Family talk:William Lumpkin and Thomasine Constable (1)

Disputed Lineages [19 June 2009]

There is no evidence or consensus on the origin of the wife in this family. Various GEDCOM uploads have proposed Person:Thomasen Lumpkin (1), Person:Thomasine Constable (1) and Person:Tamesin Sunderling (1).

• William Lumpkin m. Thomasine (Constable?)
• John Mayo m. Thomasine (Brike?). There are some people who think he married secondly William Lumpkin's widow, so actually had two wives named Thomasine.
• John's son Samuel m. William Lumpkin's daughter, Thomasine Lumpkin. She remarried John Sunderland when Samuel died.

Of the three names offered as wives of William Lumpkin, all without proof, it appears Person:Tamesin Sunderling (1) is probably a mixup with the daughter and her second husband. One would guess Person:Thomasen Lumpkin (1) is somebody using the married name because they don't know the maiden name, instead of what I consider the more accurate and informative Thomasen Unknown. There are weak sources (International Genealogical Index) for the third consideration, Person:Thomasine Constable (1), weak because we don't don't know if this conclusion is based on credible sources or wild hunch. At least one website I saw hinted that Marmaduke Constable is a person who lived in the right area, but they haven't found any information that he had a daughter named Thomasine. So the choice of this must be considered very marginal. However, to avoid losing what could be a useful hint (or equally likely, a over-aggressive assumption) I like keeping this rather than using the married name.

I wonder if it would have been better to make the family page say William Lumpkin and Thomasine Unknown, and then have listed on the family page the three Thomasines as alternate wives? It is more complex, probably harder to clean up when a credible answer is known, but may communicate the state of our knowledge more accurately. --Jrich 14:27, 19 June 2009 (EDT)

This is an interesting question, and I run into this more often than just here. I think we should take this discussion to the watercooler for more general participation. Look for me to create a topic out there, then please weigh in...or go first, if you're antsy to get going...--Jrm03063 14:49, 19 June 2009 (EDT)