Chat
|
Daily Search
|
My GenForum
|
Community Standards
|
Terms of Service
|
|
|
I have read this post with interest, and I went back and re-read yours and the others that disagreed , earlier post on the John Aaron theory. To me it looks like all parties on all sides agree that the link from the Northern Branch to the Southern Branch is thru the three Burlesons that were recorded on the Lunenburg Co. VA tithes list of 1748 thru 1752. This is my problem with that line of thinking. Whether the Southern Branch is directed related to the Northern Branch will probably be proven by some undiscovered document someday in the future, But I have found no one that is looking for that proof. Everyone is looking to find where or how their ancestors FIT into the accepted family lines of either Sir Edward or Aaron I. The Northern branch (Edward of Suffield) is fairly well documented, and I have not found or heard tell of , a document that proves there ever was a man known as "AaronI" that has a proven ancestory line or a descendant line or siblings.
If I understand correctly, you say that in Lunenburg that the JOHN changed his name to Aaron, and that makes him now the AaronI, daddy rabbit of all the Southern Branch. Everyone that disagrees with your theory MUST believe that the AARON on the Lunenburg list is realy the AaronI, daddy rabbit of all the southern Branch. If you can document the name change then you have connected to an ancestory line something that no one else has done, but still NO desendant line. If all of the people that accept the Aaron of Lunenburg as the AaronI, then they have no ancestor or descendant line that is documented. Without any documention or some type of evidences , we seem to tear off a corner of the piece of puzzle to make it FIT.
My proplem is: why must it be one way or the other if no one can or has not ever found a single document that proves where the John, Aaron and Jonathan of the Lunenburg tithes list came from, where they went or who were their children. If that piece of documentation is found, and I think it will be found, then Burleson researchers can start again where they left off in 1886 tracing their ancestors back as far as possible, not just making the information they have found FIT into the family line of the Phantom known as AaronI.
I`m sure most of the Burleson researchers will not agree with me, but the fun is in the challenge of the search. I welcome any comments or corrections anyone may have, but remember that Buncombe Co. was not settled untill after 1790!
John H. Burleson North Carolina
Notify Administrator about this message?
| http://genforum.genealogy.com/burleson/messages/2097.html | ||
 |
Link to GenForum Add Forum |
|