Here's some information that will either advance your Fulton research or cause you to throw your hands up in disgust. What is the difference between a Transcript and an Abstract? Or, is it real or is it Memorex? As Roberta and the rest of us are struggling with the bits and pieces of Fulton information copied from the records of New York, Pennsylvania, and Kentucky, the question of reliability of transcripts, abstracts, and other genealogy sources is becoming increasingly important. TRANSCRIPTS A transcript is supposed to be a complete and accurate duplicate of the original record. A transcript should include misspelled words, abbreviations, capitalization and all punctuation found in the original. If the dates in the original seem contradictory, the transcriber should write [sic] after the information to alert the reader that, while contradictory, the information is copied exactly as shown on the original. Unfortunately, we have found many cases where "transcripts" have been 'cleaned up' by well-meaning copyists. If you find yourself preparing a transcript of a Will, or any other document, and if you cannot read certain words or phrases, you should write exactly what you can decipher and estimate the number of letters and words you cannot. Don't try to guess what is on the page, or what is missing, and don't correct the spelling of the original. For example, if you cannot read some of the letters or words, write the following: "...my dear?? ???ved wife, Le"""ia..." When we were looking at the Fultons of Ontario County, NY, I presented information found in the "transcript" of Rev. Colin McFarquahr's Catechism Roll, 1776, published in Egle's Notes & Queries back in the 1880s. I pointed out that family No. 99, "JOSEPH FULTON" was probably an error. No man named JOSEPH Fulton appears on the surviving tax records for Donegal Township for this period. However, a JAMES Fulton did pay taxes from 1759 until 1783. The early script abbreviation for James was "Jas" with the "as" written as a superscript above the line. The early abbreviation for Joseph was "Jos" with the "os" written above the line. It appears that either the tax collector had poor hand-writing (Jos looked like Jas) or, a well-meaning transcriber 'cleaned up the information' and inserted "JOSEPH" for the abbreviation. It was a good guess but, in light of the evidence, appears to be absolutely wrong and has not helped later Fulton family searchers. ABSTRACTS An abstract, on the other hand, is a short version of the original document. Abstracts were created by court clerks as an early method of indexing voluminous court records. Technically, an abstract may omit words but cannot rearrange or change any of the content. All punctuation, capitalization and spelling that is contained in the abstract should be copied exactly as found in the original document. For example, assume a Will begins: "In the Name of God Amen, I john Fulton, yeoman, resident of Marion county in the State of Illinois, ...." A correct abstract of this Will would begin: "... john Fulton, yeoman, ... Marion county ...Illinois...." Note that the capitalization should match the original record. Even though it is tempting, don't 'clean up' anything. Please. COMMON TRANSCRIPTION AND ABSTRACT ERRORS The most common error is the error of omission. A sentence is simply skipped; a name is left out. The "Chronicles of the Scotch-Irish" compiled by Judge Lyman Chalkley is a classic example of omissions. For example, the abstract of the Will of David Fulton of Grayson County, Virginia, omits two of the nine children in the actual will. (Of course, my ancestor William Fulton, was omitted.) Even worse, the entire Will of William Fulton of Augusta County is omitted, an error that may be attributed to Judge Chalkley or to the typesetter who prepared his manuscript for publication. IDENTIFYING COPIES Another maddening problem is obtaining what you believe is an "original record" and discovering that it is actually a copy. This is more common than you may expect. I ordered a microfilm of the original marriage records of Grayson County, Virginia. The entries are hand-written. It really looks authentic. However, when I looked closer at my Fulton information ("William Fulton married Lucy Jones") I discovered that 23 names were duplicated. How could that happen? Easy, the copyist walked away from the original document and a breeze caused the page to turn back and the copyist sat down and duplicated the entire page. I was happy to find this duplication because it proved that the "original" was not original marriage record, but a copy of some earlier document. This information helped me prove that William Fulton did NOT marry LUCY Jones -- rather he married Seny Jones, a name the transcriber couldn't decipher. The Bible of Abner Jones proves that his daughter Seny married William Fulton on the date shown in the "Marriages of Grayson County." But what about the page that is omitted because the breeze blew the other way? That page is lost forever. (And, according to Murphy's Law, contains YOUR Fulton ancestor.) TWO VERY REAL AND DISTURBING STORIES You are not going to like these examples. Read on, only if you have a strong stomach. ***Duplicate Will Books?*** Through a bizarre turn of events, Jeff Miller, Jim Fulton and I discovered that there are two sets of Will Books at Chester County, Pennsylvania. One is a copy of the other. Both are hand-written and both records are identified by Chester County as the original Will Book. We proved the existence of the two sets of Will Books through photocopies. In 1989, James L. Fulton, Jr. of Arizona, sent me his photocopy of the Will of James Keys obtained at the Chester County courthouse. In 1995, Jeff Miller sent me his photocopy of the Will of James Keys as sent to him from the Chester County courthouse. However, the Jeff Miller copy omits a name contained in the Jim Fulton copy. How could this happen? One must be a copy of the other. James Keys of West Caln Twp, signed his Will on 7 December 1770 and wrote a codicil dated 18 December 1770. The Will was proved 9 June 1772. The omission appears in the codicil. In one "transcript" the codicil names son John Keys, daughter Jennet Keys, and grand children James Clark and John Fulton. In the other "transcript" the codicil names son John Keys, daughter Jennet Keys, and grand children "James and John Fulton." A signficant error if you're trying to piece together a Fulton family! (Or, in this case, a Clark family.) ***Completely False Family Information?*** As a final example of Genealogy Caveats, I have to share this tale of Fulton woe. In 1981, the Guilford County Genealogical Society published the "Abstracts of Marriage Bonds & Additional Data, Guilford Co., NC, 1791-1840" compiled by Ruth F. Thompson and Louise J. Hartgrove. As far as I can tell, the abstracts of the marriage bonds are accurate, however the "additional data" that the well-meaning authors inserted is maddening. After abstracting so many marriages, the authors became pretty familiar with the families living in Guilford County and obviously felt confident about the [bracketed notes] they inserted next to certain marriages. Unfortunately, later readers think the [bracketed notes] were somehow found in the marriage records. On 28 March 1833, Thomas Fulton married Rachel Sillivan. Authors Thompson and Hartgrove incorrectly assumed that this Thomas Fulton was the son Thomas Fulton named in the 1820 Will of Samuel Fulton of Guilford County and inserted this information in the "Marriage Abstracts". Because Samuel Fulton did not appoint guardians to any of the children named in his Will, we know that all of his children were "of age" (over 21) in 1820. A quick check of the US Census for Guilford County shows that Thomas Fulton, with wife Rachel, was born in 1810. Therefore, he cannot possibly be the son named in the Will of Samuel Fulton. LESSONS TO BE LEARNED When copying any document, be a good Scout, "do your best." Don't clean up the record. Try to be as faithful as possible and, when in doubt, tell the reader. When looking for your Fulton ancestors, don't give up. Understand that "abstracts" contain omissions. Keep looking for other sources of information. When relying on any document, be sure to note the source of the information. It's possible that you are not really looking at what you think. You may be reading a copy of a copy. When you find that your genealogy simply hits dead-ends, reconsider all of your sources. There are a lot of descendants of Thomas and Rachel (Sillivan) Fulton that cannot find their Fulton ancestors. They still believe what they read in the "Marriage Abstracts" published by the Guilford County Genealogical Society. Wouldn't you? Never give up! Patrice (Fulton) Stark Lone Tree, Colorado