How to collapse the Gilmans?

Question

Hi, I have been using the 1950 Gilman book by Constance Le Neve Gilman Ames which mostly agrees with the many Gilmans in Wikitree. Not in the book is Edward Gilman b. 1500. Presumably there is some reason to think he existed. He and his son Edward (b.1525) and wife (b. 1504)are represented as such:

b.1500 b.1525 wife

15        14         26

193      185

262      261

334     337

354     353

I have captured control of orphan Gilman-334. Can I just commence merging these? There are many, many more 1525 Edwards. Do I need to gather those up before I would start merging the 1500 Edwards?

Is this something I could do, or is it really a committee thing?

Thanks.

Comments

Here are the first four Edwards, their wives (w), and daughter (d) Bridget (Gilman) Lincoln. The first and last Edwards look like they could be collapsed (of course there are many children not named Edward to consider), but the others appear to be about intractable. Advice sought!

Edward 1500
15   => 14   (w26)
193  => 185
262  => 261
334  => 337
354  => 353

Edward 1525
14*  => 16        (wRysse-1)
124  => 88, 129 (wRysse Or Rice-1)
142  => 141      (wRyse-32)
185* => 187     (wRysse-2)
261* => 260     (wRysse-3)
337* => 321     (wRysse-7)
353* =>           (wRyse-44)
469  => 467      (wRysse-8)

Edward 1557
3                 (wHawes-1)
16*
67                (wUNKNOWN-33923) (d68)
88*  => 78    (d120)
129*
141* => 139  (d135)
187*            (wHawes-180) (d186)
260* => 263 (wHawes-295)
294  => 295  (wHawes-304)
296              (wHawes-304)
307              (d306)
321*            (wUNKNOWN-101024) (d322)
362              (d361)
467* => 466 (d468)

Edward 1587
12   => 13    (wClark-307)
38   =>        (wClark-508)
78*  => 106 (wClark-2114)
139* => 140 (wClarke-577)
200  
263* => 271 (wClark-4491)
293  => 288 (wClark-4680)
295* =>      (wClark-4742)
303  =>       (wClark-4742)
312  => 314 (wUNKNOWN-101020)
351  =>       (wClark-5886)
466* =>      (wCark-1)

Edward 1617
13*
106*
140*
271* =>       (wMaverick-63) (wSmith-16847)
288*
314*

---

These appear to be the same John Gilman, more or less. They appear to be somewhat collapsible:

John 1624
74
128
155
275
304
350
457
465

Answer 1

Hi BK,

This is totally something you can do! I would start with the father, and then do the son after, because it's easier to start further back in the tree (merging parents is more trouble than merging children, I find).

You don't necessarily have to find all of them before you start merging, but you should find the final profile, which you'll merge all others into. From what you've said, it looks like Gilman-15 is the final profile for the father (you want the one with the lowest profile ID). So, the important thing is that you merge each one into that profile. Eg. don't merge 262 into 193, and then 193 into 15. Instead, merge 262 into 15, and 193 into 15.

Let me know if you have any more questions about this and I can help you out! Merging is totally my thing. :)

~Lianne

Comments

It seems like I have to contact everyone. That is, I propose a merge and it says that I don't have perms, but I can add a note to the proposal.... Am I missing something?

---

That's true. You have to either propose the merges, or request to be on the trusted lists and then do the merges yourself, or ask a Supervisor to do the merges for you.

---

I, then, would like to request a supervisor to collapse all the 1500 and all the 1617 Edward Gilmans, and the John Gilmans from ca. 1624. There are multiple birth dates for the Johns, so I don't know how clean the collapse would be. Collapsing these three individuals should be relatively easy and be a good start for the many Edward 1525 profiles.

If a supervisor would like to collapse the Edward Gilmans from 1525, 1557, and 1587, that would be a bonus, but it is not easy work. I don't know what one does where there is a tradition of naming them Edward I, II, III, etc. I have not seen evidence that any of them used those numbers personally (and I have seen no evidence that Edward of 1500 even existed), so how to decide who is Edward IV, is beyond me....

For me to do it by communicating with everyone who ever slapped a *.GED file onto the wiki would take weeks! I suppose that is reasonable for the 1525, 1557, and 1587 Edward tangle, but swift action on the 1500 and 1617 Edwards would be relatively simple and non-controversial.

Gilman notes: Edward of 1587 (1638 immigrant to the U. S.) is common to a large slug of Gilmans, and Edward's sister, Bridget (Gilman) Lincoln is a good candidate for an ancestor to Abraham Lincoln.

Thank you, bkm

---

Hi BK,

I've done the 1500 and 1525 Edward Gilmans so far. There weren't many so those were easy.

Do you know the correct spelling of the 1525 Edward's wife's name? I've seen Ryse, Rysse, and Rice. I can merge those, but I need to know which last name to choose.

~Lianne

---

[[Gilman-482|Constance Le Neve (Gilman) Ames]] states: Rose Rysse and that she remarried in 1578. She does not explicitly provide a source, but she mentions the (Caston?) parish register commencing in 1539, so perhaps in the prose section of her book she describes the exact source.... She cites: "[[Torrey-192|Mr. Clarence Torrey]], Genealogist, Dorcheser, Mass."

Thank you very much for taking on the tangle!

---

I found another confusing bit... Gilman-3 (Edward 1557) currently has some brothers that may or may not be the same person. There are a few named Robert and Robert Edward, and they (along with Edward) are all married to Mary Hawes. Are they all the same person, or is there actually a brother named Robert? And if that's the case, who married Mary Hawes?

Also, the Edward 1587 profiles do not agree on who his father is: Edward or Robert.

---

I might have answered my own question. I found this book: http://books.google.ca/books?id=GDBMAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA9&lpg=PA9&dq=%22edward+gilman%22+caston&source=bl&ots=cOKpEVQgZA&sig=ioacUOI1fsAYDyT5zUnK-M6nXB0&hl=en&ei=YCZDSrO7CIPMsgP-z4nODQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%22edward%20gilman%22%20caston&f=false and it seems that Edward 1557 does not exist, but is actually Robert 1559. (He married Mary and had a son named Edward who married Mary Clark.)

Does this make sense?

---

2nd question: [[Ames-482|Constance Le Neve (Gilman) Ames]] in [[Space:Doc_-_Ames_1950|1950]] cites [[Banks-751|Charles E. Banks]] who claims a 1637 document by [[Gilman-12|Edward (the Emigrant) Gilman]] stating that Edward's father was named Edward. Presumably Ames felt this was stronger evidence than the 1864 evidence for Robert as father that was compiled from the papers of [[Gilman-484|Samuel Heyhoe Le Neve Gilman]].

1st question:
Ames cites children of [[Gilman-3]]:
Bridget (Gilman) Lincoln* b. ca. 1582
Edward The Emigrant Gilman, bapt. 1587
John Gilman
Margaret, bapt. 1602-08-01
Mary

* A good candidate for Lincoln ancestor

The only evidence for Mary Hawes being married to [[Gilman-3|Edward]] is apparently found in Notable Kin by [[Roberts-5120|Gary Boyd Roberts]]. I have not seen this book, so I do not know why he and only he makes this claim.

Some of the *.ged files claim a Mayflower CD, which I have never seen.

Not sure if anyone has cared to contradict Ames. Her book was reissued in <s>2000</s> 1996, but I have never found anyone who claimed to have a copy, nor have I heard a description of any differences in the <s>2000</s> edition from the 1950 edition. It purports to be 200 p. while the highest page number in the 1950 edition is 192.

Thank you, bkm

---

I suppose it's whether one trusts [[Banks-751|Charles E Bank's]] 1637 deposition versus whatever papers [[Gillman-27|A. W. Gillman]] had passed down from [[Gilman-484|Samuel Heyhoe Le Neve Gilman]].

The Ames book was reissued in 1996 with 200 pages v. what I take to be 192 pages in the original. Not sure of any differences with the 1950 editions:

http://books.google.com/books/about/The_story_of_the_Gilmans_and_a_Gilman_ge.html?id=sDJMAAAAMAAJ

http://books.google.com/books?id=sDJMAAAAMAAJ&q=edition#search_anchor

The search for the term, "edition" shows that they claim the book is "revised." Also, they cite six main sources of Gilman genealogical information, but Google Books preview does not allow a glimpse ofeven that much information.

I have never seen a copy of this 1996 edition.

>>>>There is apparently a 711 p. book from 2000 by Nadine Gilman Scott. Maybe she has gone beyond the 1950 work.<<<<


Thank you, bkm

---

Hello, could an admin type please collapse Gilmans number: 18, 21, 27, 29, 73, 85, 93, and 99? I believe most of these merges are non-controversial and will reduced the complexity of the tree. In the two weeks or so since I proposed these, some merges were made by one user and another user expressed interest but did not have the time. Thank you very much. 

---

Hello, could I please be granted superpowers to complete the non-controversial Gilman merges? It's been four months and no one else seems to be able to coordinate this. There are two fathers for Edward. I would like to get a look at all possible sources before I made a decision on these, but otherwise, there are many merges that can be made that will not have insurmountable conflicts. Thank you, bkm