At what point can you call parents "Confirmed"? 1700s

Question

Being a little new to pre-1800 American genealogy, where birth certificates are not always present, and church records are often unavailable on the "American frontier", I'm trying to decide whether I have enough evidence to call my Bowden lineage "confirmed".  

[[Bowden-1885 | Jesse Bowden]], as far as my earliest absolutely certain verifiable first source record that this is my 5XGG Jesse and no other with the same name, married in Logan County Kentucky February 1799.  

I found a family in North Carolina, Baker and Martha Bowden, with a son named Jesse, the parents died in 1790 and 1792 respectively, while he was still a minor, probably mid-teens, estimated birth 1774 - 1776.  The rest of the sons are documented, marriages, lineages, etc., but their Jesse is simply unaccounted for, probably assumed to have died young by most genealogists, as so many did.   My Jesse appeared from somewhere, on the frontier moving through Kentucky, into, and around in, the Louisiana Purchase area starting around 1800.

There are many subtle hints to suggest that this is the right family, such as he named a son Lemuel, like his brother, a daughter Martha, like his mother, a John Bowden witnesses an 1826 conveyance in Louisiana that is highly likely to be his brother, etc.  But when I found two of Jesse's wife's uncles with lands bordering Baker's in Duplin County, North Carolina, as far as my own personal confirmation, I was done.   But, for valid genealogy work, do I need to continue searching for tutorship records or something else that might tie him more directly to this family?  Or his wife, since her parents died in Georgia around 1795.  Or am I good?

Thanks for your expertise and guidance, Wiki-Family

Lynn

Answer 1

Hi Lynn,

First, let me say that your analysis seems sound to me, but I think that the term "confirmed" probably means different things to different people. In these situations, experienced genealogists employ the "Genealogical Proof Standard" which, in short, means that the following has been done (simplifying the actual standard):

1. a reasonable search for records and documents;
2. proper citations;
3. analysis of the collected information;
4. resolution of conflicting evidence; and
5. a reasoned conclusion generated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genealogical_Proof_Standard

Considering those five elements, No, 1 and No. 4 might require a little more work.  

You didn't mention if there are any estate records of parents or siblings naming Jesse.  Also, there may be a guardianship record if Jesse was a minor when his parents died.  Are there any more common records that you can check?

And, you didn't mention if you have found any conflicting evidence.  Conflicting evidence, by itself, doesn't defeat proof in all cases, but it needs to be evaluated.

Mastering Genealogical Proof by Thomas Jones is a great source for learning this method of analysis.

Hope this helps.

Comments

Outstanding answer!  As an amateur, that is exactly what I needed to know and my question was precisely that, "What is the Standard".  

There has been some extensive research into the estate which I have reviewed, but not all the first sources of that.  

I can not find anything at all that conflicts.The other four brothers are for the most part traced to present day descendants. Their Jesse just disappeared into thin air, apparently.   But since I felt like I needed to ask the question, I suppose I knew that a more concrete record would make me more confident.  

I keep going back to trying to reconcile the negative scenario... in other words, that this young woman, Comfort Bowie, had uncles living in North Carolina when her parents died, next to a Jesse Bowden's father, her family had migrated through North Carolina to Georgia, beyond all doubt I have records of her father having received multiple land grants in NC as well as her mother's brothers, then she and her brothers emigrate to Kentucky after their parents' deaths, and she marries a Jesse Bowden, who is not the same one she had very likely known in North Carolina.  I just can't work that out to be a coincidence.  

But I'll dig through some more legal records to see if I can find another connection that is even more solid.