Downs Family Trees
Notes
Matches 1 to 29 of 29
| # | Notes | Linked to |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | A permenant hardcopy is of this source is on file with the compiler. | Source (S246)
|
| 2 | from a photocopy of an official copy. The photocopy is in the possesion of the compiler. I believe the original was used by John William Downs {1} for his application to the Mayflower Society. The date on this copy is November 20, 1984. Also of note is that Cordelia Higgins name is mispelled as "Clodilia Higgins." I will disregard this as a clerical error since It is clearly listed as "Cordelia" in other sources. She is mentioned multiple times in "Have You Anything to Teach Me?" for instance and always as "Cordelia." I think this is reliable considering the author was her son. | Source (S9)
|
| 3 | Hector Davie has done research in many different venues. Although he does not state most sources on his page, he has provided me with a partial list which includes: - IGI, checked against microfilm of Dungarvan and Monksland parish registers - 1901 and 1911 censuses of Bonmahon - microfilm of Waterford News and Waterford Times, indexed in Waterford Public Library - civil registration registers (BMD) in Dublin - masonic records at Freemasons' Hall, Dublin - various trade directories - various personal notes by my mother, granddaughter of Annie Sidwell Watts, who visited Bonmahon a few times between 1910 and 1930 - reminiscences culled from local residents in Bonmahon - Griffith's Valuation of County Waterford (1851) | Source (S319)
|
| 4 | I find that this source to be aq bit sloppy at times with dates. | Source (S243)
|
| 5 | I put a high level of credibility on information published by the Mayflower Society. They are very stringent in what they consider proof. | Source (S29)
|
| 6 | I put a high level of credibility on information published by the Mayflower Society. They are very stringent in what they consider proof. | Source (S240)
|
| 7 | I put a high level of credibility on information published by the Mayflower Society. They are very stringent in what they consider proof. | Source (S402)
|
| 8 | I put a high level of credibility on information published by the Mayflower Society. They are very stringent in what they consider proof. | Source (S296)
|
| 9 | I put a high level of credibility on information published by the Mayflower Society. They are very stringent in what they consider proof. | Source (S28)
|
| 10 | I removed, with permission, this stone from the Orleans Cemetary. It had broken and fallen face up for the second time. I removed it to preserve it. Plans are being made for a replacement to be put there. The stone is in my possesion. | Source (S33)
|
| 11 | I requested this copy and obtained it from Orleans Town Hall. It is dated November 18, 1996. I am sure this is an accurate record of Thomas Downs's death, much of the other information I highly question. See the "Notes on Death" section for Thomas Downs for further discussion. | Source (S23)
|
| 12 | I use and have in my possesion a copy of this work that I consult on CD-ROM, which is provided by Quintin Publications, 2003. | Source (S44)
|
| 13 | In chronicling the Atwood/Wood/Atte Wode family through the Middle Ages, I have found three sources that contain considerable information on this family. They are as follows in chronological order: Charles Atwood, 'History of the Atwood Family in England and the United States to Which is Appended a Short Account of the Tenny Family,' (Boston: George H. Ware, 1888) Elijah Francis Atwood, 'Ye Atte Wode Annals,' (Sisseton, South Dakota: Atwood Publishing Company, 1928) Julian Atwood, "History of the Atwood Family," the titled introduction to 'Atwood Family History,' by Flodene Parks Troutman, (no place: privately printed, no date) In this type of discussion, I normally would refer to these works by the authors' last names. Since they are all Atwoods, this will not work. However, they each have a unique first name so I will use those to reference each work, Charles, Elijah and Julian. Charles is basically a compilation and organization of the notes and documents on the Atwood family collected by Charles Atwood. He was a Boston lawyer and collected much throughout his lifetime. He died in 1854 without having published anything. This work was edited and published in 1888 by a man who will only identify himself as H.A.W. Charles did extensive research in England. Elijah was the work of 40 years of research by the author. According to his story, he collected as much on this family as he could find, began substantial correspondence files with researchers in both England and America, and generated a card catalog of all of this information. He claimed that it was the largest collection of information on the Atwood family ever compiled. He covers much of the same family branches that Charles did, but includes much more detail and facts. It is tempting to assume that since his 40 years of work, ending in 1928, would have begun about the time that Charles was published in 1888, that he took it and built heavily upon it. There were at least two newer editions of this work published by the author, but I checked and the information on the English Atwoods and found it was essentially the same as in the 1928 edition I had originally used. The newer editions were dated 1929 and 1930. Julian is the third and shortest of my sources. This work is written by Flodene Parks Troutman, but the short work on the Atwood family in England is by Julian Atwood and is the introduction to Troutman's work, which deals with the family in America. This work has no publication data given, but other researchers have attributed a date of 1967 to it. I'm not sure what this is based on, but it is definitely a later work than Elijah in 1928 as he is one of several acknowledged sources. He too researched both in America and England. In laying out the family lines of descent, I noticed some differences in the three works. At this point I thought it wise to build a chart showing all three, side by side. I did this and lined up individuals who I knew were the same in two or three charts. These I indicated in red ink and I have attached a color copy of this here. The first thing I noticed was that Charles had fewer generations than the other two. At first this seemed like it may have been a problem, but then I noticed that he often used the phrase "was of the family of" to describe relationships. This means that he could have been a son, grandson, even a nephew or cousin. Both Elijah and Julian mostly used "son of" or other exact phrases to indicate relations. These were made later and with further research. They also provided many more details on siblings and such, and for the most part they agreed with each other on most points of the lineage. What I have compiled here is a family tree that is a hybrid of the three sources. It doesn't match any of the three exactly, but I have combed through all three and corrected a couple of minor mistakes. I have put together here what I believe to be the most likely case for correctness based on careful analysis of all three works. My final lineage looks like the later two works, except that I have combined them, since Julian may have given more detail in one area and Elijah in another. The whole time I made decisions based on analysis of what I had constructed against genealogical reasoning. For example, could Peter Atte Wode, who paid a fine in 1346, be the father of Peter Atte Wode who was called to Parliament in 1384, and great grandfather of John Atte Wode who died in 1525. The answer is yes. Let us say that Peter1 paid the fine when he was 30 years old. If his son Peter2 was born when he was 40, that would be 1356. That means that Peter2 would have been 28 when he was summoned to Parliament in 1384. If he had a son John1 12 years later when he was 40, John1 would have been born about 1396. If he was 40 when his son John2 was born, this would have been about 1436. John2 could have died in 1525 at age 89. It is interesting that John2's son, John3 made his will out in 1529, only 4 years after his fathers death. This is suggestive of, but not proof, that John2 lived to a very old age for the time. Wills were usually written when one suspected that death was immanent such as on one's deathbed or going off to war. After compiling the lineage and making sure that everything was plausable, I next filled in details from all three sources. Even Charles, the oldest and the most in error, had quotes from grave monuments and other information that there was no reason to doubt. What you have here is the most likely series of events based on the work of these three researchers. I am quite confidant in it back to Peter Atte Wode who paid the fine in 1346. I offer the whole here "as is," with no endorsement on my part for its accuracy. At least two of these men spent major portions of their lives researching this material. I do not think that I will be able to further clarify things. | Source (S257)
|
| 14 | In chronicling the Atwood/Wood/Atte Wode family through the Middle Ages, I have found three sources that contain considerable information on this family. They are as follows in chronological order: Charles Atwood, 'History of the Atwood Family in England and the United States to Which is Appended a Short Account of the Tenny Family,' (Boston: George H. Ware, 1888) Elijah Francis Atwood, 'Ye Atte Wode Annals,' (Sisseton, South Dakota: Atwood Publishing Company, 1928) Julian Atwood, "History of the Atwood Family," the titled introduction to 'Atwood Family History,' by Flodene Parks Troutman, (no place: privately printed, no date) In this type of discussion, I normally would refer to these works by the authors' last names. Since they are all Atwoods, this will not work. However, they each have a unique first name so I will use those to reference each work, Charles, Elijah and Julian. Charles is basically a compilation and organization of the notes and documents on the Atwood family collected by Charles Atwood. He was a Boston lawyer and collected much throughout his lifetime. He died in 1854 without having published anything. This work was edited and published in 1888 by a man who will only identify himself as H.A.W. Charles did extensive research in England. Elijah was the work of 40 years of research by the author. According to his story, he collected as much on this family as he could find, began substantial correspondence files with researchers in both England and America, and generated a card catalog of all of this information. He claimed that it was the largest collection of information on the Atwood family ever compiled. He covers much of the same family branches that Charles did, but includes much more detail and facts. It is tempting to assume that since his 40 years of work, ending in 1928, would have begun about the time that Charles was published in 1888, that he took it and built heavily upon it. There were at least two newer editions of this work published by the author, but I checked and the information on the English Atwoods and found it was essentially the same as in the 1928 edition I had originally used. The newer editions were dated 1929 and 1930. Julian is the third and shortest of my sources. This work is written by Flodene Parks Troutman, but the short work on the Atwood family in England is by Julian Atwood and is the introduction to Troutman's work, which deals with the family in America. This work has no publication data given, but other researchers have attributed a date of 1967 to it. I'm not sure what this is based on, but it is definitely a later work than Elijah in 1928 as he is one of several acknowledged sources. He too researched both in America and England. In laying out the family lines of descent, I noticed some differences in the three works. At this point I thought it wise to build a chart showing all three, side by side. I did this and lined up individuals who I knew were the same in two or three charts. These I indicated in red ink and I have attached a color copy of this here. The first thing I noticed was that Charles had fewer generations than the other two. At first this seemed like it may have been a problem, but then I noticed that he often used the phrase "was of the family of" to describe relationships. This means that he could have been a son, grandson, even a nephew or cousin. Both Elijah and Julian mostly used "son of" or other exact phrases to indicate relations. These were made later and with further research. They also provided many more details on siblings and such, and for the most part they agreed with each other on most points of the lineage. What I have compiled here is a family tree that is a hybrid of the three sources. It doesn't match any of the three exactly, but I have combed through all three and corrected a couple of minor mistakes. I have put together here what I believe to be the most likely case for correctness based on careful analysis of all three works. My final lineage looks like the later two works, except that I have combined them, since Julian may have given more detail in one area and Elijah in another. The whole time I made decisions based on analysis of what I had constructed against genealogical reasoning. For example, could Peter Atte Wode, who paid a fine in 1346, be the father of Peter Atte Wode who was called to Parliament in 1384, and great grandfather of John Atte Wode who died in 1525. The answer is yes. Let us say that Peter1 paid the fine when he was 30 years old. If his son Peter2 was born when he was 40, that would be 1356. That means that Peter2 would have been 28 when he was summoned to Parliament in 1384. If he had a son John1 12 years later when he was 40, John1 would have been born about 1396. If he was 40 when his son John2 was born, this would have been about 1436. John2 could have died in 1525 at age 89. It is interesting that John2's son, John3 made his will out in 1529, only 4 years after his fathers death. This is suggestive of, but not proof, that John2 lived to a very old age for the time. Wills were usually written when one suspected that death was immanent such as on one's deathbed or going off to war. After compiling the lineage and making sure that everything was plausable, I next filled in details from all three sources. Even Charles, the oldest and the most in error, had quotes from grave monuments and other information that there was no reason to doubt. What you have here is the most likely series of events based on the work of these three researchers. I am quite confidant in it back to Peter Atte Wode who paid the fine in 1346. I offer the whole here "as is," with no endorsement on my part for its accuracy. At least two of these men spent major portions of their lives researching this material. I do not think that I will be able to further clarify things. | Source (S260)
|
| 15 | In chronicling the Atwood/Wood/Atte Wode family through the Middle Ages, I have found three sources that contain considerable information on this family. They are as follows in chronological order: Charles Atwood, 'History of the Atwood Family in England and the United States to Which is Appended a Short Account of the Tenny Family,' (Boston: George H. Ware, 1888) Elijah Francis Atwood, 'Ye Atte Wode Annals,' (Sisseton, South Dakota: Atwood Publishing Company, 1928) Julian Atwood, "History of the Atwood Family," the titled introduction to 'Atwood Family History,' by Flodene Parks Troutman, (no place: privately printed, no date) In this type of discussion, I normally would refer to these works by the authors' last names. Since they are all Atwoods, this will not work. However, they each have a unique first name so I will use those to reference each work, Charles, Elijah and Julian. Charles is basically a compilation and organization of the notes and documents on the Atwood family collected by Charles Atwood. He was a Boston lawyer and collected much throughout his lifetime. He died in 1854 without having published anything. This work was edited and published in 1888 by a man who will only identify himself as H.A.W. Charles did extensive research in England. Elijah was the work of 40 years of research by the author. According to his story, he collected as much on this family as he could find, began substantial correspondence files with researchers in both England and America, and generated a card catalog of all of this information. He claimed that it was the largest collection of information on the Atwood family ever compiled. He covers much of the same family branches that Charles did, but includes much more detail and facts. It is tempting to assume that since his 40 years of work, ending in 1928, would have begun about the time that Charles was published in 1888, that he took it and built heavily upon it. There were at least two newer editions of this work published by the author, but I checked and the information on the English Atwoods and found it was essentially the same as in the 1928 edition I had originally used. The newer editions were dated 1929 and 1930. Julian is the third and shortest of my sources. This work is written by Flodene Parks Troutman, but the short work on the Atwood family in England is by Julian Atwood and is the introduction to Troutman's work, which deals with the family in America. This work has no publication data given, but other researchers have attributed a date of 1967 to it. I'm not sure what this is based on, but it is definitely a later work than Elijah in 1928 as he is one of several acknowledged sources. He too researched both in America and England. In laying out the family lines of descent, I noticed some differences in the three works. At this point I thought it wise to build a chart showing all three, side by side. I did this and lined up individuals who I knew were the same in two or three charts. These I indicated in red ink and I have attached a color copy of this here. The first thing I noticed was that Charles had fewer generations than the other two. At first this seemed like it may have been a problem, but then I noticed that he often used the phrase "was of the family of" to describe relationships. This means that he could have been a son, grandson, even a nephew or cousin. Both Elijah and Julian mostly used "son of" or other exact phrases to indicate relations. These were made later and with further research. They also provided many more details on siblings and such, and for the most part they agreed with each other on most points of the lineage. What I have compiled here is a family tree that is a hybrid of the three sources. It doesn't match any of the three exactly, but I have combed through all three and corrected a couple of minor mistakes. I have put together here what I believe to be the most likely case for correctness based on careful analysis of all three works. My final lineage looks like the later two works, except that I have combined them, since Julian may have given more detail in one area and Elijah in another. The whole time I made decisions based on analysis of what I had constructed against genealogical reasoning. For example, could Peter Atte Wode, who paid a fine in 1346, be the father of Peter Atte Wode who was called to Parliament in 1384, and great grandfather of John Atte Wode who died in 1525. The answer is yes. Let us say that Peter1 paid the fine when he was 30 years old. If his son Peter2 was born when he was 40, that would be 1356. That means that Peter2 would have been 28 when he was summoned to Parliament in 1384. If he had a son John1 12 years later when he was 40, John1 would have been born about 1396. If he was 40 when his son John2 was born, this would have been about 1436. John2 could have died in 1525 at age 89. It is interesting that John2's son, John3 made his will out in 1529, only 4 years after his fathers death. This is suggestive of, but not proof, that John2 lived to a very old age for the time. Wills were usually written when one suspected that death was immanent such as on one's deathbed or going off to war. After compiling the lineage and making sure that everything was plausable, I next filled in details from all three sources. Even Charles, the oldest and the most in error, had quotes from grave monuments and other information that there was no reason to doubt. What you have here is the most likely series of events based on the work of these three researchers. I am quite confidant in it back to Peter Atte Wode who paid the fine in 1346. I offer the whole here "as is," with no endorsement on my part for its accuracy. At least two of these men spent major portions of their lives researching this material. I do not think that I will be able to further clarify things. | Source (S259)
|
| 16 | On this document, "Downs" is consistently misspelled as "Downes." This is taken from an official copy in the possesion of the compiler and dated July 10, 1989. John Downs, son of this individual requested this copy and carried on a correspondence with the Commonwealth concerning this error. Discussion about this is in the main note section. Also, I can find no such place as "Benmahon"; discussion under notes for Anna Maria Watts. | Source (S12)
|
| 17 | Supplement to Richard Higgins and his Descendants | Source (S286)
|
| 18 | The copy referred to was an official (raised seal) copy of this document, issued July1, 2002. certificate- A901681 | Source (S3)
|
| 19 | The sections concerning the Eastham branch of the family in volume 2, ar authored by Josiah Paine of Harwich, Massachusetts. | Source (S288)
|
| 20 | This book was presented by the subject's grandmother, Anna (watts) Downs, in April 1922. | Source (S399)
|
| 21 | This copy is a reproduction on CD-ROM. | Source (S48)
|
| 22 | This is a copy printed and bound from Dorothy Kucks and made its way into the possesion of the compiler through his mother. Again, there is no source information given, however I know she relies on verbal information given to her from people involved with, or near to, the events. In other words, I have provided Dorothy and Jane with information concerning the birth of my nieces and nephews, marriage of my brother and myself, and the death of my other brother. I will therefore put great weight on the information contain therein concerning events starting with the sons of Thomas and Anna Downs. This source did not contain any county information. I supplied this at a latter date using Legacy's Geolocator. | Source (S13)
|
| 23 | This is a photo copy in the compilers possesion. It is two pages and I believe that there is a third missing page as there is no signature or date. | Source (S25)
|
| 24 | This is a photocopy of an original in the possesion of John William Downs Jr. It is dated September 11, 1986. | Source (S20)
|
| 25 | This is an official copy of this record issued on December 31, 1998, the date of record. | Source (S22)
|
| 26 | This is an official copy with raised seal in the compiler's possesion and dated July 13, 1989. Certificate no. A263064. His birth place is listed here as Orleans, but most other documentation list it as Eastham, including his birth certificate. I believe Orleans to be a clerical error in this document. | Source (S11)
|
| 27 | This is an Official copy, with raised seal, and dated July 13, 1989. | Source (S21)
|
| 28 | This is an official copy, with raised seal, that I obtained at the Town Hall of Orleans on May 4, 2001. | Source (S453)
|
| 29 | This is an official copy, with raised seal, that I obtained at the Town Hall of Orleans on May 4, 2001. | Source (S24)
|