Maternal/Paternal Connections

Sometimes, when dancing with the ancestors, you find connections between your maternal and paternal lines. Oh, not the obvious connection of your parents, but rather a far distant connection.

This isn't a simple connection that both your maternal/paternal lines all lived in the same town for generations. Multiple connections between both lines are certain to be found in those instances. No, the connections I'm talking about are when the lines were in the same place, at the same time, generations past.

In my parents case, my father's ancestors, for the most part, settled in Warren County, Tennessee, while my mother's ancestors settled in Nelson County, Kentucky. As Fate would have it, mom and dad both ended up in Louisville, Kentucky working for the same company. They met, dated for many years, married, had children and grandchildren. Our normal vacations were Kentucky to visit mom's family and then on to Tennessee to visit dad's family. And they lived happily ever after.

Before all that happened, my maternal lines lived in two places: Maryland and Massachusetts (and New Hampshire, Connecticut, Maine, etc.). The Maryland lines, in the late 1700s, migrated to central Kentucky (Nelson County) so they could practice their Catholic faith free from the persecution they were experiencing in Maryland. My many times Great Grandpappy William Boarman actually spent 30 days in jail for being a Catholic. He was dang proud of that jail time. Meanwhile, an ancestor from Massachusetts ended up in Indiana, then Kentucky, and well, one day my mother was born.

At the same time, my paternal lines had settled in Virginia and, as I was to later learn, Maryland as well. In fact, many of my maternal ancestors went to court against my immigrant Mitchell ancestor. Who knew? But, at some point, the Virginia ancestors moved to Warren County, Tennessee. The various lines married, produced children, and eventually my dad was born.

But, in doing the family research on both lines, I sometimes run across a familiar name. One of those times was the name McPherson. My 6 x Paternal Great Grandfather was Daniel McPherson. He married Elizabeth Nevitt. Well, when researching my maternal line, I discovered that my 6 x Maternal Grandmother Susannah, who married William Nalley, was a McPherson. Well, some more digging and I realized that both Daniel and Susannah were both from Charles County, Maryland. Then, was the discovery of Daniel's last will and testament with one of the witnesses being . . . Mrs. Susannah Nalley. 

Yes, Susannah was either a sister or cousin to Daniel. I have not been able to determine the exact relationship. But, what was obvious to me was that suddenly, beyond a casual living in the same town connection, there was actually a distant blood/dna connection between my maternal and paternal lines. Wow!

Then, this morning, came another connection when I received an email from Ancestry DNA regarding a distant cousin with the common ancestor being 7 x Great Grandfather Richard Nevitt, father of 6 x Great Grandmother Elizabeth Nevitt who married Daniel McPherson.

The interesting fact about this particular distant cousin is, prior to this recent match to Richard Nevitt, that we were already related on my maternal line. In fact, we share a number of common ancestors: 6 x Greats Thomas and Mary (Aisquith) Hagan, 7 x Greats James and Mary (Goodrick) Semmes, 7 x Great Charles Beaven and 6 x Greats Thomas James and Jane (Edelen) Boarman. All of those are my maternal lines, and now, descending down to this cousin, is one of my paternal lines. 

So, when dancing with the ancestors, it is possible that your maternal and paternal lines will intersect far beyond the common connection of your parents.

The Turner Line

9 x Great Grandfather Thomas Turner was born in Essex County, England about 1624. He settled in Virginia first, where he married Judith Mattingly, by whom he had at least two known children: Thomas and Mary. At some point, he and his family ended up in St. Mary's County Maryland (more on this below). After Judith's death, in about 1660, he married secondly Emma Morris-Johnson, the widow of William Johnson, by whom she had one child: Elizabeth.

Note: William Johnson was the brother of my 9 x Great Grandmother Agatha Johnson-Langworth. She married James Langworth.

Thomas immigrated to America by 1656/7 as a free adult and resided at St Winnifred's, St. Clement's Bay in St. Mary's County, Maryland.

From information I've been able to find about him, I know the following:

• He was educated
• He was Catholic
• He was an attorney (good thing he was educated - ha!)
• He served in the Lower House, St. Mary's County in 1662.
• He was Clerk of the Secretary's Office and of the Provincial Court between 1657-58
• He was Clerk of the Lower House in 1658

At his death, he left property in both Maryland and England to his wife and children.

His daughter Mary Turner (my 8 x Great Grandmother) married Joseph Pile.

Bridget Hewitt

As always, dancing with the ancestors is an intricate dance with many varied steps. One misstep and . . . SPLAT, you're on the floor. This is something you should always remember when doing your own dancing with your ancestors. 

Here's what I initially knew about 11 x Great Grammy Bridget Hewett. She married Henry Clitherow. This has been documented time over time. They had a number of children, one of whom was my 10 x Great Grandmother Anne Cletherow. 

I hadn't bothered to look past 11 x Great Grammy regarding her parents. I decided to do so today. The Ancestry trees - always suspect, please always verify through other sources what you find on Ancestry - indicated she was the daughter of William Hewett and his wife Alice Elizabeth Leveson. 

Great! I have a starting point. A bit of Googling - Google is your friend - later and here's what I found out about William and Alice (Leveson) Hewitt: they had a number of children, all who died in infancy except their daughter Anne.

Have you figured out the issue? 

Well, in case you haven't, I'll point it out: William and Alice had a single child to survive in adulthood, and her name was not Bridget. In fact, their daughter's marriage to Edward Osborne is well documented.

So, I did a bit more research and found out that William Hewett indicates he had a brother Thomas. Well, a bit more Googling and I had the last will and testament of Thomas Hewett which lists his many bequests, one of which was to Henry Clyderow (a variant of Cletherow). The next bequest, right after the one to Henry, was to Thomas's daughter "Bridget Hewett". 

AH-HA!!!!

So, suddenly, with a wee bit of work on my part, I was able to disprove that Bridget was the daughter of William and Alice Elizabeth (Leveson) Hewett, and prove that she was the daughter of Thomas Hewett and Julian Amcots, daughter of Sir William Amcots.

So, when dancing with the ancestors, take just a bit more time to double check your facts and do some additional research. And, whatever you do, never take Ancestry trees at face value. There is far too much information out there that's easily obtainable with a few quick searches on Google or some other search engine.

Odd Coincidences in Genealogy

When dancing with the ancestors most people come across some odd coincidences. For me, the coincidences have been many and varied.

Who knew that my paternal and maternal lines connected way back when, far before either of my parents were born? My 6 x Paternal Great Grandfather is Daniel McPherson who was born about 1701, most likely in Scotland. He died in 1740 in Charles County, Maryland. A witness to his last will and testament was Susanna (McPherson) Nally . . . my 6 x Maternal Great Grandmother. She was either his sister or cousin, I haven't been able to determine the exact connection. Still, who knew that the McPherson surname was both maternal and paternal? I certainly didn't when I began dancing with the ancestors.

Then, was the recent discovery that my 7 x Paternal Great Grandparents Charles & Ann Dodson were witnesses to my 8 x Great Grandmother Eve (maiden name unknown)-Williams-Smith's last will and testament. Eve's daughter Catherine Williams married Abraham Goad. They were my 7 x Great Grandparents.

Now, with the Smith/Dodson connection, the lines both descend down to my Grandmother Osie Lee Smith-Mitchell. 

The Smith descent is . . .

Eve (MNU) - John Williams

Catherine Williams - Abraham Goad

John Goad - Katherine Jennings

Joannah Goad - Valentine Sevier

Abraham Sevier - Mary Little

Mary Ann Sevier - John Halterman

Emaline Halterman - Hardin Smith Lane

Martha Ann Lane - John Leonard Smith

Osie Lee Smith - John Francis Mitchell

Dad - Mom

Me

The Dodson descent is . . .

Charles Joseph Dodson Sr. - Ann (maiden name not proven, alleged Elsmore)

Thomas Dodson - Mary Durham

Joshua Dodson - Ruth Dodson (his first cousin)

Dorcas Dodson - James Ballenger

Francis Ballenger - William Adcock

Rebecca Adcock - John Smith

John Leonard Smith - Martha Ann Lane

Osie Lee Smith - John Francis Mitchell

Dad - Mom

Me

Both descents began in Virginia. Valentine and Joannah (Goad) Sevier eventually ended up in Carter County, Tennessee. John and Mary Ann (Sevier) Halterman ended up in White County, Tennessee which was later divided up into Warren County, Tennessee where my family ended up settling. 

The Dodson line was also in Virginia, but it was Joshua Dodson who ended up in North Carolina. His daughter Dorcas and her husband James Ballenger ended up in South Carolina, which is where their daughter Francis met and married William Adcock. Sometime after 1818, the majority of the Adcock family - William's father and most of his siblings and their families - ended up in Warren County, Tennessee. This is where Rebecca met and married John Smith. As a side note, part of Warren County became DeKalb County, which is where most of the Adcock family ended up.

So, as you can see, when dancing with the ancestors you just never know when two, or more, of your surnames connect. 

Frances Ballenger (aka Ballinger)

When dancing with the ancestors there is a high probability that you will run across two people with the same name. See this post regarding Greenberry Mitchell-1 and Greenberry Mitchell-2, who most researchers combined - mistakenly - into one individual. Oy! In this instance, I'm referring to my 3 x Great Grandmother Frances Ballenger-Adcock. 

Frances is the daughter of James and Dorcas (Dodson) Ballenger/Ballinger, and sister to John, James, William, Edward, Elijah, Peggy (Margaret) and Tabitha. In her father's will, written in 1813 she is referenced as Francis Ballenger, while her sisters as referenced as Peggy Lewis and Tabitha Foster, their married names. So, in 1813 Frances was still unmarried. This is important.

In trying to research Frances Ballenger, daughter of James Ballenger and Dorcas Dodson very few people list her as the wife of William Adcock. Hmmmm . . . But, most sites list her as the husband of Isaac Bishop.

Well, a bit more research and I found that Isaac Bishop did indeed marry Frances Ballenger in 1797. Fine! Dandy! But wait . . . if she married him in 1797, why didn't her father mention her as Frances Bishop in his will? 

The obvious conclusion I'm going with at this moment is this: because she, the daughter of James and Dorcas, was not married in 1797. She was unmarried in 1813, so her father referred to her by her surname. The second obvious conclusion is that the Francis Ballenger who married Isaac Bishop was a cousin to the Francis Bishop who married William Adcock.

Yes, I know, genealogists everywhere are gasping in horror at my conclusions. 

I'd gasp too except . . . I have DNA connections to Thomas and Mary (Durham) Dodson, the grandparents of Dorcas Dodson who married James Ballenger. Yes, some genealogists are gasping even more.

The fact is: families used the same names throughout the various generations, especially back in the day. James and Edward were common names in the Ballenger family, as was Francis. In my Adcock line, all the children of Leonard Adcock named one of their children Leonard Adcock. The grandchildren did the same. A good example is this: Leonard Adcock's son, who married first unknown, named his first child Joseph Leonard Adcock. William's daughter, by his second wife Francis Ballenger, Rebecca Adcock named one of her children John Leonard Smith (this would be my great grandfather). Now all of John Leonard Smith's sons died at an early age. Realizing he would not have a male heir, my grandmother was named Osie Lee (for Leonard) Smith. I have one line where an ancestor - William Boarman - named a child by his first and second wife William. Then, there is my Duvall line where Mareen Duvall had two sons named Mareen - one by his first wife and one by his second. So, as you can see, naming patterns easily produce two individuals in a family with the same name.

The tricky part is separating out the various individuals into multiple people, as I did with Greenberry Mitchell, instead of perpetuating the myth that there was only one individual named Greenberry Mitchell . . . or Francis Ballenger. 

So, when dancing with the ancestors, just because you find it on the Internet, doesn't make it true. Yes, a Francis Ballenger did marry Isaac Bishop and have children with him. But that Francis Ballenger was not the daughter of James and Dorcas (Dodson) Ballenger.

Lazy Genealogists . . . AGAIN

When dancing with the ancestors you are going to come across research done by lazy genealogists. I've covered this topic before and probably will multiple times in the future.

Now, as stated before, back in the day before Google genealogy was much harder. Now, there's a ton of stuff online at Ancestry, FamilySearch and many other genealogy based websites. It's easier to find and prove, in most cases, what you need to find and prove.

In researching my Ballenger/Ballinger line . . . there appears to be more misinformation than facts. People seem to confuse the various James Ballenger/Ballinger's out there. It's frustrating.

They always seem to get the name of his wife correct and his children, but from there . . . it's a hodge-podge of misinformation. 

The James Ballenger/Ballinger that married Dorcas Dodson had the following children, as listed in his last will and testament: John, Edward, James, William, Elijah, Peggy, Francis and Tabitha. He lists his daughters that were married by their married names: Peggy Lewis and Tabitha Foster. He listed his unmarried daughter by her surname: Francis Ballenger.

THIS IS IMPORTANT

Many sites list his daughter Frances, aka Frankie, as marrying Isaac Bishop in 1797. I'm sure there was a Francis Ballenger/Ballinger that married Isaac Bishop in 1797. It just doesn't happen to be the daughter of James and Dorcas (Dodson) Ballenger. If it was, James would have listed her as Francis Bishop in his last will and testament, and not as Francis Ballenger.

There is also the issue of James Ballenger, husband of Dorcas Dodson, death: 1795 versus 1813. The James Ballenger that married Dorcas Dodson and had John, Edward, James, William, Elijah, Peggy, Francis and Tabitha wrote his last will and testament on July 19, 1813. This would not be possible if he died in 1795.

Now, back in the day, researchers might not have been able to find the will. There where most likely multiple James Ballenger's and . . . researchers confused the two. Check out my post on the two Greenberry Mitchells. This was a simple case of two men with the same name living in the same county and early researchers confusing the two. It took me just a wee bit of time to actually separate the two men and sort out their various lives. 

As with any family back in the day, family names were used multiple times. MULTIPLE! James, Edward and William were common names in the Ballenger family. In my Adcock Line, every child of Leonard Adcock named one of their children Leonard Adcock. His grandchildren continued the tradition with their children. Many families did the same thing so that there were multiple people with the same first name and surname in the same area. Separating the various individuals is difficult under the best of circumstances, and close to impossible under the circumstances faced by early genealogists.

That does not excuse the lazy genealogists out there! Take some time to separate fact from fiction when dancing with the ancestors.

Proving Things for Yourself

When dancing with the ancestors you are going to come across family trees created by other researchers. As I've mentioned before, do not take those trees at face value and trust that the information you're finding is 100% correct. There's a chance it is 100% correct, but there's a greater chance it isn't. PROVE THE FACTS FOR YOURSELF!

Okay, now that I've SHOUTED at you, dear readers, on to this post which is about misinformation in online trees. Yes, it happens. It happens on a regular basis. It happens so often it is not even funny.

Now, in my dance with my ancestors, I've come across this misinformation time and time and time again. I come to expect it, rather than not expect it now.

Case in point: all the trees I've found for my 3 x Great Grandfather William Adcock list his wife as Francis Ballinger, daughter of James Ballinger and Dorcas Dodson. This is 100% correct. William Adcock did marry Francis Ballinger. No mystery there, except . . .

Francis Ballinger was the second wife of William Adcock!

AH-HAH!!!

Why is this important, you might be wondering? Well, in all the family trees I've found for William Adcock with Francis Ballinger as his wife, the following children are listed: Joseph Leonard (b. 1806), Jane (b. 1807), David (b. 1814), Francis (b. 1815), Rebecca (b. 1818 - she's my 2 x Great Grandmother), Martha (b. 1821) and Nancy (b. 1827).

For the longest time, I took these facts as presented: William and Francis (Ballinger) Adcock had 7 children. No problem.

Yeah, famous last words: no problem. 

The problem didn't happen until I discovered the last will and testament of 4 x Great Grandfather James Ballinger which was probated in August 1813. His will listed his wife and all his children, including the married names of his daughters. The kicker: his daughter Francis was referred to as Francis Ballinger and not Francis Adcock. 

The will was written on July 19, 1813, which means . . . Francis was not married at that time, therefore . . .

. . . she cannot be the mother of Joseph Leonard or Jane, and potentially not David because she did not marry William Adcock until sometime after July 19, 1813. AH-HAH!

But, every tree out there lists her as the only wife of William Adcock. This was an easy assumption to make . . . until you take into account the last will and testament of James Ballinger.

Then there is the second problem with trees, and this involves 4 x Great Grandfather James Ballenger: every single tree lists his date of death as 1795. Sons of the American Revolution applications lists his date of death as 1795 . . . and his wife as Dorcas Dodson.

Now, if you've been paying attention, you know that James Ballenger/Ballinger wrote his last will and testament on July 19, 1813. This is 18 years past his published date of death. He mentions his wife Dorcas in his will. So, either his a zombie, a vampire, or faked his own death . . . the misinformation about his date of death was never discovered or . . . lazy genealogists got the date from somewhere and kept on using it. I'm not sure which option applies.

So, when dancing with the ancestors take the time to research all avenues/angles and prove things for yourself. Do not take the easy, i.e., the lazy genealogist, way out and trust that the person before you crossed all the t's and dotted all the i's because there's an excellent chance they didn't!

Greenberry Mitchell

Sometimes, when dancing with the ancestors, you come across more than one person with the same name. Such is the case with Greenberry Mitchell. You see, there is not just one Greenberry Mitchell. No, having just one would be far too easy. There are two men named Greenberry Mitchell.

Actually . . . there are three. Okay, one of them is imaginary. Okay, not really imaginary, but, rather the third Greenberry Mitchell is a hybrid. Okay, not a hybrid, actually, but rather the third Greenberry Mitchell is a genealogical mistake. He never existed and yet . . . he has trees on Ancestry. Go figure.

Greenberry Mitchell3 is actually a blending of Greenberry1 and Greenberry2. He is the result of people confusing the other two and ultimately combining him into one person.

Now, first and foremost, this third Greenberry Mitchell probably came into existence a long, long time ago before Ancestry and the indexing of records. He was probably created by some researcher scrolling through microfilm and not realizing that, back in 1832, two babies were born into separate Mitchell families and named . . . you guessed it: Greenberry. It also doesn't help that both of these families lived in Warren County, Tennessee and that both men named Greenberry remained in that county the entirety of their lives.

So, back in the olden days of genealogical research, this was an easy mistake to make. 

Now, I cannot claim to know why the multiple people out there confusing Greenberry1 with Greenberry2, and those creating Greenberry3, never realized there were two men named Greenberry Mitchell. All I know is that it happened, and this post will disassemble Greenberry3 and reveal the truth, as far as I've been able to determine about Greenberry1 and Greenberry2.

I'm not passing judgement. I'm only passing along what I discovered. So, here goes . . .

First - 98% of the trees on Ancestry list Greenberry Mitchell as the son of Robert Mitchell and Jane Tate. 98%! This is a HUGE number. Plus, too many people rely on Ancestry as a solid source of information when, in fact, much of the information is suspect at best. My advice: use Ancestry as a stepping stone in your research, but use the facts you prove and disprove yourself as the actual road of your research.

Robert Mitchell married Jane Tate. This is important. The name Jane is important. The name Jane, and the error of a census taker, is very important in the creation of Greenberry3 and the 98% of trees on Ancestry that I mentioned in the above paragraph.

William Mitchell married Darcus/Dorcas (maiden name unknown, but possibly Coffee).

In the fall of 1831, both Jane and Darcus (this is how her name is spelled according to a census record) became pregnant. In the spring of 1832 both women gave birth to a baby boy and . . . named him Greenberry. Oy!

Flash forward 18 years and . . .

In 1850, in Warren County, Tennessee, on the census recorded on August 22, we have the following . . .

• William Mitchell
• Darcus Mitchell
• Mary Mitchell
• Julia Mitchell
• Greenberry Mitchell (age 19)
• Celia Mitchell (age 14)
• Matilda Mitchell
• Darcas Mitchell

In 1850, in Warren County, Tennessee, on the census recorded on November 28, we have the following . . .

• Robert Mitchell
• Jane Mitchell
• Greenberry Mitchell (age 18)
• Squire J. Mitchell
• Andrew J. Mitchell
• Ruth Mitchell
• John Mitchell
• Susan Mitchell
• Robert Mitchell

Note: Mitchell is transcribed as Mitchael on these records.

For this blog post, Greenberry1 is the son of Robert and Jane (Tate) Mitchell. Greenberry2 is the son of William and Darcus Mitchell.

Greenberry1 married Cynthia Brewer. Greenberry2 married Sarah Dodson. 

But, before I get on with marriages, census records and death records, lets go back to the census records and something I do when I'm researching the ancestor: pay attention to the siblings. In this case, pay attention to Celia Mitchell because she was the key to separating Greenberry1 from Greenberry2. Always remember, and never forget, sometimes the key to a direct ancestor is his or her siblings, especially the female siblings.

By 1860, both Greenberry1 and Greenberry2 have married and had children. As I mentioned, Greenberry1 married Cynthia Brewer. 

In 1860, they're living in McMinnville, Warren County, Tennessee and have three children: George, Robert, and Lowry.

In 1870, they're still in McMinnville, with the following children: L. A., Canabert (i.e., Conner Robert), Laura and David. L. A. is George who was 7 in 1860, but 17 in 1870, and I'm guessing his name is George A., and don't have a clue why it was transcribed as L. A.

In 1880, Greenberry and Cynthia are still in McMinnville, and their son David is still living with them. 

And 1880, is the last I have found of them, most likely because a Greenberry Mitchell died in 1899 and that, would be Greenberry1. More on this in a bit.

So, now we switch over to Greenberry2, who by 1860 was married to Sarah Dodson. They married on September 18, 1857. They were living in McMinnville and had two children: Selitha and Murphy. Murphy plays an important part in the tracking of Greenberry and Sarah in later census records.

In 1870, Greenberry is listed as Green on the Census Record. The census record is mis-indexed under Washington County, TN with the post office of McMinnville (which is in Warren County, TN). On closer inspection of the actual record, the county is listed as Warren. This is just another instance where an indexer made a mistake and created havor for future researchers. On the census record with him are his wife Sarah and their children Tabitha, Murphy, James, Mary, and Ambrose (aka Christie). Also on the census record with him are his sisters Matilda and Dorcas. 

In 1880 they are back in Warren County, and living in McMinnville with the following children: Tabitha (aka Selitha), Murphy, Jas. T., Christie (known as Ambrose in 1870), Minnie, and Dillard. Also living with them at the time is Jane Dodson who is recorded on the census record as the mother of . . .  Greenberry Mitchell. Say what?

Yes, she is listed as the mother of Greenberry Mitchell. And this, dear readers, is where 98% of the researchers out there confuse Greenberry1 and Greenberry2 and create the hybrid Greenberry3. 

It is my belief that everybody who looked at this census record took the fact that Jane Dodson, listed as the mother of Greenberry Mitchell (when, in fact, she was his mother-in-law), was in fact Jane Tate. Robert had died in 1871, so most researchers, without digging any further, made the mistaken assumption that Jane Tate-Mitchell remarried a man named Dodson. Why they didn't connect the dots between Jane Dodson and Sarah Dodson, I don't have a clue!

The problem with the assumption that Jane Tate-Mitchell remarried a Dodson is this: Jane Tate-Mitchell died in 1874. So, unless she's a zombie who then married a Dodson, there's a bit of an impossibility here.

Further research by me, showed, in 1850, that Jane Dodson was living with her husband Eli, and their children Latitia, Sarah, Laura, and Meria. So, the Jane on the 1880 Census record is Sarah's mother and Greenberry's mother-in-law. Then, there is Sarah Mitchell's death certificate which lists her parents as Eli Dodson and Jane Ware. Mystery solved.

Ah-Hah!! 

So, this is an easy mistake to make. It's also an easy mistake to correct if a researcher takes a little bit of time to do, well, do some research and verify the results. 

Taking things at face value, when doing research, is never a good thing.

But, now let's move forward to 1900. Greenberry and Sarah are living with their daughter Ollie, who was recorded as Minnie on the 1880 Census record.

But also, in 1900, in Warren County, we have James Mitchell living with his wife Hattie (he married Hattie Cantrell on September 16, 1880) and their children: Roy E., Waymon, Lueby E., and Lela O. Also in the house with him is his aunt Celia Mitchell!

Now, if you remember, way back in 1850, one of the children of William and Dorcas, along with Greenberry2, was Celia Mitchell. She was the key to beginning to unravel the mystery of Greenberry1, 2, and 3. Then, there is the death certificate for James Mitchell which lists his parents as Greenberry Mitchell and Sarah Dodson.

Now, in 1910, we have Sarah Mitchell living with her son Murphy and her daughter Ollie. In 1920, Murphy is the head of household, but living with him are his sister Ollie, his mother Sarah, and his father Robert. Say what? I thought Greenberry was his father. Well, in fact . . . Greenberry Robert Mitchell was his father! OY!

BUT . . . according to the tombstone located at Riverside Cemetery in McMinnville, Tennessee, G. B. Mitchell was born May 14, 1832 and died April 20, 1902. Sarah was born April 19, 1833 and died October 23, 1927 - this is confirmed by her death certificate. So, if Greenberry (aka G. B. Mitchell) died in 1902 . . . who in the heck is Robert, age 82, listed as the father of Murphy Mitchell? Did Sarah remarry after her husband's death in 1902? Did she marry a cousin? I don't have a clue. All I know is that Greenberry was dead by 1902, so whatever Robert Mitchell is living in the household with Murphy in 1920 . . . it's not his biological father. 

So, the take away from all of this is: do not take Ancestry trees at face value. Prove and disprove absolutely everything for yourself.

The other takeaway is that Greenberry1 is the son of Robert and Jane (Tate) Mitchell and Greenberry2 is the son of William and Darcus Mitchell. This has been proved through census, marriage, and death records.

I can't change the misinformation out there on Ancestry, nor the multitude of people that have merged Greenberry1 and Greenberry2 into Greenberry3. All I can do is put this information out there and hope that future researchers will find this post and apply the correct parental and sibling information to Greenberry1 and Greenberry2.

My final take away is, when dancing with the ancestors, do the hard work for yourself. Sometimes, you're going to run across two people born in the same year, with the same name, and living in the same town/county all their lives. When this happens, a bit of work on your part, can stop confusion and false information from being spread. For the record, it took me less than an hour to deconstruct Greenberry3 into Greenberry1 and Greenberry2. Yes, I have the advantage of census records being indexed and knowing to research the siblings. But, so do many of the researchers out there who continue to perpetuate Greenberry3! Your diligence can help future researchers.

S

Lazy Genealogists

Okay, when dancing with the ancestors, you're going to run across what I call, not too unkindly, lazy genealogists! To put it simply: lazy genealogists want to believe everything they find on the Internet is real! Bonjour!!

Seriously, people, do not rely on the research of others. Prove it for yourself!!!

Case in point: The two men named Greenberry Mitchell.

Now, it's bad enough that families passed their names back and forth, hither and thither, here, there and everywhere without a thought for future generations doing family research. In this instance, there is Greenberry1 and Greenberry2. For this post: Greenberry1 was born May 23, 1832 and died April 6, 1899. He is buried in Trousdale (Jacksboro) Cemetery in Warren County, Tennessee. Greenberry2 was born April 13, 1832 and died October 23, 1927. He is buried in Riverside Cemetery in Warren County, Tennessee.

In 1850, in Warren County, Tennessee, on the census recorded on August 22, we have the following . . .

• William Mitchell
• Darcus Mitchell
• Mary Mitchell
• Julia Mitchell
• Greenberry Mitchell (age 19)
• Celia Mitchell (age 14)
• Matilda Mitchell
• Darcas Mitchell

In 1850, in Warren County, Tennessee, on the census recorded on November 28, we have the following . . .

• Robert Mitchell
• Jane Mitchell
• Greenberry Mitchell (age 18)
• Squire J. Mitchell
• Andrew J. Mitchell
• Ruth Mitchell
• John Mitchell
• Susan Mitchell
• Robert Mitchell

Note: Mitchell is transcribed as Mitchael on these records.

So, there exists two possibilities:

1. It's the same Greenberry recorded on two different census records for 1850. It happens people, more than I care to express right now.
2. There are two different men named Greenberry Mitchell

The reality: there are two different men named Greenberry Mitchell

One Greenberry (we'll call him Greenberry1) married Cynthia Brewer. The other Greenberry (we'll call him Greenberry2) married Sarah Dodson.

This is all fine and dandy expect . . . 99% of the trees on Ancestry link Greenberry1 and Greenberry2 as the son of Robert Mitchell and Jane Tate (more on the reasons for this in a bit).

So, back to 1850 Warren County, Tennessee, and William Mitchell and family. They are living next door to my 3 x Great Grandfather Allen Mitchell, his second wife Sarah and their children. 

Flash forward to 1900 Warren County, Tennessee and Celia Mitchell (single, age 65, meaning born in 1835) is listed on the Census Record with James Mitchell, his wife Hattie and their children and listed as his aunt! James' death record lists his parents as Greenberry Mitchell and Sarah Dodson. So, if his father is Greenberry, and his aunt is Celia, then going back to 1850, their parents would be William and Dorcas/Darcus Mitchell.

And yet . . . most people don't give poor William and Dorcas any credit as Greenberry1 or 2's parents! Shame on those lazy genealogists.

But, why is this, you're probably wondering? Okay, even if you're not, I'm going to tell you that it's all because of what happened in 1880 when the Census Taker arrived at Greenberry2's house and started taking down the information. He recorded the following . . .

• G. Mitchell (Head)
• Sarah Mitchell (Wife)
• Tabitha Mitchell (daughter)
• Murphy Mitchell (son)
• Jas T. Mitchell (son)
• Christie Mitchell (daughter)
• Minnie Mitchell (daughter)
• Dillard Mitchell (son)
• Jane Dodson (mother)

So, any researcher that had ever come across Robert Mitchell and Jane Tate as the parents of Greenberry, in seeing this record, and the notation mother would automatically assume it was 100% correct: Jane Dodson is the mother of Greenberry Mitchell. 

The problem: Jane Tate-Mitchell died in 1874. So, unless she's a zombie who then married a Dodson, there's a bit of an impossibility here.

Further research by me, showed, in 1850, that Jane Dodson was living with her husband Eli, and their children Latitia, Sarah, Laura, and Meria. So, the Jane on the 1880 Census record is Sarah's mother and Greenberry's mother-in-law. 

Ah-Hah!! 

So, this is an easy mistake to make. It's also an easy mistake to correct if a researcher takes a little bit of time to do, well, do some research and verify the results. 

Taking things at face value, when doing research, is never a good thing.

Relying 100% on the work of prior researchers, and assuming they are 100% correct, is NEVER a good thing. 

So, my take away from this is, that Greenberry1 who married Cynthia Brewer is the son of Robert Mitchell and Jane Tate. Greenberry2 who married Sarah Dodson is the son of William Mitchell and Darcus/Dorcas (Maiden Name Unknown, but possibly Coffee), sister of Celia, and father of James T. Mitchell (which is known for a fact based on his death record).

So, when dancing with the ancestors never assume what you are finding is 100% correct unless you have verified it for yourself. Sometimes, the face value is inaccurate. Sometimes, the mother is actually the mother-in-law and the census taker was, well, a bit lazy. 

S