|Posted By:||Richard Alan McCool|
|Subject:||Re: The Relative Value of the Sources|
|Post Date:||September 06, 2001 at 16:50:16|
|Forum:||Vansickle Family Genealogy Forum|
The fatal flaw in your argument is that you have no idea when exactly Simeon Lawson began spelling his name that way (if, indeed, he ever did). Once again, I would urge you to locate and read the Lossing article Doug had pointed to. This will explain everything to you that you will need to know in order to make an informed decision about this family--and a whole lot of others of Dutch heritage.
You are victimizing yourself by using one or two snapshots from within a continuum. The bottom line here is that you will never find Hannah's ancestry until you come to this realization.
I am rooting for you--but sooner or later you will have to lend a hand to your own research object.
PS--I should also point out that the New York Dutch-descending (by which I mean to include the New Jersey branches)routinely used the wife's maiden name on her grave stone into the mid-1800s, and later. This would, of course, be spelled as the deceased will have spelled it at the time of her death and may bare only slight resemblance to how her father spelled the name during the course of his life.
One also gets the impression that you may think of church baptismal registers as some sort of autograph book. These folks did not write their names in these books, anymore more than we do today. As you well know, the pastor who performed the ceremony, or the church clerk, will have made the notation--and spelled the name as he will have thought it to be spelled.