A patrilineal descendant of Reason CARRICO:
http://dgmweb.net/genealogy/FGS/Car/CarricoReason-ElizabethEngle.shtml
has just joined the CARRICO-DNA project. This test is of particular interest to
me because I descend from Reason's sister, Catherine CARRICO, so this is about
the closest I'll ever get to testing "my" CARRICO line.
I have assumed this is Reason's ancestry:
Peter CARRICO I
_Peter CARRICO II & Margaret __?__
__Basil CARRICO & Margaret __?__
___Charles CARRICO & Martha REASON
____Reason CARRICO & Elizabeth ENGLE
but Linda Boorom has questioned the connection between Charles and Basil. My
reply is that I do not have primary documentation for the connection.
I was following several secondary sources, ones I assumed were reliable, namely,
Pamela CARICO
http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/c/a/r/Pamela-A-Carico/GENE1-00...
Kay Tapia CARRICO
http://genforum.genealogy.com/in/messages/466.html
and James Hume
http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~hume/tree/5379.htm
plus numerous other secondary sources of lesser reliability, namely,
WorldConnect, the LDS IGI and Ancestral Files, and a Broderbund WorldFamilyTree.
I don't know on what basis the connection was made from Charles to Basil, so if
it is unsupported, I'd appreciate knowing that's the case.
I'm doing my best to add documentation to what I have, but I cannot entirely
redo in a few years what has taken dozens of researchers decades to accomplish.
I tend not to question the work of others, unless it's internally inconsistent
or blatantly erroneous or disagrees with other sources. It's then that I begin
looking for primary documentation.
I very much appreciate having my errors brought to my attention, so I'd
appreciate an opinion on the connection between Charles and Basil. I had
assumed it was an accepted one. If not, then my CARRICO line and the new
project member's CARRICO line are only supported back to Charles.
Diana