The only thing that a genealogist can use to prove something are facts. You may never find one document that proves a statement with concrete proof. However, if you find enough documents you'll begin to paint a picture of your ancestor's life.
Facts are great things to have. Intuition is nice, but intuition doesn't really prove anything. You might have an intuition to look for a specific document because something doesn't add up. You may or may not find that document. You may run into a problem I ran into, I found a document, but there were so many people in that particular area of the country with that exact same name I can't prove or disprove that document belongs to my ancestor.
In my family we have a great debate.
The great Birdsell debate pertains to which brother married Margaret the mother of William Birdsell, my great, great grandfather.
For me, the facts are very cut and dry. There is not one specific document that states who his father is. For that matter, the truth is, what we're trying to determine is what family he was born into. I have no way of knowing if his mother was happily married and faithful to her husband. I have no way of knowing if she was ever raped. Without knowing any of the answers to those possible scenarios, we can only attempt to learn which family he was born into. Not actually "prove" that his mother was always true or never compromised.
Let's start with the two brothers. The two in question are Abram AKA Abraham and Reuben. According to various census records, Abram was born around 1805 in NY state. The census records I've used for determining approximate age and place of birth are the 1850-1880 Federal Census. In 1850 Abram was in Waterford Twp, Washington Co., Ohio living in the Obediah Preston household with his presumed daughter, Letitia, who appears to be 16, and born in Ohio. In 1860-1880 Abram is located in Windsor Twp, Morgan Co., Ohio. Each census states place of birth as NY state. The year varies, but is pretty consistant with a birth of approximately 1805 +/- 3 years.
Next we'll look at Reuben. In 1850 he's listed in the household of Martin Birdsell, his presumed father, in Harmar Twp, Washington Co., Ohio. It lists his age as 32 with a birth year of around 1818 and a birth state of NY. Also listed in that household are Mary, presumed wife of Martin, William, age 17, born in Ohio, John H, age 13, born in Ohio and Jane, age 11, born in Ohio.
I believe this is the census that creates the debate. Oh, Reuben is the father of the three children, since Martin and Mary are of the age to where Mary was too old to give birth to those children. It does reason that the three younger children are the grandchildren of Martin and Mary. The flaw is naturally assuming they are Reuben's children.
First, Reuben is 32 years old and William is 17. While it is possible that Reuben could have fathered William, it is not probable. Even in 1832 when William was born, it was not common for 15 year old males to be married. Despite what many like to claim, in my research, it wasn't all that common for 15 year old females to be married either. At least among my ancestors.
The first thing that I needed was a marriage record. Almost everyone was in agreement that William's mother was Margaret Carolle. Could I find a marriage record for her?
It so happens that a trip over to FamilySearch.org resulted in a marriage record between Abram Birdsil and Margaret Carolle on 4 Dec 1828 in Washington Co., Ohio.
Alone the only thing that proves is that Abram and Margaret were married. It doesn't prove that they ever had any children.
The next document that I looked for was the 1830 Federal Census for Waterford Twp., Washington Co., Ohio. Abraham Birdsel is listed. In his household is a female under age 5 and another female who is age 20-30. Abram is also listed as age 20-30. My next goal is to attempt to learn where Reuben is living in 1830. Martin Birdsel is listed two households above Abraham Birdsel. There is a male in that household that fits Reuben's age, 10-15. There is a second young male there, age 5-10. This is Martin and Mary's youngest son. This one is also the reason I've discarded the possibility that Martin and Mary could be the grandparents of Reuben and Abram. They had a younger son after they moved to Ohio around 1820. I won't go into the documents I have supporting that this youngest son is their son and not their grandson. My goal here is to list the documents that I've located that points to William being the son of Abram and Margaret, not Reuben and Margaret.
There are several tax records located at FamilySearch.org for Abram or Abraham Birdsell in Waterford Twp., Washington Co., Ohio throughout those years, too.
Let's jump to the 1840 Federal Census for Waterford Twp., Washington Co., Ohio. Abram Birdcell is listed as head of household. Included in his household is a male, age under five (correlates to John H who is 13 in the 1850 Federal Census), a male, age 5-10 (correlates to William who is 17 in the 1850 Federal Census), a male, age 30-40 (correlates to Abram, head of household born about 1805), a female, age under five (correlates to Jane who is 11 in the 1850 Federal Census), two females, age 5-10 (correlates to Letitia who is 16 in the 1850 Federal Census and an Unknown, who coule be the under five listed in 1830 census and given the wrong age here or someone completely unknown) and a female, age 20-30, probably Margaret when combined with other documentation and her age was marked wrong.
We're not finished with 1840 though. Several pages earlier, Martin Birdcell is listed as head of household. Included in his household is a male, age 15-20 (their youngest son) and another male, age 20-30 (correlates to Reuben in the 1850 Federal Census), plus a male in Martin's age group and a female in Mary's age group.
Now we come to the 1850 Federal Census. Where is Margaret? She died in 1842 and is buried at Delong/Ross/Relief Cemetery in Waterford Twp, Washington Co., Ohio.
There are five Birdsell's buried in that cemetery. In 1930 there was a reading of the tombstones. Listed were: Sarah G. Birdsell, b. 1828, d. 1828. Margaret, b. 1808, d. 1842. Two sons of Abram and M (no dates on this reading). Reuben b. 1847, d. 1848.
In 1970 there was another reading of the headstones of that same cemetery. Those listed this time were: Infant son of A. and M.F. Birdsell. Died 1840. Infant son of A. and M.F. Birdsell. Died 1842. Margaret F., wife of Abram Birdsell. Died 9 November 1812 (1842?). Aged 31 years, 10 months and 3 days. Reuben, son of J.H. and C. Birdsell. Died 6 September 1848. Age 1 year.
There are two problems between the 1930 reading and the 1970 reading. Sarah G. Birdsell is gone from the 1970 reading. In 1930 Margaret's dates are 1808-1842. How can this be? It takes some detective work, but any good genealogist is a good detective, too.
I contacted the Lower Muskingham Historical Society and asked if they had a volunteer who would be willing to go out to the cemetery to photograph the headstones. I always make this request with an offer to pay the volunteer or make a donation to the society. It's the proper thing to do. In this case, Sue Trotter, answered the call. She went to the cemetery. Since it's on private property owned by a utility company and one has to cross railroad tracks, an escort is required. When she got to the cemetery she discovered only a handful of headstones were still readable.
She explained to me that the headstones there were made of sandstone and after about a 100 years they begin to chip and flake off chunks. Over time, they crumble and completely disappear. That is the case for the majority of headstones in that cemetery. They are gone. They did not survive the time they were erected through April of 2012 when she visited the cemetery.
Using this new information, once realizes the dates from the 1930 readings are more accurate than the dates from the 1970 reading, since the stones were forty years younger in 1930. It's reasonable to assume that since Sarah G Birdsell's tombstone was erected probably in 1828 or 1829, it had completely crumbled by 1970 and that is why her reading is missing from the 1970 reading.
Even in 1970 the readers questioned the date of 1812 on Margaret and included the date of 1842 with a question mark. Especially since the two infants were born in 1840 and 1842 and their markers claim them as the son of A. and M.F. Birdsell. When one realizes that sandstone chips and flakes off, it's reasonable to suspect that the original date was 1842 and enough of the date flaked off to make the four appear as a one. If one takes Margaret's age of 31 years, 10 months and 3 days, it gives her a date of birth of about 6 Jan 1812. But if you compare that to the dates on the 1930 reading, they had her year of birth as 1808. It's likely that the age should have read 34 years, 10 months and 3 days. There is enough reason to suspect that the same affect on the 4 in 1842 happened to the 4 in 34 years. If that's the case, then it would give Margaret a date of birth of about 6 Jan 1808, making the 1808-1842 from the 1930 reading accurate.
Again, one needs to keep in mind that the 1930 readings were from markers that were easier to read then than in 1970.
Now we have an approximate date of birth for Margaret. It's possible, but not probable that she ever married Reuben. Two reasons, the first there is no marriage record of her marriage to him. There's a marriage record of her marriage to Abram. There's a marriage record of Abram's second marriage. There's a marriage record of Martin's youngest son. There's a marriage record of Abram's two daughters. There is no marriage record for Reuben and anyone in Ohio. The second reason why it's very unlikely is it appears Margaret was ten years older than Reuben. Reuben was 24 years old when Margaret died. Reuben was 14 or 15 when William was born. It's not reasonable, or logical to believe a 24 or 25 year old female married a 14 or 15 year old male. It's even more unreasonable to believe she left his older brother, who we have documentation that she did marry, for his younger brother. Even more unrealistic is that in 1842 when she died, Abram was able to overlook any such transgression and list himself as her husband on her headstone.
Adding additional doubt to Reuben being William's father is the fact he did not have his own household in 1840. He was still in Martin's household and there is no male listed there that is William's age, nor a female of child bearing years. Adding additional speculation that Abram and Margaret Carolle Birdsell were the parents of William Birdsell is the death certificate for Lucy Jane Birdsell Pettibone. Lucy Jane is the Jane listed in the 1850 Federal Census as Jane, age 11. She married John H Pettibone and had several children. Lucy Jane died 1 Sep 1924. Her death certificate lists Abraham Birdsell as her father.
That is how I came to the conclusion that the parents of William Birdsell, born 24 Nov 1832, was Abram/Abraham and Margaret Carolle Birdsell. I have included most of the records that I have in my possession. The cemetery readings from 1930 and 1970 were obtained from the Washington County Historical Society in Marietta, Ohio.
The only marriage record I've found for a Reuben Birdsell was in 1858 in Missouri. By 1858, William was married and had a son of his own.
When making statements, one needs to have documents that support the statements. The only interest I have in determining which household William was born into is learning more about my ancestors. I did not start the journey biased toward one man over the other. They were both gone long before my birth.
However, the marriage record, the early Federal Census and the readings from the headstones point to a strong belief that William was born to Abram and Margaret. The only document that brings Reuben into the equation is Reuben and William are in the same household in 1850. That document alone is not enough to prove Reuben was his father. However, the evidence that supports Abram and Margaret offer more proof than the one census.
How do you prove your statements when others disagree? And for those who disagree with my statement about William's parentage, I'm willing to consider other options, but please back it up with documents that I can review.
