Person talk:Damaris Spafford (1)

Using Indexes [9 November 2017]

Working notes

   Parent couple is likely wrong as birthdate is 26 yrs before the next child is born to mother Dameris Spafford.
       Some claim that there were 2 Ebenezers - father and son - with the father married to a Miss Lovell and the son married to Dameris Spafford. This could explain the gap in birth years if this is a child of the elder Ebenezer. 

   ↑ .

   "Vermont Births and Christenings, 1765-1908," database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:F8L3-XD7 : 12 December 2014), Dameris Olmsted, 05 Dec 1760; citing BRADFORD TWP,ORANGE,VERMONT, reference ; FHL microfilm unknown.
   -----
   Name Dameris Olmsted
   Gender Female
   Birth Date 05 Dec 1760
   Birthplace BRADFORD TWP,ORANGE,VERMONT
   Father's Name Ebener. Olmsted

The problem with using indexes instead of trying to drill down to the underlying record is the loss of context. This is not the record of a birth in Bradford, it is the record of the birth of Ebenezer's wife, in some unspecified location, probably found at the beginning of the family register, which doesn't itself appear to be available online, unfortunately. We have an amateur indexing done by some volunteer saying 1760 or an index built by a town clerk which says 1768. My money is on the 1768 especially since Ebenezer's birth is 1763. The record of course says nothing about her name, that is left as it was entered (except for choosing a more universal spelling). --Jrich 01:32, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

[1]. --Jrich 02:04, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

I left the working notes on the page, because I had to leave for the evening and was not finished looking into it. I do agree with your line of reasoning and have some more to add, so I will do so shortly. --cos1776 13:42, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

I meant son Eliazer's birth, 1788, both 8's especially shows the stroke pattern making the 8, the second being sloppier is almost identical to the 8 in Damaris's birth. --Jrich 16:03, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I can agree to that interpretation of the funky 8s which would change son Elizor's birthdate to 18 Dec instead of the indexed date of 10 Dec as well. Do you agree? I wonder how many other entries written by the same person are indexed incorrectly for this same reason? I will update some of the notes on this page and move on to correct the children's pages. --cos1776 16:41, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Yes, that looks like an 8 also. This is not an uncommon form for 8's. (Here is an example: first and last records on p. 49, particularly, show this type of 8 but not all the 8's on this page are the same) Colonial writing is very tricky. --Jrich 16:58, 10 November 2017 (UTC)