Playing around with Google Notebook LM Slide Deck

Have you ever wondered whether someone else—especially an objective tool—would look at your brick-wall research and reach the same conclusions you have? Curious to see how an AI might sort through the many men named James Crawford in my Crawford FAN Club, I summarized the relevant families and asked Google Notebook LM to create a slide deck explaining my brick-wall question.

One of my most stubborn brick walls is my fourth great-grandfather, James Crawford (219). James married Sally Duggins (1441) in Garrard County, Kentucky, in 1799. This was Sally’s second marriage; she had two sons with her first husband, Alexander Duggins (639): Henry Duggins (481) and William A. Duggins (482). Sally’s maiden name was Sally Smith (1441).

Crawford Families in Garrard County, Kentucky Prior to 1800

Several Crawford families lived in the area before 1800, creating a challenging network of potential connections:

• Mary Crawford (1413) purchased land from Richard Cave and lived along Sugar Creek before her marriage to Alexander Moore.
• James Crawford (1443) owned land along Paint Lick Creek on the eastern edge of Garrard County. His wife, Rebecca Anderson (1444), was the daughter of John Anderson (10083). Rebecca’s first husband was John Maxwell (13444), with whom she had a son, John Maxwell (13445).
• John Crawford (6251) is believed to have married Rebekah Douglas (168). Rebekah purchased Garrard County land from George Douglas (10320) along the ridge dividing Boone Creek and Sugar Creek.
• Moses Dooley, an original Sugar Creek landowner and host of the “Old Sugar Meeting House,” would have known many of these families. Both Mary Crawford (1413) and Rebekah Crawford (168) likely attended events at this meeting house.
• William Crawford (10065) owned Garrard County land before migrating to Pulaski County and eventually southeast Missouri.
• Andrew Crawford (6251) is believed to be a brother to William (10065), John (6251), and James (1443).

Crawford–Sellers Connections

• James Crawford (1) married Martha Knight in 1793 in Lincoln County, Kentucky. He is believed to be a son of Rebekah (Douglas) Crawford (168).
• Sarah Crawford (171) married William David Sellers (5228)—son of Nathaniel Sellers (1422)—in 1796 in Lincoln County. Rebekah Crawford (168) gave permission.
• Mary Crawford (170) married James Sellers (174), also a son of Nathaniel Sellers (1422), in Lincoln County in 1791. Again, permission was granted by Rebekah Crawford (168).

Migration to Ohio and Indiana

• William Sellers (5228) and James Crawford (219) jointly purchased land in Preble County, Ohio, as tenants in common in 1816.
• James Crawford (219) and James Crawford (1) owned adjoining land in Preble County. James Crawford (1) later migrated to Warren County, Indiana around the same time as Nelson Crawford (199), son of James Crawford (219). Descendants from both lines eventually settled in Dodge City, Kansas—and some are buried in the same cemetery section.

DNA Tangents

• William Nelson Crawford (9886) remains a brick wall for another researcher. DNA supports a relationship to descendants of James Crawford (1) and Martha Knight, though not to my specific line.

Note: Numbers after names are the RootsMagic identifiers in my genealogy file.

---

About the Slide Deck

Google Notebook LM produced a beautifully organized slide deck—visually clear, logically structured, and surprisingly accurate given the complexity of this Crawford network. However, two slides needed correction:

Slide 4 – Misassigned Individual

The deck listed a second “John Crawford” and incorrectly applied William Crawford (10065)’s number to him.

Slide 12 – The Hypothesis Problem

Google proposed that James Crawford (219) was a son of Rebekah (Douglas) Crawford (168) and therefore a brother to James Crawford (1). This would require two surviving sons with the same name—highly improbable.

I modified the hypothesis: James Crawford (219) is better positioned as a cousin to James Crawford (1) and therefore a nephew of Rebekah Crawford (168).

I also removed the DNA slide, as it focused on the DNA link between descendants of William Nelson Crawford (9886) and the family of James Crawford (1) / Martha Knight—not my direct line.

Conclusion

Exploring my Crawford brick wall through Google Notebook LM turned out to be a fascinating experiment. Even with a few inevitable hiccups, the slide deck offered a fresh way to visualize long-studied relationships and reinforced how complex—and interconnected—these early Garrard County families truly were. While I still have unanswered questions about James Crawford (219), seeing my data reframed in a new format helped clarify patterns, highlight assumptions, and even spark a few new research angles. AI may not solve a brick wall, but it certainly provides another lens—and sometimes that new perspective is exactly what we need to keep moving forward.