Cursed slow internet, sorry. I don't want to test relationship paths until everything is properly merged up etc. The Barnes clearly move on to Indiana, however.
I have a very clean copy of 1820 US Fed Census Fayette KY for Thomas Barnes 1775-1822 with beautiful penmanship I will get loaded to his profile. But you will be amused to know: Total Free White Persons: 9 Total Slaves: 1 Total All Person: 10.
My Howtons are Fayette County, KY (well - really two branches after Ancestral TN: Alabama and Kentucky. But I'm the Kentucky line). Fayette County has some nice USGenWeb stories if I remember right.
That Malvina Barnes name is ringing bells but we'll see on a better internet day. Feel free to rampage around my tree. Here's another of my Mystery Jackson women:
I have a Thomas Barnes 1806-1883, Madison KY, married to Dorcas King, moved on to MO, likely not connected with your Jacksons:
The migration patterns fascinate me. I always try and find out what events triggered to moves (or the not!moves).
Looks to me like Delilah would be one generation younger than Rachel's generation. There are a number of male Jacksons in that generation.
Best I can tell, the reason for migration from Kentucky on the Jackson side was the opening of the state following the treaty used to kick out all the native tribes in the southern part of the state. But I suspect one or two of them were running from creditors... :)
Apparently not so unusual (remember: time and place). Also - one slave on the farm or in the house? Maybe people could wrap their minds around it.
In researching the Levi Coffin profile it turns out the Indiana Society of Friends had some mighty battles over abolition. Good refs in that profile if you're interested.
http://www.fewpb.net/~estillco1/whybarnes.htm "How the Barnes came to Estill"
"Today, the descendants of the original Barnes settlers include hundreds of known members scattered throughout the country. The number would be much greater if unacknowledged Barnes progeny could be counted."
You know I started a Project. :)
I used to have a professor named Barnes... think his father worked on the Manhattan Project. Still Huguenotting... French are apparently not so straight forward on the whole married/maiden name controversy. They have an official name (use maiden name) and a "usage name" (use husband's family name). Still, if I find a primary source with a married name on it, I'm probably going to end up using that.
You can make projects of anything you like as far as I'm concerned, Erica. You do pretty good with those. I just am into sort of plugging in information and sources as I go... and clearing up messes like the ball of confusion around Theodoric the Great. That keeps me occupied for far too much time in the day...
Last cross post...
Okay, the big announcement for the Ostrogoths is at:
If indeed these profiles are the same, why would two MP's have been created...aren't we supposed to have a "clean" tree before we make a profile an MP?
Why would a profile with no mother, no wife, and no birth or death dates be called a Master profile...?? Isn't a basically blank profile marked as an MP incongruious? I take the MP designation to indicate "this is the proven profile that contains everything we know about this person"...am I wrong in that understanding?
Actually when you're trying to clean up a tangled line, it's sometimes easier to start with a profile whose dates and relationships are correct and designate it the MP for merging purposes. It's a method I've used quite a bit.
The MP was designed to be in two or three phases: first -- clean up the dups. Second, build out the "overview."
In any event I de-MPed one of the profiles so you can merge on. :)
Forgive the Mina Bird routine, but yeah, as Erica says, it's sometimes a highly useful "stupid pet trick" that gets us researching merge monkeys past the Merge-Everyone-Into-One-Profile-Named-"Ancestor" types (think "The Borg" from Star Trek), and closer to the real tree. If there are two masters of the same profile temporarily, that's not really a problem in my eyes. As long as at some point, when the two profiles are discovered and need to be merged that one can be de-mastered and merged (before the Borg can be reactivated), then having more than one seems to me a potentially useful tactic (already seen this in use in one such case in amongst the Provencals).
Much more important is to back the basic data on profiles with sources. The sources are much more meaningful than the MP designation. (Though I'm quite happy to see my Jacksons MPed... looks like it's time to send through another line... give me an hour or two.)
Obviously, drinking pisco tends to slow things down a bit... probably time to get some sleep before finishing off the list. But these are the first couple generations that I'm listed as manager. -Ben.
This one I'm putting up for MP - I'm happy with the About Me now:
Erica....I am a "mere mortal"??? That's it for helping you on any more projects!!!! jk :)
Ben...stay away from the pisco...those Mallots are all spelled wrong!
Thanks for the info on the MP...I can see where you Curator Gods might use something a mere mortal wouldn't understand. :)
I am so excited...went to Mom's for Thanksgiving and got all of her notebooks and reference notes, so I can start working on my OWN tree now (when time permits) and getting those completed so you can MP them! Does the profile have to be public for you guys to MP? I could add you to my family group for you to MP non-public profiles, right?
Richard Williams (immigrant) is good enough to be a MP. The Williams family is quite interesting and I have a project on them and plan to engage family members to make their story a microcosm of the early history of America.
Ah, but I spelled those long before I came across pisco :)
Actually, I have the name changing in the mid-1800s from Mellott to Malott, which I believe was how Hannah Malott who married George Badger spelled it (my most recent direct ancestral Malott).
Though someone pointed out the name was somehow related to the French word for blackbird, I'm half suspecting that it's somehow related to the town of Marle, about 30 miles north of their earliest known ancestral home of Roucy. It would be funny if the connection were to Thomas de Marle, Lord of Coucy.... yet another fine example of why aristocrats should be considered "the black sheep" of any family... I try to look at such potentialities philosophically... pisco helps... :)
- Does the profile have to be public for you guys to MP? I could add you to my family group for you to MP non-public profiles, right?
Answer: MP's are for public profiles only and pretty much before 1850 as a rule of thumb.
Now remember -- even though you are of course just a wee slip of a lass, it only takes 3 generations or so to get you into public / MP land where you'd want to share. :)