Talk:Francis Dade (politician)

Merger from John Smith (Virginia burgess)

These two articles, Francis Dade (politician) and John Smith (Virginia burgess), are about the same person, a man named "Francis Dade" who used the pseudonym "John Smith" for several years for political reasons. Indeed, it appears that the Dade article was originally cloned from the Smith article (which I first created, 3 years ago) and then improved from there. Why the first author didn't just move the article, I don't know.

To complicate things further, the Dade article did have a merge tag on it at one time, but an IP removed it for no apparent reason, and that was allowed to stand.

Anyway, both articles have had updates, and they need to be merged, after which the Smith title can be made a redirect, per the usual process. The Dade title is the right place for the real article, since that was his real name. Rklear (talk) 01:37, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Thomas Dade, Dominican Provincial

Just for future reference, an "original research" note: The Dominican provincial in London named Thomas Dade alias Thomas Middleton was tried on suspicion of being a Catholic priest in 1651. Dade/Middleton was a legatee of Anne Cornwallis, countess of Argyll, d. 1635 (http://www.oxforddnb.com/templates/article.jsp?articleid=68036&back=). Francis Dade's grandmother was also named Anne Cornwallis, so probably Francis Dade alias John Smith and Thomas Dade alias Thomas Middleton were brothers or cousins involved in the same Royalist affairs. Tarchon (talk) 23:36, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

More work needed

I tried cleaning this up, despite various logistical difficulties. What may be odd is that the new Dictionary of Virginia Biography never quite got to this man, for it ended with the D's and the entry refers to him as "John Smith" which of course never got finished. The only two Dade entries relate to cousins born after the Revolutionary War, one to Langhorn Dade and another to one of the Townshend Dades. There was also speculation that this man chose the name John Smith because he was related to the famous early English explorer and colonist in Virginia, John Smith, who never married.Jweaver28 (talk) 00:44, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

One problem is the source of the genealogical information, Kate Mason Rowland's 1904 article. It has an obvious problem in saying this man's sole son and heir had 4 sons but named only three, putting parentheses around the first name. I've encountered Kate Mason Rowland before, for her biography of her ancestor, George Mason IV. Unfortunately, modern scholars cannot find many of her supposed sources. She wrote in part to emphasize her family's Confederate heritage, and most definitely downplayed Mason's anti-slavery orations at the U.S. Constitutional Convention. Genealogists at the turn of the 20th century often relied upon family legends as well as actual documents, which of course could be lost over time. Genealogical research has changed greatly since tax rolls and church records have been digitized and made available online.Jweaver28 (talk) 14:32, 20 September 2022 (UTC)