Assumptions

[Wanda Stevenson]

I'm about to make a HUGE assumption, and I need some help decided if it's the right assumption or if I'm way off base.
I have a John Stevenson who married a Jean (Jane) Walker inJuly 6, 1804, now they had 7 children Janet, Jean, Matthew, William, Agnes, John and David. I can't find death certificate for John, who disappeared off the face of the earth before the 1851 census. So I'm assumming he died (in 1841 census he was listed as 58 years old). Now I also can't find his parents his birth is listed as about 1779 in I.G.I., but the census of 1841 puts his birth at about 1783, sooooooooooo my assumption is, I found a birth for a John Stevenson born 1782 (in the ballpark) to parents WILLIAM Stevenson and JEAN Hay, so can I safely assume that this is my John? The only reason I'm making this assumptyion is because the dates are right sort of, and because my Johns second son was named William.
Thanks for letting me know if I'm ok, or way out in left field.
Wanda

[AndrewP]

Hi Wanda,

In your research, you have reached the point where the trails run cold for a lot of people. In my research, that is where I take it that the trail stops, unless I come across some other nugget of information at a later date that can show a recorded connection.

I cannot tell you that you are wrong to take that assumption, but unless any other information is forthcoming an assumption is all it will ever be. If you are happy with that assumption, then go for it, but it is not an assumption I would be happy with (my personal choice).

I am sorry I cannot help you to make your mind up on this issue.

All the best,

AndrewP

[kathyc]

Wanda,

I don't know if it's a safe assumption or not, but with the similarities in names, I think it's certainly worth pursuing to see if you can prove it. I've made a couple of leaps that ended up being right as more information turned up. I've also had to ditch some leads that turned out to be completely wrong. I'm fairly new at this, but for those I'm not sure of, I simply add a question mark to the end of the names in my notes so I'll remember they're not a sure thing.

Kathy

[Ted]

Wanda

AndrewP is giving very sound advice !! Over many years I have come up against 'brick walls' - twice I have made assumptions which cost me dearly in time, effort and lots of cash. Whilst it can be good to accept what you hope to be right this can be far outweighed when two or three years later you find that you have been totally wrong. I often find that if you cannot prove some research to be accurate - try the converse - if you can disprove it - then you can eliminate it for ever - this has worked for me many times.

Good luck with whatever you decide.

Ted

[emanday]

Hi Wanda,

I think you'll find more than a few of us have experienced discovering that a lead we have followed has turned out to be totally wrong. Like Ted, I too have expended time and cash on the wrong trail.

If I am not quite sure, I keep the information in a separate file - "Potentials", and there they stay till I have better information, whether positive or negative.

I hadn't thought about Ted's suggestion of disproving a link, but I'm thinking that a couple of my "wilder" potentials could be finally sorted out using this method. I'm going to give it a try. Thanks Ted.

[SarahND]

If I am not quite sure, I keep the information in a separate file - "Potentials", and there they stay till I have better information, whether positive or negative.

I can see you are more optimistic by nature than I am, Mary-- my file is called "probably unrelated"
Regards,
Sarah

[emanday]

If I am not quite sure, I keep the information in a separate file - "Potentials", and there they stay till I have better information, whether positive or negative.

I can see you are more optimistic by nature than I am, Mary-- my file is called "probably unrelated"
Regards,
Sarah

Please don't laugh
I renamed the folder It used to be called "Mistakes" till I realised that I kept putting it out of the way in a cupboard!

Psychological illusion I think it's called! Since as I renamed it "Potentials "it stays in clear sight and prompts me to re-investigate the records, just in case

[ninatoo]

Mine are in flies named "Unconfirmed" And well worth keeping too, as I had a whole bunch of Eastons in that file that I was later able to transfer over.

I am with Andrew...in such a situation I declare the search cold until I can find more proof. And also with Ted...sometimes it is easier to disprove a thing.

Nina

[wini]

I don't think assumptions are a good idea, having, like others gone off on the wrong track.
My file is called "Unresolved" and I get it out from time to time and occasionally get a clue that leads me on somewhere else.
I see on another site someone has traced their line back to William the conqueror. Pity I can't find mine past 1750 and that is only one well documented line.

wini

[StewL]

Like the others I have gone down the wrong track costing me time and money. Similarly to Sarah I have a file I call "possibly related" and pop the possibles in that.

Like Andrew I realise that now that I am into OPR's I may have reached the end of the line in my search for my lang deid yins. And only when a gem pops up can it help. I recently received information from a distant cousin on the marriages of two of my paternal uncles from more recent records not availabe online. It turned out his middle name clinched the link to a ggreat grandfather, the mysterious Mudie name which led me a bit further back. Just wish my lot had registered their marriages and wains

Once you get back into the OPR's it becomes a bit harder to verify links, I have obtained a possible baptism for a ggggreat grandmother in 1742 but as there is no mother named I am not sure that it is the right one and may never be.