Henry Dixon family - dubious sources re: children [closed]

Question

The connection between Henry Dixon and his wife (Supposedly Rose Unknown, or even Rose Harlan) and his supposed children (William, Dinah and Rose) has, in the opinion of many, dubious sourcing. I would like to discuss disconnecting this profile until sources can be verified. 

I have created two Free-Space profiles with the text of discussions and research which were originally held in 1993 and 2000. Here are the links:

E.O. Dixon Research on Early Dixons

Glenna Sytsma on Early Dixons

 

Comments

Interesting. I know close to nothing about Quakers. However, I did add some additional tags, so hopefully, someone with more knowledge will chime in.

---

Glenn, the free space pages you link to focus in William Dixon and Isabelle Rea, not Henry and Rose.

Ideally a Research Notes section on the profile would summarize the key points and conclusions citing sources;  unfortunately neither of the arguments pasted into the free space pages cite their sources.

Can you outline here what you think the conclusions lead to concerning the structure if the family ?

---

Anne - thank you! I often forget tags...

 

Jillaine - that is because Isabelle's marriage is key to the puzzle :)

I will try to summarize my main points. First, regarding the link I provided to Glenna Sytsma:

1. the Lurgan MM reference a marriage between William Dickson and Isabelle Rea, witnessed by Henry and Rose Dixon (I am not sure of the exact surname spellings in the original meeting minutes, there are 3 variants commonly used). In the second Free-Space link I provided, Jerry Richmond states that Glenna convinced him that "Isabelle Rea was NOT the wife of the emigrant William Dickson." In other words, there are two William Dixon's being referred to. The emigrant is therefore not connected to Henry by this marriage record.
2. A William Dixon came to the colonies with Thomas Pierson in 1676. Per Glenna, Thomas has a removal request in the meeting minutes (not sure *which* meeting) to go back to England to marry. William does not have such a request. Her conclusion is that this means that the emigrant William is not the one who married Isabelle Rea.
3. Lurgan MM records state that William and Isabelle were from Sego Parish, but per Glenna -- if William was returning from the colonies to marry, he would not have been 'from' that Parish.
4. Jerry Richmond states this re: A. C. Myers: "If one reads A C Myers closely you come to realize that again & again he talks about the Irish emigrant & family and then proceeds to juxtapose data from the Irish Quaker records for people of the SAME SURNAME. However A C Myers in the majority of cases stops just short of concluding that he has matched up the emigrant to the correct individual in Ireland. Over the years some researchers have read more into A C Myers than what is actually said."
5. Jerry also states: "It is my opinion that the William Dixson/Dickson that married Isabelle Rea is more likely the brother of Henry Dickson and uncle of the emigrant William Dickson."

I'll summarize the other link I provided in a separate comment.

---

Jillaine, to summarize the E. O. Dixon/McEver link:

1. Dan McEver states: " I found an old letter written by Albert Cook Myers himself (Quaker historian), who said that he could never find any documentation that Henry Dixon came to America." Personally, I would love to find this letter that Dan refers to! But if Henry was never here, then we lose another source for connection.
2. From E. O. Dixon's conclusions: "It appears that if we are to tie our ancestor William to the Lurgan Meeting and to the family of Henry Dixson, the evidence must come from America. A new review of primary data in the Pennsylvania area should be instituted."
3. E. O. Dixon speculates a possible scenario whereby the William Dixon who married Isabelle Rea is the one who accompanied Thomas Pierson to the colonies, but it has the same issues Glenna Sytsma referred to regarding meeting records.
4. Dan McEver concludes: "When you consider that Thomas Pierson left from the LONDON area (the "Downes") in 1676, and that our Dixson family was clear over to the northwest in Northern Ireland, it seems unlikely that the Dixson reference in the Thomas Pierson document is to OUR Dixsons. Why would any Irish Quaker want to journey clear over to England first (the source of major persecution at that time), before coming to the New World?"
5. Again, from Dan: " It's far more likely that our N. Ireland Dixsons met up with Thomas Pierson in Pennsylvania."

I will summarize all of this and propose actions in a separate comment.

---

In summary:

1. While Henry and Rose Dixon witnessed a marriage of their (presumably) son William to Isabelle Rea in Ireland, there is no definitive source linking them to the William, Dinah and Rose Dixon in Delaware.
2. The primary source used for this link, AC Myers "Immigration of the Irish Quakers Into Pennsylvania, 1682‑1750" uses the phrases "no doubt" and "it is said" when he details this Ireland/Delaware connection
3. Without definitive sourcing, I propose that Henry and Rose be disconnected from William, Dinah and Rose, until such time that their parents can be definitively located and fully sourced.

---

Well, so here is something I have never seen before. This extract was compiled from the Newark Monthly Meeting marriage records by Debbie Street. It claims the following:

"The first few entries below are marriages performed in Ireland, being recorded in the Newark MM records, presumably pertaining to families which settled on the verge of the Newark MM."

It then proceeds to list several marriages from Co. Armagh, including the marriage of William Dixson and Isabell Rea. This would certainly be a major piece of evidence! But I can't seem to find any sort of actual scan or 'official' record proving that these marriages were actually written out in the Newark MM marriage records. 

Does anyone know of a source where this could be verified?

Delaware Roots

---

Great work you're doing, Glenn.  Thanks for the summary.