Problems we all Face in Research
1. In the past, ladies of the DAR (Daughters of the American Revolution) and gentlemen of the SAR (Sons of the American Revolution) were diligent, often way too diligent, about trying to match themselves up with a Revolutionary War ancestor, a necessary requirement to become a member. In many cases, there are two or three different lineages all claiming the SAME Revolutionary War ancestor.
2. A Name and a Location do not establish a relationship. In the 1700's you can find very common English given names such as Thomas, John, William, Richard, Samuel, Michael, Charles etc. and those names were repeated into the following generations. So to assume one Thomas is the SAME Thomas found later, is a stretch, without documentation. Another common practice is to assume if a person is found in one generation with a name, such as Michael, that the next generation Michael belongs to the same line. Maybe yes and maybe no. There were certain patterns that SOME people followed such as naming children for the grandfather, uncle etc. but this wasn't always true. Sometimes the children of with a certain name died, and someone by that name might be a cousin born about the same time. There are cases of re-naming a later child for a prior deceased child. So names do not establish relationships, and since families traveled together - uncles, cousins, fathers, sons and in-laws, there's usually not enough information to make a compelling case with an isolated name and location.
3. There was no federal census report until 1790. The Maryland and Pennsylvania lists exist for that year, but the Virginia ones do not. The 1790 census only names the head of the household, and for males, only shows those over and under age 16. Not much help in identifying people, although the location can help IF there is other information about that person in the same location, and hopefully there was only one person with that name. No names of other household members are listed until the 1850 census. So from 1790 until 1850 we only have the head of the household named, and the age range. In 1800 for example, the head of household is usually the person listed as age 26 to 45 or 'over 45', so the over 45 could be born 1755 or much earlier, and the 26 to 45 person could have been born from 1755 to 1774 - not an exact science, allowing for a lot of guessing.
4. Tax lists can be helpful, particularly if there are several years available. If a person appears in tax lists and the census, that's usually an indication of settlement in an area. Of course many tax lists are missing. The ideal list is one found in Pennsylvania in 1814 that shows name, age, occupation, but that is rare. Usually, the lists will show the county, township, whether the person owns horses, cattle and other livestock and sometimes if the person owns land. Again with duplication of names, it's hard to decide if there were two different Johns over time, such as a father and then a son, or the same John.
5. Fortunately, there were people who were dedicated to research from documents before the Internet. The Internet is a blessing and a curse. Footnote has original documents scanned, particularly the Revolutionary War pension applications, muster rolls, etc. Ancestry has the census reports and more and more books with listings. So, those 2 sources of copies of original documents are helpful in research, but both require paid membership to search. Google Books has many old history books on line, but consider if there is documentation included or if they are just family histories.
6. LDS records, Ancestry family trees, and trees posted on the Internet have produced many half-truths and misconceptions. Some records are partly true, or true to a point, but then people have stretched a name or an event based on a theory or a guess. I have no problems with theories, just don't post them on the Internet - or- be sure to state that it's unproven or there is no documentation. We have a case of one of our long deceased cousins who posted some information on the internet a long time ago. Some of it is wrong, but he's gone, so no one can change his posting. That's the type of problem the Internet produces for us.
A convincing lineage cannot be built with 'research' that is undocumented.
No comments:
Post a Comment