Assumptions don't count in geneLogy. They can lead us into all kinds of wrong conclusions. They can be hints, but they cannot be the final solution by themselves.
I have family buried in a small cemetery at the base of Nuuanu Valley in Honolulu. It is called Maemae cemetery. There was once a small church on the property. Next door is Maemae School. It never occurred to me to ask where the name came from. I ASSUMED it came from the church.
In the online indexes of Maemae Cemetery there is a burial for Peter Ka'eo, cousin of Queen Emma and a member of what in the Western world would be referred to as a Royal Family. Ka'eo is the only member of his family listed at Maemae, indeed the only person of Alii rank buried here.
For several years a non-genealogist friend and I have had discussions about where Peter is actually buried. Not far fron Maemae Cemetery is the Royal Masoleum, Mauna'ala, burial place of most of Hawaii monarchs and their families. The monument for Queen Emma's family includes the name ofPeter Ka'eo.
My friend is used to a marker being placed only where a person is actually buried. Genealogy has taught me that memorial markers are not uncommon. They mark a person as part of the community or the family even if they are buried elsewhere. My husband's ashes were scattered; I placed a memorial bench in the cemetery in our little town.
Peter Ka'eo had been a leprosy patient --or had at least spent 3 years confined at Kalaupapa, the leper colony on Molokai. Perhaps he was denied burial at Mauna'ala because of this, I rationalized. I ASSUMED.
Then I found the obituary. His body was taken "to the burial place of the Chiefs, Maemae". The warning bells began to sound. There was a disconnect here, as if the obituary was describing two different places. Time for a reality check.
While at Mauna'ala I asked a friend who knows about these things. Was Mauna'ala ever referred to as Maemae? His look said it all. He pointed out that we were standing at the top of a small hill overlooking the city. "The whole top of this knoll is called Maemae," he said patiently.
Someone before me did not know that Maemae was a. place name before the church and it's graveyard were built. Someone took the obituary reference to Maemae as more important than the phrase "burial place of the chiefs". That person did not understand Hawaiian culture or know the old name for that little neighborhood. That person included Peter Ka'eo in a list of burials at Maemae Cemetery and there he has stayed --incorrectly--for too many years.
My lessons? Keep an open mind. Accep alternatives to your original hypothesis. Find the original record. Check sources. Read. Ask. Admit your mistakes. Keep learning.
Tuesday, February 24, 2015
Thursday, January 1, 2015
Those Original Records
I've been working a lot recently in Hawaiian families, long time Hawaiian families, including some Americans and Europeans who came into the Pacific hot on the heels of British Captains James Cook and George Vancouver. That has brought to the forefront some major flaws in the indexing process.
First, Hawaii is unique in the United States. Not only are we an island state, the most isolated group of islands on our planet, but we are the ONLY state that was ever a completely independent Kingdom recognized by and interacting with major political powers around the globe. Did you know that there are three royal palaces in the United States? Yes, they are all in Hawaii.
Hawaii has been either a US protectorate, an independent republic run by transplanted Americans, a US territory or a US State since 1893 when the monarchy was overthrown -- not by native Hawaiians who honored their Queen, but by foreigners living in the Kingdom who clearly understood that their substantial income streams could be negatively impacted by monarchs to were more comfortable dealing with Europeans and Asians than Americans. You don't come to a foreign country when you come to Hawaii, nor you "go back" to the United States after visiting here. The US has claimed Hawaii as its own. While we are nearly as far from California, Oregon and Washington as those states are from Washington, DC, we are still part of the United States of America.
I can laugh at the census indexers who don't read those small print instructions at the bottom of many census pages, the small print that defines the abbreviations used in the reporting. In Hawaii we separate out the Portuguese and the Puerto Ricans (both Caucasian) because they were specifically brought to Hawaii to work in the sugar and pineapple fields. All the other Caucasian groups we lump into a category aptly titled Other Caucasian, or OC. Most indexers see OC, assume Octaroon (1/8 black) and index the individual as BLACK. A whole lot of those white folk would be appalled to find themselves -- or their direct line ancestors -- described as Black. The issue is very consistent from 1900 (the first US Census to include Hawaii) through 1940.
When Hawaii became a US territory, all her citizens became US citizens. So I was appalled to discover an entry in the 1910 US census showing a part-Hawaiian family living in the San Francisco Bay Area classified as ALIEN because they were born in Hawaii.
Recently I read through a list of Hawaiian burials from the 1880's. They were all in a rural cemetery and had a column which consistently showed "no body". What happened to the body? Then a cousin pointed out that the column was asking who was the responsible person in charge at the burial -- the undertaker, the minister or priest, for example. Small, rural cemetery. No need to call in someone else to take charge. The family could do this. Who was in charge? No body. Nobody.
The lessons for genealogists are clear. Don't settle for the index. Read the original document, especially if it is only the click of a button away. Read the small print. Understand the abbreviations used. Know your history and know your geography. The same county name may appear is several states. Is it Washington Co., NY or PA? Rutherford Co. NC or TN? Lincoln Co. KY or TN? Nevada Co. California -- or Missouri? The Azores are not islands in Scotland, as some indexers have asserted. And in Hawaii, nearly every island has a district called Kona.
First, Hawaii is unique in the United States. Not only are we an island state, the most isolated group of islands on our planet, but we are the ONLY state that was ever a completely independent Kingdom recognized by and interacting with major political powers around the globe. Did you know that there are three royal palaces in the United States? Yes, they are all in Hawaii.
Hawaii has been either a US protectorate, an independent republic run by transplanted Americans, a US territory or a US State since 1893 when the monarchy was overthrown -- not by native Hawaiians who honored their Queen, but by foreigners living in the Kingdom who clearly understood that their substantial income streams could be negatively impacted by monarchs to were more comfortable dealing with Europeans and Asians than Americans. You don't come to a foreign country when you come to Hawaii, nor you "go back" to the United States after visiting here. The US has claimed Hawaii as its own. While we are nearly as far from California, Oregon and Washington as those states are from Washington, DC, we are still part of the United States of America.
I can laugh at the census indexers who don't read those small print instructions at the bottom of many census pages, the small print that defines the abbreviations used in the reporting. In Hawaii we separate out the Portuguese and the Puerto Ricans (both Caucasian) because they were specifically brought to Hawaii to work in the sugar and pineapple fields. All the other Caucasian groups we lump into a category aptly titled Other Caucasian, or OC. Most indexers see OC, assume Octaroon (1/8 black) and index the individual as BLACK. A whole lot of those white folk would be appalled to find themselves -- or their direct line ancestors -- described as Black. The issue is very consistent from 1900 (the first US Census to include Hawaii) through 1940.
When Hawaii became a US territory, all her citizens became US citizens. So I was appalled to discover an entry in the 1910 US census showing a part-Hawaiian family living in the San Francisco Bay Area classified as ALIEN because they were born in Hawaii.
Recently I read through a list of Hawaiian burials from the 1880's. They were all in a rural cemetery and had a column which consistently showed "no body". What happened to the body? Then a cousin pointed out that the column was asking who was the responsible person in charge at the burial -- the undertaker, the minister or priest, for example. Small, rural cemetery. No need to call in someone else to take charge. The family could do this. Who was in charge? No body. Nobody.
The lessons for genealogists are clear. Don't settle for the index. Read the original document, especially if it is only the click of a button away. Read the small print. Understand the abbreviations used. Know your history and know your geography. The same county name may appear is several states. Is it Washington Co., NY or PA? Rutherford Co. NC or TN? Lincoln Co. KY or TN? Nevada Co. California -- or Missouri? The Azores are not islands in Scotland, as some indexers have asserted. And in Hawaii, nearly every island has a district called Kona.
Thursday, August 21, 2014
Alexander Steele Turner -- and ancestors?
It was 1965. My then-brand-new in-laws discovered I was interested in genealogy. They produced a page from a family bible showing that their earliest known ancestor Hiram Lawrence was born in Vermont in 1786, that he married second Mary Bryan Griffin, and with her had 3 children. The youngest of these was my father-in-law's direct ancestor, Pamelia Woods Lawrence. Pamelia married Alexander S Turner and in 1850, still a new bride,was living in Whitehall, Washington Co., New York. Pamelia's Lawrence family had deep roots in both New York and Massachusetts.
Alexander left a long paper trail through New York, Pennsylvania and Ohio -- all after his marriage. There seemed to be nothing -- first in vital and church records, deeds, books, journals or libraries, later online -- regarding his early years or his parentage. My father-in-law believed that his grandfather Lawrence Alexander Turner was the only child of Alexander Turner and Pamelia Lawrence.
My one-time father-in-law died before I found the lone census record revealing a second child in the family: Edwin Bryan Turner. Collaboration kicked in and suddenly family began appearing. Edwin's family had "the portraits" -- paintings of Hiram's daughter Pamelia Woods (Lawrence) Turner and her husband Alexander Steele Turner. After some false starts working through Turners in Washington Co., New York (there were several), we stumbled upon Payne (sometimes Paine) Turner living along the Vermont-New York border in Essex Co., New York. His family came to upstate New York via Vermont. Payne married Ruby (Witherby) Hammond in Oct 1820, the same year the couple were named Adminstrators of the estate of Jedediah Hammond. Ruby died in 1824 and is buried in Lewis Cemetery, Essex Co. with an infant daughter. Payne and Ruby had one son together, Alexander Steele Turner, born 22 Oct 1822 in Essex Co., New York.
David Wetherbee (sic), born in Lunenberg, Massachusetts in 1764, came from several generations of Massachusetts Wetherbees. His wife, Esther Hathorn/Hawthorne has a similar lineage. Their children included Ruba (sic) Wetherbee, born 1797 -- shown as married to Obadiah Hammond. Nothing else is mentioned in the online family trees about Ruba.
It appears that the Wetherbee descendants knew that daughter Ruba (sic) had married a Hammond and thought his name was Obadiah. Ruba fits the profile of Ruby who in 1800, as his presumed widow, was named co-Administrator of the estate of Jedediah Hammond and is the known mother of three Hammond children. If this is all correct, she is the same Ruby (Witherby) Hammond who married Payne Turner, by him had two more children, and who died in 1824.
Can anyone confirm or rule out this hypothesis?
Alexander left a long paper trail through New York, Pennsylvania and Ohio -- all after his marriage. There seemed to be nothing -- first in vital and church records, deeds, books, journals or libraries, later online -- regarding his early years or his parentage. My father-in-law believed that his grandfather Lawrence Alexander Turner was the only child of Alexander Turner and Pamelia Lawrence.
My one-time father-in-law died before I found the lone census record revealing a second child in the family: Edwin Bryan Turner. Collaboration kicked in and suddenly family began appearing. Edwin's family had "the portraits" -- paintings of Hiram's daughter Pamelia Woods (Lawrence) Turner and her husband Alexander Steele Turner. After some false starts working through Turners in Washington Co., New York (there were several), we stumbled upon Payne (sometimes Paine) Turner living along the Vermont-New York border in Essex Co., New York. His family came to upstate New York via Vermont. Payne married Ruby (Witherby) Hammond in Oct 1820, the same year the couple were named Adminstrators of the estate of Jedediah Hammond. Ruby died in 1824 and is buried in Lewis Cemetery, Essex Co. with an infant daughter. Payne and Ruby had one son together, Alexander Steele Turner, born 22 Oct 1822 in Essex Co., New York.
David Wetherbee (sic), born in Lunenberg, Massachusetts in 1764, came from several generations of Massachusetts Wetherbees. His wife, Esther Hathorn/Hawthorne has a similar lineage. Their children included Ruba (sic) Wetherbee, born 1797 -- shown as married to Obadiah Hammond. Nothing else is mentioned in the online family trees about Ruba.
It appears that the Wetherbee descendants knew that daughter Ruba (sic) had married a Hammond and thought his name was Obadiah. Ruba fits the profile of Ruby who in 1800, as his presumed widow, was named co-Administrator of the estate of Jedediah Hammond and is the known mother of three Hammond children. If this is all correct, she is the same Ruby (Witherby) Hammond who married Payne Turner, by him had two more children, and who died in 1824.
Can anyone confirm or rule out this hypothesis?
Monday, June 16, 2014
Needed: Scotsmen for DNA Testing
Last year, my brother took a DNA test throught FTDNA. So far, he has matched NO ONE -- with the notable exception of a known 3rd cousin. He doesn't even match another family with the same surname living since c 1780 in the same small Scottish farming community where our LIND ancestors have lived since a
It appears that somewhere in one of the two Lind families in the FTDNA database with roots in West Calder, there is a male ancestor whose father was not a Lind. Could be the son of a Lind daughter who was raised by his grandparents. Could be a a child born out of wedlock who took his mother's maiden surname. Could be ..... ????
Since there are only two families in the database who hail from "our" neighborhood, and since they don't match each other genetically, it is difficult to say which family has the disconnect.
SO ---- we are looking for men with the surname LIND, LINN, LEIN or any of its variations with known family links to the Scottish lowlands -- particularly Lanarkshire and West Lothian (formerly Midlothian) around the parishes of West Calder and Carnwath.
We are also interested in comparing the DNA of any surname with known associations with farms MOSSHAT, AUCHINGRAY, TARBRAX, WOOLFORDS and COBBINSHAW. These are all on the old border between the parishes of Carnwath and West Calder. Surnames with known associations to Linds include INGLIS and SOMERVILLE, but it's worth looking at any family that lived in the area at any period 1650 onward.
All help appreciated!
It appears that somewhere in one of the two Lind families in the FTDNA database with roots in West Calder, there is a male ancestor whose father was not a Lind. Could be the son of a Lind daughter who was raised by his grandparents. Could be a a child born out of wedlock who took his mother's maiden surname. Could be ..... ????
Since there are only two families in the database who hail from "our" neighborhood, and since they don't match each other genetically, it is difficult to say which family has the disconnect.
SO ---- we are looking for men with the surname LIND, LINN, LEIN or any of its variations with known family links to the Scottish lowlands -- particularly Lanarkshire and West Lothian (formerly Midlothian) around the parishes of West Calder and Carnwath.
We are also interested in comparing the DNA of any surname with known associations with farms MOSSHAT, AUCHINGRAY, TARBRAX, WOOLFORDS and COBBINSHAW. These are all on the old border between the parishes of Carnwath and West Calder. Surnames with known associations to Linds include INGLIS and SOMERVILLE, but it's worth looking at any family that lived in the area at any period 1650 onward.
All help appreciated!
Thursday, August 29, 2013
The Elusive Mr. Morris
Fanny (Proctor) Morris Ray was the great-grandmother of my great-great-grandmother. We believe she was born in Virginia, know she was living in Rutherford Co., North Carolina by 1790, suspect she lived for some period in South Carolina and for another period in Kentucky, We know she died in McMinn Co., Tennessee about 1845 and by that time was approaching her 100th birthday. We know she was married twice because she has children surname Morris and others surname Ray.
We don't really know anything about her first husband, identified only as Mr. Morris.
This morning I was re-reading the 1902 memoir written by Fanny's great-granddaughter Eleanor Howard (Thomas) Brittain Knowlton. Ellen states with considerable conviction that her great-grandparents came to America aboard the Mayflower and that her great-grandfather fought at Braddock's Defeat.
Some simple math is appropriate here. Assume her great-grandfather Morris indeed arrived on the Mayflower in 1620. Braddock's Defeat was 1755. A man born early enough to arrive on the Mayflower would have been at least 135 years old in 1755. The same person cannot have been part of both events. But perhaps we should be looking for an ancestor who was an early settler in New England.
Back to Braddock's Defeat. I am not a great student of military history, so had to go looking for information about Braddock's Defeat. Wikipedia tells me the battle was part of a greater Brittish campaign during the French and Indian War, and that it was a huge defeat for the British. It took place in the vicinity of present day Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. George Washington (yes, that George Washington) was 23 years old, knew the territory, and served as aide-de-camp to General Braddock. Wikipedia adds that the British forces were supplemented by colonial militia from many areas -- including Virginia -- and that Daniel Boone and Daniel Morgan were both wagoners in the company.
Why have I never noticed Daniel Morgan's name before? Especially linked to Daniel Boone? Why have I never before connected that our Thomas and Morris/Ray ancestors were living in 1790 in the MORGAN DISTRICT of Rutherford Co., North Carolina?
So who was Daniel Morgan, and did he connect in any way with North Carolina? Rather than plagiarize, I refer all readers to the Wikipedia articles about Daniel Morgan, American frontiersman, military hero, and member of Congress from Virginia. He was one of the major commanders at the Battle of Cowpens (1781), fought in South Carolina but in the general neighborhood of today's Rutherford County, North Carolina.
Wikipedia reports that Daniel Morgan was considered one of the most brilliant battlefield tacticians of the Revolutionary War. In 1775 he was charged with organizing one of 10 rifle companies ordered by the Continental Congress to support the Siege on Boston. These were to come from the middle colonies; Virginia agreed to send two. Morgan's Riflemen were well known for their uncanny accuracy, due in part to a unique technology in their rifles. The barrels were thin-walled with interior spiral grooves, making them light weight and far more accurate than the conventional muskets of the time. Morgan used his sharpshooters to ambush an enemy unit and pick off first their guides and then their officers, creating havoc among the troops who usually needed someone to tell them where they were going and how they were supposed to fight.
Morgan's Riflemen and the 11th Virginia Regiment of which they were a part, fought at the Battle of Saratoga in September 1777. A number of the company were killed there when they mistakenly took an advance party of the British Army for the main body, picked off the leaders, then charged -- into the face of the main body of the army just arriving on the scene.
Ellen says in her memoir that Mr. Morris was well known for the ammunition he supplied to the Colonial Army. We know by calculation that he probably died 1777-1778. We further calculate that he was likely born 1730-1740. If we assume he was about 20 at Braddock's Defeat, that narrows the range and makes him a contemporary of George Washington, Daniel Boone, and Daniel Morgan.
We know that Fanny's presumed family came from Virginia, so it is reasonable to assume that Mr. Morris also had Virginia connections. Might he have been a part of the Morgan Riflemen? Might he have been supplying ammunition for their unique rifles? Might he have been at the Battle of Saratoga? Might he have died there? The dates fit. The circumstances fit. But right now the whole idea is speculation. It needs documentation, and that means research.
Are there lists available of the members of Morgan's Riflemen? Are there lists of the Colonial forces who were killed at the Battle of Saratoga? There may be better places to start this hunt than the LDS Family History Library in Salt Lake City, but it is an interesting place to start. So is the National Archives branch library in San Bruno, California.
Goin' hunting!
Should be be looking for our Mr. Morris among those Morgan Rifleman who died at Freeman's Farm? The timing is right. Fanny's youngest Morris child was born about 1777, her eldest Ray child born in October 1779. Therefore, Fanny was married to Mr. Ray by January 1779. Morris was likely alive in early 1777, but could have died as late as March or April and still have a child born that year. Freeman's Farm was in September, 1777.
I'll be in Salt Lake City in a couple of weeks. Meanwhile, I'll be searching the Internet!
We don't really know anything about her first husband, identified only as Mr. Morris.
This morning I was re-reading the 1902 memoir written by Fanny's great-granddaughter Eleanor Howard (Thomas) Brittain Knowlton. Ellen states with considerable conviction that her great-grandparents came to America aboard the Mayflower and that her great-grandfather fought at Braddock's Defeat.
Some simple math is appropriate here. Assume her great-grandfather Morris indeed arrived on the Mayflower in 1620. Braddock's Defeat was 1755. A man born early enough to arrive on the Mayflower would have been at least 135 years old in 1755. The same person cannot have been part of both events. But perhaps we should be looking for an ancestor who was an early settler in New England.
Back to Braddock's Defeat. I am not a great student of military history, so had to go looking for information about Braddock's Defeat. Wikipedia tells me the battle was part of a greater Brittish campaign during the French and Indian War, and that it was a huge defeat for the British. It took place in the vicinity of present day Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. George Washington (yes, that George Washington) was 23 years old, knew the territory, and served as aide-de-camp to General Braddock. Wikipedia adds that the British forces were supplemented by colonial militia from many areas -- including Virginia -- and that Daniel Boone and Daniel Morgan were both wagoners in the company.
Why have I never noticed Daniel Morgan's name before? Especially linked to Daniel Boone? Why have I never before connected that our Thomas and Morris/Ray ancestors were living in 1790 in the MORGAN DISTRICT of Rutherford Co., North Carolina?
So who was Daniel Morgan, and did he connect in any way with North Carolina? Rather than plagiarize, I refer all readers to the Wikipedia articles about Daniel Morgan, American frontiersman, military hero, and member of Congress from Virginia. He was one of the major commanders at the Battle of Cowpens (1781), fought in South Carolina but in the general neighborhood of today's Rutherford County, North Carolina.
Wikipedia reports that Daniel Morgan was considered one of the most brilliant battlefield tacticians of the Revolutionary War. In 1775 he was charged with organizing one of 10 rifle companies ordered by the Continental Congress to support the Siege on Boston. These were to come from the middle colonies; Virginia agreed to send two. Morgan's Riflemen were well known for their uncanny accuracy, due in part to a unique technology in their rifles. The barrels were thin-walled with interior spiral grooves, making them light weight and far more accurate than the conventional muskets of the time. Morgan used his sharpshooters to ambush an enemy unit and pick off first their guides and then their officers, creating havoc among the troops who usually needed someone to tell them where they were going and how they were supposed to fight.
Morgan's Riflemen and the 11th Virginia Regiment of which they were a part, fought at the Battle of Saratoga in September 1777. A number of the company were killed there when they mistakenly took an advance party of the British Army for the main body, picked off the leaders, then charged -- into the face of the main body of the army just arriving on the scene.
Ellen says in her memoir that Mr. Morris was well known for the ammunition he supplied to the Colonial Army. We know by calculation that he probably died 1777-1778. We further calculate that he was likely born 1730-1740. If we assume he was about 20 at Braddock's Defeat, that narrows the range and makes him a contemporary of George Washington, Daniel Boone, and Daniel Morgan.
We know that Fanny's presumed family came from Virginia, so it is reasonable to assume that Mr. Morris also had Virginia connections. Might he have been a part of the Morgan Riflemen? Might he have been supplying ammunition for their unique rifles? Might he have been at the Battle of Saratoga? Might he have died there? The dates fit. The circumstances fit. But right now the whole idea is speculation. It needs documentation, and that means research.
Are there lists available of the members of Morgan's Riflemen? Are there lists of the Colonial forces who were killed at the Battle of Saratoga? There may be better places to start this hunt than the LDS Family History Library in Salt Lake City, but it is an interesting place to start. So is the National Archives branch library in San Bruno, California.
Goin' hunting!
Also look at the articles about the Battle of Saratoga. Daniel Morgan was a commanding officer there, too.
On June 13, 1777, Morgan was also placed in command of the Provisional Rifle Corps, a light infantry unit of 500 riflemen selected primarily from Pennsylvania, Maryland and Virginia units of the main army. Many were drawn from his own permanent unit, the 11th Virginia Regiment. Washington assigned them to harass General William Howe's rear guard, and Morgan followed and attacked them during their entire withdrawal across New Jersey.
...[Battle of Freeman's Farm]Morgan's men took very careful aim, and picked off virtually every single officer in the advance company, and then charged, unaware that they were headed directly for Burgoyne's main army. While they succeeded in driving back the advance company, Fraser's leading edge arrived just in time to attack Morgan's left, scattering his men back into the woods. ...We are never told the given name of Fanny's husband Mr. Morris, but we are told that he was well known for the ammunition which he provided to the colonial army and that he was killed on one of his trips to provide ammunition. Is it such a far reach to think that he might have been providing ammunition to the Morgan Rifleman for use in their specially designed rifles? Is it so far-fetched the think that a North Carolina resident with Virginia links might be part of the 11th Virginia Regiment and a member of the Morgan Rifleman? Was he one of those Morgan Rifleman who were at Freeman's Farm at the Battle of Saratoga?
Should be be looking for our Mr. Morris among those Morgan Rifleman who died at Freeman's Farm? The timing is right. Fanny's youngest Morris child was born about 1777, her eldest Ray child born in October 1779. Therefore, Fanny was married to Mr. Ray by January 1779. Morris was likely alive in early 1777, but could have died as late as March or April and still have a child born that year. Freeman's Farm was in September, 1777.
I'll be in Salt Lake City in a couple of weeks. Meanwhile, I'll be searching the Internet!
Thursday, May 23, 2013
Evaluating Evidence: Who Has the Correct Story?
I volunteer with a small museum in the Sierra Nevadas near Yosemite National Park. Our community grew up in the Gold Rush era, and our genealogical dream is to build a database that will include everyone who has ever lived in our part of the county. You can see it by finding the Genealogy pages at www.grovelandmuseum.org or going directly to STCHSGenealogy.com.
In the 35 miles or so of California's Hwy 120 between Don Pedro Reservoir and the Big Oak Flat entrance to Yosemite National Park there are two cemeteries. Each year for Memorial Day our genealogy volunteers lead a cemetery tour of one cemetery. This year we are at the Divide Cemetery, so named because it is at the top of the ridge (aka The Divide) between the villages of Big Oak Flat and Groveland. Each volunteer has chosen a family represented in the cemetery to share with our visitors. This year, one family is that of Dearborn Fuller Longfellow who was born 8 Aug 832 in Waldo Co., Maine.
Longfellow was in California by 1860 when he appears in the census as running a livery stable in the town of Coulterville. Just up the road is the town of Greeley Hill, named for cousins Si and Watson Greeley. They took literally the advice of their journalist cousins, Horace Greeley, who wrote "Go west, young man, go west and grow up with the country!" Longfellow, yet another cousin, was but one of a small colony of New Englanders settled in Greeley Hill, Coulterville, and neighboring Big Oak Flat and Groveland from the 1850's onward.
We thought we knew quite a bit about Dearborn F Longfellow until Peggy started preparing for her part in this weekend's event. We knew he had come from Maine, that he was connected to THE Longfellow family, that his wife was born in Australia, that he was a relatively prosperous businessman and rancher in Big Oak Flat, and that he owned a mine, the ruins of which were still standing in 2007 but which burned that winter. A model of the Longfellow Mine is a favorite display in the Groveland Museum.
Yesterday my friend wrote,
But while we were looking at the tree, another question leaped into view. The Dearborn Longfellow of the tree was assigned a wife Clara. Who was Clara? We knew about wife Louisa, but not Clara. To further complicate matters, Dearborn was assigned two children by Clara. His daughter, said the tree, was born in Maine in 1863, when we know Dearborn was in California.
As it turns out, there are two men, both born in Maine, both named Dearborn Longfellow, close in age and likely cousins. One remained in Maine and married Clara. The other came to California, married Louisa, and settled in southern Tuolumne County. The researcher who posted at Ancestry knew the Dearborn he was writing about came to California from Maine. When he found a marriage in Maine for a Dearborn Longfellow of about the right age ... The assumption throws a cloud over all the rest of his research.
My friend and I have decided that since the Dearborn Longfellow in this chart (as well as in other charts of the same family) is consistently reported as coming to California, then the line backwards is probably correct. We have the marriage records from California, burial records of Dearborn, Louisa and several of their children, and copies of correspondence from the youngest daughter. We are confident our research from Dearborn forward is correct.
In the 35 miles or so of California's Hwy 120 between Don Pedro Reservoir and the Big Oak Flat entrance to Yosemite National Park there are two cemeteries. Each year for Memorial Day our genealogy volunteers lead a cemetery tour of one cemetery. This year we are at the Divide Cemetery, so named because it is at the top of the ridge (aka The Divide) between the villages of Big Oak Flat and Groveland. Each volunteer has chosen a family represented in the cemetery to share with our visitors. This year, one family is that of Dearborn Fuller Longfellow who was born 8 Aug 832 in Waldo Co., Maine.
Longfellow was in California by 1860 when he appears in the census as running a livery stable in the town of Coulterville. Just up the road is the town of Greeley Hill, named for cousins Si and Watson Greeley. They took literally the advice of their journalist cousins, Horace Greeley, who wrote "Go west, young man, go west and grow up with the country!" Longfellow, yet another cousin, was but one of a small colony of New Englanders settled in Greeley Hill, Coulterville, and neighboring Big Oak Flat and Groveland from the 1850's onward.
We thought we knew quite a bit about Dearborn F Longfellow until Peggy started preparing for her part in this weekend's event. We knew he had come from Maine, that he was connected to THE Longfellow family, that his wife was born in Australia, that he was a relatively prosperous businessman and rancher in Big Oak Flat, and that he owned a mine, the ruins of which were still standing in 2007 but which burned that winter. A model of the Longfellow Mine is a favorite display in the Groveland Museum.
Yesterday my friend wrote,
I have to run this by you because it's driving me crazy. Go to Ancestry and look up Samuel Fuller and Mary Longfellow, parents of Mary Fuller, mother of Dearborn F.Good observation, good question. She's looking at patron-submitted data, comparing it with her own research from different records, and asking if what she is seeing is reasonable. We looked at the Ancestry-posted profile views and then at the family tree, giving us a better view across several generations. We realized that Mary Fuller's grandfather and her father-in-law are brothers. Yes, Dearborn Fuller's maternal great-grandfather Samuel Longfellow and paternal great uncle Samuel Longfellow were the same person.
... Am I crazy or do Dearborn's parents have the same great grandfather?
But while we were looking at the tree, another question leaped into view. The Dearborn Longfellow of the tree was assigned a wife Clara. Who was Clara? We knew about wife Louisa, but not Clara. To further complicate matters, Dearborn was assigned two children by Clara. His daughter, said the tree, was born in Maine in 1863, when we know Dearborn was in California.
As it turns out, there are two men, both born in Maine, both named Dearborn Longfellow, close in age and likely cousins. One remained in Maine and married Clara. The other came to California, married Louisa, and settled in southern Tuolumne County. The researcher who posted at Ancestry knew the Dearborn he was writing about came to California from Maine. When he found a marriage in Maine for a Dearborn Longfellow of about the right age ... The assumption throws a cloud over all the rest of his research.
My friend and I have decided that since the Dearborn Longfellow in this chart (as well as in other charts of the same family) is consistently reported as coming to California, then the line backwards is probably correct. We have the marriage records from California, burial records of Dearborn, Louisa and several of their children, and copies of correspondence from the youngest daughter. We are confident our research from Dearborn forward is correct.
Notes to self:
- Question conflicting evidence.
- Evaluate the sources. The closer to the date the event happened, the more accurate is is likely to be. Original documents are generally more reliable than oral history.
- Look for those original documents. The Index to Tuolumne Co. Marriages 1850-1900 lists essential data -- Derbon (sic) Longfellow married Louisa Wootten (sic) on 29 Oct 1862. The marriage registration in the courthouse shows that her father had to give his permission for her to marry, showing that she was a minor. It also shows that her father wrote his own name as WOOTTON -- not Wootten or Wooten as we often see in other documents.
- Evaluate again.
- Now update your database!
Monday, May 20, 2013
Same Material, Diffferent Perspective
NOTE TO SELF: Learn from your errors!
Back in 2009, I was still deep in recovery mode, dealing with widowhood and aged parents. My father was in residential nursing care because his needs were greater than was able to meet at home. Dementia, his primary disability, did not make him a candidate for hospice. I was living with my mother who was then 95 and unable to live alone safely, and longing for even a brief trip off island to anywhere with a seasonal change that did not include another summer.
Back in 2009, I wasn't spending much time wading through complex sets of data or inteligently evaluating the clues they contained.
Back in 2009 I purchased two Scottish wills online -- one from 1705 and the other about 25 years later. Forwarded images to another family member and researcher who is an Edinburgh-trained attorney (Americn term) who routinely explains Scottish law to non-Scotttish legal folk.
He responded with a series of emails crammed full of significant information, much of which seems to have gone right over my head. Witness the fact that one of those emails included 3 maps. Maps from the same set in my previous post. Maps which I smugly assumed (in 2013) that none of my fellow Lind researchers had discovered.
Remember what they say about assumptions? ASSUME, making this: ASS-U-ME.
Here are my reminders to myself.
Back in 2009, I was still deep in recovery mode, dealing with widowhood and aged parents. My father was in residential nursing care because his needs were greater than was able to meet at home. Dementia, his primary disability, did not make him a candidate for hospice. I was living with my mother who was then 95 and unable to live alone safely, and longing for even a brief trip off island to anywhere with a seasonal change that did not include another summer.
Back in 2009, I wasn't spending much time wading through complex sets of data or inteligently evaluating the clues they contained.
Back in 2009 I purchased two Scottish wills online -- one from 1705 and the other about 25 years later. Forwarded images to another family member and researcher who is an Edinburgh-trained attorney (Americn term) who routinely explains Scottish law to non-Scotttish legal folk.
He responded with a series of emails crammed full of significant information, much of which seems to have gone right over my head. Witness the fact that one of those emails included 3 maps. Maps from the same set in my previous post. Maps which I smugly assumed (in 2013) that none of my fellow Lind researchers had discovered.
Remember what they say about assumptions? ASSUME, making this: ASS-U-ME.
Here are my reminders to myself.
- If you have found it, especially online, it is likely that others have found it before you. Truly original genealogical work is really, really hard to do.
- Share your work, but be open to someone else's understanding and interpretation of the same facts. There will ALWAYS be someone who knows things about your family that you do not.
- Review your sources and research notes regularly. As your knowledge of and familiarity with a family or community grows, you will read the same information differently, interpret differently, gain new insight.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)