CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Thomas Bridge

Canadian political figure in Nova Scotia

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionDec 1, 2024
Entity authorityQ7787880 ↗
Source-derived summary

Thomas Bridge (– after 1781) was a political figure in Nova Scotia. He represented Halifax Township in the Nova Scotia House of Assembly from 1770 to 1781.

In 1766, he married the widow Susan Scott. Bridge was named a justice of the peace for Halifax County in 1774. He was named a clerk of licenses for the town of Halifax in the same year. Bridge also served as coroner for the county. He is believed to have left Nova Scotia in 1781.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Thomas Bridge” is canadian political figure in Nova Scotia. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Thomas, Bridge and Canadian, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA dependable orientation record for establishing vocabulary, names and a first evidence trail. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1781, 1770, 1766, 1774—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, Thomas, Bridge and Canadian is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “canadian political figure in Nova Scotia” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Dec 1, 2024. The linked authority identifier is Q7787880. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1781, 1770, 1766 and 1774.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Thomas Bridge”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Thomas Bridge primary sources, Thomas Bridge archive and Thomas research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Thomas Bridge”?
  2. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Thomas Bridge” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.