Chapter 5: Home Work Assignment
Reference:
Thomas W. Jones, Mastering Genealogical Proof (Arlington, Virginia) : National
Genealogical Society, (2013). Book available from Publisher at: www.ngsgenealogy.org
Question 1:
A. This would be a derivative record.
B. Looks like the informant could be Ida
because it was from her bible.
C. The birth date would be primary
information if the informant is Ida.
D. This would be direct evidence since
it gives the exact birth date of the person.
E. It gives indirect evidence because
you do not have an exact date for the divorce, but with the date of birth for
the last child with the surname of the first husband and the wedding date for
the second marriage you have a date range for when the divorce took place.
F. The source was created to have the
family vital information in the bible
G. If the entries were written all the
same time as suggested in the footnote, then there would be a time lapse
because they would have been written after 1893.
H. Unknown
I. Unknown
J. Unknown
K. If Ida was the creator of this bible
entry then she could have adjusted dates of her marriages and/or birth dates to
hide time lapse between marriage and child birth.
L. The source could be reliable but does
not make the information valid.
Question 2.
1850 Census (Missouri)
Don Higele, Born in Germany,
1811-1812, a bricklayer
Barb Higele, Born in Germany, 1825-1826
Ad Higele, Born in Germany, 1844-1845
Fritz Higele, Born in Germany, 1845-1846
Joh[n] Higele, Born in Missouri, 1847-1848
Marie Higele, Born in Missouri, 1849-1850
Corn Higele, Born in Germany, 1826-1827
1860 Census (Illinois)
Antoine Higley, Born in Hanover,
1809-1810, Stone Mason
Barb Higley, Born in
Hanover, 1826-1827
Adolph Higley, Born in
Hanover, 1845-1846
Fred[eric]k Higley,
Born in Hanover, 1846-1847
Mary Higley, Born in
Hanover, 1849-1850
Sopha Higley, Born in
Hanover, 1850-1851
Jacob Higley, Born in
Illinois, 1853-1854
Louisa Higley, Born in
Illinois, 1857-1858
Commentary: Even with
the variation in the names and dates, this does seem to be the same family in
both of the census records.
The family appears to
have left Germany after having 2 sons born there. They arrived in Missouri for
the birth of another son around 1847. This son appears to have died before
1860. Marie, who is 6 months old in the 1850 census, would be Mary in the 1860
census. Given the fact that they were in Missouri for the 1850 census it would
be unlikely that Mary/Marie and Sopha would have been born in Hanover. Then
between 1851 and 1853 they moved to Illinois and had two more children. Corn,
mentioned in the 1850 census, looks like he could be Don’s brother and he most
likely started his own family or possibly died before the 1860 census. The
differences in the names could be the result of language and understanding on
both the part of the enumerator and the family. It looks like for the 1850
census they had not been in this country long, so that could have been the
problem.
Question 3.
Narrative: the
article’s page 35, Lewis’s Parentage, The evidence presented does link Lewis to
being the son of Lewis and Mary Pritchett.
List: Bullet list on
the article’s page 30. These three points do identify Philip Pritchett that
sued in Virginia in 1783 as being the same person in Kentucky.
Timeline: the article’s
page 36-37, the senior Lewis Pritchett. This timeline does support Lewis and
Mary as candidates for Philip’s parents.
Table: the article’s
page 34, Stafford County Land of two Pritchett Taxpayers. This supports that
there were two Lewis Pritchett’s that were landowners.
Map: the article’s page
32, this map shows how the Pritchett Land in Stafford County was closer to the
land in Fauquier County where Phillip had the law suit, so it would make sense
that the senior Lewis Pritchett was with him in court.
Question 4.
Narrative: the article’s
page 107 -108. This presents evidence from a variety of records to find which
of the two sources presented could be correct.
List: the list on the
article’s page 107 makes good points for the argument of Earl being Charles’
son.
Timeline: The timeline
beginning on page 109 brings together many facts about James, the suspected father
of Charles. These do support the conclusion that would be father-in-law to both
Ida and Emma.
Table: on the table 2
on page 115 we see the tools for David. These are tools of a wood worker, like
Charles?
Map: the map on page
103 shows the counties in Michigan that records have been found for the McLain
family
