Talk:Edward Digges

False Assumption About Surviving Children

The following entry by 213.78.83.242,

"The division of the estate shows that only three children (William, Dudley, and Edward) were still living in 1692."

is not a valid statement. The fact that children were left out of a will or out of a division of an estate is not an indication that they were dead at the time. This is especially true in the 17th century with regard to married female children who were considered to be members of their husband's family.

I am asking for a consensus on deleting such conjectures from this article.

Not a Conjecture; Source is Cited

The statement objected to is not a conjecture. The cited source, John Frederick Dorman, is one of the foremost genealogists in the country. In addition to editing Adventurers of Purse and Person, 4th edition, he has edited The Virginia Genealogist since 1955. He can be presumed to have a sound understanding of the inheritance laws of 17th-century Virginia.

Additional surviving child, Catherine

I just added Catherine. Her information has been proven over and over. She is the ancestor of most of the Herndons of Virginia. She's my 9th great-grandmother. Bob (talk) 02:24, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

No surviving daughter named Catherine

The division of the estate of Edward Digges' wife Elizabeth proves that there was no surviving daughter named Catherine.

Elizabeth Digges's personal estate was divided by the court between her three existing children (sons William, Dudley, and Edward) and one grandchild, the daughter of Elizabeth Digges' deceased daughter Mary. If there had been a surviving daughter, she would have shared in the division. See Dorman, 'Adventurers of Purse and Person', 4th ed., v.1, pp.821-844.~~