Advice before editing this pre-1700 Bugg profile?

+3 votes
305 views
I am trying to prove a connection between my ancestors and Samuel Bugg (Bugg-14), b. c1640 in Brandeston, Suffolk, through DNA, so I'm trying to trace family relationships.  Unfortunately there is a second profile (with a different DOB) for the same person (Bugg-49).  

There is a proposed merge for Bugg-15 and Bugg-49 which can not proceed because the second profile is PPP.   Someone has tried to merge, but was unable to because of the PPP.  The date of birth is different, but the profile manager of the PPP profile has commented that it should reflect the same date (abt 1640) of the Bugg-15 profile.

Can anyone tell me how to either join the project or contact the project manager for the profile, as there is no information shown to assist, other than the PPP badge.

Thank you!

Mary Bugg
WikiTree profile: Samuel Bugg
in Policy and Style by Mary Bugg G2G1 (1.8k points)
retagged by Liz Shifflett
You should have a good source before changing the dates to match. Once you have that all you need to do is ask in G2G for the PPP to be temporarily removed to effect the merge. I think these profiles have been identified, but not merged since at least 2016 because there is no source for the date of birth. You should try to get more input from the appropriate project by tagging them in your post.

I do see where the profile manager of Bugg-49 is saying to use the 1640 date, but there must be a reason why this merge has been left hanging for 3 years.
sorry... posted a comment here that was meant to be a reply to everyone...

3 Answers

+3 votes
 
Best answer
The PPP goes way back to 2012.  The reasons will be lost in the mists.  It wasn't necessarily linked with a project - there weren't a lot of projects then.

Obviously both profiles are supposed to be the immigrant, so they should have been merged a long time ago.  Discrepancies in details are not a reason to hold up a merge - keeping two profiles isn't the way to keep two versions.

Especially when the details aren't significant or critical to the genealogy at all.  And especially when they may never be known anyway.  Dates should be removed if they aren't known.

Beyond that, we need to know more about Nathaniel's will.  It might have been proved at Norwich.  It would be helpful to know when it was written, not just when it was proved.  And we need to know exactly what it says about the two Samuels to try to get an impression of their ages.

The details on the profile are secondary conclusions.  Obviously the will doesn't mention Deborah Sherwood.  If it mentions the younger Samuel at all, he was born by 1656.  A bequest to a baby with the relevant parent living would be unusual.  But does the will indicate that Samuel senior was living?

At some point we have to wonder what connects this family with the immigrant.
by Living Horace G2G6 Pilot (620k points)
selected by William Foster
sorry about the "reshown" ... I clicked the wrong button.
0 votes

I cannot find any support* for any of the information about Samuel Bugg/e of England. (RJ - you're amazing. Love the [stranger story].)

Two choices -

  1. leave the two in unmerged-match limbo until additional collaborative information is found.
  2. remove PPP from Bugg-49 & repropose the merge since the text for the two profiles clearly indicates they are intended to represent the same person.

I'm leaning toward leaving them in limbo, mostly because I think that perhaps a generation is being skipped. While the era did have many marriages of an older man and a young woman, 1640/1669 seems a bit wider a gap than usual.

Cheers, Liz
* I searched freereg.org for Bugg records & found nothing. Closest was a Samuel son of Samuel Buck, baker, of London.
by Liz Shifflett G2G6 Pilot (622k points)
I think the merge could go forward but what remains in question is if the Samuel Bugg who married Deborah Sherwood was the Samuel son of Samuel mentioned in the will of a supposed uncle Nathaniel.  

I concur with Liz's concern about the 29-year age gap between the married couple especially given lack of any evidence or suggestion that Samuel had a previous wife.

He was transported in 1681. I'd estimate he was likely an adult by then suggesting a birth year of 1660 or at least no later than 1663.
+1 vote

Thank you all for your answers, and sorry it's taken me so long to respond. 

Thanks for the link to the family-history-moments too, RJ Horace.  It makes for some interesting reading - and it does appear that someone has managed to find sources for at least some of the information.   

I'm still uncertain about what should happen here.... although it would seem logical to leave the birth date and place as unknown on both profiles, and then merge them.  They are obviously the same person, even though no-one has found any source or evidence regarding his date and place of birth. 

As I'm not the profile manager of either of the profiles, I might just leave it in limbo for the moment, though.   

As I said in my first post, my main objective is to try to find a link between my Bugg line (which goes back to Suffolk) and the Samuel Bugg who married Deborah Sherwood in Virginia.  I have DNA matches with descendants of Samuel and Deborah, but although the Bugg/Suffolk combination stands out as an obvious link, there are other possibilities. 

There is a "source" listed on one of the Ancestry profiles for Samuel Bugg (U.S. and International Marriage Records, 1560-1900) that notes his year of birth as 1640 - but I'm not sure how credible the database/source is.  Does anyone know of it, and/or how reliable it is? 

Details:

Name: Debora Sherwood
Gender: Female
Spouse Name: Samuel Bugg
Spouse 
Birth Place:
EN
Spouse Birth Year: 1640
Marriage State: of VA
Number Pages: 3


Source Citation 
Source number: 24006.003; Source type: Pedigree chart; Number of Pages: 3 
Source Information 
Yates Publishing. U.S. and International Marriage Records, 1560-1900 [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations Inc, 2004. 

The collection is described as: 
"This database contains marriage record information for approximately 1,400,000 individuals from across all 50 United States and 32 different countries around the world between 1560 and 1900. These records, which include information on over 500 years of marriages, were extracted from family group sheets, electronic databases, biographies, wills, and other sources. Compiled over thirty-four years by professional genealogist Bill Yates, these marriage records are unique because they were taken from a wide array of sources and stand to provide a great deal of information about entire families." 

Anyway... I'll keep working on it, and see if I can eventually come up with something more reliable. 

Thanks again, everyone!! 

Kind regards 
Mary (nee Bugg)

by Mary Bugg G2G1 (1.8k points)
Yates was a "finding aid".  A huge collection of stuff found in other places, all collected together and sorted alphabetically.

The data wasn't filtered much, if at all.  Most of the marriages will be good, but bogus ones went in as well.  For the purpose of the index, it wasn't helpful to be too picky.  People weren't supposed to rely on it as real data.

Many of the marriages are synthetic - ie the couple are known to have married, but there's no official record of the wedding as such.  Often people find the marriage in Yates and are misled into thinking they've found a marriage record, when all they've found is an inference, and they already had that.

This sort of index was incredibly valuable in the days before computers.  But we don't need them much now.

Yates might still be worth linking to, for what it's worth, but it shouldn't be regarded as evidence.
The PGM project lists this source under unreliable sources that are subject to removal if found on PGM profiles.  This profile is not PGM though. And the project it would fall under is currently on hiatus.
US Southern Colonies project, although currently dormant, does have a Reliable Sources page: https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:US_Southern_Colonies_Project_Reliable_Sources

The Virginia Project does not have a separate Reliable Sources page.* It is a subproject of US History, which does - https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:US_History_Project_Reliable_Sources  

* Virginia source pages include https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:Virginia_Sourcing_Help & https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:Sources-Virginia
Thank you!

Related questions

+1 vote
0 answers
+3 votes
2 answers
+3 votes
2 answers
249 views asked Apr 2, 2014 in Genealogy Help by anonymous
+2 votes
3 answers
158 views asked Jul 4, 2021 in Genealogy Help by M Fitz G2G Rookie (220 points)
+5 votes
1 answer
+4 votes
1 answer
+3 votes
1 answer
166 views asked May 25, 2023 in Photos by Anne Baker G2G Crew (870 points)
+3 votes
2 answers

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

disclaimer - terms - copyright

...