Posted By:Bill Wright
Email:
Subject:Re: John and Elizabeth{Drake} Crandall, ca.1586,Rhode Island
Post Date:February 09, 2011 at 14:21:04
Message URL:http://genforum.genealogy.com/crandall/messages/2241.html
Forum:Crandall Family Genealogy Forum
Forum URL:http://genforum.genealogy.com/crandall/

Hally,

Thank you for the link. I was able to pull it up. It is NOT an original marriage record, but a list in a mass computer database containing both good and incorrect information.

Ancestry decribes this database as:
"This database contains marriage record information for approximately 1,400,000 individuals from across all 50 United States and 32 different countries around the world between 1560 and 1900. These records, which include information on over 500 years of marriages, were extracted from family group sheets, electronic databases, biographies, wills, and other sources."

Until you can find the actual source ancestry used, you do not know if it is correct or not. Neither "family groups sheets, electronic databases, biographies, or wills" would be considered primary records for a marriage. Wills could be an original source, but still secondary Te family group sheets, electronic databases and biographies would be derived sources and still secondary.

Based on Paul Gifford's comments, I would be hesitant to include the marriage in my family tree. But there are many other family trees on ancestry that are inaccurate or at least have unproven data.

Bill