Unsupported conclusions for B/M/D?
- Read more about Unsupported conclusions for B/M/D?
- Log in or register to post comments
- 1 comment
- 406 views
Forums
Hello,
I've been using the Barbour Collection to find B/M/D records from Connecticut.
I've just come to the realization that I've been drawing conclusions from it that it doesn't actually support.
For example, Dan Hill is listed in the Wallingford records as being born 14 January 1734 but is also listed in the Goshen records.
From other records I can show that it's probable that the Wallingford records are the original birth record, so I concluded that Wallingford was the birth location. I now think that conclusion was wrong.