tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post468301450982214524..comments2023-04-20T12:46:11.858-06:00Comments on The Ancestry Insider: Darned Boys in DressesThe Ancestry Insiderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02490682912125335188noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-68814745282297599662014-05-31T11:07:11.739-06:002014-05-31T11:07:11.739-06:00My mother said her brother was in a baptism dress...My mother said her brother was in a baptism dress in a picture of them, Karl was in a dress and I have many baby pictures of boys in a dress looking outfit.patcohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05981300815240065446noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-63175913857454481732014-05-31T07:02:42.580-06:002014-05-31T07:02:42.580-06:00Dear Randy and ponyswimgal,
Thanks for your thoug...Dear Randy and ponyswimgal,<br /><br />Thanks for your thoughtful comments. You are absolutely right. You'll be glad to know that Melinda did perform a reasonably exhaustive search. When I wrote this article I kept being drawn down the path of showing the supportive evidence from Melinda's 10 page article. My article kept ballooning in size and infringing on Melinda's copyright.<br /><br />A key piece of evidence was a family Bible that helped define the composition of the family. And, as Karl points out, I neglecting to include Susan in my screenshot for the 1870 census.<br /><br /><i>Crossroads</i> is published by the Utah Genealogical Association. The issue containing this article, as well as other back issues, is available to members for download.<br /><br />--The Ancestry InsiderThe Ancestry Insiderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02490682912125335188noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-88413204966223354332014-05-30T13:23:29.122-06:002014-05-30T13:23:29.122-06:00There were two census of Wards Island in 1870. My ...There were two census of Wards Island in 1870. My gggrandfather's sister was enumerated in one as Rike, a male, and not in the other at all. Her name was Christine Friederike Marie. She must have been called Rike. She was 8 years old. Thttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13256855136448978468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-77305574964134621862014-05-30T13:16:30.033-06:002014-05-30T13:16:30.033-06:00I followed the link in AI's footnotes to the 1...I followed the link in AI's footnotes to the 1870 Census. Susan appears in the 1870 census several lines below the rest of the family (line 17).Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03694688428917974294noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-9212396502005769622014-05-30T12:32:22.718-06:002014-05-30T12:32:22.718-06:00Yay, Randy!
I think using only two records to pr...Yay, Randy! <br /><br />I think using only two records to prove/disprove is inadequate. There's a 50-50 chance one of the two is incorrect or there is a chance BOTH of the records are incorrect (see Randy's reply). Much further research is necessary. <br /><br />I had two children that 'disappeared' from my father's sibling list. It's taken me nearly 20 years to track down their existence and find what happened to them since my father & all of the rest of his siblings are gone. It turns out that even their given names -- repeated in our family lore -- were incorrect. They never appeared on any census forms (born/died in between census years) and were buried in a family cemetery miles from the city they were born in & which is no longer in active use. By using FamilySearch.org digital records (not yet indexed), I finally found the evidence of their correct names & birth dates, and the local paper (again after an online intensive search) revealed their death dates and burial information. If I'd only gone with the census records, I'd have had to conclude there WERE no children born, let alone that they were twins and died separately in one of the coldest winters the U.S. ever experienced.<br /><br />The only way to truly resolve questions is to use as wide a base of information as possible. And continue to keep an open mind, because newly revealed information/records just might blow a very large hole in what you regarded as irrefutable 'proof.'ponyswimgalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16954750336015646359noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-47000358052612843602014-05-30T09:25:17.749-06:002014-05-30T09:25:17.749-06:00There are several other rational explanations to t...There are several other rational explanations to these two records.<br /><br />* Hariet age 5 in 1870 was a female who died before 1880, and Harry was a male born after the 1870 census whose age was incorrectly given in the 1880 census.<br /><br />* Was Susan age 23 in 1880 the same person as Robert in 1870 age 12? Why isn't Susan in the 1870 census? <br /><br />Obviously, the resolution of all of these questions requires much more study - doing a reasonably exhaustive search (e.g., the 1860 census, later census, church, birth, marriage, death, military, newspaper, cemetery, probate, land, court, etc.) for all of the persons, gathering and analyzing all of the evidence, resolving conflicts, and writing a proof argument, etc. <br />Randy Seaverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17477703429102065294noreply@blogger.com