[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: 1796



Dear Richard, I'll do a very quick note to catch up. We have had a week
without a phone and hence no email at home, and I haven't looked at email
or Internet in UCD-I've hardly been to work, I've been shopping! The phone
came back today; some contract crowd were in laying new cables in the area
and apparently messed up the existing cabling.   Do have a good look at the
1796 lists; like how closely Torrens names are placed, etc. Yes, your point
about later Aarons leading to expectations of earlier ones is a good one;
as you have said, the naming pattern seems to break down in America, but
presumably the genealogist was still expecting it to be holding, and
extrapolated backward.  There may well have been a real Aaron T. from
another line, maybe from Scotland even, who muddied the waters in
America by causing Aaronic expectations, and was stitched into what "The
Genealogist" seems to have regarded as the  all-important Culnaman line,
just as Sgt Hugh was grafted in too.  I would happily agree to a line of
Alexander and Johns in Carnroe and moving to Culnaman; I had almost
written an enthusiastic assent, but I remembered in time that I would
like to fit in Samuel; the Samuel who was whatever he was in Bovedy.
Samuel is clearly an important name in Culnaman; it is used oftener than
John.   What about having Samuel of Bovedy congregation as resident in
Culnaman and as son of HMR Hugh, but not having any sons, so that his
name doesn't propagate in the usual way? Succeeded in Carnroe by John
son of Alexander, to fit what Annie's lot remembered as a move at some
point from Carnroe to Culnaman? Is it adequate to start all the known
early households off if we suggest three sons of HMR Hugh; viz Alexander
in Carnroe, Samuel in Culnaman, and Hugh in Caheny/Mayoghil? Suggest
also a father Alexander in Scotland for HMR Hugh. The John who moved to
Culnaman would then have had sons Alexander, aka Aaron, Samuel, Thomas
and John-Jean.   This is maybe a bit over-simplified. We could hardly
expect it to be as simple as that. More speculation to frill it up a
bit?  No reason at all why John who moved might not have married a
daughter of Samuel's.   Of course ALexander in Carnroe might have been
a brother of HMR Hugh's, rather than a son, but that is just something
we'll never be sure about.  Do we need to fit in a Robert aka Albert?
This is the kind of speculation that reminds me of a form of Patience
where you set out all the cards in 4 rows and try to move them into
numerical sequence.   Re the John before whom the will was proved-I
rather think he is a John from the Dungiven lot, who produced
respectable people-clergymen to swear an oath in front of, and probably
solicitors' clerks and such.   One of my friends at work has friends who
have produced a database of Scots who went to Sweden and Germany in the
17th C.--it's on the internet and searchable on the univ. of Aberdeen
site; they are still adding to it; it has scads of Hamiltons, with
biographical and genealogical details, but so far no Torrenses. I'd
better stop. I don't at all mind writing up a N. Derry intro., but NOT
BEFORE CHRISTMAS!  I or you could drop a note to the Coleraien Hist. Jnl
and tell them about the mailing list, so they could carry a note about
it in the journal-that's what I meant about sponsoring it. Inexact
terminology! All the best Linde