroup L3 who lived in Africa. AI made a massive mistake.

But it gets worse.

ChatGPT incorrect information about haplogroup A2ex.

The AI “answer” continued for four pages, containing completely erroneous information. To begin with, A2ex is a haplogroup, and “ex” has never meant excluding.

That’s bizarre, and an example of AI making something up that is patently false, but sounds wonderful and very authoritative.

The term for this AI behavior is hallucinating. I’m not publishing the rest of this exchange because I don’t want anyone (or any AI bot), for one minute, to think any of it is accurate. AI even made up mutations, along with four pages of “fairy tale.”

The individual who received this information was so excited and proudly posted it, which in turn provided incorrect information for other consumers, and encouraged them to use a badly flawed tool. Then they proceeded to argue with the experts.

They were absolutely convinced because it “felt” true to them, and because they wanted to believe they had discovered something special, and were related to Anzick. Their comment was, “You’re wrong, because AI told me it was true, and I’ve learned a lot from AI.” I was quite exasperated, but also feel sorry for them and can’t help but wonder how much else of what they “learned” from AI is wrong too, but I digress.

Most AI errors aren’t obviously wrong to the consumer. If AI said that you were descended from Tyrannosaurus Rex, you’d laugh. But if it tells you something more plausible and sounds confident, it’s very easy to be convinced. The reason these errors are so dangerous isn’t because the experts are fooled, it’s because non-experts either can’t, don’t, won’t or don’t think they need to invest the time to discern the difference.

I find it a bit baffling why anyone would use AI, or worse yet, a pay site for haplogroup misinformation, especially since FamilyTreeDNA provides the Discover website with free reports for every haplogroup. They are the unquestioned industry phylogenetic experts for both Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA, and literally created the reference model for all haplogroups with the Mitotree.

Everyone can use Discover to access both the Y-DNA tree and Mitotree – for free – here. Discover isn’t even behind a paywall, and every customer can click through from their results page.

As far as haplogroups are concerned, there’s really no reason to rely on AI-generated answers without verifying them, because the authoritative resources are freely available and incredibly easy to access.

FamilyTreeDNA’s Discover Ancient Connection for Anzick-1.

Regarding Anzick’s haplogroup, all I had to do was enter haplogroup D4h3a in Discover and under Ancient Connections, right there is Anzick’s information.

I may start posting a link to this article on every single post where someone starts out with, “I submitted my DNA (or haplogroup) to AI, and it said…”

Let me be very direct. Don’t believe AI when it has to do with genetic information, especially Y-DNA, mitochondrial DNA, and haplogroups. AI does not have the capability of understanding topology and nuances of phylogenetic trees, and can only parrot back what others have said – correctly or incorrectly.

Incorrect information that’s publicly posted is then fed back into the AI algorithm, further reinforcing incorrect results.

You can find the free Discover tool for both Y and mtDNA, here, and you can join FamilyTreeDNA’s Mitochondrial DNA Group, here, and the Big Y Group, here.

AI Training and AI at Work

AI is trained on massive datasets of mostly unknown origin, including all public postings such as Reddit and Facebook public groups, pages and postings.

In other words, AI is always accruing additional information, including data uploaded by users.

As genealogists, we are already aware of the dangers of unsourced trees and and information that is repeated and copy/pasted without verification.

AI’s training provides more than just data points for you to evaluate, like trees.

AI bots are trained to interact in a humanlike manner. So instead of trees with hints, think hypothetically of an AI bot that reads the trees, then “creates” a wonderful story or infographic about your ancestor – that may or may not be either fully or partially accurate. But it’s beautiful, heartwarming and you love it! Plus, you don’t have to sort through all those trees, hints, and do the work yourself. AI did it for you! Win – win, right? Wrong.

AI knows how to very effectively manipulate language, images, and with them, emotion. Yours, to be specific. That’s both the bad news and the good news.

AI also has the ability to sift through large amounts of data and summarize succinctly –  sometimes even correctly. Sometimes it takes several refinements to obtain something that’s both correct and what you want. AI can discern patterns in massive amounts of data that we cannot, at least not readily.

Think of AI as your not-so-trusty but very confident and friendly intern – and I don’t necessarily mean a college intern.

Remember when you see AI published by others, their intern has been at work too.

AI itself is not a sentient being. It’s not inherently ethical or unethical. However, it has been trained to interact with you in a human way. It’s easy after tens of thousands of years of human conditioning for us to interpret AI as human.

Let me give you an example.

I use ChatGPT regularly and was having an interactive conversation after asking it a question. ChatGPT replied that it didn’t know, which is a substantial and startling improvement over earlier versions. I replied, “I’m one of the team members, and even I don’t know.” Really, there was no reason for me to say that, except we interact with our GPTs as human, sometimes even naming them. Then, ChatGPT said, “That made me laugh.”

I was a bit startled.

That made ME laugh, because AI is a machine. It can’t laugh, but it has been trained how to interact with us in a humanlike manner – often sycophantically. Remember how LLMs are trained. It knows what to say next. The smiley face was probably its “humor” clue. Making your interactions both useful and enjoyable keeps you paying your monthly subscription fee.

Remember that AI has no morals, because it’s a machine, and no ethics, for the same reason. That falls to the humans driving. If someone intentionally drives their car into a crowd, it’s not the car’s fault.

AI currently doesn’t have the ability to self-check or self-regulate, though this has improved somewhat in recent months and will, hopefully, continue to improve over time.

People who use AI can use the results for good, for nefarious purposes, or simply as a “time-saving” assistant. There are no guardrails. I could give you very ugly examples, but I’ll simply say that, if prompted, AI will generate the worst things you can imagine, including nonconsensual adult images of people that never happened. These are generally called deepfakes, although deepfakes aren’t always generated in a negative context. I’ll discuss this phenomenon as part of Generative AI in the final article where we’ll cover the dark side of AI.

Conversely, AI can be intended for good by its human “driver” but still be inaccurate and, consequently, unintentionally inflict damage or spread misinformation.

The Bottom Line

Here’s the bottom line.

Your personal threat level warning flag now needs to be permanently set to red.

You need to be increasingly vigilant, meaning actively suspicious, of absolutely everything, even exchanges that used to be safe. In other words, if you receive an email from an organization or government agency that you’ve interacted with in the past – don’t click on an embedded link because you always have in the past and it was safe then.

Hint: Go to the website directly. E-mails are very easy to spoof and your SS account password, for example, is invaluable to a hacker.

The bad guys have gotten really good at being horrible. AI is becoming more difficult to detect every day – even for those of us with a significant amount of experience.

I realize that I sound paranoid, but I just completed security update training, and the threat landscape is worse than I ever imagined. I’ll be sharing that information throughout these articles. Better paranoid and safe than trusting and sorry. What I’m striving for is an appropriate amount of alarm and a safe level of balance. I don’t want you to learn the hard way.

Today’s tip-offs that something is AI-generated will be gone tomorrow.

To use AI tools is to learn what AI output looks and feels like, so you can recognize when you encounter AI that you didn’t generate.

Now that we know what AI is, and isn’t, the next article will focus on AI Assistants, using AI successfully, and how to avoid pitfalls. You don’t want to be the president of the AI Fan Club, nor do you want to feel like you’re in an AI Escape Room.

_____________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

Subscribe!

If you haven’t already subscribed, it’s free. You’ll receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button at the top of the main blog page, here.

Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small commission when you click a vendor link in my articles and purchase that item. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the affiliate links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

Love Lives

Unresolved grief is a terrible burden

That wears on your soul.

An aching that becomes ingrained in your life.

Its constant presence, an unwelcome companion.

It’s not until it’s unexpectedly lifted that you realize

The magnitude of its weight.

Love lives.

Douglas, sweet Douglas,

You were lost to us

Or so we thought.

But you had simply departed on your next adventure

Of sorts.

Leaving us behind.

For a while.

To catch up later.

You tried to tell us that you were leaving…

But we didn’t hear you.

 

What is it that you used to say?

“A river cannot run upstream.”

I’ll carry your water now, Douglas.

“What matters most is how well you walk through the fire.”

Walk through the fire if we must.

And so we must.

We have.

We will.

Love is a beautiful thing.

Your shoes are still unfillable.

 

Born of utter and devastating grief…

It was Christmas Eve, 1986.

Straight to the airport from the morgue…

Your partner…

A death

A birth

That was your first night in Guatemala.

“The universe kinda took me by the hand thereafter.

An accidental tourist in the world,” you said.

No Douglas

You were no tourist.

Half your heart was left on that cold morgue table

But the other half

You planted in the Garden of Good

Guided, perhaps, by the Universe

Who knew the Good you would do.

The path from devastating tragedy

To unfillable shoes.

 

You never counted,

But I have.

Nearly 40 years later

And 100,000 children

Books, pencils, paper, crayons

Children in school

Who didn’t even have pencils

Before your broken heart

Came to save them.

An accidental Godfather

Perhaps.

 

Learning

Seeds

Opportunity

God love you Douglas.

For all of them

All the lives

All those seeds you sowed

Sprouting now in the Garden of Good

Spreading Love.

Every one of them

Carries a little bit of you.

 

But then

One Sunday morning,

Far away

In Guatemala,

Another world,

In the land of the Maya and children working the fields

And going to school

Learning to read and write

Something they had never done before

Your body failed you.

Failed all of us, actually

And failed “our kids.”

 

Those children to whom you offered the blessing of education

In a land where there was no other opportunity

To escape the death-grip of

Generational poverty.

 

That humid Sunday morning

After you had finished

Your school trip into the mountains

Through torrential rains

And “rumblers” as you called them

To downplay earthquakes,

So we wouldn’t worry,

Walter called you,

Then left to come home.

Fifteen minutes later

When he arrived,

You were already gone

To be with your patron saint,

Our Lady of Guadeloupe.

Your soul flying free.

 

How you must have suffered…

Watching those you love suffer

After your departure

At least, until we got to the honoring part

Of your transition.

 

Reality split into two.

Those you love in Guatemala,

And those you love here.

Notice I didn’t say loved

Because…

Love Lives.

 

Love is your legacy.

You did more with your grief-stricken heart

Planting seeds in the Garden of Good

Than most do

With an entire lifetime.

 

Your love will live forever

In the souls

Of thousands

Of eager children

Who carried their own boxes of books

And school supplies

Up the mountains

Into the school

When the terrain was even too steep

And muddy

For trucks

Or even donkeys.

They love you.

Love Lives.

 

They will pass the gift on.

Ripples

For generations

To come.

 

Your love lives

In the life of the young man

Who didn’t end it

Late that night

Just before you left for Guatemala

For the last time.

He called you instead

At 2:30 AM.

Lucky for him,

When Fate called upon you

You never failed to answer.

You fed him coffee

Tough love

And hope.

Love Lives.

 

He still carries your rosary.

That accidental rosary that I sent two of

And you hung on the mirror in your truck

Just hours before.

“It’s no accident, these things,” you said.

I hope he understands.

Somehow.

 

A few days later

You took the second rosary

To Guatemala

And hung it

Where it would forever remind

Those who look

With eyes that know

Of love

Your love

Her love

His love

 

Stateside, we heard that you were gone

Through the tendrils of a grapevine.

There was nothing more,

No matter how hard we tried.

Only stony silence.

“Died in Guatemala.

On Sunday.”

That was it

Gone

Just gone

 

But then, you knew you were going.

You told me that if that young man waited another 7 years to call

He’d have to talk to the rosary

Because you wouldn’t be here

Anymore.

I didn’t understand then

But I surely do now.

The last words we said to each other

Were

“Love You”

Love Lives.

 

But Love means it’s even more painful

To have no closure

No resolution

No comforting rituals to soften the blow

That kind of mourning

Lasts forever.

 

Where are you, Douglas?

Where is your body resting?

What happened?

Were you brought back to the states?

Away from the land and people you love so much?

There is no obituary.

Who honored your life?

Anyone?

Anyplace?

Where?

Who brought flowers?

Were there flowers?

You loved roses.

Who came to sit by you?

And where?

Did they light candles?

Was there a priest?

So many questions.

No answers

No avenue for answers

Doors slammed

Chained and bolted.

I couldn’t even find the doors

For all the locks.

Silence.

 

Human beings need answers.

Answers give grief and loss

A resting place.

 

The days ticked by

One

Two

Where’s Douglas…

Thanksgiving

Christmas

100 days

200 days

So many days

And nights

In the darkness of unanswered questions

Prayers

And tears.

Then there was the dream

That I didn’t understand

But would, soon.

 

Finally

261 days

An email titled

“Friend of Douglas Rhodenbaugh Reaching Out”

Thank God,

Oh, thank God.

She loved you, too

And had answers

 

You rest in Guatemala

And died in only a way Douglas could

Imprisoned in a paperwork purgatory

That not even the best lawyers could spring you from.

Retrospectively,

It’s all hilariously funny

But not then,

And not while you were missing

In our world

Of no answers.

 

As your body waited in an icy chamber

For two long months

You must have been laughing

But Walter surely wasn’t

The only jail we ever had to spring you from was the morgue

And we couldn’t even do that!

 

Mayan traditions don’t take into account modern-day inconveniences

Like paperwork delays.

Wake and funeral photos and videos courtesy of Laura.

There, those who have joined the Creator

Are honored with a wake

Wrapped in beautiful hand-woven textiles

Then, both joyfully

And tearfully

Committed to where

Earthly remains

Spend their afterlife.

 

You must have sent the dream,

Because when I saw the picture

I recognized it immediately.

Even from the other side

You were trying to comfort me

As I continued to grieve,

Relentlessly.

I had given up hope of ever knowing.

But now,

My heart is so full.

 

You are so loved, Douglas.

Your bones were lovingly claimed

As theirs.

They came by the hundreds

Walking down the mountain

In muddy ruts

To honor you.

The Godfather

As they called you,

The man sent by God

To save their children

Raised up out of grief.

Like a Phoenix.

 

Not all fathers have children

In the traditional way,

Some are sent by God

To Father.

That was you, Douglas.

Your ministry,

Although we never called it that

Because you were far too humble.

We’ll just call it the mission

That saved your broken heart, too

Their hearts

And hands

Made you a beautiful casket

Gleefully painted

Probably while shedding tears

And sharing stories

Until they laughed.

You would have loved that.

You were there

With them.

 

At your wake

Your “good” picture

Adorned the top

Of your casket,

In the suit you wore

To your students’ graduations

And celebrations

In the states.

 

Your hat

With a raincovering, of course,

Candles,

Flowers,

Rose,s

Always red roses

Your favorite.

And love

So much love

As they gathered

To sit beside you

One last time.

 

Your wake lasted two full days

And nights

And oh, the stories

Your handmade coffin was a little “small”

Given the unusual circumstances

We’ll just explain as

Your necessary cremation

Your own unique version of

“Fire Ceremony.”

 

Your irredeemable sense of humor…

You must have been howling.

Finally, those who love you

Were able to mourn

Properly

Joyfully

Tearfully

Telling Douglas stories

Reliving your antics

Regaled.

 

But buried in all of that

Was a commitment

Many commitments

Seared in hearts

To carry on the ministry

Of love

Of the Godfather.

Of your huge

Huge heart.

So maybe your burial

Was a commitment ceremony

Because

Love Lives.

 

The bells rang

The market fell silent

The community

Hundreds of people

Walked with you

Escorted you

Up the hill

To the cathedral

The church you loved

So very much.

A place of peaceful solitude

Madonnas and crosses

Where you received your final Mass

The Misa de Cenizas

Mass of the Ashes.

 

And then, so lovingly,

The third generation,

The grandson of one

Of the children you lifted up,

Carried you,

Their Godfather,

Who took a spiritual vow

To watch over them

And lift them up

All of them

Carried you to the place you chose.

 

Where you stepped out

Into the cobblestone street

Each dawn

As the market stirred,

And awakened,

The church bells

Ringing.

The resplendent cemetery

Up the hill

On the mountainside

Where memories live

And come alive.

 

“How beautiful” you said

Indeed – how beautiful.

Love lives here

Not solemnly

Not here

Joyfully

Bursting with riotous color.

 

Did you know

That one day

After a bit of a “delay”

Your bones would rest here?

In a borrowed crypt

A family member of a family you were not born to

One of your children

All grown up

Did you always know?

I think so.

You were a seer.

 

The children you saved will walk by and honor you

By lighting candles

And bringing flowers

Until they are old.

Then their children

And their children too

Who can read

And write

Because of you

Sweet Douglas,

Dear Sweet Douglas.

 

How ironic

And perfect

That your funeral was on Halloween

The day before All Saints Day

And the day before the Day of the Dead

Which is not morbid

But a day of beautiful remembrance

And celebration

And your birthday

How perfect!

 

This means that every year,

Without fail,

For as long as eternity lasts on earth,

You will have fresh flowers on your grave

In the borrowed crypt

Where your earthly remains remain

Turning to dust

Joining the stars

For those of us left behind

To visit

And mourn

And celebrate.

The only mourning that needs to be done is that you are gone too soon.

 

The only thing we leave behind

Is a legacy.

Your legacy

Half a heart

Sewn in the Garden of Good.

Decades later,

100,000 books and crayons

Opportunities

Roots

Love.

Love Lives.

 

But that’s not all

Your story doesn’t end here

That is not the final chapter…

 

There’s a vow.

 

Douglas,

When Curtis died, I carried his love

And his clothes with me

For thirty years

The ones his mother threw away.

I refused to allow him to be erased

To be pitched away like trash.

 

I grieved his too-early death so deeply.

A soul-wound.

Just five years after you left for Guatemala

But it would be another quarter-century before

Fate intertwined our lives

Wove them together.

 

As what I thought was

My final loving act for Curtis

Honoring his life,

And yours,

I sewed my love and his clothes into a quilt

With scraps of mine too

Transformed them into light

And love

For you.

 

A quilt that arrived when you needed it most

A box on your porch

When you were alone

An hour after a heart surgery diagnosis,

Allowing you to collapse into your quilt

Wrapped around you

In sheltering love.

That surgery

Gave us a few extra years

But not nearly enough.

 

Now your quilt has continued its own journey of love

Healing

Anonymously

Someplace

With someone we don’t know

Purchased at the auction of your worldly goods.

Maybe they were drawn to the colors

Maybe you directed them there

Because they needed healing

Comforting,

Or love.

The threads just keep connecting.

That’s what love does.

It’s alive,

It travels

Infecting others.

It is not ours to own

Or direct.

Love Lives.

 

I walked with Curtis,

Curtis walked with you

Weaving our lives together in the tapestry of our mission

Your ministry

Partners

For oh so many years.

I could not honor you at your wake

Because we were still in the darkness.

I could not carry your bones

Because we did not know.

I could not put flowers on your grave for your birthday.

I could not bear witness then,

But I’ll do better now.

 

The candle has been lit

From an eternal flame

Grief has shapeshifted

Into Love.

 

Now the scraps from Curtis’s clothes

Will join yours

And mine

In Care Quilts.

Our ministry continues

Just a little differently

Than either of us imagined.

 

Together,

We will lift them up.

We will tell them

Without words

That they matter

And are not forgotten.

Scattering acts of love.

Love Lives.

 

I will not fail you,

I will not look away

You never did,

The price was your life.

The reward is theirs.

Those 100,000 seeds

Now in the third generation

Spreading love

And hope

And redemption.

“What matters most is how well you walk through the fire.”

 

Need knows no season

Right is right.

There are fights waiting to be fought

And won

One by tiny one

Each sprout a victory

And each victory a sprout,

A seed.

Somehow.

Ours is not to know how

Ours is only to sew

The seeds

Seeds of love

So that others may reap

And grow

In the Garden of Good.

I know you’re with me

I can feel your presence

And see your light

As we walk into the future

Spreading love

Together.

Boundless,

Endless,

Timeless.

I love you.

Love Lives.

Douglas’s photo.

Your Wonderful AI Assistant – Sometimes Wrong, Never Unsure, Always Convincing

I should add, “…and With Absolutely No Judgment”, because AI is not a sentient being and has neither intelligence, ethics, nor common sense.

I’ve put off writing about AI, but several recent experiences have convinced me that too many people are trusting AI without understanding either its strengths or its dangers. That made me realize that I absolutely MUST write this series.

Here’s the challenge, though, and the quandary, which is why I’ve hesitated.

I can’t talk about the good, without talking about the problems and abject failures. I can’t do the reverse either, because there’s absolutely an upside. Plus, AI is getting “better” every day. Better is subjective, depending on how AI is applied.

I’m neither an AI evangelist nor a doomsayer. I’m a cautious practitioner.

Like it or not, AI is here to stay, and it’s already embedded in your life in ways you might not realize or recognize.

AI has great potential for good, helping us in our daily lives. It also has an equivalent potential for evil. There’s a very dangerous aspect of AI, and you absolutely need to be aware so that you can take steps to protect yourself.

That said, AI provides extremely useful tools…under some circumstances. I use it for something almost every day – but NOT to write my articles. These are my words. Yes, I do sometimes ask AI for input, and I’ll share how I balance my work and my words with AI assistance – like creating the graphic in this article.

AI is really about education and balance.

To achieve that, I’m writing a four-part series that will be:

  • Encouraging but not advocating for AI
  • Friendly rather than alarmist
  • Skeptical and vigilant rather than anti-AI
  • Educational rather than preachy
  • Focused on critical thinking
  • Warning when necessary

I’ve been working with AI since the beginning in a very restricted, measured way. I use AI regularly, tactically, and cautiously, with huge guardrails. I took the original classes from Mark Thompson and Steve Little, AI experts that I absolutely trust, to learn how to use AI both productively and safely. That was a couple of years ago, and a lot has changed since then. I make it a priority to stay current. We’ve been growing as a community ever since, celebrating our successes and analyzing the failures.

Mark and Steve say:

  1. Know your tool
  2. Know your limitations
  3. Know your data

I would add

  • Know your subject
  • Know what can (and will) go wrong

You absolutely, positively must check and verify everything AI tells you, without fail.

Being trusting and over-confident is a fool’s errand and assuredly will come back to bite you, sooner than later. It’s essential to be hypervigilant.

In a nutshell, AI is a wonderful servant, although sometimes it has an attitude and doesn’t listen to directions well, but it’s a terrible authority. AI, much like my teenagers used to do, fibs very convincingly and with impunity.

As the adults in the room, it’s up to us to always monitor and check AI output – and learn to recognize it when others use it as well.

That’s the purpose of this series. I’ll be combining my computer science background and genetic genealogy expertise with a couple of years of hard knocks in the AI arena to help everyone be safe and effective. I’ll be sharing successes and failures, good examples, and do I EVER have a great bad example for you.

Articles will include:

  • All About AI – What is AI and How Does It Work?
  • AI Assistants – The Good, the Bad, the Ugly and the Clandestine
  • AI and Genealogy – Brick Walls, Breakthroughs and Blunders
  • The AI Threat Landscape – Evil, Dangers and You

My Dad used to tell me, “You don’t have to roll in every mudpuddle that the rest of us have rolled in just to come out the other side saying it’s wet and it’s muddy.”

Some lessons are better learned by someone else going first.

Technology changes, but human nature doesn’t. The tools may be new and revolutionary, but the risks of overconfidence, misplaced trust, and wishful thinking are as old as humanity itself. So come along and join me for the next article, where I’ll share what finally pushed me over the edge to write this series.

_____________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

Subscribe!

If you haven’t already subscribed, it’s free. You’ll receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button at the top of the main blog page, here.

Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small commission when you click a vendor link in my articles and purchase that item. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the affiliate links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

Reconstructing the World of Philippe Mius’s Unknown Mi’kmaq Wife (c1663-c1685) – 52 Ancestors #480

We don’t know her name.

More than three centuries after her death, she remains elusive and mysterious. No known records reveal her identity. Yet, she appears in the shadows, waiting for us to find her.

She’s Philippe Mius’s first wife. For a long time, that was all we knew. Little by little, we add pieces of evidence.

We must reconstruct her life indirectly. Her life story begins to come into focus through the history of the Mi’kmaq people, Philippe’s life, the lives of her children and descendants, and her mitochondrial DNA.

Most unnamed women disappear completely from history. We’re not letting her do that.

Philippe’s First Wife

Evidence shows that Philippe Mius d’Azy had at least two wives. He had five children born between 1679 and 1684. In the 1686 census, he was living in Port Royal with his father and without either a wife or children. Beginning about 1687, he had additional children with a Native woman named Marie, born about 1670, who was too young to have been the mother of those earlier children.

We know that Philippe lived most of his life among the Mi’kmaq people. The only exception seems to be that 1686 census.

The mitochondrial DNA results from the descendants of daughter, Francoise Mius, and her older sister, Marie, fall into haplogroup X2a2, which is unquestionably Native American. Their mother, Philippe’s first wife, is the woman who remains nameless and about whom we are writing.

There is confusion about the haplogroups of the children from Philippe’s second wife, which is probably a result of confusing genealogy. It doesn’t help that he had daughters named Marie and Francoise with both wives.

To learn more about the mothers of Philippe’s children, we would need mitochondrial DNA tests from the direct matrilineal descendants (female to female to the current generation, which can be male) of each daughter with solid genealogical trees back to Philippe’s daughters, who are:

  • Marie Mius born about 1680, married Francois Viger about 1697. They lived among the Native people at Quimakagan, present-day Robert’s Island, in 1705 when they had their children baptized in Port Royal. They are living at “Cap Sable” in 1708. It’s unclear where they lived after that.
  • Francoise Mius born around 1684, married Jacques Bonnevie, a French soldier. We have her mitochondrial DNA and she matches several other people who descend from Francois and her sister, Marie, born in 1680.

The 1686 census where Philippe Mius is enumerated with his father in Port Royal.

  • Marie Mius, born about 1689, married Jean Baptiste Thomas, who was a Mi’kmaq chief in 1726.
  • Madeleine Mius, born about 1694, married Jean-Baptiste Guedry before November 1708. They lived among the Native people at Merligueche, present-day Lunenburg, and La Heve.
  • Francoise Mius, born about 1697 in La Heve, married an unknown man about 1717, and Pierre Celier about 1733, where she is noted as being from La Have. No documented children.
  • Anne Marie Mius, born about 1705 in Merleguiche, married Paul Guidry/Guedry about 1720, and lived among the Native people.

One of the reasons that we believe Philippe had two wives is that the names of the first two daughters are also included in the second group of children who were born after the 1686 census, where Philippe is living in Port Royal.

Furthermore, his “second wife,” Marie, was born about 1670, so she was not old enough, based on her reported age of 38 in the 1708 census, to be the mother of Philippe’s first child, Joseph, born about 1679.

I have not listed Philippe’s sons, above, as they are not relevant to his wives’ mitochondrial DNA. Males don’t pass their mitochondrial DNA on to their children. Only females do. However, there were no known children between Francoise in 1684 and a son born about 1688. In other words, it appears that his first wife died between 1684 when Francoise was born, and 1688 when his next child was born.

Sadly, she would have died quite young. Probably just 21 or 22.

Aside from mitochondrial DNA testing for Philippe’s first wife, which we have today, the original information that both of Philippe’s wives were Native comes from a letter from a priest to his bishop, documented in the late Stephen A. White’s book, Dictionnaire généalogique des familles acadiennes, and reported on WikiTree, stating:

Unknown Amerindien married about 1678 and (married) Marie Amerindien married date unknown (to) Phillipe d’Azy Mius.

Unfortunately, the date of the letter is not known, but there’s no reason to doubt the authenticity of the information.

In addition to that, in the 1708 Indian census, Philippe Mieusse, age 48, is living with his wife, Marie, age 38, and their children, beginning with their oldest son, Jacques who is 20. The location is “Indians from La Heve and surrounding area.” This tells us that Philippe has been living among the Native people for more than 20 years, or since 1687 or so. Most people have French first names, which suggests they have been baptized, but Native surnames.

Early European Encounters

We know frustratingly little about Philippe’s first wife. However, we do know a great deal about the world in which she lived. To understand her life, we need to understand the Mi’kmaq people among whom she was born, raised, married, and ultimately buried.

We may not know her name, but we can reconstruct her world

How did the history and relationship between the Mi’kmaq people and the French evolve? While Philippe’s wife hadn’t been born yet when that relationship began, it profoundly influenced what happened over the next century.

In 1604 and 1605, Pierre Dugua, Sieur de Mons, along with cartographer Samuel de Champlain, explored Nova Scotia and the surrounding region.

DeMons established the first mill on the Lequille, now Allain River, above Port Royal, where a replica stands today, and a habitation or fort was designed by Champlain and built across the river.

On Champlain’s map, you can see the mill in the bottom right hand corner, labeled with letter “I”, or roman numeral “1.” I’m not sure which it is. Across the river, the habitation is labeled by “X.”

The original habitation was burned in 1613 by English raiders from Virginia, but a faithful reproduction has been built to welcome visitors and demonstrate life in an early French fort in Nova Scotia, where trading took place with the Mi’kmaq people.

Trading between the French and Native people took place at the habitation.

Marc Lescarbot, a lawyer and one of the earliest French explorers, first wrote about the Mi’kmaq in 1606, recording details of their daily life. It’s interesting that he recorded that the Mi’kmaq greeted the French and Basque traders by saying “Nikmaq!”, meaning “my kin-friends” or “my brothers” and the French referred to the Mi’kmaq as their “nikmaqs.”

He was particularly impressed by their welcoming nature, recording in his diary that they warmly greeted any stranger who was not a known enemy, and possessed “mutual charity” towards others. Resources, including food, were shared with their entire community to ensure survival.

During a time when Native people were often viewed as savages, or worse, by Europeans, Lescarbot said that they were highly intelligent, had “deep eloquence” of speech along with “much judgment and good sense.”

The French were particularly interested in furs, which were harvested primarily in the winter. Initially, the Mi’kmaq people only hunted enough animals to address their immediate needs, so they didn’t have furs, skins, or pelts to trade – but before long, that changed.

The Mi’kmaq established a trade relationship with the French, but that led to the Tarrateen War between the Mi’kmaw and their rivals, the Abenaki in Maine. The worst part lasted for eight years, but tensions and raids persisted for more than a quarter century.

In 1606, Lescarbot and Champlain wrote that Chief Membertou held a funeral for his son-in-law Panoniac, a Mi’kmaw sakmow, or grand chief, who had been killed by a member of the Passamaquoddy tribe. Seeking revenge for this and other acts of hostility, in July, 1607, Membertou led 500 warriors in a raid on the Passamaquoddy village in present-day Saco, Maine, killing 20 of their warriors and two leaders.

Extrapolating from later census information, if Membertou had 500 warriors, that would suggest the tribe consisted of around 1,500 or maybe as many as 2,000 people – assuming he took all the warriors with him. No warrior would have wanted to be left behind.

In 1607, the French left Port Royal because King Henri IV revoked the fur trade monopoly that had been fueling the settlement. Upon their departure, the French entrusted the fort to Membertou’s care. He faithfully guarded it until they returned in June of 1610.

On June 24, 1610, Membertou was baptized in the Catholic faith as a gesture of alliance, taking the English name of Henri after the French King. However, he appeared not to comprehend the scope of what Catholicism meant. The following year, on his deathbed, Membertou stated that he didn’t want to go to Christian heaven because he wanted to be with his people. He died in September, 1611, someplace between 80 and over 100 years of age. He was reported to be between 102 and 104, but that age is greeted with some skepticism.

Although Membertou’s age is unclear, he recalled that he was a fully grown married man with a family when he met French explorer, Jacques Cartier during his first voyage in 1534. That would place his birth year well before 1514, and probably around 1504. Membertou’s son was over 60 in 1610, so we know he was at least 80.

In 1612, the Mi’kmaq raided the Abenaki villages in Maine, but tragically, they returned with a plague or illness of some sort that killed about three-fourths of the Mi’kmaq people.

In genetic parlance, this is approaching a bottleneck event, and it’s why knowing that Membertou had 500 warriors in 1607 is important.

By 1620, when the Pilgrims arrived in what would one day become Massachusetts, King James of England granted Acadia to Sir William Alexander, who named it New Scotland, the name that would morph to Nova Scotia.

Philippe Mius’s first Native wife was probably born about 1663, a few years after his 1660 birth, in the Pobomcoup areas, the region near today’s Pubnico, or in other known Mi’kmaq villages.

The Mi’kmaq people who met these early French explorers would probably have been two or three generations older than her, and there’s no evidence to indicate that she was directly or recently related to Chief Membertou.

However, given the level of endogamy that exists within a closed population, everyone in the tribe was probably related to Membertou in multiple ways. Before European arrival and colonization, there were no other people available to marry and have children with.

By Michka B – Own work à partir des images bitmap (Mikmaq), CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=67251179

The Mi’kmaq were regionally migratory, semi-nomadic people, and both the Port Royal and Pobomcoup bands were part of the Gespogoitnag or Kespu’kwitk district that encompassed southwest Nova Scotia. Kespu’kwitk means “land ends” or “end of flow.”

Although trading slowed somewhat after 1613 when the English attacked and burned the fort, it didn’t stop, as the French never completely left.

In 1631, when France regained control of Nova Scotia, Charles St. Estienne de La Tour built Fort Sainte Marie at the mouth of the Saint John River, across the bay from Port Royal.

The following year, Isaac de Razilly established a fort at Le Have, and three or four years later, the first French families arrived.

In 1635, Razilly died, and Charles d’Aulnay took his place as Governor, moving the seat of Acadia to Port Royal, a more sheltered and agriculturally more productive area, between 1636 and 1640. D’Aulnay drowned in 1650.

In 1651, La Tour, the new governor, brought Philippe Mius d’Entremont (Sr.), with his wife, Madeleine Helie, and their first child, to Acadia, to be his second-in-command.

In 1653, Mius selected the area known as Pobomcoup, today’s Pubnico area surrounding the harbor, to establish his seigneury, which elevated him to the status of Baron of Pobomcoup.

A year later, 1654, the English retook Nova Scotia and retained it until 1667.

Philippe Mius’s grant area, and where he likely built his manor house near Pubnico.

Philipp Mius d’Entremont Sr. built a manor house someplace at Pobomcoup, probably within the red square above, and expanded his family.

Philippe Mius Jr., who eventually married into and lived among the Mi’kmaq, was born around 1660 in Pobomcoup. The only other residents in this remote outpost were the LaTour family, at least 22 miles away by water, and the Native people who lived at and had frequented Pobomcoup for generations.

In the 1671 Acadian census, Philippe Mius d’Entremont is shown as a child with his family, and only his family, in “The settlement of Pobomcou near the Island of Tousquet.” Their only neighbors would have been the Mi’kmaq people.

In that census, Philippe is age 11. His oldest sister has married and lives in Port Royal, his oldest brother, Jacques, is missing from the census, his brother Abraham, 13, is shown, as is his baby sister, who is 2.

Perhaps the most important thing about this census is that there are no other European children, so Philippe’s playmates, aside from his siblings, are the Native children living nearby.

Philippe’s father, the Baron of Pobomcoup, had built a manor house that would have served as a gathering place and trading post. Everyone would have come there to trade, and the Native people may have made their summer encampment nearby. Or, perhaps Philippe built his home intentioinally close to the Mi’kmaq village to facilitate easy trading.

Trade goods would have included skins in return for metal objects, specifically knives, hatchets, awls, kettles, and sometimes woven cloth.

Some skins, mostly moose and deer, were scraped with shells to remove the fur. These are beautifully painted today with paint made from natural dyes, but we don’t know whether the skins they traded then were decorative.

While not specific to Nova Scotia, French chroniclers reported stunningly beautiful painted hides, collectively called Matachees.

Within the tribe, painted objects weren’t simply decorative, but served a larger purpose, integrating spiritual protection with social identity and survival. Depending on the size of the hide, painted skins provided robes, cloaks, blankets, leggings, detachable sleeves, and of course, moccasins. Ceremonial clothing, including moccasins, were even more festive and decorative.

Additionally, painting the hide honored the animal that gave its life to feed and clothe the community’s members. Absolutely nothing was wasted.

Special occasions, like weddings, political councils, important feasts and sacred ceremonies were marked with elaborate, bleached moosehide robes that were painted with red and black ochre.

This might provide a clue about the wedding of Philippe Mius (Jr.) with his Mi’kmaq wife. I can’t help but wonder if, given his father’s status, he married a high-status daughter as well. Traditionally, Mi’kmaq marriages were family arrangements that focused on mutual cooperation, but included the consent of the bride. If the families agreed and the couple consented, they were expected to develop a lifelong bond. Did Philippe ask his father to approach her father to discuss a possible marriage? In traditional Mi’kmaq society, the young man would avoid looking at or speaking directly to his future wife until his father had spoken with hers – although no doubt there were numerous furtive glances to indicate interest combined with the local grapevine.

Philippe would have spent his formative years with the Native people mastering the skills necessary to survive in the maritime wilderness and along the shoreline.

He would have been able to handle a canoe, just like the Mi’kmaq children. He would probably not have dressed in European clothes, which would simply have been in the way.

He would have learned to find, harvest and braid sweetgrass, along with other skills such as how to construct a birchbark canoe.

The next Acadian census isn’t until 1678, at which time Philippe Mius d’Azy would be about 18. His father has been appointed as the King’s Attorney and now, the family is living in Port Royal – except – Philippe is not living with them.

He was probably living with his brothers in Pobomcoup. He may never have made the move to Port Royal when his father, as the King’s Attorney, moved, sometime after 1671.

It’s not surprising that Philippe, who came to be known as Philippe d’Azy as his dit name, would marry into the Mi’kmaq tribe. I’m referring to him by “d’Azy” to differentiate him from his father at this point.

The Mi’kmaq have fished at Pobomcoup from time immemorial, and the word Pobomcoup is taken from their language, meaning something similar to, “Place where we drill holes in the ice to fish.”

Philippe grew up with only his siblings and the Mi’kmaq children as playmates. He would have learned to hunt and fish with the boys, and when old enough, clearly a young lady caught his eye.

Philippe may have been missing in the 1678 census because he was living with his future wife’s parents, performing the trial of “bride-service.” A suitor typically lived with the bride’s parents for some time, up to a year, before a wedding was agreed to, demonstrating that he could hunt and work sufficiently to provide for the daughter and his own household.

Given the status of Philippe’s father, this arrangement could have been somewhat different. He would still have been expected to gift her parents with beaver pelts and other goods.

Weddings were communal, celebratory feasting events. People ate blueberries and meat, sang traditional songs, and danced in ceremonial regalia. Sacred rituals would have included smudging with sweetgrass, a sacred pipe ceremony, and tying a feather to the side of each other’s heads – an act equivalent to contemporary wedding rings.

To close the ritual, the couple was wrapped in a single blanket, symbolizing both visually and spiritually their new life together and the journey they were undertaking as a single unit.

Weddings bonded more than the couple, they formed alliances between families and sometimes villages.

In this case, they symbolically connected both worlds.

We do know that these traditions continued despite Catholic conversion. The Mi’kmaq eventually blended aspects of both.

Philippe and his wife probably married at Pobomcoup, since that’s likely where they met. It would be interesting to know if both families attended, or how they handled the very different European and Mi’kmaq traditions and expectations.

The only way we know where Philippe d’Azy was and what he was doing with his life is by piecing his life together, and by extension his wife, the Mi’kmaq mother of his children.

Let’s see what we can infer about her life from his story and the lives of their children.

Philippe d’Azy’s mother died between 1677 and 1678, probably in Port Royal given that’s where his father and younger siblings were living in 1678.

Based on the birth year of their oldest child, named Joseph d’Azy Mius, around 1679, Philippe d’Azy had married a year or so earlier.

Philippe was young, only about 18, so his wife was probably around the same age, or perhaps slightly younger. Based on the ages of the Mi’kmaq women in the 1708 census, 15 or 16 seems to be the most common marriage age, so let’s say that in 1678, Philippe’s bride was 15 or 16, so born about 1662 or 1663.

We have absolutely no idea what her name was, but it could have been either Marie or Francoise, because her two daughters were given those names, in that order.

I feel badly that I have to refer to her namelessly, but I’m not going to “assign” a name, because that’s how incorrect names become part of legend. We already have that problem with Philippe’s second Native wife, Marie, who, at some point got labeled with the surname CoyoteWhite or Coyote Blanc. Nope, no documentation whatsoever to support that.

Philippe’s oldest children, born prior to 1686, so to his first wife, were:

  • Joseph Mius born about 1679 and married a Native woman named Marie about 1699
  • Marie Mius born about 1680 and married Francois Viger about 1697
  • Mathieu Mius born about 1682 and married a Native woman named Madeleine about 1706
  • Maurice Mius born about 1682 and married a Native woman named Marguerite about 1702
  • Francoise Mius born about 1684 married Jacques Bonnevie, a soldier, about 1701

It’s presumed that the woman Philippe married around 1678 is the same woman who gave birth to Francoise about 1684, but that could be in error.

It’s possible that Francoise’s older siblings had more than one mother, but it’s unlikely given that descendants of both Marie born in 1680 and Francoise born about 1684 carry Native American haplogroup X2a2 and match exactly.

However, given that we know there weren’t many Mi’kmaq, and that they had survived at least one bottleneck event in 1612, Marie and Francoise could possibly have the same haplogroup and not share the same mother. In other words, their mothers could be siblings, cousins, or otherwise share the same direct matrilineal line ancestor.

I would also assume that because all five children have “French” first names that they were baptized at some point, either at birth by Philippe, who we know baptized children born in 1702 and later, or by a visiting missionary priest.

The children probably also had Mi’kmaq names used within the family and community.

We also know that Marie was a favorite Catholic name, as in Marie, the mother of Christ.

When Mi’kmaq people were baptized, they were given European, in this case, French names, so Philippe’s wife probably had a French biblical name. For that matter, we really don’t know if Philippe’s family was Protestant or Catholic when they arrived in Acadia. The La Tour family was Protestant. Eventually, the Mius family was Catholic, certainly before 1702, but we don’t know when that occurred.

There are no parish records prior to 1702. Earlier records were lost or destroyed.

Their first child, Joseph Mius was born around 1679, probably in or near Pobomcoup, the general area surrounding Pubnico Harbour today.

Joseph, like his father, lived among the Native people.

The 1708 Indian Census

The November 1708 census is known as “The Indian Census” and lists the Mi’kmaq people by location, name, age and by wigwam. This is the only census in which at least some are listed by their Native names. The census records all of the Indians who reside on the coast of Nova Scotia, including Port Royal and along the western and southern coastlines, plus at Pintagouet (Castine, Maine) and Canibeky (the Kennebec River area). It includes a summary of the number of men and boys capable of going to war, meaning those 15 or older, which may have been the motivation for taking the census in the first place.

The Indians at Port Royal include several widows and orphans, for a total of 102 people. Cape Sable has 97 people. Port Razoir has three families with 15 people. La Heve has 127 people. Les Mines has 59 people. Mouscoudabouet has 196 people. Chiguenictou has 100 people.

There’s a note that the Indians of Pintgouet were enumerated by wigwam and not by family by Father de la Chasse, their missionary. Twenty-six wigwams housed 388 people, or about 15 people per wigwam.

This is probably insightful as to how Philippe’s wife’s family lived, and how they lived together after they married. Communal living would explain why, after Philippe’s wife died, their children were raised by their Native relatives, not taken by their father to Port Royal in 1686. Philippe must have been utterly miserable there, because he was gone soon after.

Another note says that the Indians from Canikeby were not in their villages, so the census-taker could not know the names of their family members or the number of children, they “being sometimes in Canada and sometimes on the other coast.”

On the St. Jean River, they counted only the 82 men and boys capable of carrying arms.

The “Indian Census” totaled 1305 people, with 439 being classified as “warriors”. That’s not very many people. I wonder how many there would have been if three-fourth of their population hadn’t perished a century earlier. For adults old enough to have completed their family, the number of surviving children seems to be someplace around four. That means their population roughly doubled in every generation.

Backing the census number up by generation, there would only have been about 650 people in 1673, 35 years, or a very long generation, earlier, and about 325 in 1638. The plague occurred about 1612, which tells us that the population was probably reduced to around 165 people, or maybe between 165 and 325. This is close to our earlier approximation of about 1500 people before 75% died, which would have left about 375.

Some estimates of Indigenous “plague deaths” between 1612 and 1619, known also as “The Great Dying”, reach as high as 90-95%. Given that the affliction did not seem to affect the French fishermen, it was likely a result of exposure to European diseases, or the disease carried by the rats on their ships. Unfortunately, the Europeans viewed this unfortunate epidemic as “God’s hand” in freeing up the lands for European colonization.

It’s hard to imagine that only around 300 people, or maybe even fewer, stood between the Mi’kmaq and extinction.

Perhaps their scattered locations along the coastline, as reflected in the 1708 census, helped to save them.

Under the title, Cape Sable Indians, which is not close to La Heve where Philippe and his second wife are living, we find:

  • Mathieu Emieusse, 26, Madelaine, 20, with Joachim, 1

This is Mathieu, born about 1682, Philippe Mius d’Azy’s son with his first wife.

Under the title, Indians from La Heve and surrounding area:

  • Philippe Mieusse, age 48, is listed at Le Have and surrounding area in the 10th wigwam, with his wife, Marie, age 38, son Jacques 20, son Pierre, 17, son Francois, 8, son Philipe 5, daughter Francoise, 11, and daughter Anne, 3.

This is Philippe Mius d’Entremont Sr.’s son, Philippe Mius d’Azy, born about 1660, living at Le Have, with his second wife, Marie, a Mi’kmaq woman.

Under the title, Indians from Mouscoudabouet:

  • Maurice Mieuse, age 26, is living with his wife Margueritte, 27 and their two children in the 5th wigwam at Mouscoudabouet.

Mouscoudabouet was an early combined French and Native settlement located about 80 miles northeast of La Heve by water, about 20 miles further east of present-day Halifax.

Maurice, born about 1682, is Philippe d’Azy’s son with his first Native wife.

Following that, we find a list of “the French settled on the East Coast – the French of Cape Sable.”

The couples, with the spelling remaining unchanged, include:

  • Julien auboiss, 67, and Jeanne aimee, 45
  • Gabriel mouleson, 23, and Marie aubois, 22
  • francois Vige, 46, Marie mieusse, 28

Marie is Philippe’s daughter by his first wife, who married Francois Viger. This suggests her birth about 1680.

  • Francois Tourangeau, 66, Marie Pitre, 42
  • Marc Pitre, 37, Jeanne brun, 36
  • Joseph dazy, 35, Marie tourangeau, 24, with son Joseph, 8, Charles, 6, francois, 5, Angelique, 4, Marie Joseph, 2

This is Joseph, born about 1679 (although this subtracts to 1673), the son of Philippe Mius d’Azy with his first wife. In 1715, Joseph received land, where he is described as “part Indian who dwelt at Port Le Tore,” and is the son-in-law of “Tourangeaut”. In this census, Tourangeaut is probably Francois Tourangeau, with his wife Marie Pitre.

  • Jean Pitre, 33, francoise Babin, 25

At Port Rasoirs:

  • Claude Bertram, 50, Catherine Pitre, 40
  • Etienne Chicau (no age or other people)
  • Jean Guy, 70, Marie Lureau, 40

At La Heve:

  • Pierre Briart, 55, Marie Thibaudeau, 46
  • Joseph Boutin, 32, Marie Briart, 22
  • Martin Briart, 5, Marie Godet, 28
  • Jean Godet, 58, Jeanne Briart, 62
  • Rene Labauve, 30, Anne Briart, 21
  • Jean Petit, 58, Jeanne Fauueau, 60
  • Claude Guedry, 60, Marguerite Petit pas, 48
  • Jean baptiste Guedry, 24, Madelaine Mieusse, 14

Madelaine, born about 1694, is the daughter of Philippe and his first wife.

In 1726 Jean Baptiste Guidry, and his namesake son, who was about 16, were both kidnapped by the English in the harbour at Merligueche, present-day Lunenburg, and hanged for piracy in Boston, on November 13, 1726. Philip Mius d’Azy’s son, Philip, about age 23, by his second wife, Marie, and his son Joseph from his first marriage, about age 53, were also kidnapped and hanged on the same day.

They had all probably been living as a family, here, at Merligueche.

Philippe d’Azy was still living at that time, although I wouldn’t be surprised if losing two of his sons, his son-in-law, and his grandson killed him. We never find him again in any record. He would have been about 66.

Philippe’s first wife, whoever she was, had “walked on” some 40 years earlier and was waiting to greet and comfort her son, Joseph Mius d’Azy, his half-brother, Philippe Mius d’Azy, her son-in-law Jean-Baptiste Guidry and grandson, also Jean-Baptiste Guidry.

Say their names.

While their death was astoundingly tragic, traditional Mi’kmaq belief is that death is a natural transition, and one’s ancestors are waiting to guide and embrace those who are passing into the spirit realm where the spirit lives on.

In the 1708 Indian Census, Philippe’s children were scattered over 300 miles along interlinked coastal villages in the southern and southwestern portion of Nova Scotia, and Philippe Mius d’Azy’s fifth child, by his first wife, Francoise, had married Jacques Bonnevie about 1701 and was living at Port Royal.

Even though these families lwere enumerated far apart along the coastline, they clearly sailed back and forth, given how many were in the same place on that fateful day in 1726. Various records place Philippe along a very long stretch of coastline throughout his life – all the way from Port Royal to Musquodoboit Harbour.

Francoise Mius is the only one of Philippe’s first Mi’kmaq wife’s children who did not retain a Native lifestyle and live among the Native people as an adult. Born about 1684, she and Jacques Bonnevie, a soldier, lived with their family in Port Royal among the French families.

Courtesy Nova Scotia Archives

Prior to that, Francoise is not found in the census, so would have been living among the Mi’kmaq.

Given how scattered the family is in 1708, it’s impossible to tell whether Philippe lived at Pobomcoup or elsewhere along the coastline with his first wife. They were only married for six or 7 years before she passed on – but that was half a dozen summers and winters where they would transition from their summer village to a winter location.

The Mi’kmaq people led a lifestyle in tune with nature, moving to where hunting and fishing were abundant and where safe shelter could be found during the various seasons of the year.

The Mi’kmaq people were seasonally migratory and moved from place to place.

Their wigwams, consisting of five or six poles, lashed together and covered with birch bark sewn together with spruce were easily assembled in less than a day by the women. Floors were covered with boughs, animals skins and furs.

The Mi’kmaq had few personal belongings, but they packed up their wigwams and hunting tools each season as they moved to the next location.

They lived in villages near Canso, Rivere Sainte Marie, Chebucto, La Heve, Port Medway, Port Rossignol (Shelburne), Ministiguesch (Port La Tour), Merligueche, Ouimakagan (near Pubnico), and other locations. For a more detailed discussion of their village sites, see Bill Wicken, “Encounters with Tall Sails and Tall Tales: Mi’kmaq Society, 1600-1760”.

The Port Royal Parish Register

The Port Royal parish register, on October 22 and 23, 1705, shows that several mixed Native/Acadian children were baptized who had previously been baptized at Cape Sable, or nearby. Residences of their parents include Outkrukagan, Pombomkou, Puikmakagan, OneKmakagan, Mirliguish, Petite Riviere, Merligueshe, Port Multois, and Kayigomias.

This cluster of 1705 baptisms within a day or so of each other makes me wonder if there was some kind of community baptismal event where everyone who wanted their child officially baptized climbed into a canoe or fishing boat and set out for Port Royal, where they had access to a priest. Conversely, the gathering could have been a harvest festival, Mawio’mi (powwow), or celebration of some type. One thing is clear, lots of non-resident people were visiting Port Royal that weekend and they probably didn’t visit regularly since the children being baptized were born across several years.

Conversely, it’s also possible that the priest visited Pobomcoup or someplace along the coastline and baptized everyone there, recording the events in the parish register. Have church will travel!

Many people were recorded with place names as their surnames, like Anne de Pobomkou.

There was only one Catholic church on the western shores of Acadia – at Port Royal. We know that children were born elsewhere and baptized at birth by someone nearby when no priest was present. Sometimes, they were later baptized by a priest and the baptism was recorded in the parish register.

It’s interesting that “Philippe de Pobomkou,” who signed as Philippe Muis, baptized children in 1702. This identifies him, but it may also indicate where he’s living at that time. Or at least during that part of the year in 1702.

  • In 1704, Philippe’s daughter, Francoise, the one born in 1684, had a child baptized where her name is recorded as “Françoise Muis dit Beaumon.” Her husband, Jacques Bonnevie, was a soldier.
  • In February 1708 Francoise Mius the wife of Baumont stood as Godmother to a baptism.
  • In June of 1712, Jacques Mius de Pobomkou and Agathe de la Tour stood as godparents at a baptism, both French who lived at Pobomcoup. This is Philippe’s brother and his wife.
  • In 1730, a baptism took place at the house of “Sieur Poboncour at Cape Sable”, which would be Philippe d’Azy’s brother, Jacques, where Joseph Mieux was listed as deceased. Joseph was one of the men hanged in 1726 in Boston.

Some years ago, Fran Wilcox extracted the Mi’kmaq marriages from the parish registers of St. Jean-Baptiste Church of Port Royal, and they are published, here.

Many of the Native people are listed under the French names they adopted or were bestowed upon them at baptism, along with their family members.

The balance of Mius family records, meaning those not shown above, seem to be from Philippe d’Azy’s marriage to his second wife, although I can’t identify everyone. There is obviously a deeper history, and perhaps more children and grandchildren, than we’ve been able to document.

Some families can be correlated to the 1708 Native census, but others are mysteries.

  • On June 20, 1726, Marie, the wife of Francois Mieux, Philippe’s son by his second wife, stood as a godmother. Marie has no surname, which, based on other entries, probably indicates that she is Native. Francois was appointed by the French in 1742 as Chief. He lived at Merligueche but in 1761, he signed as chief of the Indians at La Heve. This probably reflected seasonal travels.

Some baptisms and marriages state that some of the people involved were “Mi’kmaq of Cape Sable.” However, that does not mean they stayed in one place from season to season.

  • In March 1728, Gabriel Thomas was baptized. He was born to Jean Baptiste Thomas, a Mi’kmaq “of this river” (Annapolis River), and mother, Marie Mius (daughter of Philippe Mius and his second wife, Marie). Francois Mius, Marie’s brother, and Anne Thomas, the daughter of Jean Baptiste Thomas, stood as Godparents.
  • In February of 1730, Marie, the 30-year-old wife of Jean Baptiste Mius, of the Mi’kmaq Nation was buried. This would be very young for the Jean-Baptiste Mius born in 1713, the son of Joseph Mius, to have married, but I don’t know of other candidates.
  • In October 1732, a baptism of a Mi’kmaq child was witnessed by Charles Amiraux and Claire Mieux, relationship not stated. Claire’s identity is unknown.
  • In April of 1733, Marie Mieux is noted as a Mi’kmaq mother. Husband Baptiste Thomas, daughter Clere born in 1732 and baptized. Marie Mieux is Philippe’s daughter with his second wife, Marie. Jean-Baptiste Thomas was a Mi’kmaq man and future chief of the Mi’kmaq “of the river at Port Royal” in 1726.
  • In April of 1734, a Mi’kmaq child was baptized with Madeleine Mius listed as the Mi’kmaq mother, along with Baptiste Pierret, a Mi’kmaq father.
  • In August 1735, Francoise Myus, widow of the second time of the late Rene grande Claude of La Heve, Mi’kmaq bride, married Pierre Ceiller, a Mi’kmaq from the Annapolis River. This Francoise is the daughter of Philippe and his second wife, Marie.

Robichau family members witnessed many of these events

Philippe’s Wife’s Death

We don’t know when Philippe’s first wife died, but she had her first child, Joseph, in 1679 when they were newlyweds, followed by Marie in about 1680. Mathieu and Maurice are estimated to have been born about 1682 and may have been twins. Finally, Francoise was born about 1684, but assuredly before the census was taken in 1686.

If was born about 1663, married in 1678 at 15, and had her first child the following year – she would have only been about 21 when daughter Francoise was born in 1684. We don’t know exactly when she died, but it could have been anything from Francoise’s birth to the 1686 census where Philippe is found in Port Royal with his father.

Given that there is no child, or no child that survived in 1685 or 1686, and Philippe remarried sometime in 1687, she probably died in 1684 or 1685, leaving her five children behind. It’s certainly possible that she died in childbirth with the next child, who also perished along with her.

Communal living makes so much sense in circumstances like this.

What do we know about her short life?

From 1679 until 1685, Philippe was engaged in the fur trade and eel fishing at Ouikmakagan, a summer village on or near Robert’s Island, an eel-fishing settlement near the Tusket River.

The Mi’kmaq people fished for whales and porpoises along the shore, and gathered shellfish.

This is also where their eldest daughter, Marie, lived with François Vignee (Viger), so this must have been very familiar territory.

During those years, before her passing, Philippe’s first wife would have resided here with him, among these pristine islands, moving seasonally, as was the Mi’kmaq tradition.

We also know that in 1685, Philippe lived in a town called Ministiguesche, a native village, with his brother Abraham, near present-day Barrington Head. Barrington Head is near Fort LaTour, and Abraham married a LaTour.

That makes sense, as Ministiguesche wasn’t far from Pobomcoup, may have been in or near its eastern boundary, and was the known site of a Mi’kmaq village. Philippe’s wife would have accompanied him here, too.

The two cultures coexisted harmoniously, with the French settling the salt marsh lands, and the Mi’kmaq people living along the coastline in the summers, then in the woods and uplands in cold weather. They hunted and fished together, sharing the bounty of the woods and sea, and intermarried.

Given that the Mi’kmaq moved from place to place with the seasons, we don’t know when or where Philippe’s wife perished.

We presume that she was deceased before 1686 when Philippe was living with his father, also a widower, in Port Royal. I know how much trouble “presume” can get a genealogist into. However, I doubt that he would have left his family otherwise. Perhaps after her death, he decided to try living in the white world again. Based on what we know about Philippe, I’d wager that he was very unhappy there.

By 1687, he was on a trader’s list of European men in Indian villages, and his next child, born to Marie, arrived the following year.

Mi’kmaq Life

During my visit to Nova Scotia in the summer of 2024, I returned home to the sacred places of my Mi’kmaq ancestors.

No story of the Acadians would be complete without the Mi’kmaq people, so every museum includes documentation and references to the Native people and the role they played in Acadian settlement. The Mi’kmaq people lived throughout Nova Scotia for thousands of years.

Two locations were devoted to telling the story of the Mi’kmaq people, by the Mi’kmaq people themselves. Kespukwitk is the entire SW Nova Scotia region in the Mi’kmaq language. Today the Kejimkujik National Park and National Historic Site at Maitland tells the story of the Mi’kmaq people.

The second location is the Millbrook Cultural and Heritage Center, located on tribal land at Truro where they educate us about Mi’kmaq life.

Birth, Life and Beyond

All cultures have unique customs for commemorating life’s milestones, be they birth, coming of age, marriage or, finally, death. Some of the ways in which the Mi’kmaq observed these occasions remained unchanged for centuries. With the introduction of Catholicism, others gradually changed or died out completely.

For the Mi’kmaq, large families were means of forging alliances, and practically speaking, the more kin one had, young or old, the better. Polygamy was once common and parenting began early. Nicholas Denys, observing Mi’kmaq ways in the 1600s, remarked that, “The greatest persons give way to the little ones. The father and mother draw the morsel from their mouths for a child asks for it. They love their children greatly. They are never afraid of having too many, for they are their wealth.”

There was no pampering of expectant mothers. Writing in 1616, Father Pierre Biard noted that women gave birth outdoors and then with newborns warmly wrapped and secure inside a type of wooden backpack (a cradle board), the mothers resumed everyday tasks within hours. If a birth was particularly difficult, a shaman (puoin) was summoned to assist by blowing sweet tobacco smoke around the tree where the expectant mother stood, her hands grasping a branch.

Parents welcomed the new baby by hosting a birthing feast. The guests danced in a circle around the infant, offering up thanks and blessings. Families celebrated a youngster’s first tooth and first steps. Increasingly, after 1600, children were baptized.

A boy was considered a man when he killed his first moose. The last moose-kill feast ever held was at Shubenacadie for Max Basque in 1937. A young girl’s coming of age meant that she was ready to marry and this too was a milestone. Menstruating women retired to be alone so as to “…recite certain formularies of invocation to the Manitou …that they might obtain blessing of fruitfulness.” (Abbé Maillard, 1758)

Courtship meant that a young man and woman lived with the girl’s family for an extended period. Each demonstrated their prowess with respect to carrying out specific day-to-day tasks. The young man proved himself a hunter and fisherman and made tools, weapons, a canoe, a sled, and other items. The young woman demonstrated her butchering and cooking skills, made clothing and containers, wove webbing for snowshoes, and prepared herbal remedies.

If the twosome were compatible and the families willing, there was a wedding feast. The couple painted their faces in hues of red and blue and adorned their hair. The bride wore an elaborately-decorated white robe. There were speeches and much singing, dancing, storytelling, and eating. Festivities lasted several days.

Sadly, accidents and death occurred, although death was merely a transformation or shape-change, the last movements a passing over of protective power from one being to another. Burial customs varied and included primary burials, sky burials and secondary burials. A primary burial took place when a grave could be easily dug in a communal burying ground. The person was buried intact in either a horizontal or a flexed position.

A sky burial involved the placement of an intact body on an elevated outdoor scaffold so it could dry in the sun. This took place during winter or when death occurred at a remote place. A secondary burial meant that, following a sky burial, the bones were placed in the ground, months or years later.

Labor was divided, and everyone participated.

“The boys aid the father on the hunt and help in the support of the family. Girls work aiding the mother; they go for the wood, for water, and to find the slain animal and carry it to the wigwam. There is always some old woman with the girls to conduct them and show them the way, for often these animals are killed at five or six leagues from the wigwam and there are no beaten roads. Sometimes they camp where the animal is. They make broiled steaks and return next day.” [Adapted from Nicolas Denys, Concerning the Ways of the Indians, 1672]

Other sources tell us that the Mi’kmaq people utilized toboggans and snowshoes during the winter months, especially in conjunction with hunting.

Moose was prized, and along with any other forest animal, was a staple. Moose butter known as “cacamo” was a great delicacy made by boiling crushed moose bones in a large wooden vat. The fat was skimmed from the top of the water, congealed, and packed in birch bark boxes to be taken on hunts or given as a treasured gift. It was both high energy and portable for long hunting trips in the winter.

Salmon were speared from canoes by torchlight at night.

Brush weirs were utilized in tidal estuaries. Stakes were driven into the mud and then brush was used to make an interwoven netting, trapping fish and marine life as the water flowed out, back towards the sea.

Hooks were carved from bone and attached to moosehide lines. Larger fish were harvested using bone-tipped lances. Even larger lance-type harpoons were used to hunt seals, walrus, and small whales from seagoing canoes.

I can only imagine harpooning a whale from a canoe. The terror, but also the glory, if one was successful and did not die in the process!

The Mi’kmaq people were highly mobile and semi-nomadic, but returned to the same areas year after year, just as their ancestors had done.

Families camped by estuaries in the spring to take advantage of the spring fish runs. They moved closer to the coast in the summer to harvest cod and shellfish. Hunting in the forest took place in the fall and winter months, and fishing was done through holes in the ice.

Wild resources such as nuts and berries were harvested when ripe, and maple and birch sap were collected and boiled to make syrup or sweet drinks.

Some plants were used as medicine and others were woven into cloth. Lescarbot reported that the cloth made of hemp by the Mi’kmaq people was “finer, whiter and stronger than that of France.” Porcupine quills were used generously for decoration, and plants were used for dye.

As with many Native peoples, the Mi’kmaq were one with nature, considering many locations as sacred. The abundance of nature was understood as a gift from the Great Spirit or Creator. Nature was not a separate thing, but interwoven with them, and they with it. All was one. The Mi’kmaq people were stewards of the land and took only what was needed, wasting nothing. To do otherwise would be disrespecting Nature and the gifts bestowed upon them. Nicolas Denys kept a journal and said that they killed animals only in proportion to their need for them. As a trader, he was interested in skins and mentioned that “they never make an accumulation of skins of moose, beaver, otter, or others, but only as far as they need them for personal use.”

The Native people had no concept of “private property” as everything was shared communally, and the earth could not be “owned.” This vast difference in perspective led to many clashes and disagreements that persist to this day.

Nothing was wasted. Meat was eaten. Bones were used as implements, skins as clothing and wigwam covering, and so forth.

The Native people felt a responsibility to, and a kinship with the forest and sea animals, even those they harvested. They held the animals in great respect – thanking them for allowing themselves to be caught to nourish their bodies. It would be a “sin” of sorts to waste any part of them, or kill them needlessly, which constituted waste. Animals were considered to be persons, with souls.

The concept of massive harvesting of natural resources like trees and animals, only for their furs to be shipped back to European markets, was entirely foreign to the Mi’kmaq people.

Within a generation or so, the Mi’kmaq embraced hunting for trade, beaver was over-hunted for their lucrative pelts, and life was forever changed. Life as they knew it disappeared quickly, and with it, much of their equilibrium with Nature.

The arrival of Europeans in the early 1600s seemed innocent enough at first, but over the next few decades, the onslaught of new settlers with their very different cultural expectations and beliefs would destroy life as the Mi’kmaq people knew it.

If Philippe and his Mi’kmaq wife, whose name is unknown, welcomed their first child around 1679, based on what we know about the Mi’kmaq culture, we can estimate that his mother was maybe 16 at the time, so born about 1663.

Given what else we know about the habits of the Mi’kmaq people, and that they were know to freqent Pobomcoup, indicating that it was the place where they ice fished, it’s reasonable to surmise that area is where Philippe met his first wife. They married around 1678, probably in the Mi’kmaq tradition, given that Philippe lived among the tribe, and not the reverse where she lived among the French.

Furthermore, just a few years later when she died, their children were already an integral part of the communal family unit of their band – so taking them away from their family to be raised elsewhere by their father was simply unthinkable.

Based on Philippe’s appearance in Port Royal with his widowed father in 1686, Philippe may have tried to return to “French life,” but quickly found that he needed to follow his heart, back to nature and the Mi’kmaq people – where he remarried and lived the rest of his life.

Returning Home

During my 2024 trip back to Nova Scotia, I visited the Habitation at Port Royal, the Museum at Fort Anne, Kespukwitk and the Millbrook Cultural and Heritage Center at Truro. Each of these tells a different chapter and explains different aspects of Mi’kmaq life in Nova Scotia.

Lake Kejimkujik, today a National Park, is the spiritual center of Kespukwitk, the ancient home of the Mi’kmaq people for thousands of years, “since the beginning of time.”

Ancient petroglyphs, the traditional written Mi’kmaq language, are heavily protected within Kejimkujik.

Stone, like any other element of nature, is considered to be a living entity. Therefore, these petroglyphs are considered to be living as well, and need to be afforded respect.

Petroglyphs are found in locations across the traditional Mi’kmaq land, many disappearing due to the ravages of time. This petroglyph was part of a cliff face at Red Bridge Pond near Dartmouth, but was unintentionally displaced during road construction. It fell into a lake, then was recovered some years later and placed in a grassy area beside the road. Normally, artifacts like this cannot be moved, but in this case, given the circumstances, it was moved to the Millbrook Cultural and Heritage Center, on tribal land, for its own protection.

Upon arrival in Kejimkujik, we began in the museum where we saw a beautiful birchbark canoe.

An incredible amount of skill is required to achieve balance and symmetry when crafting these watercraft so they track straight and don’t roll over. The seams must be sealed to make them waterproof.

An inside view of the hand-hewn ribs of the canoe, with its brace. Canoes are built from the outside in, and the wood must be curved and bent without breaking. Today, locating and harvesting perfectly flawless birch trees, free of knots, is increasingly difficult due to disease, over-harvesting, and habitat destruction.

Chief Charlie Labrador was a traditional canoe builder, Elder and Spiritual Healer who lived at Kejimkujik.

You can read his interview about his younger life, his parents and grandparents, along with the traditional Mi’kmaq ways, here.

Reproductions of Native tools discovered by archaeologists.

Beautiful traditional woven basketry.

After leaving the museum, I spent some time walking along the lake’s shore, communing with the spirits of my ancestors. I can always feel them.

Anytime you see two red wooden chairs in Parks Canada, there’s something historical of interest, and those chairs are an invitation to sit and enjoy the scenery.

I was too excited to be there to sit very long.

After walking a little further, we noticed a demonstration area.

Todd Labrador, son of Chief Charlie Labrador, was giving demonstrations on traditional canoe-building – a nearly-lost art.

Todd is an incredible artist.

Todd, working in his workshop beside the photo of his grandfather, Charlie Labrador, born in 1874.

Tools lay on a table in front of another canoe underway.

I would have LOVED to bring that birchbark box home.

I wonder what Todd is going to do with these huge moose antlers. They can have a spread of up to six feed and weigh 80 pounds or more.

From the canoe workshop, I noticed a path along the lake that beckoned to me.

I could not resist hiking the same path that my ancestors did. We walked past a few other people doing the same thing.

The path took us along the lakeshore.

Eventually, opening into a clearing with a path down to a sandy beach.

Here, one can look, unconstrained, across time. Into the past, and perhaps into the future

I wasn’t quite ready to leave, but eventually, the mosquitoes convinced me otherwise.

Making our way back to the car, we noticed a lovely little picnic area, purchased a light lunch, and enjoyed ourselves immensely.

The road that traverses the park has several places to stop, though some are easy to miss.

“What’s that? Over there! Let’s stop!”

Poor Cousin Mark had at least one back-seat driver. Sorry Mark. I was so excited, and what we discovered next was the best part.

Secluded behind some trees, down a barely noticeable trail was what looked to be an abandoned Mi’kmaq camp.

Fortunately, there was a ranger who I think was very glad to have someone to explain things to. We were equally as grateful.

I spotted the wigwam and simply could not stop myself. It was calling to me.

I absolutely HAD to crawl in there, just like my ancestors did. Well, not just like they did because they were MUCH more agile.

I remembered my manners and asked if it would be alright, and yes, it was fine.

My cousins were kind and did not take a picture of me actually sort of crab-crawling inside, as I’m absolutely positive that I was no place near as graceful as my ancestors were.

In fact, I’m sure they were all collectively laughing from someplace over the lake.

I’m determined, though, and I made it.

I was simply gleeful. So, so, happy.

My cousins went back to discussing whatever they were discussing with the ranger, which gave me a chance to marvel at the experience.

This is the view that my Mi’kmaq ancestors woke up to every morning. Their front door.

People milling around outside – the village coming to life. Maybe children playing already.

I began to look around. The sides of the wigwam are waterproof.

Looking up and out through the center smoke hole.

Close up of the very top, where all of the poles join together in a cone. This is what every person woke up seeing, warm weather or cold.

During inclement weather, the hole was covered by a birchbark collar, which could also be adjusted for ventilation and heat regulation through side vents. You can read more, here.

The smoke hole is more than just for ventilation. It symbolizes the pathway of the soul, where the soul leaves the body and exits, tethering the earth and sky with the spirit realm.

Mom couldn’t come with me in person on this journey, given that she lives in the spirit world, so I wore her ring that descended from this side of her family. Here’s “Mom” in the wigwam on her ancestral land. Philippe’s wife was here, and so were her ancestors for time immemorial.

We’re home Mom.

The poles, with the hoops lashed to the poles along with the protective birchbark.

Reassembling the wigwam was the woman’s job. I can’t imagine accomplishing this in a day.

Hmmm, what’s that red thing, and what’s the ranger saying?

I can’t hear from here.

Should I embarrass myself and make an undignified exit?

Sooner or later, I have to.

As it turns out, this is a traditional Mi’kmaq game of chance called Waltes or Woltes. You can watch a champion player in a YouTube video, here.

That stunning wooden bowl is carved from the burl of a tree. The six beautiful moose or deer bone dice are carved on one side and rounded on the other. They are kept in that leather pouch when not in use.

The sticks are counting sticks. The goal is to win all of your opponents sticks by landing matching combinations of dice as the bowl is bounced against the blanket by players who take turns.

Having been played for thousands of years, Waltes is both cultural and has a spiritual aspect as well. It’s not only fun, but teaches counting, patience, and how to handle defeat. In earlier times, the bowl was often used by medicine men and women for divination and healing.

Of course, because it’s a game of chance, or more specifically, probability, wagers are sometimes involved too.

This is not a reproduction, but the real deal. No place did I find anything like this to purchase. I would have been happy with just one original piece.

Looking around the camp, I asked about this strange-looking skin. Turns out, it’s an eel’s skin lying on a pelt.

This is particularly relevant for Philippe and the Mi’kmaq people, given that they moved from the area near Tusket where they fished for eels during warm weather, to this interior lake in the fall and winter.

The benches were covered with furs and pelts, perhaps as they would have been displayed when trading.

The ranger explained how the skins and pelts were prepared, with the tools lying on the bench with the pelts.

Furs and pelts curing and drying.

Bearskin at the right, and I think the lighter pelt at left is caribou.

A log hollowed out for cooking.

Hunting and food preparation were a year-round affair.

When the tribe was encamped along the coastline, children collected eggs from the nests of seabirds, some of which were eaten as well. In season, berries, nuts, tree sap, and other plants supplemented their fare.

Fats and oils from moose and harbour seals were important dietary staples. Absolutely every part of the animal was utilized. Whatever couldn’t be eaten was used for clothing, utensils, or jewelry.

Moose bladders stored seal oil. Moose butter, a cherished treat, was rendered from boiled bones and marrow. Intestines were used for rope, or to stuff with a combination of meat, often organ meat, fat, and berries before smoking to preserve it for the lean winter months.

Salmon ran in the spring and fall. Sturgeon was caught at night by groups of men in canoes that would harpoon one fish and haul it to shore.

Moose were hunted mostly in the winter when snow slowed the animal, making it easier prey. Not only are moose huge animals, reaching from 5 to 7 feet at the shoulder, they also weigh from 600 to 1600 pounds, depending on their sex and age.

With bows, arrows, and lances, multiple men were required to harvest a moose, often having to track it for a day or more after it was initially wounded.

Meat was boiled, roasted, smoked or dried, depending on the season and if it was going to be eaten immediately or preserved for future use.

The Mi’kmaq people were not farmers. They were opportunistic hunters, but also tended to hunt certain things based on the moon under which it fell.

  • January was for seal hunting.
  • February and March were for beaver, otter, moose, bear, and caribou hunting.
  • April ushered in smelt and gaspereau season, along with salmon and sturgeon. Children began gathering eggs.
  • Fishing began in May and continued all summer.
  • Roots and edible plants began to be gathered in June.
  • July added berries to the diet, along with hunting partridge and pigeons.
  • August was for rabbit hunting.
  • They fished for eels in September.
  • Snow began to fall in October, and hunting for ducks, moose, and beaver began and continued through November.
  • December saw fishing for tomcod and the gathering of turtles.

Campfires, the center and heart of the community served many purposes and was tended primarily by the women. Fire, along with the other elements, is considered to be a living relative that transforms, cleanses and heals, and served many purposes. It was around the campfire that Elders passed on the sacred stories and laws.

Fire was also used for communal cooking. Men were responsible for procuring the meat. They would field-dress the animal to make it lighter or easier to transport, if necessary, but women were responsible for cleaning and preparing what the men brought home. Women also gathered berries and plants.

Aside from food, the women prepared hides for use or trade, including cleaning, brain-tanning, chewing them for softness, and sewing them into their final form.

Fire and heat are used for cooking, preparing hides and skins, rendering dyes, and, of course, for teaching, warmth and socializing.

Who doesn’t love to gather round a campfire?

I knew that our time had come to depart, but I didn’t want to leave.

One more walk to the lake to say “so long.” Not goodbye, because I’ll join them one day on that side of the spirit world.

Lifted by the wings of the sacred eagle.

Of all the locations and exhibits in Nova Scotia, our day at Kejimkujik was by far the most authentic, filled with a bone-deep spiritual connection and meaning. Knowing that my ancestors had unquestionably been here, stood here, slept here, and entered the spirit realm here made this a deeply personal experience.

They spent their winters on this lakeshore, and canoed on these waters. They loved, made love, and birthed babies here.

My ancestors. My family. For thousands of years.

I may not know her name, but I felt her presence. I can’t help but wonder what cut her time on earth so short. I hope she didn’t suffer.

Some 340 years later, I shared her world for a little bit, and I could almost, almost see through her eyes.

_____________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

Subscribe!

If you haven’t already subscribed, it’s free. You’ll receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button at the top of the main blog page, here.

Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small commission when you click a vendor link in my articles and purchase that item. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the affiliate links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research