"Marti Ford" <mford@moscow.com> wrote: > Ancestor X born in 1773 is considered to be the son of Y & Z based > on published histories in the 1800's. He certainly lived and > married alongside this family (but there were others of his surname > in the area). > > According to the published sources, X was the 3rd of 4 sons born to > Y & Z, after a string of girls all living. All three sons other > than X die before the age of 5. When the last of these sons dies, X > was 2 years old. > > I have tombstone inscriptions of all three other sons. They agree > with the published birth/death dates. However, on the 4th son's > tombstone, he is identified as "the third son of Y&Z". (The first > two tombstones just say "son of ...") > > How much weight should I give this seeming descrepancy? Could the > tombstone possibly be interpreted as "the third son of Y&Z to die"? > What that sort of "ordering" ever a custom to anyone's knowledge? Not that I have ever heard of. > I am new at this, and I would greatly appreciate any help from more > experienced hands. Bear in mind that the accuracy of the inscription can be no better than the knowledge of those who commissioned it. Very likely no-one was around who actually knew - or those who remembered he had brothers had simply forgotten how many. -- Don Aitken Don Aitken <don-aitken@freeuk.com>