Is this the correct Sarah (Doggett) married to the correct John Allen; parents of Daniel Allen?

Question

I added Sarah Doggett as a spouse of John Allen. I found a record on Ancestry that seemed plausible. It was brought to my attention that there are many more possibilities at the time frame and location to be the correct wife of the correct John Allen who are the parents of Daniel Allen. Sarah and John Allen would be my 7th great grandparents. I can't find this record on familysearch.

Working this far back in history is not my comfort zone. I tend to work more with the living or recently deceased in DNA NPE projects.

Does anyone more familiar to this area or timeframe able to direct me to how to figure out if this information is correct or if I need to just change her to Sarah - no surname?

Thanks

Answer 1

Samuel Doggett and Mary Rogers are the parents of this Sarah Doggett. All the Doggetts were from the same Marsfield, Plymouth, Massachusetts area after our PGM ancestor, Thomas Doggett, migrated to America.

There is a Doggett Family Book where Sarah is found in her father's Will, on page 350, and is listed as his daughter, Sarah Allen.

Her ancestry is then found on pages 362-363 as below.

Sarah Doggett (born 7 April 1689 in Marshfield, Massachusetts) was married to John Allen (born 8 July 1686 in Braintree, Massachusetts) on 12 January 1710 by Rev. James Gardner. John Allen was the son of Joseph and Rebecca Allen (different from your John's parents). Their children are listed as:

I. John Allen, born Braintree, Mass., May 19, 1711
II. Isaac Allen, born Braintree, Mass., Oct. 26, 1713.
III. Bethia Allen, born Braintree, Mass., March 23, 1716
IV. Sarah Allen, born Braintree, Mass., March 4, 1718/1719.

There is not a son named Daniel, according to the book. So while Sarah Doggett did marry a John Allen, it is not the John Allen you have her connected to.

Comments

Thanks for your through explanation.

I linked to John Allen (not the owner of that) as the date of birth I had and towns matched when I went to add the record and didn't want to create a dupe.

Now I need to figure out how to unlink my Daniel from this John and Sarah.

Thanks for your help.

---

I'm working on that for you right now. I have already removed both John and Daniel from Sarah's profile and am updating her profile with the information I posted here. I'm sure the very close birth dates of both John's 1) 5 July 1686 and 2) 8 July 1686 doesn't help and I can see how they would be confused.

---

I connected the right John Allen to Sarah and to his parents who were already on WikiTree. Hopefully, this will help with the confusion of these two John Allen's who were born 3 days apart in Massachusetts and both married women named Sarah.

---

Amazing! Thank you so much!

Answer 2

Just my opinion, but if you do not have a reliable source to prove Sarah's maiden name it should be "Unknown".

It is fine to put a ==Research Notes== section below the ==Biography== section ..to discuss why you suspect her maiden name is Doggett.

Doing that is not wrong, just what is known (proven by source) at the moment. If a reliable source comes along that shows the maiden name then you just update the profile.

Comments

How does one verify the marriage record? I found a marriage record that is plausible.

Typically if I accept a fact I have a linking fact. Like maiden name was on birth or death certificate that connects back to a marriage certificate name. Or grandparents are listed on the marriage certificate. Something! So with these really old records where those linking facts are few and far between if they exist at all how do these cases get solved?

Thanks for your suggestions about unlinking her maiden name.

---

I see you have some answers from Shonda about John Allen. That's a bit of the mystery solved.

In answer to your question, when a reliable source document is not found or available it would fall to a "burden of proof". You would have to build your case for the connection with facts/sources that were secondary in nature. Without any disputing evidence, it could then be proposed as reasonably possible. Even then, you may not be able to say without a doubt that your theory is correct. And that should be discussed in a Research Notes section.

The bottom line is, if you don't know for sure you can't say it's so. And your Biography must reflect what you know, your research notes reflect what you don't know or what you suspect.

Hope that helps

Regards

Lorraine