William Bean and Children

Started by Beth Marie Beeman on Friday, January 28, 2011
Problem with this page?

Profiles Mentioned:

Related Projects:

Showing all 3 posts

Hello All
This profile shows John Bean Sr/John Beaman as a child of William Bean. In all my research, there are no records supporting this claim. In fact John Beaman is never shown as John Bean. The only place this seems to live is on ancestry.com with no documentation. If anyone here has documentation, then it would be great to see it.

Otherwise, the link between these two profiles is not accurate.

Thanks in advance.

Beth Beeman (John Beaman is my 5th great grandfather)

To all the managers of William Bean, John Beaman is not the same as the son of William Beah - John Bean. If you take a look at who you have designated as "children" on John Bean Sr/Beaman this profile you will see that you have made a mistake. Some children were born the same year!

John Bean/Beaman Sr. is not John Beaman the Patriot who was born on the same day as John Bean. The Beeman line is not related to the Bean/Been/Beene line and William Bean is not an ancestor. If you have information that says otherwise, I would really love to see it.... would help a lot. So far, I haven't found a Beeman genealogist who has this proof.

Anyway, it would be helpful to rename John Bean Sr. profile without the reference to John Beaman and delete all the Beaman/Beeman children. If you don't, it's incorrect.

John Beaman is my fifth great grandfather and I am a direct line descendant though this line:

John Beaman,James Beeman (this is where the name change occurred), Samuel Sylvester Beeman, Peter Carpenter Beeman, Charles Beeman, Harold Beeman, Charles Beeman, me.

Thanks for helping! Let me know if I can help answer any questions.

Sincerely,

Beth Beeman

Beth,
the thing to do, is create an additional profile for John Beaman and move the children from this profile over there. Pretty easy to do, IF the managers agree.

Showing all 3 posts

Create a free account or login to participate in this discussion