Hugh, for what little it is worth, I have kept two data bases. One has 'proven' data, the other 'assumed' or whatever you would like to call it. At times, a link will be proven and I merge that one. If I share any of the 'assumed' I point that out. Best, Bill "J. Hugh Sullivan" wrote: > > Christmas time may not be the best time to pose a question which > probably has multiple complex answers. Nevertheless I rush ahead of > the angels.... > > I have three major data bases. Each has provable links but the three > are not combined because the links between them are not provable by > any evidence which has surfaced so far. On the other hand... > > There are three Sullivan families in Brunswick Co. VA between 1735 and > 1800. The father and one son are well-documented but the other son, > who inherited, is not. The third family appears to descend from the > inheriting son but there is no absolute proof. > > That third family moves to Warren Co. NC before 1800 where they are > the only Sullivans. That generation and the next are well documented > up to 1812 as they go to Halifax, Anson, Caswell and Franklin Cos. The > Sullivan in Franklin leaves a will indicating children but only names > one daughter - a cause for inappropriate language. The last census > before his death lists 3 males and 3 females in his household, > presumably 2 sons and 2 daughters. > > Two years after his death the family is not on the tax list. Four > years after his death three Sullivan boys appear in Johnston Co. NC. > There is no proof of their origin but they are close to two other > probable family members and other families which walked the same > trails from county to county. One of the males is probably an older > brother who was on his own by 1809. Two of the boys made bond for my > gg grandfather who had at least 4 base born children by three ladies - > he married the one who had two. > > My dad's family and my mother's family wind up in AL, about 90 miles > apart, by 1835. Both sides of mother's family were in Warren Co. at > the same time as my assumed gggg and ggg grandfather. All sides of my > dad's family were in adjacent counties. All except my dad's family > came from Surrey and Isle of Wight Co. in VA - my dad's family may > have also based on probability, but fewer facts to construct logic. > > My question is obvious - can, or should, my three data bases be linked > by preponderance of evidence? It goes without saying that the lack of > absolute proof should be noted if I combine them. > > Isn't it funny how you can't say "it goes without saying" without > saying it? 8-) > > Everything I have found indicates the probability of my theoretical > genealogy. Nothing I have found discredits my theory. Because the > family resided in Franklin Co., a part of the Lord Granville Grant, I > doubt the possibility of proof ever coming to light. It appears that > my probable ggg grandfather never owned land and my probable ggggg and > gggg grands didn't after moving from VA. > > If it gets to the point, I am more of a family historian than a pure > genealogist yet I draw the line somewhere. If "family" is slow and > "genealogy" is fast, I guess I'm half-fast. 8-) > > I thank you for opinions. > > Hugh

On Mon, 24 Dec 2001 20:06:42 GMT, Bill Floyd <billgflo@postoffice.swbell.net> wrote: >Hugh, for what little it is worth, I have kept two data bases. One has >'proven' data, the other 'assumed' or whatever you would like to call >it. At times, a link will be proven and I merge that one. If I share any >of the 'assumed' I point that out. >Best, >Bill Doesn't that mean that you have to maintain three data bases? Did you decide against maintaining only one data base with the ability to split it should it become necessary? Hugh