I am about to make myself the most unpopular person on the List. I am, however, willing to take that risk. It's all about names - This has been brought about by the current interest in the name Elizabeth Lee as the wife of Joshua Younger. I have described my personal research - not my opinion - previously, so I won't go into that again. I'd like to go on to what I believe to be other myths. One often sees in family group sheets the names "Joshua Logan Younger" and "Peter Logan Younger". I have yet to see even an L. after the name Joshua or Peter in source materials. Now we must admit that the name Logan is of great historical significance in Kentucky and who wouldn't want to be related to our historical heroes? However, the documentation doesn't support the use of either an L. or the name Logan. While I am hanging out on this limb, let me go on to the very prolific use of the middle name of Lee. Again, after almost 30 years of personal genealogical research and the cardboard boxes of the research by the very prolific Marguerite Hutchins, it is only found on family group sheets - no source documents. Who produces family group sheets? You and me and all the other family members. Who of us has not been eager to get information from others further along in their research than we are? We have dutifully copied the family group sheets making them our own. Now with the computer it is even easier to get garbled materials. One puts their information on a site and someone adds their piece and another does the same until we really don't know what to believe until we back up and check court records, census records, etc. Even tombstones are suspect. Books are written by people so we must even approach the printed word with some caution. The earlier the document and closer to the contemporary time, the better the information. Why do hanker so after middle names? We find a first name and an initial in a census record and we are not satisfied until we create a middle name that matches the letter. Bible records can be trusted for entire names and some in court documents when they are differentiating persons with the same first name. I have been asked many times. Do you think the (letter) stands for (x)? The temptation to determine that you have figured out the middle name and before long it is appearing in flaming technicolor in family group shetes and other records. I will trust middle names from birth registers, Bibles, siblings and source documents and not much else. Please, won't you join me and we will be the first "purists" in the genealogical hobby.

Friend here! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wilma C. Hillman" <hillman@one.net> To: <YOUNGER-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 12:53 PM Subject: [YOUNGER] Making enemies > > I am about to make myself the most unpopular person on the List. I am, > however, willing to take that risk. > > It's all about names - > This has been brought about by the current interest in the name > Elizabeth Lee as the wife of Joshua Younger. I have described my > personal research - not my opinion - previously, so I won't go into that > again. I'd like to go on to what I believe to be other myths. > > One often sees in family group sheets the names "Joshua Logan Younger" > and "Peter Logan Younger". I have yet to see even an L. after the name > Joshua or Peter in source materials. Now we must admit that the name > Logan is of great historical significance in Kentucky and who wouldn't > want to be related to our historical heroes? However, the documentation > doesn't support the use of either an L. or the name Logan. > > While I am hanging out on this limb, let me go on to the very prolific > use of the middle name of Lee. Again, after almost 30 years of personal > genealogical research and the cardboard boxes of the research by the > very prolific Marguerite Hutchins, it is only found on family group > sheets - no source documents. > > Who produces family group sheets? You and me and all the other family > members. Who of us has not been eager to get information from others > further along in their research than we are? We have dutifully copied > the family group sheets making them our own. Now with the computer it is > even easier to get garbled materials. One puts their information on a > site and someone adds their piece and another does the same until we > really don't know what to believe until we back up and check court > records, census records, etc. Even tombstones are suspect. Books are > written by people so we must even approach the printed word with some > caution. The earlier the document and closer to the contemporary time, > the better the information. > > Why do hanker so after middle names? We find a first name and an initial > in a census record and we are not satisfied until we create a middle > name that matches the letter. Bible records can be trusted for entire > names and some in court documents when they are differentiating persons > with the same first name. I have been asked many times. Do you think the > (letter) stands for (x)? The temptation to determine that you have > figured out the middle name and before long it is appearing in flaming > technicolor in family group shetes and other records. > > I will trust middle names from birth registers, Bibles, siblings and > source documents and not much else. Please, won't you join me and we > will be the first "purists" in the genealogical hobby. > > > ==== YOUNGER Mailing List ==== > For a place To Store and show pictures of your ancesters, goto www.ancientfaces.com (If anyone has a problem with this little ad, let me know.) > > ============================== > Add as many as 10 Good Years To Your Life > If you know how to reduce these risks. > http://www.thirdage.com/health/wecare/hearthealth/index.html > >

You make the statement, "Bible records can be trusted for entire names....." That may not be true. I can show you a Bible record where the person adding the record made some assumptions which are not true. This was my grandfathers Bible and it appears that another person has added to the record thereby making that persons name incorrect. As a matter of fact, the birth date is also incorrect. WWB ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wilma C. Hillman" <hillman@one.net> To: <YOUNGER-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 11:53 AM Subject: [YOUNGER] Making enemies > I am about to make myself the most unpopular person on the List. I am, > however, willing to take that risk. > > It's all about names - > This has been brought about by the current interest in the name > Elizabeth Lee as the wife of Joshua Younger. I have described my > personal research - not my opinion - previously, so I won't go into that > again. I'd like to go on to what I believe to be other myths. > > One often sees in family group sheets the names "Joshua Logan Younger" > and "Peter Logan Younger". I have yet to see even an L. after the name > Joshua or Peter in source materials. Now we must admit that the name > Logan is of great historical significance in Kentucky and who wouldn't > want to be related to our historical heroes? However, the documentation > doesn't support the use of either an L. or the name Logan. > > While I am hanging out on this limb, let me go on to the very prolific > use of the middle name of Lee. Again, after almost 30 years of personal > genealogical research and the cardboard boxes of the research by the > very prolific Marguerite Hutchins, it is only found on family group > sheets - no source documents. > > Who produces family group sheets? You and me and all the other family > members. Who of us has not been eager to get information from others > further along in their research than we are? We have dutifully copied > the family group sheets making them our own. Now with the computer it is > even easier to get garbled materials. One puts their information on a > site and someone adds their piece and another does the same until we > really don't know what to believe until we back up and check court > records, census records, etc. Even tombstones are suspect. Books are > written by people so we must even approach the printed word with some > caution. The earlier the document and closer to the contemporary time, > the better the information. > > Why do hanker so after middle names? We find a first name and an initial > in a census record and we are not satisfied until we create a middle > name that matches the letter. Bible records can be trusted for entire > names and some in court documents when they are differentiating persons > with the same first name. I have been asked many times. Do you think the > (letter) stands for (x)? The temptation to determine that you have > figured out the middle name and before long it is appearing in flaming > technicolor in family group shetes and other records. > > I will trust middle names from birth registers, Bibles, siblings and > source documents and not much else. Please, won't you join me and we > will be the first "purists" in the genealogical hobby. > > > ==== YOUNGER Mailing List ==== > For a place To Store and show pictures of your ancesters, goto www.ancientfaces.com (If anyone has a problem with this little ad, let me know.) > > ============================== > Add as many as 10 Good Years To Your Life > If you know how to reduce these risks. > http://www.thirdage.com/health/wecare/hearthealth/index.html >

Well said, highly concur ! CY ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wilma C. Hillman" <hillman@one.net> To: <YOUNGER-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 12:53 PM Subject: [YOUNGER] Making enemies > I am about to make myself the most unpopular person on the List. I am, > however, willing to take that risk. > > It's all about names - > This has been brought about by the current interest in the name > Elizabeth Lee as the wife of Joshua Younger. I have described my > personal research - not my opinion - previously, so I won't go into that > again. I'd like to go on to what I believe to be other myths. > > One often sees in family group sheets the names "Joshua Logan Younger" > and "Peter Logan Younger". I have yet to see even an L. after the name > Joshua or Peter in source materials. Now we must admit that the name > Logan is of great historical significance in Kentucky and who wouldn't > want to be related to our historical heroes? However, the documentation > doesn't support the use of either an L. or the name Logan. > > While I am hanging out on this limb, let me go on to the very prolific > use of the middle name of Lee. Again, after almost 30 years of personal > genealogical research and the cardboard boxes of the research by the > very prolific Marguerite Hutchins, it is only found on family group > sheets - no source documents. > > Who produces family group sheets? You and me and all the other family > members. Who of us has not been eager to get information from others > further along in their research than we are? We have dutifully copied > the family group sheets making them our own. Now with the computer it is > even easier to get garbled materials. One puts their information on a > site and someone adds their piece and another does the same until we > really don't know what to believe until we back up and check court > records, census records, etc. Even tombstones are suspect. Books are > written by people so we must even approach the printed word with some > caution. The earlier the document and closer to the contemporary time, > the better the information. > > Why do hanker so after middle names? We find a first name and an initial > in a census record and we are not satisfied until we create a middle > name that matches the letter. Bible records can be trusted for entire > names and some in court documents when they are differentiating persons > with the same first name. I have been asked many times. Do you think the > (letter) stands for (x)? The temptation to determine that you have > figured out the middle name and before long it is appearing in flaming > technicolor in family group shetes and other records. > > I will trust middle names from birth registers, Bibles, siblings and > source documents and not much else. Please, won't you join me and we > will be the first "purists" in the genealogical hobby. > > > ==== YOUNGER Mailing List ==== > For a place To Store and show pictures of your ancesters, goto www.ancientfaces.com (If anyone has a problem with this little ad, let me know.) > > ============================== > Add as many as 10 Good Years To Your Life > If you know how to reduce these risks. > http://www.thirdage.com/health/wecare/hearthealth/index.html > >

Wilma H- I'm stunned, but you are right. I have not seen the middle name Logan on a single document either, but "figured" someone must have known Joshua's name. I "figured" it was by a family member. I thought I was careful. After working at a FHC (Family History Center) in California for about 3 years or more, I did know not to trust the IGI and family group sheets and how this information was obtained. The IGI was and is constructed as you stated, by folks like us submitting FGS (Family Group Sheets). Yes, some of it is from documents, but not stated as such to determine which is which. I do admit to using the IGI and Ancestral file to gather up names to give me what I call a "jumping-off" start to look in a place or group of names. I also agree with your statement about guessing middle names from initials. How many times have we seen Benjamin F. and George W. and soon after seen someone has added Franklin or Washington, only to later find a document with Fredreich or William in it's place? So..... do we leave the Logan in our records, delete it, or....? In researching my book, I have tried to start from scratch and not use the "accepted genealogy." Jesse James researchers claim William James and Mary Hines as his gr grandparents, yet no one can proove he was father of John James.... As a matter of fact the marriage of William to Mary [Douglas Register] states he married Mary Hinds, not Hines.... yet you never see her name spelled this way. This is one example of "accepted genealogy" for which we cannot continue doing. Wilma has put a foot forward to changing these practices, so how can we "fix" the previous mistakes made? Thankyou Wilma, for bringing these subjects to the attention of the list. Linda in KCMO ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wilma C. Hillman" <hillman@one.net> To: <YOUNGER-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 11:53 AM Subject: [YOUNGER] Making enemies > I am about to make myself the most unpopular person on the List. I am, > however, willing to take that risk. > > It's all about names - > This has been brought about by the current interest in the name > Elizabeth Lee as the wife of Joshua Younger. I have described my > personal research - not my opinion - previously, so I won't go into that > again. I'd like to go on to what I believe to be other myths. > > One often sees in family group sheets the names "Joshua Logan Younger" > and "Peter Logan Younger". I have yet to see even an L. after the name > Joshua or Peter in source materials. Now we must admit that the name > Logan is of great historical significance in Kentucky and who wouldn't > want to be related to our historical heroes? However, the documentation > doesn't support the use of either an L. or the name Logan. > > While I am hanging out on this limb, let me go on to the very prolific > use of the middle name of Lee. Again, after almost 30 years of personal > genealogical research and the cardboard boxes of the research by the > very prolific Marguerite Hutchins, it is only found on family group > sheets - no source documents. > > Who produces family group sheets? You and me and all the other family > members. Who of us has not been eager to get information from others > further along in their research than we are? We have dutifully copied > the family group sheets making them our own. Now with the computer it is > even easier to get garbled materials. One puts their information on a > site and someone adds their piece and another does the same until we > really don't know what to believe until we back up and check court > records, census records, etc. Even tombstones are suspect. Books are > written by people so we must even approach the printed word with some > caution. The earlier the document and closer to the contemporary time, > the better the information. > > Why do hanker so after middle names? We find a first name and an initial > in a census record and we are not satisfied until we create a middle > name that matches the letter. Bible records can be trusted for entire > names and some in court documents when they are differentiating persons > with the same first name. I have been asked many times. Do you think the > (letter) stands for (x)? The temptation to determine that you have > figured out the middle name and before long it is appearing in flaming > technicolor in family group shetes and other records. > > I will trust middle names from birth registers, Bibles, siblings and > source documents and not much else. Please, won't you join me and we > will be the first "purists" in the genealogical hobby. > > > ==== YOUNGER Mailing List ==== > For a place To Store and show pictures of your ancesters, goto www.ancientfaces.com (If anyone has a problem with this little ad, let me know.) > > ============================== > Add as many as 10 Good Years To Your Life > If you know how to reduce these risks. > http://www.thirdage.com/health/wecare/hearthealth/index.html >