Having more is not better..... just more confusing! :) Thankyou... I am taking a break and then I might figure out some of these Wilkes guys to be yours. Later Linda ----- Original Message ----- From: <NKYList@aol.com> To: <YOUNGER-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, August 10, 2001 6:36 PM Subject: Re: [YOUNGER] Rome C. Younger-Nancy > Join the Younger confusion club! haha! > > You have a lot more than I have, because until just recently, I've only kept > anything in my files that directly belonged with Joseph Younger of Wilkes Co. > As stated earlier, his parentage is in question, but popular opinion links > him as the son of Thomas and unknown 2nd wife. I'm not 100% convinced, but > am closer than I once was to accepting that lineage. > > Joseph Younger was squarely in Wilkes Co. NC from 1782 until his death in > 1823. He had a son named Harrison that was named in his will. In 1850, a > Harrison Younger is listed in the census in Surry Co. (right next door to > Wilkes) as 46 years old (born 1804, if the age is right). Living with him > are: > > Elizabeth, 15 F > Nancy, 10 F > Pettis, 8 M > Romulus, 6 M > Adaline, 5 F > Pinckney, 2 M > > I have to assume that this Harrison is the Harrison named in Joseph's will. > I have no idea who Harrison married. I haven't been able to locate any > marriage record and there are no clues in the church records I've found > either. No mention of a Harrison at all. I can accept this as Joseph's son > with a daughter named Elizabeth after Harrison's mother and a daughter named > Nancy after Harrison's sister. The other children's names may provide clues > to Harrison's wife....time will tell. > > Harrison, Joseph's son, is listed in court records as Harrison T. and it has > been speculated that the T. stands for Thomas, but I've never seen anything > to document that theory. I've only seen Joseph's son referred to as > Harrison, never as Thomas. > > In the end, I wouldn't put much faith in anything I find in a TREE online. > As I've said before, I've found many, many error in these trees and I've only > been looking through Joseph's line. It's easy to stick a child where they > might "fit". It's a lot harder to document that you actually have the right > child with the right parent. I could later learn that this Harrison in 1850 > isn't Joseph's son, but I think that's unlikely. > > I would also be careful about attaching Harrison to Tomahawk Thomas (or any > other Thomas!). I know some early research I've seen makes that connection > in an effort to make Joseph's son Harrison, known to have the middle initial > "T", the same Thomas Younger who married Ellen London. It was a theory with > no documentation...just an attempt to connect names and families. I'm not > aware of anything legitimate to back that up. It also ignores the existance > of the Harrison Younger still in NC who is the perfect age to be Joseph's son. > > Nancy > > Oh, and yes, I got the census records I needed... for now! Thanks! :-) > > > > > ==== YOUNGER Mailing List ==== > If anyone knows what would make a good line for this area. Don't hesitate to e-mail > > ============================== > Visit Ancestry's Library - The best collection of family history > learning and how-to articles on the Internet. > http://www.ancestry.com/learn/library >