Person talk:Henry Cobb (1)

What evidence is there that Henry's father was named Henry?

Where does the birth date of 1659 come from? Susan Roser says it is most likely between 1605 and 1610, and explains why in her book Early Descendants of Henry Cobb of Barnstable, Massachusetts

What evidence is there he was even born in England? While that seems to be a prevailing theory, DNA evidence shows he is not related to any of the known English Cobb families. Irvin S. Cobb in his autobiography Exit Laughing says the family tradition in his branch was that the family was of Irish origins.

Terry

Most of the pages on WR came (at least for starters) from large GEDCOM uploads. For good or ill, those tended to be unsourced and were generally abandoned by their original contributors. Of the folks watching this page who are active, if they had evidence of particular facts found here, they would have been sure to provide it by now (they wouldn't be holding back). In any case, you aren't responsible for guessing what other researchers may have been thinking, especially if they didn't spell it out.

In my own case, if you find my name on a page, it's usually because I was merging more than one copy of the person/family - but that doesn't mean I take any position on the facts of those pages. When merging, all I try/tried to do is see if the two pages are referring to the same person (or at least, the same fantasy).

So, when you come upon a page where you see no evidence for a fact, and your own evidence either disproves or, at least, tends not to support the fact in question - I think you are under no further obligations regarding the dubious claim. Either jettison it or, if you are concerned that there may be something you're overlooking, create a section called "Disputed Lineages" or "Disputed Claims", and take notice of the issue there. Alternatively, if the issue is a pure fact, you can place your discussion of the discrepancy in a note, and attach that to a corrected (as you see it) version of the fact.

Overall, what I'm saying here, is don't wait for permission to improve pages. Add your sources and analysis. Let watchers who disagree chime in after the fact.

Best Regards... --Jrm03063 14:17, 10 November 2009 (EST)

Thanks, will follow your advice.

Terry

As the person responsible for the birthplace of England, I can say it was only put there because the previous value of Barnstable, MA was clearly wrong, and people needed to be looking overseas, though I only assumed England, and had no basis at all for that choice other than its typicalness. The birth date and parents were on the page prior to my viewing it. The Great Migration Begins says his origins are unknown, and estimates a birth around 1607, no information about parentage. GMB praises Philip Cobb's genealogy that you mentioned, by the way, adding that it avoids "the many legends and traditional tales typical of volumes published in that era". --Jrich 15:56, 10 November 2009 (EST)

England may well be correct, but I think it's unproven, and there is room for doubt. Note that Roser simply reported he was "said" to be from Reculver, Kent County, without comment. Hubert Cobb, who has researched this line in depth, seems to think Henry was from England, citing, among other arguments, that Henry's immediate linkages with Rev. Lothrup upon the latter's arrival in Massachusetts suggests strongly that they had a relationship in England. The Cobb DNA study, which disproved the previously proposed parentages for Henry, has found a Cobb line currently in Strood, Kent which is closely related to Henry. Unfortunately, members of that line have only been able to trace their ancestry back to a Thomas b. 1731, which doesn't help.

But there are several grounds for doubt about whether he was actually born in England. First, despite significant effort, no birth record has been found. Then there is Irvin S Cobb's story, which insists that Henry was Irish, and spent some time in Norwich before coming to America. I don't believe he made that up; it has to have been a family tradition passed to him. And why would a family claim to be Irish if it weren't true? I don't think the Irish were held in particularly high regard at the time. On the other hand, another branch who landed in Indiana claimed to be Welsh, and family traditions are notoriously error-prone.

Terry

Henry's father? [31 January 2010]

What is the basis for the claim that Henry's father was Henry Baronet Cobb? All reputable researchers of the Cobb family that I know of say that there is no evidence of his birth place, let alone his parents. DNA evidence proves that he is unrelated to his previously claimed parents, Henry Cobb and Pleasance Redwood. Is there some new evidence of his father's name? If not, this link should be removed.

Terry--Treigel 23:19, 30 January 2010 (EST)

I don't disagree with you, but question whether DNA testing can be considered proof for somebody in the 1600's. Doesn't such an assumption rest on the belief that the descendant's family tree tracing back to this person is correct, a nearly impossible thing to prove?

Removing a link to his alleged parents, without having a replacement to go in its spot, is just begging to have the next GEDCOM upload to put it back. In my opinion it would be better to add a note to the page disputing this link, citing sources, etc.

But basically, as JRM said above, if something is not sourced, there is no reason to worry too much about it. If you can achieve a higher level of proof for your position, and so improve the page, do it. Just be sure to provide sources. Nobody owns the page, so there is nobody that is in a position to answer you yes or no when you ask if it should be done. --Jrich 09:38, 31 January 2010 (EST)

Your point about DNA testing is true, to a point. However in the case of Henry a considerable number of descendants, as identified by traditional genealogical methods, through three of his sons, have been tested and show exact or very close matches. This seems to clearly identify the "DNA signature" of Henry (unless you want to postulate that these three alleged sons were all fathered by another man). Likewise, a significant number of descendants of the Amborse Cobb line in Virginia have been tested, again showing very close matches, but very different than Henry's descendants. Finally, Henry Cobb and Pleasance Redwood, who have been suggested as Henry's parents, have been linked by traditional genealogy to the Ambrose Cobb line. Thus, they cannot be Henry's parents (well, at least the elder Henry can not be this Henry's father, to be technical about it).

Your point about removing the link vs. posting a comment is well taken. I'll act on it.

Terry

While DNA testing doesn't prove desendancy from Henry, it can prove a common ancestor. It also can prove the ancestral haplotype. In my case, I found 2 people with a 23/25 match to mine. Each individual had a single mismatch, the probability a single mutation in each descent is practically certain and the common ancestor would have the allele value exhibited by 2 of the three individuals. Expansion of the results to 37 markers has yielded a single Additional mutation so the matches are now 35/37 and 34/37 to mine. The paper trail leads to a common ancestor born in 1780. Proving the paper trail wrong is easy though in case of a significant mismatch. Do you happen to know the Cobb haplotype?--Scot 14:59, 31 January 2010 (EST)

You are right that DNA testing doesn't prove descendancy. But in this case we have results from a scattered group of generally well-documented descendants from three of his sons. So, we have three supposed sons of Henry with a common ancestor, and all supposedly established by conventional genealogy to be his sons. A conclusion other than these descendants are all descendants of Henry seems difficult to support.

Your question about the "Cobb haplotype" raises two questions on my part. 1) Which Cobb line do you refer to here - there are quite a number of different Cobb lines that have been identified by the project in addition to the one identified with Henry? 2) What exactly does the term haplotype refer to here? The Cobb DNA group is using Ancestry's DNA service, and they do not use that term in their results. Is that the same as "haplogroup" that they use?

Terry