This is the first of possibly many posts under the theme of “untangling the knots”. The purpose is to demonstrate the complexity of tying names, people, events, and source citations to the correct person and family.
For this case study, I will use the example of SMITH MULLINS.
In my current database, there are at least four persons with the name of SMITH MULLINS. They are as follows, based upon information available to me.
- Smith “Bitter” Mullins, (b. abt 1809, Franklin, VA; d. bef 1866, Floyd, KY).
- Smith Crittenden Mullins (b. 1831, Pike, KY; d. 1898, Pike, KY).
- Smith J. Mullins, Jr. (b. 1843, Pike, KY; d. 1915, Pike, KY).
- Smith Mullins (b. 1877; d. bef 1910).
As I was attempting to utilize the multitude of online databases at FamilySearch.org to link events such as census enumerations, marriages, birth and death records to the appropriate individuals or families, I discovered the proverbial “rat’s nest” of mislinked records. More particularly, the examples of Smith Crittenden Mullins (1831-1898) and Smith J. Mullins Jr. (1843-1915) highlight the problems for family researchers.
SMITH CRITTENDEN MULLINS (1831-1898) was the son of James Booker “Dr. Jim/Pound Jim” Mullins and Polly Newsome. This individual married SARAH CRAFT (1837-1898) in Letcher County, KY, on 12 [Oct 1854. This marriage is clearly documented in the public records of Letcher County [Creda J. Baker Isaacs, compiler, Letcher County Kentucky Marriages, 1842-1884 (Books 1-6) (Whitesburg, KY: Letcher County Historical and Genealogical Society), Marriage Book 1, p. 50]. This Smith Crittenden Mullins and Sarah Craft lived on Shelby Creek of Pike County, KY throughout their marriage.
SMITH J. MULLINS (1843-1915) was the son of SMITH “BITTER” MULLINS and MARGARET “PEGGY” NEWSOME. This Smith Mullins also married a woman named “Sarah” — SARAH “SALLIE” MULLINS (1841-1913). Sallie was the daughter of JAMES SHERIDAN “JIM” MULLINS and MARY “POLLY” NEWSOME. Their marriage was recorded in Letcher County, Kentucky on 25 Nov 1869.
“1831 Smith” and “1843 Smith” both lived on Shelby Creek of Pike County, near the Letcher County line. They were separated geographically by only a few households. And both families included children who bore the same given names, such as Polly, John and William!
Only by comparing census records for a particular decade, side by side, would one easily determine that “Smith and Sarah/Sallie” would be two different families, not just one. But sloppy research can lead to assumptions, and assumptions can create big errors — and myths!
For example, on one website that attempted to resolve two marriages, the researcher simply claimed that “1831 Smith” married twice — first to Sarah Craft and then to Sarah Mullins. He ignored clear census entries showing a span of twelve years between the estimated birth years for the “one” Smith Mullins.
At least other researcher jumped to the conclusion that “1831 Smith” Mullins married Sarah Craft, but then divorced her and later remarried. And that is the false assumption that has been propagated around the internet community of Mullins researchers.
All of this is not to criticize any particular family researcher unduly. Rather, it is to begin to correct the record of one small family unit. And to highlight how easy it is to jump to a conclusion that, just because we find a single public record — or two, or six — that seem to fit a pattern, we cannot simply decide to connect a dot from Point A to Point B. I have done it myself, far too many times!
Sometimes we have to have several “Points A” laid up side by side — e.g. 1880 census entries for two different households in the same neighborhood, where birth dates for the parents can be compared, children’s given names and birth years can be sorted out, presence of a parent or sibling of the head of household can be explored, etc.
In this particular case, I spent several hours comparing records to resolve the quandary. And then I spent a couple more hours just on one website — FamilySearch.org — unlinking and relinking various records and individuals. I cannot vouch for the quality, or lack thereof, of family tree entries for these families on Ancestry.com, because I am not a paid subscriber there. However, I will make the editorial comment that my experience with their family tree records has not been good (an issue of “quantity” being valued more than “quality”). Therefore, I can only hope someone who is a client will eventually commit equal time and energy to corrections of the records there.
Anyway, for now at least, users of my database can rely a bit more on the investment of time to thoroughly document events and relationships with a critical eye. Oh, yeah… you may also want to check what you have for Smith Mullins in your own records/database!!!
(Hint of things to come: BOOKER MULLINS may be an even more tangled knot to unravel — over multiple generations.)