The Case of the Two Thomas Dowlings: A Genealogical Mix-Up

#52Ancestors – Week 15 – Big Mistake

Oh, the mistakes we make when we’re just starting out! When I first began my genealogical journey, I was bright-eyed and eager—perhaps a bit too eager. I’d found census records for my paternal great grandfather, Thomas Dowling born in Brooklyn in 1871, and I triumphantly added him to my family tree along with his parents, James and Bridget. It felt like such a satisfying discovery! Little did I know I’d just made my first big genealogical mistake, one that would take years to untangle.

The Confusion of Identical Names

Genealogy rule #1: Never assume someone is your ancestor just because the name and approximate birth year match. This seems obvious now, but as a novice researcher, I failed to follow this fundamental principle.

Brooklyn in the 1870s was home to multiple Thomas Dowlings. Not just similar names—literally the exact same name, born around the same time, in the same place. It’s a classic genealogical conundrum that I now know trips up even experienced family historians.

The Thomas Dowling I initially found was the son of James and Bridget. He was born around 1871 in New York to parents who were born in Ireland, which aligned perfectly with what I knew about my great-grandfather. I added him to my tree without much additional verification. After all, how many Thomas Dowlings could there be in New York at that time?

The answer: at least two important ones.

The Evidence That Something Was Amiss

My first clue that something was wrong came when I discovered the 1880 Mortality Schedule. There it was in black and white: Thomas F. Dowling, age 9, died in February 1880 of “Bronchitis Verdgenia Valv Dis Of Heart Chronic.” I stared at the computer screen, confused. My great-grandfather Thomas F. Dowling had lived well into the 20th century. He had purchased our family home in Brooklyn. He had raised children, including my grandmother Julia Elizabeth. He most certainly had not died as a child in 1880.

As I looked more closely at the record, another discrepancy jumped out at me. This Thomas Dowling had been born in New York City, New York County—but family lore had always placed my Thomas’s birth in Brooklyn, which was Kings County! This seemingly small geographic detail was actually a significant clue that I was looking at the wrong person entirely.

I’d committed the cardinal sin of genealogy—I’d jumped to conclusions based on a name match without following the entire life story to confirm I had the right person.

The Breakthrough Moment

The real breakthrough in my research came from an unexpected source. While browsing through old newspaper archives, I stumbled upon a death notice for an Ellen Dowling, who had died in our family home in Brooklyn. I didn’t know Thomas had a sister named Ellen. Or a brother named John for that matter! I hadn’t seen either siblings in the records for the family of James and Bridget that I’d been researching.

This discovery sent me digging deeper. I located Ellen’s death certificate, which listed her parents as William Dowling and Ellen McAuliffe—not James and Bridget Dowling. My heart raced as I realized I might have been researching the wrong family entirely for years.

With these new names in hand, I found Ellen in the 1875 NY Census with the William Dowling family, including Thomas F. Dowling. What struck me most was that these siblings—William Jr., John, Ellen, and others—were completely different from the children I’d seen in the James and Bridget Dowling household. I wasn’t just wrong about Thomas’s parents; I was wrong about his entire family constellation! The children I had thought were Thomas’s siblings for all those years of research weren’t related to him at all.

It was a humbling moment to realize how far off track I’d been. I had essentially been researching a completely different family, building elaborate stories and connections around people who weren’t even my ancestors. The Thomas Dowling in my family tree and the Thomas Dowling who died in 1880 shared nothing but a name and an approximate birth year.

This single document became my Rosetta Stone. Armed with these names—William Dowling and Ellen McAuliffe—I began a fresh search of records, crosschecking with each of Thomas’s siblings’ death certificates. One by one, they confirmed the same parents: William and Ellen.

The pieces were finally falling into place. The Thomas Dowling I had been researching—the son of James and Bridget who died in 1880—was a completely different person from my great-grandfather. Talk about a genealogical wake-up call!

Following the Paper Trail

With this new information, I carefully traced census records year by year, like piecing together a puzzle with half the pieces missing.

The 1875 New York State Census was my first solid lead. There, I found young Thomas, about 4 years old, living with his father William, mother Ellen, and siblings in Brooklyn’s Ward 22.¹ I later found out Ellen had died later that same year, leaving William to raise their children alone. This census placed the family firmly in Brooklyn and established Thomas’s family structure early in his life.

The 1880 US Census shows Thomas still living with his father William and siblings.² By this point, William was widowed, confirming Ellen’s death. This record was crucial in distinguishing my Thomas from the other Thomas Dowling (son of James and Bridget) who had died that same year.

With the unfortunate destruction of the 1890 US Census in a fire, there’s a significant gap in the records. But thankfully, the 1892 New York State Census bridges that gap beautifully. In it, I found Thomas, now a young man around 21 years old, still living with his father William and siblings in Brooklyn. This record confirms that my Thomas F. Dowling survived into adulthood, unlike his namesake who died in 1880.

By the 1900 US Census, Thomas had established his own household in Brooklyn with his wife Mary Plunkett and their growing family³. And by 1905, he had purchased the house that remains in our family to this day—the Brooklyn family home I’ve written about previously.

After years of research, I finally had the correct lineage: my great-grandfather was Thomas F. Dowling, son of William and Ellen (McAuliffe) Dowling, not James and Bridget Dowling. The paper trail from 1875 through 1940 now told a coherent, continuous story of one man’s life.

Lessons Learned

This mix-up taught me several valuable lessons:

1. Never trust a name match alone: Just because the name and age match doesn’t mean you’ve found the right person.
2. Follow the complete life story: Trace each potential ancestor through every available record to ensure continuity.
3. Death records are gold mines: Death certificates often contain parental information that can connect generations and verify family relationships.
4. Siblings can be the key: Sometimes the breakthrough in your research comes not from your direct ancestor but from their siblings.
5. Newspaper notices matter: Don’t overlook the wealth of information contained in seemingly simple death notices and obituaries.
6. Use state censuses to fill federal census gaps: The 1875 and 1892 New York State censuses were invaluable in creating a continuous timeline, especially with the 1890 US Census loss.
7. Be especially careful in urban areas: Cities like Brooklyn had many families with identical surnames, often from the same country of origin.

The Real Thomas F. Dowling: A Life Well Lived

Now that I’ve established the correct Thomas F. Dowling, I can properly tell his story. Born to William and Ellen (McAuliffe) Dowling around 1871 in Brooklyn, Thomas lost his mother when he was very young. The 1875 census suggests Ellen had already passed, leaving Thomas to be raised by his father and with his siblings.

Despite this early hardship, Thomas grew up in a stable family environment. The consecutive census records from 1875, 1880, and 1892 show the family remaining in Brooklyn’s Ward 22, suggesting William provided consistency for his children despite the loss of their mother.

By 1900, Thomas had married Mary Plunkett, and they were raising their family in Brooklyn. Their household included several children, and Thomas was working steadily to support them.

The defining moment in Thomas’s life—at least in terms of our family legacy—came when he purchased the house that would become the Dowling family home. This was no small achievement for a working-class family in the early 1900s. The house has remained in our family for generations, serving as the backdrop for countless family gatherings, holidays, and life milestones.

As the decades passed, the census records track Thomas and his family at this same address from 1905 through the 1940s. What strikes me most is the stability he provided for his family during turbulent times, including World War I and the Great Depression. The family home served as an anchor, not just for his immediate family but for future generations, including his granddaughter who calls it home to this day.

Genealogy as Detective Work

When I think about this early mistake in my research, I’m reminded that genealogy is essentially detective work. Like any good detective, we need to:

• Question our assumptions
• Gather all available evidence
• Follow logical trails
• Verify facts through multiple sources
• Be willing to start over when new evidence contradicts our theories

The case of the two Thomas Dowlings taught me to be more methodical and skeptical—skills that have served me well in all my subsequent family history research.

The Value of Mistakes

While embarrassing at the time, this mistake was actually invaluable to my development as a family historian. It taught me how easily we can be led astray and how important it is to verify every connection in our family trees.

Had I not made this error, I might have continued making similar mistakes, potentially building an entire fictional branch of my family tree. Instead, I learned early on to be thorough and cautious.

I still chuckle when I think about how many years I spent barking up the wrong family tree. Those were years I could have spent researching my actual ancestors! But I’ve come to see even this wasted time as a necessary part of my genealogical education. Sometimes the longest paths teach us the most valuable lessons.

Questions for Fellow Genealogists

Have you ever discovered you were researching the wrong ancestor? How did you realize your mistake, and what did you learn from the experience? I’d love to hear your stories of genealogical mix-ups and how you solved them!

Until next week’s #52Ancestors post!

1. 1875 New York, U.S., state census, Third Election District of Ninth Ward, City of Brooklyn, Kings County, page 42 (penned), Vanderbilt Av., Number of visit 196, Street No. 598, Family 326, William Dowling family; digital images, Ancestry (https://www.ancestry.com/imageviewer/collections/7250/ : accessed 3 Jul 2024). ↩︎
2. 1880 U.S. census, Kings County, New York, Brooklyn, Enumeration District 221, Page No. 8 (penned), house number 451, Bergen St., Dweller No. 39, William Dowling family, digital images, Ancestry (https://www.ancestry.com/discoveryui-content/view/3163560:6742 : accessed 5 Nov 2024). ↩︎
3. 1900 U.S. census, Kings County, New York, Brooklyn Ward 22, District 0377, Sheet No. 18 (penned), 17th St., house number 518, dwelling 168, family 372, Thomas Dowling family; digital images, Ancestry (https://www.ancestry.com/imageviewer/collections/7602/ : accessed 3 Jul 2024). ↩︎