I agree, though I would not be too quick to make the assumption about "two that can be ruled out." It is a dangerous mistake to underestimate the convolutions and convulsions a family structure can take. I have the same in my line and the 'can't be' actually is.
Wm Voss -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Joan Best Sent: Wednesday, 10 July, 2002 20:09 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Parents unknown, grandparents known That's how I would do it, Matt. Joan B ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt Henderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2002 6:03 PM Subject: [LegacyUG] Parents unknown, grandparents known > What are some ways that I can display an individual without knowing his > parents? Family tradition was that he was orphaned. He was born in 1854 > and in the 1860 Ark Census he was listed as living with his > grandparents. They had several sons,but two that can be ruled out as > the father as they lived past 1860. The others have no known death > dates. > I currently have him listed as son of [Unkown] Lisenby and have this > parent linked to the child's grandparents with the note that it could be > one of several of the sons already listed. > Matt > > To unsubscribe please visit: http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/LegacyLists.asp > > Legacy User Group Etiquette guidelines can be found at: > http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp > To unsubscribe please visit: http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/LegacyLists.asp Legacy User Group Etiquette guidelines can be found at: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp To unsubscribe please visit: http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/LegacyLists.asp Legacy User Group Etiquette guidelines can be found at: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp
