Alternative to superscript imbedded references? [13 July 2009]
Saw your comment on the edit. I haven't worked enough with imbedded references, and I've been intimidated by them because there seem to be alternative formats and I can never keep them straight.
My *intent* was to point them to the SOURCES; I see you've done something that points them instead to "References" which when clicked doesn't seem to do anything.
Anyway, I'm happy to change the way I do things in order to be consistent. I just can't figure out what consistent IS!
Your guidance appreciated. Thanks!
-- Jillaine jillaine 14:10, 12 July 2009 (EDT)
- I take it back; clicking on reference scrolls down to the Source, but why have the ref at all? Why not just directly to the source? Please explain. Thanks! jillaine 14:11, 12 July 2009 (EDT)
- References stay put. Source numbers change. The numbers change automatically when you add/delete, but you can't tell that when you're editing by text. Plus, sometimes I cite things that are notes or just not used in the source section in the notes or cite to different pages than the source event reference. But ultimately there's no reason you can't do one or the other, I just like references better because I think they're cleaner. That doesn't mean anyone else has to use them. Though I don't think we should change from one format to another on pages unless there's a reason (like the confusion that was going on here).--Amelia 00:10, 13 July 2009 (EDT)
- Thanks for the explanation. Okay, I'll follow your lead on this because you're more experienced in using references. Just bear with me because I doubt I've been consistent elsewhere, and I may still get confused. jillaine 09:16, 13 July 2009 (EDT)
Source(s) for Abraham's Parentage [17 July 2009]
I'm trying to nail down the source for Abraham's origins.
- On 16 Nov 2000, Doolittle Family of America genealogist Ed Doolittle reported that he had just returned from Kidderminster "where Abraham Doolittle was born/baptized." See GenForum Doolittle Posting.
- Okay, here we go. Ann Van Kempen, Our Doolittle Line, Revisited, [scroll down for both volume 1 and 2], (2005), available online at BYU. She includes photocopies in the text of the original baptism records. Makes the case for Edward being the father. (But see Doris' page below, who points out missing confirmation of this.)
jillaine 10:08, 17 July 2009 (EDT)
Background on Doolittle Sources [17 July 2009]
In attempting to confirm the sources for information on Abraham's origins, I found this interesting web site, which states, among other things:
- Anne Van Kempen wrote after Gillian Dollittle, and reviewed her evidence in great detail in her own book, which is freely available online. Everything anyone needs to know as to the immediate origins of Abraham Doolittle, such as it is, is in Anne Van Kempen's book. They disagree on the identity of Humphrey the alleged grandfather of Abraham, and Anne Van Kempen thoroughly discusses Dollittle's argument on that. Van Kempen gives the line Dollittle came up with as well as her own. As far as being a source information about Abraham Doolittle's roots that Van Kempen may have left out, Dollittle's book is mostly a dud...
- Gillian Dollittle's and Anne Van Kempen's books are the source of a reconstructed genealogy, often repeated with no citations in various electronic databases like FTW, LDS, and Rootsweb's worldconnect, that has Abraham Doolittle and his brother John born in Kidderminster, England, usually to Edward Doolittle though there are (incorrect) variations on the web. For instance, no case has been made that his father was named Abraham - though the evidence is such that he could have been!...
- The only actual paper evidence about Doolittle relationships that exists tells us that John and Abraham Doolittle of New England were brothers. John names Abraham as his brother, as well as naming two of Abraham's children in his will.
- The paper trail connecting Abraham Doolittle of Wallingford with Abraham Doolittle christened in Kiddiminster in 1620, son of Edward, consists soley [sic] of that baptismal record. The conclusion is also founded on the rarity of the name Doolittle, and the fact that no other record of an Abraham who lived past infancy exists from that time...
- No paper evidence exists that John and Abraham of New England are John and Abraham sons of an Edward Doolittle of Kidderminster for whom christening records have been found. This Edward left no will or other documents mentioning sons on New England. There is no record of how Abraham and John got to New England, nor where they were from in England, nor any recorded references by them to their families in New England.
- Followers of Davenport were largely from East Anglia, typically people who had been followers of Rev. Davenport in England. Neither the Abraham, nor his wife and her brother Roger Alling (Allen) were of that group. Abraham and his wife Joan were not from the same part of England, and her brother also went to New England and settled in New Haven. The three family genealogies I have seen are evenly split on where their authors think Abraham married. There is no record of the marriage of Abraham Doolittle and Joan Allen anywhere...
- While the Y DNA proves that Abraham was of the Kidderminster Doolittle family, it is not necessarily true that he was born in Kidderminster, nor that the one record of an Abraham Doolittle born there at the right time who lived is necessarily his...
- While it is not proven that Abraham Doolittle of Wallingford was the son of Edward Doolittle of Kidderminster, and he could be the son of another family for which no record has been found, it is not unlikely that he was the son of Edward of Kidderminster... The most serious deficit is actually that we cannot know so far if Edward was the son of Humphrey the farmer, or Humphrey the clothier. We also have little detail about Edward's life. We know where he lived, but not what his trade or business was, nor anything at all about his religious beliefs, nor do we know how wealthy he may have been. One would think not very. The picture we get of Edward was that of an itinerant laborer of some sort, or maybe a jeweler or blacksmith, again moving often, without the resources to set down roots; but Abraham and John of New England had been very well educated; Abraham had professional level math and accounting skills as well as sufficient ability to read and write to serve in the highest government offices in teh colony, and they came to New England with substantial resources, and a rank at or just below that of the gentry. Y DNA testing of more Doolittle lines from Kidderminster may help unravel that. So far we know for a fact only that there are a number of Doolittle lines in Kidderminster; Maurice Dollittle and the Irish Doolittle's descend from one of the two lines of clothiers in Kidderminster, and Abraham must descend from either the other line of clothiers in Kidderminster, or a line of farmers...
- A baptismal record for an Abraham Doolittle was found at St. Mary and All Saints Church in Kidderminster, Worcestershire, England, son of Edward and Elizabeth Doolittle. This child was baptized on 20 Aug, 1620 [incorrect: 19 August]. The record shown actually names only the father, Edward [not true; see Van Kempen's copy of the record; "and wife Elizabeth" is also included]. There was also a John Doolittle born to this family. Once again there is no direct evidence that these are the same individuals. Van Kempen takes it for granted that they are...
- Abraham married Joan Alling or Allen, daughter of James Allen of Kempson, Bedfordshire, England, nearly 70 miles from both Kidderminster and Birmingham. Joan’s family is far better documented than Abraham’s. Joan’s brother Roger went to New England and was an early settler in New Haven. ...
- We know who Abraham Doolittle married because her father mentioned Abraham Doolittle now living in New England in his will. ..--jillaine 09:09, 17 July 2009 (EDT)