Person talk:Abigail Hathaway (1)

birth date [24 August 2023]

Only source on this page is Yates Publishing, U.S. and International Marriage Records, 1560-1900 (Source:U.S. and International Marriage Records, 1560-1900), a source marked "not considered a reliable primary source". As per its own description: "extracted from a variety of sources including family group sheets and electronic databases", i.e., from secondary and tertiary sources, but not even those were not specified, or were not transcribed here, so they cannot be assessed for reliability.

Source:Versailles, Elizabeth Starr. Hathaways of America (972222), p. 44, says "Abigail,⁴ of Freetown, m. Taunton, 27 Dec. 1710, David Sherman of Dartmouth, b. 1 Jan 1680; d. 3 Apr. 1761 (N. E. H. G. R. 48-74,5) son of Edmund and Dorcas gr. son, Philip."

This appears to be the source for the information on this page, namely born 1 Jan 1680, d. 3 Apr 1761. No record for either date can be found. Assuming this is the source of the information, or a source much like it, it can be said that this has been misread, and a birthdate that belongs to David is being applied to Abigail. Where the death date comes from is unknown. But it is suspicious that this same date is the death date of her sister Martha's husband, so beginning to look like another case of misreading? Perhaps a crowded family group sheet and the wrong line was copied?

The citation in the Versailles source of Source:New England Historical and Genealogical Register, Vol. 48, p. 74, says, "Their son, Daid Shearman, born Jan. 1, 1680, married Abigail Hathaway in Taunton Dec. 27, 1710; he of Dartmouth, she of Freetown. ... Who were her parents and grandparents?". This further reinforces the above conclusion. Without knowing the parents, there is little likelihood that the birth date is known.

In fact, given a marriage in 1710 and 10 children from 1711-1732, it is likely Abigail was born closer to 1690 than 1680. So I am changing it to Abt 1688 to fit between siblings. Of course, it is unclear how valid the estimates of sibling births are, and their final resolution may require a change, but at least it is not an outright error. --Jrich 15:05, 24 August 2023 (UTC)