Do you ever experiment with an Artificial Intelligence (AI) tool based on someone else’s experience? Recently, Michelle Simmons Lewis share about her use of ChatGPT to obtain theories, inferences and conclusions for one of her genealogy FAN clubs.

Curious about what this would produce with my CRAWFORD research, I decided to try it. I used RootsMagic to create a group that included the three men named James Crawford in Garrard County, KY, known wives, potential siblings and potential mothers found in those records. I added information about yDNA testing and autosomal matches.

I then used the following prompt with ChatGPT

Your role is a professional genealogist. the file is a list of events and other information for several members of my Garrard county Kentucky James Crawford FAN club. The names are followed by the RIN for the individual. THere are 3 James Crawford lines represented in this information: RINS 1, 219 and 1443. This information contains DNA information and links to profiles on the FamilySearch tree. Using this information can you provide a list of conclusions, inferences or theories about the relationships between the 3 James Crawfords.

The original response had James Crawford-1 and James Crawford-1443 as brothers when their ages suggest and uncle/nephew relationship.

Conclusions (firm facts from evidence)

1️⃣ James Crawford-1 (RIN 1)

• Born 4 Dec 1770 in Augusta, VA.
• Married Martha Knight in 1793 in Lincoln Co., KY.
• Migrated to Barren Co., KY, then to Preble Co., OH, and finally to Warren Co., IN (died 1833).
• Y-DNA haplogroup: R-Y88686 (R1b-01A Ardmillan).

2️⃣ James Crawford-1443 (RIN 1443)

• Born 1758 in Augusta, VA.
• Married Rebecca Anderson in 1783/1790 in VA/KY.
• Lived in Madison, Garrard, KY, then moved to Jefferson, IN (died 1836).
• Y-DNA haplogroup: R-Y88686, same as James Crawford-1.

3️⃣ James Crawford-219 (RIN 219)

• Born 17 Apr 1772 in Virginia.
• Married Sarah Smith in 1799 in Garrard, KY.
• Settled finally in Preble Co., OH, died 1854.
• Y-DNA haplogroup: R-FT99108 or R-FT369906, different from the other two James.

4️⃣ Y-DNA evidence confirms:

• James Crawford-1 and James Crawford-1443 share a paternal line, as they match the same haplogroup R-Y88686.
• James Crawford-219 is not on the same direct paternal line, as he is in a different branch of R1b.

---

🔎 Inferences (likely but not absolutely proven)

• The Y-DNA connection between James-1 and James-1443 suggests they are either brothers or close paternal cousins.
• James-219, based on his different Y-DNA, was likely not a direct brother of the other two and is from a different Crawford paternal line (even though he lived close to them and had overlapping community records).
• The overlapping land, tax, and court records in Madison, Garrard, and Lincoln counties suggest that all three were part of the same social network or “FAN club”, supporting each other’s moves and legal activities.

---

💡 Theories and hypotheses (to guide further research)

🌳 Theory 1: James-1 and James-1443 are brothers

• The shared Y-DNA and similar early Virginia origins, plus their parallel migration to Kentucky, then northward.
• Both were involved with land transactions involving Paint Lick Creek, Silver Creek, and Sugar Creek areas, suggesting tight familial collaboration.

🌳 Theory 2: James-219 is a more distant paternal cousin or connected through maternal lines

• Although he migrated with or near them, his different Y-DNA implies a different paternal ancestor.
• His close presence in Kentucky and Ohio, plus joint community events, suggest possible maternal kinship or long-term family alliances.
• He could be a nephew or step-relative rather than a direct brother.

🌳 Theory 3: Shared community connections explain their “FAN club” pattern

• The repeated land purchases and sales, serving as jurors, and shared migration paths imply deliberate cooperation.
• This could reflect a broader extended Crawford family or allied kin groups migrating together for safety and opportunity, common in early frontier settlements.

---

⚖️ Supporting evidence to strengthen or test these theories

✅ Focus on wills, guardianship, and land transfer patterns — especially those involving Rebekah Douglas (guardian connections for Mary Crawford) and relationships in the Lincoln and Garrard county land transactions.

✅ Look for additional male-line Y-DNA test results from descendants of James-219 to clarify the exact branch of R1b.

✅ Consider deeper analysis of tax lists, militia records, and church affiliations (e.g., Cane Ridge Revival involvement, Restoration movement) for social clues.

✅ Re-examine FamilySearch sources, especially the linked profiles, to clarify child naming patterns and godparent/sponsor roles, which can reveal informal kin ties.

Summary chart (simplified)

James Crawford	RIN	Birth	Spouse	Y-DNA	Likely Relationship
James Crawford-1	1	1770 VA	Martha Knight	R-Y88686	Brother/cousin of 1443
James Crawford-1443	1443	1758 VA	Rebecca Anderson	R-Y88686	Brother/cousin of 1
James Crawford-219	219	1772 VA	Sarah Smith	R-FT99108 or R-FT369906	Separate paternal line (possible maternal kin)

---

🗺️ Next research steps

1️⃣ Further Y-DNA descendant testing of James-219 line to confirm branching.
2️⃣ In-depth analysis of land and tax records to trace exact timing of movements and alliances.
3️⃣ Look for contemporary letters, court depositions, or church minutes that might explicitly mention relationships.
4️⃣ Analyze ThruLines and shared matches (as you noted — 29 and 61 shared matches with James-1 descendants) for triangulated clusters pointing to a common ancestor.

---

📢 Final thoughts

Your work pulling this detailed timeline is outstanding — it lays a strong foundation for using both documentary and genetic evidence together. We can further diagram this into a visual relationship chart if you’d like, to illustrate these connections and possible hypotheses clearly.

Because the response had James Crawford-1 and James Crawford-1443 as brothers, I added the following prompt.

James Crawford-1 is believed to be a nephew of James Crawford-1443. Sarah Crawford-171 and Mary Crawford-170 are believed to be sisters of James Crawford-1. Mary Crawford-1413 may be the mother of James Crawford-219. Can you modify your answer with this additional information?

With that additional information, I got an updated reply.

Here’s a revised synthesis, explicitly incorporating:

• James Crawford-1 as a nephew of James Crawford-1443.
• Sarah Crawford-171 and Mary Crawford-170 as sisters of James Crawford-1.
• Mary Crawford-1413 as a possible mother of James Crawford-219.

---

✅ Updated Conclusions

James Crawford-1443 (RIN 1443)

• Born 1758 in Augusta, VA.
• Married Rebecca Anderson (1783/1790).
• Lived in Madison/Garrard KY; later Jefferson, Indiana.
• Y-DNA haplogroup R-Y88686.
• Likely the uncle of James Crawford-1.

James Crawford-1 (RIN 1)

• Born 1770 in Augusta, VA.
• Married Martha Knight in 1793.
• Migrated to Barren KY → Preble OH → Warren IN.
• Y-DNA haplogroup R-Y88686 (matches James-1443).
• Likely the nephew of James Crawford-1443.

James Crawford-219 (RIN 219)

• Born 1772 in Virginia.
• Married Sarah Smith in 1799.
• Settled in Garrard KY → Preble OH.
• Y-DNA haplogroup R-FT99108 or R-FT369906, distinct from the other two.
• Hypothesized to be the son of Mary Crawford-1413, making him part of a different paternal line.

---

🔎 Updated Inferences

James Crawford-1 as nephew

• Supported by Y-DNA (same paternal line), but generational timing suggests uncle-nephew rather than brothers.
• His sisters Sarah Crawford-171 and Mary Crawford-170 (both born early 1770s) likely children of the same intermediate Crawford father (a hypothetical brother of James-1443).

Sisters: Sarah Crawford-171 and Mary Crawford-170

• Born 1771 and 1772.
• Appear together in documents and migration trails.
• Both later appear in Indiana or Ohio records near James-1.

James Crawford-219

• Different Y-DNA implies a distinct paternal origin.
• Document trail suggests possible connection to Mary Crawford-1413 (shown on tax, land, and court records).
• Possible scenario: Mary-1413 had James Crawford-219 out of wedlock or via a different husband, which explains DNA discrepancy.
• James-219’s close association with the other Crawfords is likely through maternal or community connections.

---

💡 Updated Theories

🌳 Theory 1: James Crawford-1443 is patriarchal uncle figure

• James-1443 (born 1758) acted as a leader figure in Kentucky settlements.
• Younger James-1 (born 1770) and his sisters (Sarah and Mary) migrated with or near him.

🌳 Theory 2: James Crawford-1’s father (unnamed brother of James-1443) died or did not migrate

• Explains why James-1 is called a “nephew” and why he and his sisters appear closely tied to James-1443.

🌳 Theory 3: Mary Crawford-1413 as mother of James-219

• Mary Crawford-1413 is documented as having land, court cases, and tax records in Madison and Garrard counties in the same timeframe.
• Her association with James-219 supports the theory that he is her son, explaining his different Y-DNA haplogroup.
• Possibly she was widowed or unmarried, and James-219 took her Crawford surname or was raised in her household.

---

📄 Updated Relationship Chart (simplified)

Name	RIN	Birth	Hypothesized Relationship	Y-DNA
James Crawford-1443	1443	1758	Patriarchal uncle	R-Y88686
James Crawford-1	1	1770	Nephew of 1443; brother of Sarah & Mary-170	R-Y88686
Sarah Crawford-171	171	1771	Sister of James-1	—
Mary Crawford-170	170	1772	Sister of James-1	—
James Crawford-219	219	1772	Son of Mary Crawford-1413; maternal kin to others	R-FT99108 / R-FT369906

---

⚖️ Supporting Evidence for Hypotheses

✅ Y-DNA matches between James-1 and James-1443 support shared paternal line, thus uncle/nephew plausible.

✅ Court and land records show Mary Crawford-1413 active and controlling land, suggesting independence that could support her as James-219’s mother.

✅ The sisters (Sarah and Mary-170) appear consistently with James-1, supporting them as full siblings.

---

🗺️ Further Research Steps

1️⃣ Seek additional documents confirming father of James-1, Sarah, and Mary-170 (probate, guardianships, church records).

2️⃣ More Y-DNA descendant tests of James-219’s line to solidify unique haplogroup branching.

3️⃣ Deep analysis of tax and land transactions involving Mary-1413 to clarify guardianship or potential husbands.

4️⃣ Analysis of witness signatures and neighbor relationships in Kentucky court and land records — strong indirect clues to family structure.

---

📢 Summary

This updated scenario beautifully blends documentary evidence with genetic data and the oral or working family theories.

I then asked for a formal genealogy narrative with sources. Below is that report.

James Crawford-1443 was born in 1758 in Augusta County, Virginia. He served in the militia during the Revolutionary War and migrated to Kentucky, where he married Rebecca Anderson around 1783 or 1790. James and Rebecca lived in Madison and Garrard counties, Kentucky, before moving to Jefferson County, Indiana, where James died in 1836. Y-DNA testing places him in haplogroup R-Y88686, part of the R1b-01A Ardmillan group. This supports the theory that he represents an elder line of the Crawford family, possibly serving as an uncle figure to younger Crawfords in Kentucky and Indiana.

James Crawford-1 was born in 1770 in Augusta County, Virginia, and is believed to be the nephew of James Crawford-1443. He married Martha Knight in 1793 in Lincoln County, Kentucky. James and Martha lived in Barren County, Kentucky, before migrating to Preble County, Ohio, and later to Warren County, Indiana. James Crawford-1 died in 1833 in Indiana. His Y-DNA matches that of James Crawford-1443 (haplogroup R-Y88686), confirming they share a direct paternal line. James-1 had two sisters, Sarah Crawford and Mary Crawford, reinforcing the theory of a shared father (a likely brother of James-1443).

Sarah Crawford-171 was born in 1771 and married William Sellers in 1796 in Lincoln County, Kentucky. She later moved to Preble County, Ohio, where she died in 1856. Mary Crawford-170 was born in 1772 and married James Sellers in 1791 in Lincoln County, Kentucky. She later moved to Putnam County, Indiana, and died in 1855. These sisters are closely linked to James Crawford-1 in migration and community records, supporting their sibling relationship.

James Crawford-219 was born in 1772 in Virginia and married Sarah Smith in 1799 in Garrard County, Kentucky. He later moved to Preble County, Ohio, where he died in 1854. Y-DNA analysis places him in haplogroup R-FT99108 (also noted as R-FT369906), which differs from the haplogroup shared by James Crawford-1 and James Crawford-1443. This suggests that James Crawford-219 is from a different paternal line. It is believed that Mary Crawford-1413 may be his mother, as she appears in related land and tax records in Madison and Garrard counties during the relevant period.

The combination of documentary and genetic evidence supports the conclusion that James Crawford-1 and his sisters Sarah and Mary are the children of a brother of James Crawford-1443, making them his nieces and nephew. Meanwhile, James Crawford-219, though closely associated with this family network in Kentucky and Ohio, belongs to a separate paternal lineage, likely connected maternally through Mary Crawford-1413.

Endnotes

1. Sons of the American Revolution Membership Applications, 1889-1970, James Blythe Anderson descendant of John Anderson, 1930; database with images, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com : viewed online 7 April 2022).
2. Roster of Soldiers and Patriots of the American Revolution buried in Indiana. (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 1938) p. 108.
3. Interview with James Vawter Crawford and Mary F. Cowgill “Crawford” Coon, WPA Interviews for Linn County Oregon, transcribed by Patricia Dunn, 2000. http://www.lgsoregon.org/lgstng/showmedia.php?mediaID=22398.
4. Mary Hedges Reiner, compiler, Oregon State Roster of Ancestor DAR 1963 (Portland, Oregon: 1929), p. 84; digital image, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com : viewed online April 2017).
5. Roster of Soldiers and Patriots of the American Revolution Buried in Indiana, James Crawford, database with images on-line, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com : viewed online July 2017).
6. Find a Grave, database and images, Find a Grave (http://www.findagrave.com : viewed August 2016), memorial for James Crawford (1758-1836), Find a Grave Memorial no. #29998479.
7. Norman Bloss Mavity, The Mavity Family (Ann Arbor, MI: Edwards Bros., 1954), pages 7-8; http://www.ancestry.com : viewed online September 2019.
8. Find a Grave, database and images, Find a Grave (http://www.findagrave.com : viewed August 2016), memorial for Rebecca Anderson (1761-1840), Find a Grave Memorial no. #32605052.
9. Melish, Mrs. Charles, Pioneer Women (http://www.jeffersoncountylocalhistory.org/fampioneerwomen : viewed online May 2019), Crawford.
10. Gilbert, Audrey, Obituary Abstracts 1850-1890 from Eaton Register & Eaton Democrat newspapers in Eaton, Preble County, Ohio (Owensboro, KY: McDowell Publications, 1981), p. 13.
11. Ohio Death and Cemetery Records, Preble County Ohio Mound Hill Cemetery Section 6, Eaton Ohio.
12. Find a Grave, database and images, Find a Grave (http://www.findagrave.com : viewed July 2017), memorial for Sally Smith Crawford (1770-1856), Find a Grave Memorial no. #8559179.
13. Find a Grave, database and images, Find a Grave (http://www.findagrave.com : viewed August 2016), memorial for James Crawford (1770-1833), Find a Grave Memorial no. #70472513.
14. Find a Grave, database and images, Find a Grave (http://www.findagrave.com : viewed April 2016), memorial for Mary “Polly” Crawford Sellers (1772-1855), Find a Grave Memorial no. #24752935.
15. U.S. and International Marriage Records, 1560-1900 database, Ancestry.com (https://www.ancestry.com : viewed 27 October 2022).
16. Find a Grave, database and images, Find a Grave (http://www.findagrave.com : viewed July 2017), memorial for James Crawford (1772-1854), Find a Grave Memorial no. #8559177.
17. DNA Haplogroup data, FamilyTreeDNA Crawford Project spreadsheet (http://www.familytreedna.com/groups/crawford : viewed online November 2022).

While this report was comprehensive, it did not contain any surprises.