Sorry Eddy...you are wrong. The affadavits do NOT prove Cornelius' Revolutionary War Service at all. And yes, they are nothing more than family folklore where they have no records to back up the claims made. Just because they are "sworn under oath" in no way ensures that the information within is correct and valid. The affadavits are @ 130 years too late to be considered Revolutionary War records. The "fact" may have been well known within the family...but there again, that's the problem with family folklore. Once an error has been made in telling the story, the error simply carries forward until someone takes the initiative to correct it. Just because that's the way the family has been telling the story, again, does not in any way make the tale correct or valid. And that is why intelligent people research...to find the records making it possible to sort the fact from the fiction in the family folklore.
Someone needs to do some research into Canada history. Crown land grants were specifically offered to descendants of Revolutionary War veterans...to entice families of former English subjects to become new English subjects in Canada. It's not surprising that you had never heard of it...since you don't do anything resembling research, at all.
Refer to your "dialog"...the statement "If your ancestor served in a military unit (company or regiment), you should be able to find him on muster (attendance) rolls, which will give his name, date and place of enlistment and muster". Since Maria's father did not serve, there is no record of his service. Thank you very much for establishing that for us.
"Yes it is very possible that Maria’s children did not know their grandmother’s real first name, and and even more likely that they didn’t know her maiden name." Still a very valid statemnet, regardless of the children's ages. If they didn't know, then they didn't know. Age is not a factor in that.
The remainder of your "dialog" is pure gibberish. You seem to think that naming children who were born in the 1800s somehow proves that the name Catharine Johnson was known prior to 1907.
You say your grandfather knew of Cornelius' service and the name Catharine Johnson prior to 1907. I say you are wrong. So...we are back to proof. This is not a question of whether your grandfather believed it or how he told it...this is a question of "when" he gained that information. Since the name Catharine Johnson originated with Violet's error, he did not know that information before she made the error. Want to prove me wrong? It is simple. Provide us with a letter written by your grandfather sometime in the 1800s...before Violet's error..which contains a reference to the name Catharine Johnson. I know you can't, because if you had any family evidence of that name dated prior to 1900, you would have been waving it around like a flag years ago. The real truth is that no one in your family had ever heard the name Catharine Johnson until Violet made her research error. And I don't care how many people have repeated the name Catharine Johnson since....Hannah Lawson is still Maria's mother. Family folklore simply does not hold a candle to "REAL" records.
And once again....While Cornelius' marker says "Van Siclen", the name on the Cemetery entrance is "Van Sicklen", and the name on his son Ferdinand's stone is "Van SIcklin". The spelling on Cornelius stone makes no statement whatsoever as to what spelling his father or grandfather, or children might have used. Your "exact spelling" nonsense simply confirms your lack of knowledge/experience in the area of genealogy and family history. You are trying to portray yourself as an expert in a field you know absolutely nothing about, and refuse to learn about.
Notify Administrator about this message?
|Home | Help | About Us | Site Index | Jobs | PRIVACY | Affiliate|
|© 2007 The Generations Network|