Interesting coincidences in 17th century Ayrshire?

+8 votes
204 views
A totally unsourced profile for Abercrombie-641 Fannie May Abercrombie has her born in Beith in 1628 to unknown parents and dying in the same place in 1693. From a website, she is given a husband called Ramsay-2109 James Ramsay and a son, born when she was aged 7, named Ramsay-2108 James Ramsay, who is knighted and dies in 1700 in Pennsylvania.

Earlier in Beith, in about 1625, is born to unknown parents a totally unsourced Abercrombie-245 Fannie May Abercrombie, who also goes back to die in the same place about 1693. She marries a totally unsourced Ramsey-3017 Sir James Ramsey and they have two children, one being De Ramsey-1 James de Ramsey, born when she is aged about 10, who is not only knighted like his father but in addition at birth acquired the noble particule, and he also dies in 1700 in Pennsylvania.

Are these just interesting coincidences? Or, since these people are unsourced, should they be marked as of uncertain existence and unlinked?
WikiTree profile: Fannie Abercrombie
in Genealogy Help by Anonymous Flower G2G6 Mach 1 (12.2k points)
Sounds like the typical ancestry.com import.

2 Answers

+6 votes
Wow good one, any Y DNA on either? Sounds like same to me.. Great Scot! Lol
by
Yes there is now i had my sister do for  you guys hes did 23and me and up load mine but i wont be around a computer i hope u guys can match as afew have from hear USA
+4 votes

There's clearly two duplicate lines to my eye: Abercrombie-245 is married to Ramsey-3017 and has a son James who also died in Pennsylvania but his descendants all remained in America. All of these profiles should be merged; the actual circumstances of emigration to Pennsylvania prior to the Act of Union and after the Civil War deserve some kind of explanation.

There's a John Ramsay, grandson of Abercrombie-641 who was of Cockpen not Dalhousie - I disconnected his parents which are unsourced so that at least fixes this downstream.

by Kirk Hess G2G6 Mach 6 (64.3k points)

Looking at the Scot's peerage entry for George, 1st Earl of Dalhousie, he had 4 sons:

  1. George, 2nd Earl
  2. John
  3. James
  4. Captain William, styled second son in 1679.

This implies that John and James didn't have any children. The current tree has a son John who actually the son of George, 2nd Earl who is missing - I just found him and I'm fixing the tree.

In any case, both James are going to lose their parents once I wrap back to them.

Many thanks, Kirk. Disconnection of the two James solves the main problem. Should the other people in their lines be marked at least Unsourced, if not Uncertain Existence?

Disconnected that line as well - note this ground was sort of covered by this g2g - I also commented there.

I think Unsourced is appropriate - I think they were honest about their connection to the senior branch of the family but someone just guessed wrong where they connected. "James Ramsay" is a very common name which doesn't help.

As I mentioned in the other g2g, Ayrshire is problematic since the branches who owned property didn't appear to me to have any in Ayr. 

Related questions

+3 votes
2 answers
+8 votes
2 answers
+3 votes
5 answers
+4 votes
1 answer
325 views asked Mar 23, 2015 in Genealogy Help by Vic Watt G2G6 Pilot (330k points)
+1 vote
1 answer
+7 votes
2 answers
56 views asked Feb 22, 2020 in Appreciation by David Hughey G2G Astronaut (1.6m points)
+3 votes
0 answers
86 views asked Jan 18, 2018 in Genealogy Help by Rebecca Louise Johns Hendrix
+9 votes
0 answers
104 views asked Jul 16, 2017 in The Tree House by Herbert Tardy G2G6 Pilot (639k points)
+10 votes
1 answer
+3 votes
1 answer

WikiTree  ~  About  ~  Help Help  ~  Search Person Search  ~  Surname:

disclaimer - terms - copyright

...