I am becoming very unhappy with the way Ancestry.com has their tree feature. That you can add and combined other people’s trees (to your own) without asking them or verifying info. I have seen this with several different branches of my tree. The problem I see is that someone puts an "about" date for an event and when someone copies it to their tree the “about” gets lost and you just have the date. Then people start taking it as fact not a conjecture. Also one person puts up wrong info or a theory and everyone copies it as fact.
So to address the many trees that have been posted of Mordecai Southerland,
Mordecai Southerland’s birth date and origin is unproven so feel free to theorize but, PLEASE state that it is a theory on your tree.
Mordecai’s marriage was to a Susanna on an unknown date. I have started to see dates and places crop up on the internet and as far as I have found they are undocumented and most likely wrong. As for the postings of Elizabeth Susanna Manning, I believe this comes from the before mentioned problem on Ancestry that you can copy and combined with the click of the mouse. For the record Mordecai (Sr.) married Susanna and their son Mordecai (Jr.) married Elizabeth Manning daughter of Charles Manning on 28 Feb 1805 in Orange Co, NC and later the couple moved to Henderson Co, KY. (I have documents on this as well as some of their descendants if anyone wants it) So that’s two Mordecai’s and two different women.
I have started to see a death date of 1783 for Mordecai and I don’t know where it came from. I far as I have found Mordecai’s will was written in 1818 and also proved in that year. Also Mordecai is in the 1790, 1800 and 1810 Censuses of Orange co, NC.
Mordecai’s children are listed in his will so please try not to add a child, that is not listed in the will, to him on a tree.
As for Mordecai’s parents I stated above that his origins, that includes his parents, are unproven. If you have a theory please list it as so and post your reasons for coming to that conclusion. And if you are copying from someone else you should copy that it is a theory as well. If anyone finds proof then they need to post their source (not a family tree but an actual record) to verify their claim.
Genealogy is supposed to be based in fact. To be fact you have to back up claims with records.
So sorry to sound mean but I am at my end with all the confusion. Genealogy is hard enough without have to sort through fiction to find the facts. Happy hunting!