Little victories.

Well, through some online sleuthing and some luck, I've conclusively established the fate of one of the A Bs, namely C.  The problem is, this doesn't yet yield any definite answers on I.  What seems apparent is that I was not in fact a brother to C.  C appears to have been the eldest child in his family, and his brothers remained living under the shelter of their parents for some time.  While he would marry, and have children, he may have died as early as 56 years old, but this last part has to be verified.

This leaves "Colonel I A" an open question.  He doesn't appear in Australia until well outside the span of the A Bs, and well after C is safely retired from the Vaudeville circuit with a new and lucrative profession.

Time to dig into C's cause of death, if that's in fact when and where he died...

The A Bs.

The A Bs are a point of intrigue with me, in no small part because it seems so little is known about them save that they were the marksmanship act to beat for years.  I can find no photographs of them, but it's said that C A married A F, who'd been the leading lady of the B B C, and it is alleged that A went on to some fame beyond the combination, but I can't find for what, or if her marriage survived.

Meanwhile, on the trail of I A, I found records of a man going by that name ("Colonel I A") in Australia whose touted 1889 "Re-appearance after 4 years’ absence of America’s Greatest Rifleman” ended when his eyesight failed and he died May 9, 1908.  The title and stagename were only for the stage.  He served as an American military scout during the Civil War and achieved the rank of sergeant, but his real name was I P S.  A recent excursion to Australia to find the graves of Civil War vets found his in Rookwood Cemetery, Sydney.

"The (A Bs), whose marvelous marksmanship has been the subject of wide comment, will vary the chances of putting a pellet through one or the other's head.  There is a fascination about this kind of an exhibition that is curious, and maybe it is bloodthirsty...  ...there is a buzz of expectation when their act is reached which tells of the shadow of a terrible fear and fascination that (fastens?) upon their audience.  This is the fatal shadow which it seems to us must follow them wherever they exhibit their skill."

San Francisco Call, July 15, 1877 via The New York Clipper., Aug. 4, 1877

In other news, looking over my microfilms, the Gallipolis Bulletin is a political rag of little use, but the Gallipolis Journal which has advertisements for amusements including Robinson's Circus, may be more fruitful.  That said, there are better avenues to search.

Oh, and this.

A bit here, a bit there,

Well, just finally managing my intended schedule today.  Got out for a 2.5 mile jog, and now winding down to sleep.  Yesterday found some interesting pieces, though...  A poster for "B & A" among others, and some information on F & A's publicity agent in 1888.  Maybe more this evening.  Must sleep.

Found some good data on SHB (and wife) this morning (it includes his physical description, but no photo of the man yet), worked on a "Little Nemo" mockup, separated a cel from its matting, and touched base with the Wentzels.

Didn't get a lot done today, but I also got some sleep.  Mondays are always hard, 'cause you're resetting your sleep schedule.  Tomorrow, the new routine:

Exercise after work.

Cool shower.

Sleep.

Wake and write (2 hrs.+?).

Research.

I won't say "research 'til work", because I suspect I'll be interrupted with a phone call tomorrow, but that's the ideal.

No more time to write.

Easter.

Quiet Easter. Called family, left a message. Had dinner with Christina's family.

Found this article.  It's worth a look for those considering whether Annie was a victim of sexual abuse.  This has always been an open question and a point of conjecture among researchers and even her relatives living today.  While I believe it to be an important question to ask, it's a dangerous one to try to answer with any certainty unless one has irrefutable proof.  Even a hundred fifty years later, sexual abuse is a potent charge and can upset historians and living descendants (as is evident from a previous book on the topic, which shall remain unnamed, but took dramatic liberties with the story that annoyed the staff at The Garst).

And while the article notes Annie had no children of her own, and speculates thus from the possibility of sexual abuse that her marriage to Frank may have been an "asexual marriage of convenience" (a common notion which is too often used in a circular manner:  "She was sexually abused, and the trauma kept her from having children."  "How do we know she was sexually abused?"  "Well, the fact that she had no children supports this likelihood."), this ignores her married (to Benjamin Grabfelder), childless elder sister Sarah Ellen, who only died in 1939 at the age of 81.  She didn't live with "The Wolves."  Is there something we should also draw from this?  And though she died young at 26, another sister, Elizabeth, had none either with husband Martin Brewer.  Nor sister Lydia with husband Joseph Stein, though she lived 'til she was 29-and-a-half.  Can we really consider Annie's childlessness a distinct feature that tells us something about that chapter of her life, or does it tell us something about the nature of the Mosey daughters, or perhaps nothing at all?

Questions usually deserve to be asked.  Some, however, do not warrant being answered when it presumes a knowledge no one has, and when other questions inspire answers of equal merit as alternatives.

Research winding down, writing starting up.

I haven't been as mindful about keeping this blog as I should. I've visited and posted to it here and there, but rarely with any consistency. I mean to change that as of now. My genealogical research -- the portion that requires the most work and travel -- is slowly winding down. There are still some avenues to pursue: Contacting descendants of SP, EMR, and, of course, relatives of AO, to see what stones I've left unturned; but for the most part, the remaining research is getting properly acquainted with the era, the culture, technology, habits, etc. so the writing seems authentic.

Too, I must get into a habit of writing. I long ago got out of the habit of doing any more with fiction than maintain my file of story ideas. Mostly when I write, the ideas are political, and that's something I must change. I tend to believe we are reflections of what we consume, and so, my regular habit of watching political news for hours every night must be quashed, and used for period reading, Jane Eyre first among these.

Also, for purposes both of productivity and health, I must establish a rigorous schedule for sleeping, writing and exercising. I suspect 1-1.5 hours of (serious, heated) exercise when I get home from work, a cool shower, sleep, 2-3 hours of writing immediately when I awake, and reading to take with to work. I believe this to be optimal. It's just a matter of maintaining it.

And, if I'm to maintain this blog with any regularity, I must find a window for it as well. I'll place that between exercise and sleep and limit it to 1/2 hour, giving basic mentions of recent accomplishments.

To that end: I've hunted through "The Gallipolis Bulletin" 1880 in months January and June 7 - early Oct. Nothing thus far. And nothing of note either in "The Dayton Daily Journal" 1882 around May - June. I'll still have all these rolls for most of a month, so I'll make good use of them, but I really need papers from Springfield and Milwaukee.

I need to get e-mails off to P. & F'm'n relatives, Ms. G, and some info off to Mr. H'y'n. I must also look into having the Sütterlin-esque docs translated, so I can offer something to the Pioneer Library.

That's all for now.