Chat
|
Daily Search
|
My GenForum
|
Community Standards
|
Terms of Service
|
|
|
Thank you for taking the time to reply,Pamela. Yes, the 1790 census sighting involved an original record. I'm a big believer in studying the handwriting and any other details that a primary source has to offer too!
Since I posted the 1790 census record, I have also found "Mines" Dawson in the 1800 census of Union County, South Carolina, this time listed as "Minaes" Dawson. Again, the ages provided for the male children keep Mines/Minaes Dawson in the running as a possible father for my ancestor, Samuel Dawson, born in 1784.
Recently, I have found four published secondary sources with this man listed under a variety of spellings:
Menus, Manas, Manos, and Menas Dawson.
I am hoping that someone from this line will consider DNA testing to narrow the odds for all of us researching in the very early years of South Carolina.
Notify Administrator about this message?
Followups:No followups yet |
| http://genforum.genealogy.com/dawson/messages/5599.html | ||
 |
Link to GenForum Add Forum |
|