Advice before merging these pre-1700 Talman-Tallman profiles? [closed]

+2 votes
33 views

Tallman-150 is a duplicate of Talman-61 (side-by-side comparison) so they should be merged except there is a difference in the spelling of the birth surname (Tallman vs Talman).  The Barbour Collections lists both surnames together for birth record (Tallman, Talman, Peter, s. Peter & Anna, b. Nov. 13, 1694).  Which is the correct birth surname I should keep when I merge?

Thank you.

WikiTree profile: Peter Tallman
closed with the note: I better understand the names and have merged the two Peters
in Genealogy Help by Angelina Pease G2G6 Mach 1 (12.3k points)
closed by Angelina Pease

1 Answer

+1 vote
 
Best answer
The birth of Peter Tallman (son of Peter and Ann) was recorded in Portsmouth, Newport, Rhode Island as of March 22, 1657-8, so the final last name at birth should be Tallman. The merge was proposed in this direction.

I've found some additional sources I will add to the profile.
by S Willson G2G6 Pilot (147k points)
selected by Angelina Pease

Related questions

+1 vote
1 answer
+2 votes
2 answers
+2 votes
2 answers
+3 votes
1 answer
+1 vote
1 answer
+3 votes
1 answer

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

disclaimer - terms - copyright

...