Need help fixing Colonial American trees? Post it here!

Private User - Not always are the numbers in the correct order.
Sometimes there are multiple people of the same name in a town. So the clerk or minister sets the numbers. (And they change as people die off!)

In fact, there’s really no such thing in vital records except Sr., or Jr., which don’t necessarily correlate as father / son. There’s no Thomas Hale recorded with a Roman numeral until ?? (Sometime way after 1776, I would think).

So I’ve been thinking about this off and on for years, because of course we need the numbering for genealogy.

I think we need to move them to display names, so the name fields are truer the recorded names.

Emily Kent Marget - what do you think about using numerals in that way before 1776?

Erica Howton - I've seen 3rd, 4th and even 5th in some VR records. But these were never generational and never Roman numeral.

Another way to keep them straight would be to put "(born xxxx)" as part of the display name.

Private User - specifically for the Hales, numbering schemes (generally speaking) begin with the immigrant to America, the English line (if known) with its own numbering that comes to an end. The Great Migration Begins by R.C. Anderson should be our guide for the New England emigrants.

I see in the profile for Thomas Hale, of Watton-on-Stone who died in England, that he was called Senior, with a son called Junior. But notice that the family genealogy is called, “ Genealogy of descendants of Thomas Hale of Watton, England, and of Newbury, Mass,”.

And that’s usually how I see the genealogists and published family historians describing the immigrant: not as a Jr., if he happened to be, and not as a l. But by his location.

For Thomas Hale, ‘the glover,’ of Newbury you will often see nicknames (occupations) to help distinguish between similar names. We sometimes use the middle field for that.

A possibility is to use Sr./Jr. in the suffix field, with an explanation of “Junior in England, Senior on New England.” I think I’d rather see that in AKA. In New England, he wouldn’t have been known as Junior, or ll.

Right, I’ve seen 3rd, etc in VR. I even tried them in display name for a while, but no one really understood them. We’re quite used to dynastic Roman numerals! And honestly, Sr / Jr doesn’t resolve keeping the line straight.

We face the somewhat conflicting issues of normalizing spellings, genealogies, vital records, and making it simple.

BTW, there’s also “the elder” and “the younger” which aren’t necessarily father / son either.

Private User - updated John Poore, of Newbury (and added suffix of Sr.)

Emily Kent Marget - I have a lot of trouble reading and interpreting dates in names, including display name. I use them in curator notes, but usually just abbreviated. In the blue CN we hace enough characters to out. Too many numbers in a small phone screen is really hard on the eyes.

Private User - for Joane Bartlett edited out burial date & location. I see no citation.

Karl David Wright - re: https://www.geni.com/discussions/185827?msg=1664207

There’s a FindAGrave with image for John Chenoweth so updated accordingly.

Resolved data conflict for Thomas Foster Chenoweth

Karl David Wright - thank you for the cleanup of Samuel Riley, Jr. “about.” Much better now.

Private User - I’ve Re numbered the display names, from Hon. Captain Thomas Hale, (V) on up. You’ll notice that profile was born a 3rd and his father was married a Jr.

Erica Howton - thanks.

Emily Kent Marget - does the Hale naming make sense to you? You’ve probably got the most experience reading the original records.

Erica Howton - Having grown up with the Roman numeral convention, it makes sense to me. And likely will to others.
It makes me want to go back in time to learn how the family members kept the various generations straight. (In my own family, each person had their own name within the family. My mother was "Posy" to help differentiate her from her mother and later me. My father had several names depending on the context - "Jack," Mack," and "Bud." We were not the only family with such a scheme.)

Karl David Wright - merge reversed. Please check.

Hi Robert Garth Wiley

I detached Mary Reed as wife of Charles Pettit

https://www.geni.com/discussions/185827?msg=1664798 - done.

Cynthia Curtis, A183502, US7875087 - resolved inconsistencies.