Should Agnes Duckett profile (Duckett-529) be changed to Agnes Unknown?

+4 votes
107 views
Agnes Duckett was almost certainly not the Agnes who married William Keeney (b. ca. 1601 of the Great Migration).  Perry Streeter indicated today that William Keeney and wife Agnes more likely came from Devonshire and their daughter Susannah was the one baptized at Ilfracombe, Devonshire, in 1627.

     Furthermore, I just discovered that William Kynney (who married Agnes Duckett) was probably the Willm Kynny who had a son Willm baptized in 1628 at Lutterworth, Leicestershire, about 3 miles away from where he married Agnes Duckett.  And then I found a burial record for William Kinney at Lutterworth on 24 February 1668.  His wife Agnes was probably the Anne Kinney buried in 1658 (although there is also an Ann Kinny buried there in 1670).  

      Therefore, William Kinney (who married Agnes Duckett) probably has absolutely nothing to do with the immigrant William Keeney.  So should we change the Agnes Duckett profile to Agnes Unknown?  I wasn't able to find a marriage record for William Keene (and Agnes) of Devonshire who are almost certainly the immigrants.
WikiTree profile: Agnes Keeney
ago in Genealogy Help by Kenneth Kinman G2G6 Mach 5 (53.6k points)
edited ago by Kenneth Kinman
Not an answer but a thought to consider, is how likely is it that her LNAB will ever be found.  Since I have been working on finding LNAB for Unknown profiles, am dismayed to find profiles that were just recently changed to Unknown from hubby last name, and then I easily find LNAB and add another redirect to it by changing name again.  Seems better to keep current name, with Research notes on what is know to be fact.  Some Unknowns will never be solved, and if a real effort has been made to find correct name, then yes change name to Unknown.

If Agnes Duckett is an actual person, just not the correct spouse/mother, I think she should be disconnected.  Then either create a new Unknown profile (or use a Recycle Unknown )

M - Your approach would have made sense. I think we do want to have a profile for Agnes Duckett that includes her probable real life events, per Ken's post. We can then cross-reference that discussion in the profile for Agnes (Unknown) Keeney of why William Keeney's wife Agnes was probably not Agnes Duckett.

It would have been somewhat better form to have kept the original profile as Duckett and created a new one for Agnes (Unknown) Keeney. But the end result is just one more profile/redirect, which is no big deal.
Yep, not a big deal.  Next time!
My apologies if I moved too fast.  I admit that I chose the fastest route to make the PGM couple accurate.

4 Answers

+1 vote
Ken - I agree that Agnes' last name should be changed to unknown.
ago by Chase Ashley G2G6 Pilot (159k points)
+2 votes

Yes! There's far too much inertia and inaction here on this sort of issue.

I see I might have inadvertantly contributed to the confusion by posting the Leicestershire birth in answer to the original query. I am certainly not advocating that this William was the mariner immigrant and agree that it seems unlikely. The Ilfracombe baptism was a good find but I'm a little uneasy about that too as I'm struggling to read the surname as "Keene" although that's how it's been transcribed. Unfortunately it's behind a paywall but anyone with a findmypast subscription can see it here https://search.findmypast.co.uk/record?id=GBPRS%2FDEV%2F100122077%2F00018

Here's an image of the specific entry but you really need to study the handwriting as a whole as it's rather idiosyncratic. Hopefully some other FMP subscribers can offer an opinion.

"Susanna daughter of William ??? and Agnis his wife the 15 [of August 1627]"

ago by Matthew Fletcher G2G6 Mach 8 (83.2k points)

Here's an image from the same register showing the name Keene in the upper left and Kinge in the lower right.

The K's in this new image are very similar to the K in the baptismal record for Susanna Keene except the final diagonal downstroke is either missing or very light. The only other letter it could be is a lower-case b.

The image below is from the same column as the Susanna Keene baptismal record and is indexed as the baptism of Joan the daughter of Robert and Luce Kaile.

I think the supposed K in this record for Kaile is very similar to the supposed K in the record for Susanna Keene.

I might be inclined to think this was an error by the indexer, but there is a later record for the bapt of a another daughter of Robert and Luce Kaile, the spells the last name Kayle and is very clearly a K. See the image below:

So I think a decent argument can be made that the supposed K in the baptismal record for Susanna Keene really is a K.

+3 votes
I've changed her LNAB to Unknown. Could someone please go in an add the missing citations? Thanks.
ago by Jillaine Smith G2G6 Pilot (709k points)
+3 votes
A special thanks to Chase Ashley for all of his work on this, creating new profiles for Agnes (Ducket) Kynney and her husband, and modifying the profiles of Agnes (Unknown) Keeney and her husband.  He did a great job.
ago by Kenneth Kinman G2G6 Mach 5 (53.6k points)
Thanks, Ken!

Related questions

+2 votes
3 answers
+5 votes
3 answers
123 views asked Jul 17, 2017 in Genealogy Help by Jack Day G2G6 Pilot (299k points)
+5 votes
0 answers
+5 votes
1 answer
120 views asked Dec 7, 2016 in The Tree House by Karen Raichle G2G6 Mach 6 (67.8k points)
+4 votes
2 answers
+2 votes
1 answer
+2 votes
2 answers
178 views asked Jan 12, 2017 in Genealogy Help by Kenneth Kinman G2G6 Mach 5 (53.6k points)

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

disclaimer - terms - copyright

...