Do you ever come across a record that looks incredibly promising—only to realize it may not belong to your family at all?
This week’s Friday Find is exactly that kind of discovery.
While digging through my Crawford Kentucky file, I found a photocopy of a published collection of Bible records from Mercer County, Kentucky, compiled by Alma Ray Sanders Ison in 1986. Beginning on the second page is a section labeled “Crawford Bible,” reportedly copied from a Revolutionary War pension application for Thomas and Mary Crawford.
At first glance, this looked like a goldmine.
But as I worked through the details, it became clear:
this is likely not my Crawford family.
What the Record Contains
The Crawford Bible record includes:
- A marriage entry for Thomas Crawford and Mary Ewing (Feb. 28, 1783)
- A series of marriages for individuals who appear to be their children or close relatives
- A detailed list of births for their children between 1783 and 1802
The children of Thomas and Mary Crawford include:
- Margaret (1783)
- Catharine (1785) – married William McElroy in 1811
- Elizabeth (1786) – married James Gilkerson in 1808 and William Wade in 1827
- Samuel (1787) – married Catherine Ewing in 1814
- Ann (1789) – married Reverend Nathaniel Hall in 1807
- Polly (1791)
- Thomas (1793) – married Rebecca Ewing in 1816
- John (1794) – married Sarah McElroy in 1817
- Margaret (1796)
- William (1798) – married Esther McElroy in 1825
- Mary (1800) – married Jacob Crow in 1830
- Cyrus (1802) – married Mahala Walker in 1837
The associated surnames—Ewing, McElroy, Gilkerson, Hall, Walker—suggest a well-connected Mercer County family with ties typical of early Kentucky settlers.
Why This Isn’t My Crawford Family
As much as I would love to claim this family, my current research doesn’t support a connection.
My Crawford research centers on Garrard County, Kentucky, along with earlier ties to Virginia. Through years of work, I’ve developed a FAN club that includes families such as:
- Anderson
- Maxwell
- Douglas
Those names do not appear in this Bible record.
Additionally:
- The geographic focus here is Mercer County, not Garrard
- The family structure and associated surnames don’t align with what I know about my ancestor, James Crawford
- There is no clear overlap (yet) between this group and my established research network
At this point, I have to treat this as a separate Crawford family—one of many in early Kentucky.
So Why Keep the Record?
Because in genealogy, today’s “not my family” can become tomorrow’s breakthrough.
There are several reasons this record is still worth keeping:
- Neighboring counties matter. Mercer and Garrard counties are geographically close, and families often crossed county lines.
- Surname overlap may emerge later. Just because I don’t recognize these names now doesn’t mean they won’t connect through marriage or migration patterns.
- It provides context. Understanding other Crawford families in Kentucky helps avoid mistaken identity—a constant risk in my research.
- The Revolutionary War pension lead is valuable. Even if this isn’t my line, the original pension file could provide insight into Crawford migration patterns into Kentucky.
What This Record Teaches Me
This Friday Find is a good reminder of something every genealogist learns eventually:
Not every record with your surname belongs in your tree—but it may still belong in your research.
In fact, identifying what doesn’t fit can be just as important as finding what does.
Next Steps
Even though this family isn’t part of my current FAN club, I’m not ignoring it. My next steps include:
- Locating the original Revolutionary War pension application
- Mapping this family in Mercer County records (land, tax, probate)
- Watching for any future connections to Garrard County Crawfords
Final Thoughts
This record may not solve my Crawford mystery—but it helps define the landscape.
And sometimes, ruling a family out is just as valuable as proving one in.
Have you ever chased the wrong family—only to learn something useful anyway?
I’d love to hear about it!