When missing information is important

Gail Swihart Watson

I am working on the family history of an African American woman and right now my focus is on a line which was enslaved. The line stays in one state all the way back to colonial times. I have found an astounding paper trail starting with my friend's 2nd great grandmother, who was born 1853, enslaved.

I started listing all my sources, but to keep it simple here, I'll just say there are multiple documents which tie the 2nd great grandmother to both her enslaver (of a different surname) and to her father / gX3 grandfather and her mother gX3 grandmother, although the gx3 grandmother seems to have not survived the Civil War. 2 more docs name the gx4 grandfather and gx4 grandmother, through the male gx3. This gx4 couple likely were born around the Revolutionary War or in the decade following.

Here's where I have problems understanding what to source or how to source, and how to display this information in FamilySearch.

The surname of the 3 enslaved generations is extremely unusual in the state, and from the 1850 census to the 1900 census, only blacks or mulattoes had that surname (exception is one white family in the 1850 census who was pretty clearly mis-transcribed). The 1853 documented enslaver had a different surname.

Going back to colonial times, I found 3 white families had that name. 2 left the state shortly after the Rev War ended, but the 3rd stayed. It seems the 3rd had 1 son who either died without issue or left the state. Before the father died, he made a 1785 will and named a young slave boy who had the same name as gX4 grandfather. The last census for that state which had a white head of house with that surname was 1810, and the head was a woman, clearly the widow. I've looked in the tax records for both the widow and the son. They are in all tax records until 1811, and then crickets.

1820-1840 census no one of any race in the state is listed with that name. In 1850 4 black females are listed with that surname, 2 young children and 2 old women, including an 80-year-old woman of the same name as the gX4 grandmother. 1860 census, no person of any color has that name in that state. Beginning with the 1870 census blacks with that surname pop up all over the state, and the numbers grow through the 1900 census. No whites have that name. (I have not looked an 20th century censuses as I'm not sure that is relevant any more.)

So where was everybody 1820-1840? Enslaved, clearly. With identities suppressed, they were all silently clinging to their adopted surname which had died out in the state for whites but would later be carried on by blacks. I think this is a good example of irony.

Ok, I know one task ahead of me: connect the dots between the white colonial enslaver of the possible 4xg who started the surname and the 1853 enslaver of the 2xg. I have started that but am not yet finished. Wading through 3 generations of daughters and their marriages will take time.

In the meantime, I cannot think of a way to document my surname evidence so far. Does anyone have advice?

Yvonnewedgworth

Without ID numbers I'm not understanding how this would be any different than any other source citation. It seems necessary to enter all sources found to prove the relationship.

Gail Swihart Watson

Thank you for your response! I have definitely entered the sources.

I have some meetings scheduled with on site repositories, and hope to get more information. I have also identified a wider net of state experts once I have completed the onsite meetings. It's hopeful, at this point.