Mailing List:1997-09-14 05, Re: Questions, by Robert L. Ward

From WRG
Jump to: navigation, search

Mailing List Archives > 1997-09-14 05, Re: Questions, by Robert L. Ward

From: "Robert L. Ward" <rlward1 -at-> Subject: Re: Questions Date: Sun, 14 Sep 1997 10:02:22 Joe, I will attempt to answer your questions. At 01:36 AM 8/5/97 -0400, you wrote: >I have looked at the current GEDCOM of Nathaniel Whitney, b. April 14 1680. >This shows that he and his wife Sarah Ford had 10 children. This agrees with >McLellan's, "The History of Gorham, Maine," p.827. It also agrees with the >Bragdon/Frost, "Vital Records of York, Maine," p. 10. But it differs from the >Noyes, Libby and Davis, "Genealogical Dictionary of Maine and New Hampshire," >p. 750. > >Question: How does one pick one source over another? I tend to believe the >first two, because the VR shows deaths of two Lydias, children of Nathaniel >and Sarah. These two show two Lydia's. It is hard to evaluate secondary sources such as those you quote. I have not seen the first nor the second, and I have seen the third, although I didn't look up the WHITNEY entries. Transcriptions of vital records are usually very reliable, although occasional errors have been uncovered in such works. The history book no doubt depended on someone's transcription of the vital records, so would be one more step removed from the original sources. In the same way, GDMNH is probably two steps from the original sources. On the other hand, GDMNH was written by three of the most accomplished genealogists of their time, and I have found it to be generally trustworthy. Nevertheless, some of the conclusions drawn by them from interpreting the original records are such that I have had to question them, in that I interpret the same records in a different way. In this particular case, I lean toward the existence of the two Lydias. >I am related to Jesse Whitney and Mary Sawyer. I have material on many of the >maternal side down to Jesse, and beyond, e. g. John Ford, the above Sarah's >father. > >Question: Is the maternal side of interest to anyone? Is it included in a >submitted GEDCOM? Obvious, flippant answer: Yes, it is of interest to any descendants. I think I might include it in a submitted GEDCOM, especially ancestors of those who married WHITNEY descendants in the early generations. I probably would also include the parents of any WHITNEY descendant's spouse, just for identification purposes. >Some of Jesse Whitney descendants achieved quite abit, although with a >surname other than Whitney. For example, a man, Elbridge Dyer, whose company >helped introduce steam engines into agriculture in the mid19th century. He >must have adapted some of Eli Whitney's approach, because he established >assembly lines making interchangable parts. His equipment won the "highest >premium" at the London World's Fair. His firm, in Ohio, also had the first >steam agriculture equipment in California. Then there is a female MD, Abigail >Allen, circa 1900. And the world's best test pilot and a major player in >aeronautical research. This person, Edmund Allen, won the prestigious >Gugenheim award, as noted in the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum. > >Question: What criteria exists to be a "famous Whitney?" Right now we have no such criteria. Since there are probably 20,000,000 living descendants of John, Henry, or Joshua WHITNEY, the three main immigrant families, probably one out of every 14 famous Americans is a descendant in the female line of one of them. We can't include them all. What would you suggest for criteria? I certainly would include anyone who bore the WHITNEY surname, for starters. >I am slowly adding references and notes to the material I have, but the >material is interesting even without the documentation. I gathered most of >the material on trips to DC working in the Library of Congress and National >Archives after 5:30pm, or in the DAR Library in time between meetings. Other >material has come from the Sutro Library in San Francisco or the Oakland >Family History Center. Because I did not know when my trips would stop to >Washington, I was in a gathering mode, and am now slowly assimulating it. That is how I have worked over the years. Usually the gathering phase was far ahead of the assimilating phase! The places you mention are excellent ones for genealogical research, in my experience. My main research locations also include LC, NARA, and DAR, as well as the Kensington (MD) FHC. >Thanks, > >Joe Keller, Joekeller1 -at- I hope this has helped. Regards, Robert Robert L. Ward rlward1 -at- <a href=""></a> 12236 Shadetree Lane, Laurel, MD 20708-2832 301-776-1659

Copyright © 2010, the Whitney Research Group

Personal tools