Capt. Alexander Fleming - Proof of parents?

The Miles Files do not commit themselves as to the identity of "Alexander Fleming", but cite him as marrying Joyce Hoskins nee Jones c. 1666. No further records of him in the Miles Files, because he lived in Rappahannock County on the mainland.

Alexander Fleming1

M, b. circa 1635 [they think]

Charts Descendants of William Jones (Burgess at Jamestown)
Last Edited 20 Sep 2009

Birth* circa 1635 Alexander Fleming was born circa 1635.1

Marriage* circa 1666 He married Joyce Jones, daughter of Capt. William Jones and (-----) (-----), circa 1666. On 15 May 1666 there is reference to Anthony Hoskins of Accomack, dec'd's will and his widow Joyce's pre-martial agreement with Alexander Fleming of Rappahannock County.1

Family
Joyce Jones b. c 1638

Citations

[S497] James Handley Marshall, Northampton Co, VA, Abstracts of Wills & Administrations, 1632-1802, p. 89 (Anthony Hoskins dec'd widow Joyce).

Just throwing in another source for the Wigton descent

http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~mysouthernfamily/...

Captain John Fleming seems Misplaced

There seems quite a bit of mythology around the early Flemings of Virginia.

Have cut the parent link found to John Fleming, 1st Earl of Wigton, 6th Lord Fleming & Lilias Graham, Countess of Wigton of

Thomas Fleming, the immigrant

And his "sister" who seems unrelated to him

Ursula Tarleton

As quoted from The Scots Peerage, Vol 8, page 550

[Alexander, the son of John Fleming, 2nd Earl of Wigton] "had with his brother William a dispensation from their father and brother of the annual rents effeiring to the principal sums of 10,000 merks payable from the lands of Harbertshire, Denny, and Catscleuch on 5 April 1636."

I've disconnected Thomas Fleming, the immigrant and his (thought to be son) Captain John Fleming from the Earls of Wigton, specifically John Fleming, 1st Earl of Wigton, 6th Lord Fleming

All his children seem accounted for in Scotland.

Jury is still out for me on Capt. Alexander. I'm also wondering if he had a son Alexander born 1636 (as per the Miles Files reference) and if his own birth was earlier than the 1610 quoted.

Private User sometime when you're able to review this work, if you'd be so kind, particularly Captain John Fleming who married a Bolling.

Well it was on here before you took it off, why

alexander is Judith Tarlington's son, Born 1612 died 1668

The only reasonable source I've seen so far has his wife as "Judith or Ursula Tarleton." Not his mother. Of course there could be different "Judith" Tarleton's ...

Ya I had an Anna Taylor who's second husband was a Jenness. So she became Anna Jenness, which you say, sooo! Well Anna was also married to Benjamin Parker and guess what his mother's birth name was Anna Jenness.. Also had tow Anna Taylors, aunt and niece and two Rebecca Taylors',another aunt and niece.

good luck with that one ladies

Ya, that's the problem with having same name in many generations. Even in laws

@ Erica, Other reasonable source's are Thomas Fleming are Virgina land, marriage and probate records. Christ church parish records Virgina, U S and international marriage records. England and Wales christening records. Plus the mormons in provo, utah has records of Sir Thomas Fleming

Go look for them Dennis! It would be nice to find evidence of his parents.

Some of the sources you mention are of better quality then others and also are only valid for certain events. To establish parents when a high quality source (The Scots Peerage) does not list him as a known son of what LDS pedigree submissions have will take more digging by researchers.

If and when that case is presented parent links can always be established. But until then I have yet to see a good case made for them.

Bad attitude... all are to work together to find sources and documentation not just one person It is not the curators total job to document and find sources for each and every profile on GENI it is also up to those who descend from the branches - to seek out the facts and the truth, the myths that have all to long been passed down from year to year generation to generation and even falsified in written genealogies -

Only when you can document by birth, baptismal, death, marriage; will, probate and land deed transfer; census can a profile be totally unquestionable and thus parentage etc.

Now off my soap box Erica did not need that snide remark!

yeah every one here seems to be guility to some degree even me of having a bad attiude about things

Does anyone need information about the William and Mary Quarterly as a source? I will give it anyway.

"the William & Mary Quarterly is the best recognized journal of Early American History."

From their editorial page:

http://oieahc.wm.edu/wmq/

The William and Mary Quarterly is the leading journal of early American history and culture. Founded in 1892 and published by the Omohundro Institute in Williamsburg, Virginia, it is one of the oldest academic journals in the United States and was one of the first ten archived on JSTOR. Today, the Quarterly ranks among the most-cited journals covering a specific time and place and is one of the most-respected and most-acclaimed historical journals in the world.

William and Mary Quarterly (Series 1) 1903-4 Vol. 12 page 46
Fleming Family (begins page 45)

http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uva.x000238898;skin=mobile#pa...

"Mr. Brock's information, it is believed, is derived from family tradition.  There is, nevertheless, as far as I have been able to ascertain, in the records of Virginia, no mention of any Sir Thomas Fleming. The earliest person of the name was John Fleming, who, I am inclined to believe, was the emigrant ancestor." 

@Erica, I found Sir Thomas Fleming and Alexander Fleming.
The site found on is widely used here on Geni.
The site is My Heritage Genealogy / Wiki Tree.
If you discredit the sites mentioned above then you will have to redo everything on Geni.

Erica Howton if what he says is true i'd rather not be involved in another lets reinvent the wheel problem ok?

Unfortunately I have not found MyHeritage to be particularly reliable. It's like all the rest of the crowd-sourced genealogy sites: sometimes useful as a guide, occasionally providing exactly what you're looking for, but far too often GIGO.

Dennis

I think, in a sense, with the "Sir" Thomas Fleming profile (indeed widely reported on trees, including ones with good reputation - and on Geni) is that we're at "history meets family research."

When working in America AFTER 1790, the 1st US Census, on line trees can be pretty great. Detailed, thoughtful, complete, sourced, studied; and if there are mistakes, they are minor and / easy to understand.

But the period in America before the American revolution varies widely.

The first generation of arrivers to America, starting with the Jamestown Colony of Virginia (1609/ 1610) is particularly subject to -

- Just plain wrong because earlier generations of genealogists were just plain wrong.

Sir Thomas Fleming seems like he might have been an invention of 19th century genealogists.

Unfortunately still in circulation.

Private User garbage in garbage out now that's a good acrocym! havn't heard it used in a while and i find Erica Howton's statements to be true to a point.. there is a lot more garbage from 1790 on ward that needs clean up and that area is a ongoing issue just as much as people who post fraud\unsubtaincated claims as i don't think this line is fraud it's more invented then anything else. as for 1790 and earlier that also needs work

You can take it pretty much for granted that the only colonists with any titles at all were the ones who were Royal appointees or who inherited Vast Tracts of Land and wanted see what they had. The latter is the explanation for Lord Thomas Fairfax, the only known non-appointed resident Peer - he came over to see what he had inherited, and fell in love with it. (Didn't seem to have much interest in women, though there were no rumors of...anything else. So his brother inherited the whole ball of wax - temporarily, and got paid £13,758 (an immense sum for the time) as compensation.

A few years go, as a family researcher using on line resources to build an online tree for my family, I was shocked when I realized how bad the trees could become before 1790 (or really, the American Revolution, as we have records of military service).

I had naively thought, "genealogy is a branch of history, so methods of historical analysis I learned in middle school and high school have been applied."

But apparently not so much, although it's vastly improved over the last few years, and particularly on a collaborative site like Geni.

The first lesson I absorbed was:

"if it looks too good to be true, it probably is."

None of us can be experts on all areas of history, and in fact exploring history "through" the mechanism of building a tree has been a fabulous, delightful and absorbing task.

But we can all learn to ask questions, and then go looking for the possible answers.

Genealogy is as much an art as it is a science, unfortunately - and there have been far too many "creative artists" more interested in painting a pretty picture than representing the actual facts. :-D

Some of them were deluded or self-deluded, but a number were outright frauds.

It's also hard to face "the UN known.". (or - not known at this time).

I don't know if "Sir" Thomas Fleming was "family tradition," an outright invention, or fraud.

I do know it was DEBUNKED in 1905 by much the same method still available to us today -

"Did the well documented Earls of Wigtown have a Thomas in the family who "could" have emigrated to Virginia?"

No, they didn't. And what's more, it seems that the name "Sir Thomas Fleming" was thoroughly invented.

@ Erica, You leave me no choice i will have to find Burkes peerage,
We have come along way in technology since 1905.

Easy to find Burke's on line (which of course has errors). You will not see a Sir Thomas Fleming of Virginia in it.