Posted by on May 18, 2012 in Site

Maine, 1940. Before lobster had settled firmly into the position of high-priced delicacy. Before the eastern-most state had realized the impact World War II would have on its shipbuilding industry. Before there was a Stephen King to tell wonderfully creepy fictional tales about the place. That was Maine 72 years ago.

And as of last night, you can search for the state’s residents by name during that moment in time in the just-launched 1940 U.S. census index for Maine on

Adding Maine to our list of fully indexed, fully searchable locations brings us up to four: Maine, Nevada, District of Columbia and Delaware. Search for resident by name to find your own family’s Maine relations. Or look for famous Mainers including future actress Linda Lavin (a toddler at the time) and Leon Bean (better known as L.L.), who’s listed as the president of a sporting goods company. Or browse through the town of Strong, Maine to see how many residents made toothpicks for a living. It was big business back in Maine in the day – and for many years to come.

If Maine isn’t at the top of your wish list of states to search, take note: more states are on deck with indexes coming very soon. And the entire 1940 U.S. Federal Census will be fully indexed and fully searchable on long before the end of the year. Plus you can browse through every 1940 census image, regardless of state or territory, already on Start browsing and searching now.

About Jeanie Croasmun

Jeanie Croasmun has been working at while futilely attempting to prove the horse thief story in her family history for over seven years. During that time, she learned enough about her family to determine that the story is likely a great work of fiction. But the search continues ...



Not only am I DISGUSTED that Ancestry has seen fit to take away free information from and, but they charge an outrageous amount of money to use the sites. You have taken a true interest in one’s ancestry and heritage and made a mockery out of it. You have NO Right to take information a person (including me) has submitted to your websites (FOR FREE TO YOU, I MIGHT ADD) and charge for it. What a joke! There are many sites that give out information for a fraction of what you charge. This is a sick business that you have created. I EXPECT ANY AND ALL PEDIGREES, SURNAME LISTS, AND OTHER INFORMATION THAT I HAVE SUBMITTED REMOVED IMMEDIATELY FROM BOTH ROOTSWEB AND ANCESTRY!!!!!!! IF YOU DO NOT REMOVE MY INFORMATION, I WILL SEEK LEGAL ADVICE! I intend to give my ancestral and historical information out for FREEEEE to those who need it!!!

May 18, 2012 at 11:23 am
Trevor Thacker 

If you have attached user-submitted information to a tree, and you would like to remove that entire tree from your account on Ancestry, please click here:

May 18, 2012 at 12:09 pm

“By the way, we’re not slowing down anytime soon. We’re continuing to index states.”

-Jeanie Croasmun Blog
April 9, 2012

I would hate to see your progress if you did slow down. Since you posted that, ACOM has indexed 1 state with fewer that 1 million people.

Your marketing hype is more infuriating than beneficial to your cause.

May 18, 2012 at 3:45 pm
Jeff Jahn 

Ancestry: Maine, Nevada, District of Columbia and Delaware

Archives: Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Kansas, New Hampshire, Oregon, Utah, Virginia, Wyoming

Only one overlaps and that’s Delaware hmmm do I see a pattern here.

May 18, 2012 at 7:20 pm
Andy Hatchett 

Now- if only MyHeritage doesn’t duplicate any states when they start making their indexing efforts available we may see all states available before any one sites has a fully searchable index – and that would be, as Martha would say, a *very* good thing!

Andy Hatchett

May 18, 2012 at 8:19 pm
Susan Modelski will have to average better than 1 state a week to be done by the end of this year. They won’t make it at their present snail’s pace.

May 19, 2012 at 11:00 am

FamilySearch has 6 states that are searchable;

Oregon, Colorado, Kansas, Virginia, Delaware, New Hampshire.

Ancestry has 3 states that are searchable;

Maine, Nevada, Delaware.

FamilySearch has 10 additional states that are 100% indexed;

Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, Utah, Vermont, Wyoming.

They also have 4 states that are 90% or better indexed;

Alabama. Louisiana, Oklahoma, Washington.

How many states does Ancestry have at the 100% level? Or even the 90% level? We don’t know because Ancestry refuses to tell us. Once again, Ancestry’s philosophy is “we’ll determine when you need to know it and not any sooner.”

Ancestry, your PR department is incompetent.

May 19, 2012 at 2:56 pm

$300 a year apparently does not buy very many indexers in New Delhi

May 21, 2012 at 9:17 am

Come on, you can do better than this! Three small states and DC? And to keep us in total darkness, you don’t even tell us which state will be next since every state is listed as “in progress.” Why the snail’s pace?

May 23, 2012 at 5:07 pm

My subscription expires June 4th, I won’t be renewing. Your indexing progress has gone from laughable to intolerable. I started this project 35 years ago by utilizing the LDS library and, tried Ancestry for a decade or so, but now Ancestry has performed an “Epic Fail.” I can’t believe I fell for the “Count Down,” hype and got so excited. Poor form ACOM.

May 24, 2012 at 3:10 am
swayaminfotech will have to average better than 1 state a week to be done by the end of this year. They won’t make it at their present snail’s pace.

May 25, 2012 at 5:29 am
Tony Knight 

FamilySearch have 14 states searchable now

May 25, 2012 at 2:05 pm

FamilySearch have 14 states searchable now

May 30, 2012 at 2:03 am