APG-L ArchivesArchiver > APG > 2006-07 > 1152043442
From: Katherine Flynn <>
Subject: Re: [APG] Finally Found Grandparents' Wedding License, But....
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 13:04:02 -0700 (PDT)
I sympathize with you. I, too, have had a sticky
situation arise in my family research as well. Same
thing: some appeared to know but assumed that I would
never uncover it. Thought they would take it to their
graves! Seemed to be unaware of the fact that civil
records were being kept.
You do not detail your interaction with your family on
your research. So I am assuming some things here. If
it was me, I would calmly enter the data in my
database. If asked for the family data I would give
it without comment. I would NOT announce at the next
family "do" that I had uncovered a great big secret
and guess what...? -not that I think you would :) If
some family member in examining the data puts two and
two together I would simply shrug.
You appear to be unsure about what the first child,
still living knows...why go there at all? If she were
to ask for the data I would give it to her. If she
simply asked if you ever figured out WHERE they were
married then I would only say that.
I also assume that the couple in question chose some
date and year to celebrate as their marriage
anniversary? If so, then that is the way they wanted
it. You may want to note that as well in your
You know your family better than anyone. The right
answer to this is in your heart. Your database is your
In closing may I share what happened when I found one
set of my Roman Catholic ancestors in 1860's Wisconsin
giving birth to twins less than 4 months after their
marriage. One relative chatised me with "but the
twins were obviously premature!" Note these twins
born at supposedly less than 20 weeks gestation in the
wilderness in the 1860's both survived and lived to
old age! My own mother's explanation was "the priest
did not come around very often..." There you have it.
|Re: [APG] Finally Found Grandparents' Wedding License, But.... by Katherine Flynn <>|