Getting frustrated with family genealogy sites!

[csziggy]

I've been working on updating the family genealogy information. Usually all I do is locate census, deeds, grants, whatever documentation is easy to locate.

Every so often I will happen on additional information about one of my brick wall ancestors that adds to what I already had AND to what I have found solid documentation on.

My most recent one is Samuel Stuart (Stewart) who purportedly was born in Ireland in 1713, married there and immigrated to America before 1753. OK, there are some problems with this story, but it is the one that most researchers have accepted for a long time and no one has disproved it.

Here is where it gets "controversial" - one of Samuel's grandsons wrote a family history in 1859. He claims that Samuel danced at his granddaughter's wedding in 1814 and lived to be about 109 years old. Other family researchers have found probate records for a Samuel Stewart in Georgia dated 1813 and think he "only" lived to 99 years old. The linkage for that is that the wife's name is Jane, same as Samuel's wife - but Samuel's son, Samuel Jr. also had a wife named Jane (or Jean). So that in my mind is not conclusive.

I've poked around and found a number of Stewart/Stuart family web sites and finally found one that seemed to have a lot of documentation connected to their listings. I emailed the owner and asked if they had more documentation on Samuel's death - they go with the 1824, 110 year old version which is supposedly based on the obituary of a son of Samuel who died in 1844.

What do I get back? Nothing worth working with. He refers me to the 1859 family history and to another family history which *I* referred to in my email. While those sources may be well accepted, I know very well that late nineteen hundreds genealogies often used word of mouth or local lore to construct their family histories. Currently I am trying to use actual hard sources as close to the original dates as possible.

For instance, I have some doubts about Samuel being born in 1713. His wife is supposed to have been born in 1738 so the difference in ages is remarkable. They are supposed to have been married in 1754 - in Ireland according to some sources, but Samuel is thought to have been in Pennsylvania before 1753 when he is thought to have moved to North Carolina with several other families. Samuel and Jane's children were born between 1755 and 1767, when Samuel was 42 to 54. Maybe Jane was a second wife and he had another family? There are a lot of Stewarts who ended up in the same area of North Carolina but who have no documented relationship to our Samuel.

At least most researchers no longer believe the claims that Samuel was a Stewart royal heir whose parents left Scotland when they lost the wars.

But how do I phrase my requests to other people to make it clear that I only want hard, documented sources, not the same old family histories that my mother exhausted fifty years ago?

[dgibby]

1. I'm having similar problems with my research.

I've hit several brick walls, especially with 2 of my paternal grandmothers. Unfortunately, inaccurate info has been incorporated into the online data base, and no matter how hard I try to debunk this info, I can't seem to get it deleted. Needless to say, every time I try to do an online search, I keep getting referred to the same "facts".

I can prove that one of the grandmothers is not the daughter of the individuals listed, but am at a loss as to how to get the accurate info into any of the online data bases.

My nephew and I are in the process of setting up our own family genealogy website, and will only list factual information that can be proved. Other than that, I don't know what else to do. It's very frustrating. Maybe that's something you'll have to do, too(if you haven't already).

[csziggy]

2. I've given up on trying to get people to correct misinformation

Just ran into one a few minutes ago: James Dickie, father of Jane Dickie. Jane was born about 1735-1738. At least half dozen Ancestry family trees have a nice chart going back for James Dickie but they have him born in 1733. Somehow, I suspect that James is NOT the father of Jane!

It's just so frustrating when people quote a reference but do not give any information about WHERE to find that reference. And that is the problem with the James Stewart obituary that might give credence to the claim that his father Samuel lived to 109 years old - while everybody refers to that obituary, not one source I have found even tells me what publication it was in.

I guess I need to keep looking for the Edward Stewart family history. Maybe if I can find it, I can get a better feel for whether the 109 year old claim is legitimate. But even the Library of Congress does not have a copy so that may be impossible!