Should wife of Matthew Farrington, Sr. be Unknown Unknown? [closed]

+1 vote
229 views
Matthew Farrington, Sr. is shown in Anderson's ''Great Migration'', Torrey's ''New England Marriages before 1700'' and ''American Biography: A New Cyclopedia, Volume 12'' as having married a wife with an unknown name. In his will, he referred to a wife he called "Sisly" (''Essex Genealogist'' 17:144), however, according to this same publication, there is "no documented record of Mathew Farrington's wife being ''Elizabeth''". The Essex Genealogist says that Mrs. Parker and others give his wife's name as "Elizabeth Sisley" but "this is probably an error". The article goes on to say that no children of Mathew named their children Elizabeth, and that his father married an Elizabeth Newhall.

FindAGrave has her name as Elizabeth Sisley, without sources. The death date shown for her is the same DOD as Elizabeth (Newhall) Farrington per Anderson, by the way.  I contacted the manager of her page and he said he has books on the Farringtons, as well as family genealogy information that supported her name and DOD, but didn't provide any source titles when I asked.

I propose we create a new profile for Mathew Farrington's wife's, with the name Unknown Unknown, referencing an uncertain name of Elizabeth, and uncertain last name of Sisley in the data fields, along with the sources shown in the current Elizabeth Sisley Farrington's profile. Her WikiTree ID is Sisley-10.  

Elizabeth Sisley may have been a real person; there may be birth records tying Elizabeth Sisley to identified parents Henry and Margaret (Beale) Sisley, but I was unable to find them and didn't want to separate her from Elizabeth Sisley from her "parents". Both parents' profiles are unsourced and orphaned.

What are your thoughts?
WikiTree profile: Matthew Farrington
closed with the note: Question answered and action taken
in Genealogy Help by S Willson G2G6 Pilot (144k points)
closed by S Willson

1 Answer

+2 votes
 
Best answer
Sisly was not her surname. I'm sure it's her given name, Matthew wouldn't have called his wife by her maiden name but would have used her given name. Whether she was the mother of his children or a second wife can't be proved at this point. The children were registered to Mathias (only)

Whether Henry and Margaret had a child Elizabeth we don't know unless someone comes up with a birth record.

I have another profile, that the same question of the name Elizabeth / Sisley (and variations) is causing a problem. I can't help but wonder if early clerks were so unfamiliar with the name Sisely that their ears heard Elizabeth as the only thing that made sense.

So I think she's Sisly Unknown despite Anderson's ___ ____ . Create a new makes sense, or disconnect from parents and change her surname.
by Anne B G2G Astronaut (1.2m points)
selected by S Willson
I will disconnect her from "parents" and change her LNAB. That way, she can better keep her connections to spouse and children (even if they aren't proved).
Agree its her first name. I've come across a
a 16th c lady with the Christian name Sisley (and mistrancribed as Sukie ) in an other record it is the far more common Cicelie and another as Cislie.

Related questions

+7 votes
4 answers
+13 votes
0 answers
+17 votes
1 answer
+2 votes
1 answer
+3 votes
1 answer
93 views asked Jun 27, 2019 in The Tree House by Bob Keniston G2G6 Pilot (210k points)
+6 votes
1 answer
+6 votes
1 answer
103 views asked Aug 26, 2017 in Policy and Style by Gillian Thomas G2G6 Pilot (165k points)

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

disclaimer - terms - copyright

...