RAM quoted Scism as saying:Primary sources: (First order) documents and records made at the time of the occurrence, by a witness to that occurrence.
EG: It reads as though the Primary source might apply to the Certified Bible entries by Maria Van Siclen. Recognizing that the accuracy and reliability of the Bible entries is directly dependent on the integrity and careful copying of the Notary. In any event, it is the only document availble about the marrage and surname of Maria Van Siclen and her father Van Siclen....consequently until another document at some future date makes an appearance (such as the original Bible)I am compelled to accept as factual data the Certified Bible entry.
RAM: Ed, do we know when the bible was published?At any rate, so far as I can ascertain, the question is not whether Maria Van Siclen was a daughter of Cornelius Van Siclen. While Maria was almost certainly a witness to her own birth, I doubt she remembered it.She probably did not witness the birth of her parents :)Fanny and Ferd did not witness any of those events. I am happy to stipulate that the bible record is the bible record and that the notary public certified that it said what it said as best he could read it.The questions yet unanswered, so far as I can tell, include: when was the bible printed; which Van Siclen first owned it; were all the entries in the same handwriting;were the entries made all at once, or over time?
Mr. Scism left out an important phrase in his description of a primary record, disinterested party. That is, to be considered a primary record, that record shall be made by a person with no vested interest in the record being made. Otherwise it is testimony, sworn or unsworn.
RAM quoting Scism said: Secondary sources: (Second Order) A source removed from the original by Time, third party, or retrospective records recorded at a later date.
ED said: The affidavits of Violetta Voorhees, Fanny Eastling Kelly and Ferdinand Easting could most accurately be described as Secondary sources. The fact that the deponents took an oath prior to the documents being notarized could be said to place them into the Primary source.
RAM: Ed, I will be happy to stipulate that Fanny and Ferd believed what they were swearing to was true.
Ed: Fanny and Ferdinand while they were growing into adults (Cornelius died when Fanny was 13 and Ferdinand was 22) knew and talked with their Grandparents Cornelius and Catherine Johnson .
RAM: This assumes a fact not in evidence.Can you place Cornelius Van Siclen at the same place and at the same time as Fanny and Ferd? Can you place Catherine Johnson at the same place and at the same time as Fanny and Ferd?Can you tell me where this place was?
ED: The affidavits, including Violetta's which contained the Certified Bible entry, had been submitted in 1907 to the DAR and were uncovered in the DAR records about two years ago.
RAM: I am quoting from a letter dated 20 April 1991 from Nancy Foster to Lee Roy Lennington, Jr.: ‘The DAR application of Violetta Voorhees gives the source of the marriage date of Cornelius [Van Sicklen] and Catherine Johnson as ‘Names of Names of Persons For Whom Marriage Licenses were issued by the Secretary of the Provence of New York previous to 1789' p. 427, (11 June 1771) Marriage bond Vol 17, page 110.I can check out the ‘Marriages License Issued, etc.' as I am sure it is in our library. Incidentally this DAR application is incorrect as it is through a daughter Maria b 1805.Also the Cornelius of this application died in Canada.But it is the source of the marriage record."
This letter having been written more than 10 years ago, it is obvious that others were going over this same ground back then and had the Violetta Voorhees application in hand at that time.Mrs. Foster, the author of the letter, and the late Lee Roy Lennington, Jr. (who sent me the xerox of this letter shortly thereafter) were descendants of Cornelius Van Sicklen and his first wife Femmetje Vanderveer, through their daughter Maria Van Sicklen.This Maria was the step daughter of Catherine Johnson, the 2nd wife of Cornelius Van Sicklen, and had married (1) Samuel Linington (var. sp.) and (2) Simeon Freer.Not to put too fine a point on it, but the DAR "stuff" you are referring to was not "uncovered in the DAR records about two years ago."As Van Sic[k]len and Linington descendant myself (though from brothers of both Cornelius Van Sicklen and Samuel Linington), Lee Roy and Nancy and I were swapping notes over an extended period. I was first in touch with Lee in the early1980s.In the excerpt above from Nancy to Lee, she is saying exactly what Doug Van Curen has been saying to you all along.
ED: Perhaps you recall that I wrote that my objections to the genealogy containing the Van Sicklen/Eastling link would be less vociferous if the Eastling linkage had included source notes revealing that there existed notarized documents that refuted the Van Sicklen/Eastling linkage.
RAM: Ed, this is a non-sequitur.The surname transmuted over time to several spellings.Like your branch of the clan, mine dropped the "k" and went with the Van Siclen spelling.