There are a lot of apparently poor assumptions built into this branch; for example, Esther, the matriarch, Esther Reynolds is not old enough to have been born to her reported parents and not young enough to have had children attributed to her.
Some of her children are reported to have been born in Maine around 1600; if true, that would be very interesting.
I was going to ask you about that! :) I took out at least one "no it's not possible to be born in a place that didn't exist." I do notice that the PDF file has these impossible Maine births.
Dates are difficult, particularly birth dates -- even in the 20th century. Unfortunately death dates are a better tool.
I love to look at files that say someone was born in Germay in 1410 or in France in 1010. The city, maybe was there, but the country wasn't even a word yet. People love to take a name like Aragon and change it to Spain or The Holy Roman Empire and change it to France or Germany simply based on where the city is now. I was looking at something the other day whem someone was saying that someone was born in Amsterdam 500 years or so before Amterdam was founded. I guess the only way to fix this would be to add a new spot on the profiles so you could put the name of the modern place and the original place, that way we can put in "Germany" in the old "Holy Roman Empire" . Why not add more work than needed. (LOL)
Here are some good ones New Amsterdam is not the same as New York
Illinois was not Illinois in 16xx
California was not in the US in 1840
Texas was not in the US in 1800
Hawaii was still ait's own Kingdom in 1920
need I go on
If everyone nows this, why do thet keep changing them around? Just to keep us busy. (LOL)
I blame "autocomplete" myself. And yes we are agitating for a "place name database." Or google earth. Or just *buy* google earth. :)
When did you become a Reynolds? Welcome aboard, lots of mysteries, lots of connections to the rest of the geni-verse. We haven't even connected in R.J. Reynolds of tobacco fame yet.
Just had to add my 2 cents, I'm not a Reynolds this week, but I'm sure I'm at least a 25th cousin or so. It would be nice if "autocomplete" would take a look at the year of birth/death and change the name to what it was called in yester year, it would drive people crazy.
I will now return you to your regular scheduled program.
The first European settlement in Maine was in 1604 on Saint Croix Island, by Pierre Dugua, Sieur de Mons. The first English settlement in Maine, the short-lived Popham Colony, was established by the Plymouth Company in 1607. A number of English settlements were established along the coast of Maine in the 1620s
Sorry, Marv. You're drafted, if it's OK by Ned.
Cleaning up Reynolds has resulted in a much straighter tree. There were two rich guys in the line: the merchant of Boston and the merchant of Virginia. I think I might be descended from both lines but I'll never find out if we don't get Maine back where it should be.
OK, 12th cousin to
William Reynolds, of Bermuda
See, I knew we were related
In the project you use Stephen Hopkins, "Mayflower" Passenger as an example yet the profile reads
Place of Burial: Brewster Cemetery, Barnstable, Massachusetts, United States
Birth: October 29, 1581
Hursley, Hampshire, England
Death: July 27, 1644 (62)
Plymouth, Plymouth, Massachusetts
What happened to the "Colonial America" part?
(I bet someone changed it on you, didn't they)
I was reading the ref for the The Reynolds Family Association.
Seems all the legworks been done if you could get the family charts from them, anyone a member?
can't be autofill
Place of Burial: Brewster Cemetery, Barnstable, Massachusetts, United States is OK he IS buried in the USA (now)
Plymouth, Plymouth, Massachusetts
see no USA but no Colonial America either
but was Plymouth in Plymouth Co then Mass was only first colonized in 1620, I bet the county didn't have a name them ( I see. Louis your my 9th cousin HI)
(I hope you know that my nick-picking is not really serious, we'll never get it all perfect)
The point was that she used an example that was wrong, but that's OK, I stay confused most of the time anyway and I need help to keep it that way the rest of the time.
Re Reynolds Family Association, I am not a member but have its "bible" for the New England branch, the book published in 1931 by Marion Reynolds - "The History and some of the Descendants of Robert and Mary Reynolds (1630?-1931)". No info on Robert's parents or on his siblings who went to Virginia, but lots of color on early life in and around Boston. I have filled in most of the first six generations using this book, but need to add the commentary. Would be handy if it was online.
Hmm ... Plymouth Colony, Colonial America sounds good. And Virginia Colony. Hmm. What do you all say?
I am going to look for some on line sources -- including getting into the Great Migration database -- and fill them in on the "overview" page. I really liked the Bob's File Cabinet page for the VA Reynolds.
Where does R.J. Reynolds fit in?
I've been putting in (Present USA) instead of Colonial America. A lot of times, if you don't put in some reference to the present, you leave a lot of people confused, i.e., people start placing Limbourg in Spain instead of the Spanish Netherlands (present Belgium). Then you come back to the profile three weeks later to find Limbourg has morphed into Leon, Spain.
And of course there are all those Holy Roman Empire monkeys who keep insisting that they have a prince of the HRE in the 800s (the entity that was so named the Holy Roman Empire in the 12th century didn't come into existence until 962). I've started calling Charlemagne's empire as the Carolingian Empire - and the entity that he took over before his takeover as the Frankish Empire. Then you have the date that Oadacer took over Italy as the end of the Roman Empire, so your province of Italy just becomes Italy, Pannonia is demarked as (present Hungary) to keep people from placing them in Ukraine, and Scythia has (present Ukraine) behind it to keep them from placing it in Hungary, etc., etc.
As to the colony names themselves - they are defined. Just takes a look-up in Wikipedia. I think at one point, everything became Province of this or that. For Massachusetts it was something like the late 1680s when Plymouth and a bunch of others merged together. Again, putting in some reference to the present helps the cause. It better communicates where all these people are coming from.
I had the poor fellow who was ready to go to his ancestor's grave sited listed (historically accurately) as Hingham, Massachusetts Bay Colony. However the ancestor died in Sunderland, Massachusetts, a farm masquerading as a town (oops -- I lived there) nearish (not in ice season) to Northhampton, Massachusetts.
He used google maps and his mind to think, OK, I wonder how they transported the body by cart some 200 miles ....
So yeah, you need the reference to where it is today.
I am lazy and just putting in Virginia and Massachusetts when I have to touch the data. (i.e., take out United States and United Kingdom). I will plot a database upload one day. :) :)
Why do people not just put the NOW name down for where it happens and in the note section put the place name at the time that it happened so that people can find it both now and in historic records? When a place changes names do the churches move? I do not think so and since it is mostly church records that are followed in those early dates we need to find the church NOW when we search so we need the NOW placement of an event as much as we would love the ancestral name for accuracy.