Andrew Linn Lynn of Scotland a/k/a " 'Linn;Leynn;Lynn;', 'Laird of Loch Lynn' "

I order to help us here it would be good to see the url for Andrew posted on this thread.
~• Thanks...

If I am not wrong I think this is the profile
Andrew Lynn of that Ilk

In that case we need to tag Erin Ishimoticha.

Hi Loretta, you and I share this line and we're collaborators on Geni. You should be able to make all of these changes. If you need help where a field is locked you can contact me privately for changes.

Hi Justin. Indeed we do and are. I'll get at trying to make appropriate changes for Andrew this evening and will let you know if anything is locked. Thanks much.

Thank you Angus. You have the right profile. I apologize for not providing the URL right off.

Hi all,

Some changes here Andrew Lynn of that Ilk
and here William Lynn

Hello! Thank you for the detailed corrections, Loretta Ann Layman! It looks like you all have made the correct changes and that I am not needed after all. Let me know if I can do anything!

You're welcome Erin. If anything comes up (and it may well), I'll let you know. Thanks!

I separated the two Andrew Lynns married to Ann Blairs born 1605 in Ayrshire such that the one who died in 1643 is the descendant of Norwegians and the one who died in 1670 is childless.

I think we still have a problem with the line from William Lynn to Jon Ellingsen Lein. As Loretta says above there is no Laird of Loch Lynn. Moreover, the profile for John Ellingsen Lynn still claims he was husband of an identically named half-sister of Ann Blair, of Auldmuir. Is there any primary evidence of this Lynn family from Norway?

Is it possible that there is but one Ann with two husbands born in 1605 Ayrshire named Andrew Linn , one childless descended from Scots of that milk and one childful descended from Norwegians?

Hella big coincidence if so, Jonathan. It usually doesn't work that way.

Just seems too many sources, over 100, conflate both Ann Blair Linn and Andrew Linn. Seems too convincing to ignore. I bet I'm right and I'll prove my case soon.

What you don't realize, Jonathan, is the prevalence of copypaste. People *constantly* copy and paste bad information from tree to tree to tree to tree, often without ever doing the least bit of original research. It's easy to rack up 100 or even 1000 bad sources that way.

yeah, but the sources are not just WikiTree and MyHeritage, but even Genealogy.com and pre-internet old-school capital letter surname sites such as http://www.montyhistnotes.com/genealogy/getperson.php?personID=I222...

Private -- those sources are still only family web trees. If they don't give real sources, other than other family web trees, they are not actual sources. The link you provide isn't listing sources.

This is a major problem in the medieval and early branches of the tree. I've seen absolute nonsense even in the LDS files.

The only "real" sources will be actual records -- court records, land records, church records, wills.

The extent to which this is a problem cannot be over emphasized.

Occasionally, when I'm stuck trying to figure things out, I'll do a search for the name on rootsweb, as SOMETIMES the users of rootsweb provide information as to real sources.

Why rootsweb, I do not know.

Rootsweb is hit-and-miss - there are/were some serious genealogists on it who do/did extensive original research and provide their sources, and then there are the copypasters.

It's pretty easy to tell which is which, though. :-)

There is a whole lot of the rootsweb trees that actually, no kidding, cite Bartrum's genealogies. Which is great, cause then I know which tree to go to and don't have to struggle with his horrible index. I love them.

Jonathan, it's not uncommon to find a web tree you think looks good then find out it's problematic. When that happens the best thing to do is isolate it pending further research.

Here, I recommend:

1. Cut Ann Blair, of Auldmuir from her parents, and clean up the About so that you present your theory but make it clear you have no evidence yet.

2. Cut the parents of William Lynn, the Virginia immigrant (unless you can find primary sources for his parents).

3. Clean up the profiles to remove references to Lairds of Loch Lynne. Loretta has pointed out the extreme unlikelihood any of that is correct.

Then you can work on documenting the early generations of the Virginia family and see if there are actually any primary sources for their ancestry. As well, you will want to see if there are actual sources for a Scottish Lein family from Norway, or whether it is just a 19th or 20th fake.

No Linn/Lynns in Northampton/Accomack, which only narrows the search down a little.

Middle names were Not A Thing, as a rule, in his time. So he's likely to be William OR David but not both.

Fredericksburg, VA, was not founded until 1728. "Spotsylvania County" would work, it was established in 1720.

Here is a good resource by our own Loretta:
http://www.house-of-lynn.com/Dr_William_Lynn.html

A comparison with what we have on Geni shows how garbled the Geni version is.

A good starting point on this page is Margaret Lewis. That makes it easy to identify William Lynn despite the garbling.

My work is never garbled, only a mistake here or there. The confusion here is conflation of the name of a Scottish lake and that of a surname. I'll fix it so Margaret Lewis' ancestors are clearer but still I think one Ann Blair Lynn married two Andrew Linns born in Ayrshire 1605, one descended from Norwegians and reproductive and the other with Scotch parentage with no kids.

Jonathan, please provide original sources to support your argument.

Jonathan, I hope you see that your idea Ann Blair married two different men named Andrew Linn is a theory but not a fact until you present evidence of it. There appears to be documentation for one of them, but not the other.

What you might not see that more experienced genealogists see immediately is the line you are creating has the hallmarks of a Victorian fake:

1. The use of double names in a period and place when having two given names would be most unusual. This usually suggests someone who has no experience with this period has tried to 'smerge two different people into a single person.

2. The mangled title Laird of Loch Lynn. "Laird" is a generic word for the owner of an estate. It is related to the word Lord but different. It is not a title. It is not a prefix. A laird would not be described as the owner of a loch (lake), although he might be laird of a similarly named property near a loch. That is, laird of Lynn perhaps, but not laird of Loch Lynn (which does not exist). Except there is no evidence for such an estate separate from the other Lynn family.

3. The exceptional unlikelihood of a Norwegian family settled (and documented) in rural Scotland at this period. This is the typical stuff of Victorian myth making. A family doesn't appear in the records so jump to the idea that they came from somewhere else in western Europe where there is a family with a similar name.

4. "The name's the same" approach to identifying and linking the parents of the immigrant. Dr. William Lynn can be proved as son of William Lynn and Ann. Identifying that William Lynn with any other in Scotland involves the wildest guessing. And, linking this family to Andrew Lynn involves the same kind of guessing, based only on the idea that surely our Virginia ancestors came from the most prominent family possible. More Victorian myth making. Then too, creating two different Andrew Lynns to be husbands of Ann Blair in order to make it all work is just more of the same silliness.

So you see, this line practically screams to someone familiar with the period that it is a fake. It's possible some of these problems would be resolved with evidence. Sometimes a woman really does marry two men with the same name. But this is something you would have to really prove, not just speculate about in order to keep a line you like.

I have been in contact with the owner of this site: https://stadsbygd.info/individual.php?pid=I4537&ged=stadsbygd Dennis Haarsager and after having talked to him I find his Research to be pretty good allthough he hasn't many sources on his webtree.

He says that he has never heard of Jon Ellingsen Lein moving to Scotland or having descendants there. And in my view he is correct.

Thanks, Remi. Very helpful to know the Norwegians are real just not in Scotland.

Then there's this. They're talking about Norwegian surnames and someone says, "The Lynn connection, on the other hand, seems suspect - I looked some at it on Geni. That sort of thing, someone moving from Norway to Scotland around 1600, would need some good sources to convince me - but at that point what we get is a profile manager saying 'because I think so'."
https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/395439/when-did-surnames-come-into-use...

That's the kind of thing that gives Geni a bad name.

I think it's time to conform the line on Geni to the sources. I'll work on that tomorrow.

And this comment from Loretta is disturbing. I'm sorry she's losing confidence in us at Geni.

https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/395439/when-did-surnames-come-into-use...

"The Lein-Lynn tree first appeared on Ancestry nearly 10 years ago and, in spite of my efforts to help folks understand the facts, has since popped up in other places. It's like a bad rumor that won't go away and a good example of why I place far more confidence in WikiTree than other family trees. ..."