There are trees all over Ancestry (and now Mundia) showing
Richard SHIPLEY born 1775 Tennessee as the son of Samuel SIBLY and Elizabeth Coombe of St Cleer, Cornwall.
Sadly, the plain fact is that he was NOT their son.
This nonsense comes from an Ancestry "hint" based on the supposed similarity of the surnames SIBLY and SHIPLEY, and the fact that Samuel and Elizabeth did have a son named Richard SIBLY born in the year Richard SHIPLEY was apparently born.
But c'mon. Has no one any sense at all???
The parish clerk of the tiny parish of St Cleer, Cornwall, in the 1700s -- Samuel SIBLY -- who was born, married and died in that parish, and had all his children there, did NOT have a son born in Tennessee.
Samuel and Elizabeth were MY ancestors.
They are NOT the ancestors of anyone who descends from Richard Shipley of Tennessee. Richard SIBLY, son of Samuel and Elizabeth, is buried in Cornwall. He had probably never heard of Tennessee.
Here we have the beginning of Richard SIBLY, son of Samuel SIBLY, baptised in St. Cleer, Cornwall:
- BAPTISM - SIBLY Richard 1775 17-Apr M Samuel & Elizabeth SIBLY
So ... is there evidence of the birthdate of Richard SHIPLEY in Tennessee -- the same as the baptism date of Richard SIBLY of Cornwall? Is this a giant coincidence, or has Richard SHIPLEY's birthdate actually just been lifted from Richard SIBLY's baptism date??
And here we have the end of Richard SIBLY of Cornwall:
- BURIAL - SIBLY Richard 1847 01-Aug Hal ballick Liskeard Parish 72 yrs
1842 minus 72 equals 1775.
Richard SIBLY son of Samuel SIBLY and Elizabeth was BORN and DIED in Cornwall.
He never set foot in Tennessee, let alone being born there.
If anyone reading is a descendant of Richard SHIPLEY of Tennessee and has him in their tree as descended from SIBLY of Cornwall, would you do my ancestors the great favour of removing them from your tree?
I would be thrilled if I could wipe all trace of this utter nonsense from the Internet. Of course this will not be possible, with Ancestry doing its moronic thing (and persuading people with all its TV ads that all they have to do is put a name in a tree and leaves will sprout all over it, and voilà, instant tree), but the fewer people involved in perpetrating this genealogical idiocy, the better.
(If you actually are descended from this SIBLY couple of Cornwall, as I am, or from one of their families, and you have Richard SHIPLEY of Tennessee in your tree, this applies to you too. Please remove him. He is not related to you.)
Some people to whom I have reported the problem re Richard Shipley's ancestors in their trees at Ancestry have agreed that the "hint" they were offered was nonsense, and deleted the Cornish family from their trees. Others have deleted my comment and ignored it. Those people need to go back to genealogy kindergarten.
Maybe if anyone here who descends from the real Richard SHIPLEY would help me whack this mole when you see it rear its head in future, we can keep it to a dull roar. ;)