Chat
|
Daily Search
|
My GenForum
|
Community Standards
|
Terms of Service
|
|
|
That's okay if your line runs from Thomas Harris (d12) that is mostly correct except for the line of his son Thomas (d124) that is entirely wrong. There is absolutely no evidence,including DNA, to connect this Thomas Harris d1688 to any of those Harris in Charles City Co., Virginia, or to those in England. One well noted certified professional genealogist has stated that there is no connection with the family of this Thomas Harris d1688 with those in Crixsea, England. Robert Harris had depended on information in books by John Boddie, as he states in his book and in personal letters to me. Boddie did not do enough research on these Harris lines and combined several different families of Edward Harris into one family and the same for several Thomas Harris families, so records pertaining to several different Thomas Harris'es he ascribed to one person. And Robert Harris used this information without rechecking it, so some of the records he notes for Thomas Harris (d12) actually belong to an entirely different Thomas Harris who died in 1672 (d1), the one Robert Harris has as the father of Thomas Harris (d12). Recent DNA studies have proven that there is no connection (relationship) between these two, d1 and d12, just as the professional had published that there weren't back in 1995. You can never rely on any printed book unless you actually confirm the information by looking at the actual records themselves, NOT some printed abstracts in another book, LDS files, or what someone publishes on the
internet. I'll always be a doubting Thomas, so in my 45+
years of doing research in courthouses, etc. from Alaska to
Georgia and in Europe, I find more accurate results are found in the actual original documents than are found in published second hand records.
Notify Administrator about this message?
Followups:
|
| http://genforum.genealogy.com/harris/messages/21358.html | ||
 |
Link to GenForum Add Forum |
|