In Part 1 of this series we talked about where to test, and in Part 2, why to test. Now let's talk about how to select the optimal number of markers to test.
Part 3 - How many markers should you test?
The simple answer is that you should test as many as you can possibly afford to.
I had a quick look at Family Tree DNA's product page and it looks like they are no longer promoting Y-12 or Y-25. I believe those can still be had for specific testing purposes by joining one of the surname projects, but the current public entry-level test now appears to be a Y-37 at a cost of $169.00. I believe that discounts may be available if you first search for the desired surname project and request a test through the project, but I am not sure. Try that method first, or search online for coupon codes specific to FTDNA or special limited-time offers.
Here's why more markers is better.
I touched earlier on the fact that unique mutations can appear through time within specific branches of a related family cluster. The higher the number of matching markers between you and another tester, the closer in time your common ancestor will likely be found. Higher level tests will help you narrow down a time frame for your mutual connection. In the case of my Henderson example in the previous article in this series, we are upgrading the Delmarva line (currently only tested at 12-marker levels) to compare to our own line which has already tested at higher levels. In this way we may be able to determine whether our common ancestor is likely to have lived before the older group first appears in Virginia in 1661 (in which case the shared connection would likely be in Scotland), or after 1661 (in which case the younger branch likely descends from the older).
Another reason to test at higher levels was mentioned in Part 1 of this series, but not explained. The 12-marker tests will often turn up a number of distracting non-surname matches. You may have shared an ancestor with these matches in pre-historic times, but probably not within historic memory, and in most cases you should not waste time and energy attempting to find the connection. Take my Brooks surname project for instance. At 12 markers, I currently have 151 matches! Imagine if I wasted precious time and resources trying to track all of those folks down just to discover we go back to Og who lived in a cave in Austria! (As if you could ever identify such a distant connection anyway.)
When I upgraded the Brooks test to 25 markers, I was still left with 106 matches, including a large number of testers with non-matching surnames. Too many leads to reasonably pursue. At 37 markers the red herrings and more distant matches begin to fall away, but I am still left with 27 leads. This is definitely a more manageable group, and probably an acceptable starting point for such a common surname, but what if I took things a step further and tested at 67 markers? 19 matches, but at this point, anyone within the same surname is definitely worth investigating further. Even some of the non-surname matches might turn out to be NPE's (non-paternal events) that could actually be genetic Brooks relatives. I typically don't focus my efforts on those, but it doesn't hurt to establish contact. One non-surname match actually suspected he was a Brooks on the male line, and his surname was already familiar to several of us through a maternal lineage. He had an interesting story to tell, but I digress...
By jumping in at 37-markers or higher instead of incrementally upgrading (which can ultimately be more expensive), I can much more quickly and effectively narrow down the matches that are most promising and relevant to my own research, and avoid wasting time on folks who might just muddy the waters to no discernible advantage.
This brings me to the subject of upgrading. If the cost of a 37-marker test is a barrier to entry for you, it is my opinion that it is far better for posterity to get a sample to the lab, even with at the inexpensive 12-marker level (especially for older relatives and most especially for lines that are in danger of daughtering out) than to do no test at all. Tests can always be upgraded in the future as funds become available, but if your potential tester dies, or if a line daughters out as you vacillate over cost, then you have lost a valuable -- possibly an irreplaceable -- opportunity.
In some cases, where there may already be a number of high-level, well-documented testers within a surname, and you simply want to verify your paper trail leading to that family, you can make do with a 12 or 25-marker test. That will be enough to tell you whether you're on the right trail, or barking up the wrong family tree. If it turns out you are a match at those lower levels, then you can always upgrade in order to see how far the match holds up or where mutations begin to appear, and therefore potentially identify exactly which branch you fit into.
So as a general rule of thumb, 111 is better than 67. 67 is better than 37. 37 is better than 25. 25 is better than 12. And for the love of heaven, 12 is better than nothing at all.
Important update 1/1/16: Although I already recommend the use of Family Tree DNA as the test facility of choice, a recent article on DNAExplained.com has raised serious ethical concerns in my mind about the privacy practices of Ancestry and 23andMe. Please read this before choosing to test through either of those two facilities.
Monday, April 20, 2015
Sunday, April 19, 2015
Y-DNA Testing: Where to Do It, Why to Do It, How Many Markers to Test - Part 2
Part 2 - Why Do a Y-DNA Test?
In my previous article we talked about which testing facility to use when deciding to undertake Y-DNA testing for genealogical purposes. Now we'll look at why it's useful, which is closely tied to the number of markers you choose to test.
As I mentioned in the first article, Y-DNA testing is a rapidly evolving science and our understanding of the results it provides is changing on a daily basis. What holds true today may hold less so (or more so) tomorrow. But let's take a stab at this in the here and now. Why should you do a Y-DNA test? What, exactly, can it do for you?
First, I believe it's easier to start with what the test can't do for you.
The testing facility I prefer, Family Tree DNA, examines specific portions of the chromosome solely for the purpose of comparison with other testers in order to identify patterns that reveal familial relationships on the direct-male line. Unlike what 23andMe purports to do, a Y-DNA test through Family Tree DNA (or Ancestry.com, for that matter) will not tell you anything about your health, or that "you are a superb dancer." As I stated in Part 1 of this series, a FTDNA Y-DNA test cannot tell you if you carry a gene for cancer - it simply does not know.
DNA testing will not do your research for you. It will not provide you with a pedigree chart back to Adam, complete with family photos and amusing anecdotes. If you want that, join Ancestry.com and browse their trees, which are only as reliable as the researchers who post them (often not very). You might get lucky and your DNA test might connect you with another researcher who can provide additional generations and supporting photos and documentation, but Family Tree DNA's results will not do your work for you. Ancestry.com's DNA test may have an edge in that respect with any ability to integrate its test results with it's paid-access family trees, but again, the trees are only as reliable as the researchers create them.
A Y-DNA test from Family Tree DNA will simply provide you with a panel of seemingly random numbers and the names and contact information of your genetic matches. The numbers represent the individual values that count the number of repetitions between selected genetic markers. That information has no inherent value until you compare it to the results of other testers. The more numbers (marker repetitions) you match with other testers (especially within the same surname), the closer your relationship with that tester is likely to be. It is up to you to work with matching testers and figure out who your common ancestor is. While Family Tree DNA and Ancestry.com both provide general overviews about your deep ancestral origins, and haplogrouping (the depth and accuracy of which, again, depend on the number of markers tested), the real value of Y-DNA testing for genealogy lies in the two basic things a test can tell you.
First, a Y-DNA test can tell you who you are not.
A genealogist will immediately recognize the potential usefulness of this, but let me give an example.
For two decades I wondered if my Corder relatives in early Frederick County VA were related to the only other 18th-century Corder family in Virginia -- a family who lived just over the crest of the Blue Ridge in neighboring Fauquier County. These two families were literally within walking distance, so although there was no paper trail indicating a relationship between them, given their proximity and the rarity of the surname, the likelihood of a relationship seemed very high. We fully expected to match genetically, but much to the surprise of both groups, a quick 12-marker Y-DNA test produced non-matching results! To rule out any non-paternal events skewing the results (that's just what it sounds like), we secured two newly identified and distantly-related testers from each family and upgraded all tests to 25 markers. The new tests confirmed the original results. The two families definitely did not share a common ancestor on the direct male line.
Does that mean that the two families were not part of the same historical family unit? That's a possibility that can't be ruled out. Perhaps a Corder ancestor somewhere along the line took his mother's surname, but was nonetheless part of the wider Corder story. On the other hand, it's always possible that a cuckoo slipped into the nest. We just don't know. There are limits to what the DNA can tell. This is why I spoke in the first article about the complexity surrounding interpreting test results -- there are exceptions to what seem like straightforward rules. It is up to you, the genealogist, to investigate and reason out your conclusions based on a combination of what the scientific data suggests, and solid paper trail documentation. Sometimes you end up with more questions than answers. Sometimes when you hear hoof beats you have to think "zebras," not "horses" (or vice versa). But the bottom line is that in this example case, DNA showed us that we are searching for different direct-male ancestors for these two families, despite the same surname and the close proximity of the two groups.
In a more straightforward example but along the same lines, consider how we might have used a DNA test to break through a longstanding brick wall for the Burgess family of central North Carolina. After years of traditional research, no male Burgess ancestor could be identified, only a female who we had always assumed to have married a Burgess and produced three male Burgess children. A simple DNA test would have shown a mismatch with others of the Burgess surname, and just as likely would have pointed researchers to matches within other families. I say other families (plural) because in this case, even the DNA among the descendants of the three brothers would not have matched (yep, that's right - different fathers). In this case, before the advent of DNA testing, we had to do a lot more digging before we discovered a "bastardy bond" (yes, there really was such a thing) that named the father of our particular Burgess ancestor as one "Elias Swift." A DNA test had the potential to have saved us a lot of effort and shown us the correct path a lot sooner. In this case, it could have told us who we were not (Burgesses) and possibly who we were (Swifts?). If I could identify a reliable male tester from this line, I could next compare him to the genetic signature of Swift descendants to see if our lady of the alternative 19th-century lifestyle was telling the courts the truth.
In one last example, another lineage I'm working on has a long tradition that they are descended from a prolific family of the same surname in central Virginia. The central Virginia family has a number of existing tests currently on file with FTDNA that match at high marker levels, thus creating a well-established genetic signature for that group, with which we can compare our own line's results. Our line has three tests in FTDNA's lab as I write. The results of these tests will tell us once and for all whether we need to stay on this same central Virginia family's trail, or look elsewhere. A match with the family in question would delight us all and possibly help us better understand the origins of an ancestor who met a tragic fate far from home. By the same token, a non-match, while initially disappointing (or aggravating in the sense that our family history will have to be "re-written"), has the potential to shed just as much light on our elusive ancestor if not more, in another way. A match with a different established lineage could be equally helpful. We might get lucky...
If you get lucky, a Y-DNA test can tell you who you are.
Notice that I said "if you get lucky." There are no guarantees. When I submitted my original three test samples for three different surnames back in 2006, I had no instant matches. Not a single person with whom I could compare my results. A big fat zero. But as the popularity of genetic genealogy has grown, zero matches is a lot less likely (though not unheard of), and as the years have gone by, the matching tests have trickled in, each one providing new revelations as well as new mysteries.
Just as the examples above showed how DNA can help you stop wasting time chasing wild geese, let me give you an example of how a test can actually show you who you are, and hook you up with the right researchers.
First, my Brooks family line was always problematic. Brooks is a relatively common name and there were Brooks families scattered all over the eastern seaboard, many lines tracing back through centuries. It was overwhelming and demoralizing to spend hours and hours trying to sort out all of the red herrings and unwind error-laden genealogies and questionable family trees compiled by other equally frustrated researchers (some of whom had finally given up and fudged the documentation just to get 'er done). Year after year went by and individually we were getting nowhere, often laying the troublesome Brookses aside to focus on other families.
The Y-DNA test quickly established a closely-knit group of matching (and therefore proven-to-be-related) Brooks researchers who have since set about advancing our understanding of our family's origins and migration patterns. A very knowledgeable and involved project administrator for the group has encouraged us to upgrade our tests in order to track unique mutations which can be used to identify specific branches within our family cluster. This allows new high marker-level testers to compare their specific mutations and gives them a better idea of which branch their ancestor might have come from. Without the original tests and the subsequent upgrades, we'd still be flailing around, stabbing in the dark at hundreds of unrelated Brooks connections across America. Our information-sharing between members of the correct family group, and our ongoing combined efforts have allowed us to push our research back several generations. A recent 111-marker test has even identified this family's origins in Norway 4,500 years ago, an interesting little bit of trivia surrounding our ancient heritage that explains how our ancestors may have come to be in England. (A' viking we will go, a' viking we will go...)
In another example of a test telling you who you are, my Henderson family of coastal and central North Carolina had wondered for decades whether they were connected to an older group of Hendersons who had settled on the Delmarva Peninsula in the mid-1600's. There was no paper trail connecting the two families. Subsequent DNA testing of the two lines at 67-markers has indicated not only a connection, but potentially a close one. All that remains is to identify it. In the mean time, we know that at the very least, the two family branches should be looking for a common ancestor in Scotland or very early colonial America, and can combine our research efforts towards that purpose.
Hopefully these scenarios will fire your imagination and you can begin considering in what ways the benefits of a DNA test have the potential to far outweigh the costs in your own research conundrums.
In the final article in this series I'll talk about how many markers you should test, and why more is almost always better.
Important update 1/1/16: Although I already recommend the use of Family Tree DNA as the test facility of choice, a recent article on DNAExplained.com has raised serious ethical concerns in my mind about the privacy practices of Ancestry and 23andMe. Please read this before choosing to test through either of those two facilities.
In my previous article we talked about which testing facility to use when deciding to undertake Y-DNA testing for genealogical purposes. Now we'll look at why it's useful, which is closely tied to the number of markers you choose to test.
As I mentioned in the first article, Y-DNA testing is a rapidly evolving science and our understanding of the results it provides is changing on a daily basis. What holds true today may hold less so (or more so) tomorrow. But let's take a stab at this in the here and now. Why should you do a Y-DNA test? What, exactly, can it do for you?
First, I believe it's easier to start with what the test can't do for you.
The testing facility I prefer, Family Tree DNA, examines specific portions of the chromosome solely for the purpose of comparison with other testers in order to identify patterns that reveal familial relationships on the direct-male line. Unlike what 23andMe purports to do, a Y-DNA test through Family Tree DNA (or Ancestry.com, for that matter) will not tell you anything about your health, or that "you are a superb dancer." As I stated in Part 1 of this series, a FTDNA Y-DNA test cannot tell you if you carry a gene for cancer - it simply does not know.
DNA testing will not do your research for you. It will not provide you with a pedigree chart back to Adam, complete with family photos and amusing anecdotes. If you want that, join Ancestry.com and browse their trees, which are only as reliable as the researchers who post them (often not very). You might get lucky and your DNA test might connect you with another researcher who can provide additional generations and supporting photos and documentation, but Family Tree DNA's results will not do your work for you. Ancestry.com's DNA test may have an edge in that respect with any ability to integrate its test results with it's paid-access family trees, but again, the trees are only as reliable as the researchers create them.
A Y-DNA test from Family Tree DNA will simply provide you with a panel of seemingly random numbers and the names and contact information of your genetic matches. The numbers represent the individual values that count the number of repetitions between selected genetic markers. That information has no inherent value until you compare it to the results of other testers. The more numbers (marker repetitions) you match with other testers (especially within the same surname), the closer your relationship with that tester is likely to be. It is up to you to work with matching testers and figure out who your common ancestor is. While Family Tree DNA and Ancestry.com both provide general overviews about your deep ancestral origins, and haplogrouping (the depth and accuracy of which, again, depend on the number of markers tested), the real value of Y-DNA testing for genealogy lies in the two basic things a test can tell you.
First, a Y-DNA test can tell you who you are not.
A genealogist will immediately recognize the potential usefulness of this, but let me give an example.
For two decades I wondered if my Corder relatives in early Frederick County VA were related to the only other 18th-century Corder family in Virginia -- a family who lived just over the crest of the Blue Ridge in neighboring Fauquier County. These two families were literally within walking distance, so although there was no paper trail indicating a relationship between them, given their proximity and the rarity of the surname, the likelihood of a relationship seemed very high. We fully expected to match genetically, but much to the surprise of both groups, a quick 12-marker Y-DNA test produced non-matching results! To rule out any non-paternal events skewing the results (that's just what it sounds like), we secured two newly identified and distantly-related testers from each family and upgraded all tests to 25 markers. The new tests confirmed the original results. The two families definitely did not share a common ancestor on the direct male line.
Does that mean that the two families were not part of the same historical family unit? That's a possibility that can't be ruled out. Perhaps a Corder ancestor somewhere along the line took his mother's surname, but was nonetheless part of the wider Corder story. On the other hand, it's always possible that a cuckoo slipped into the nest. We just don't know. There are limits to what the DNA can tell. This is why I spoke in the first article about the complexity surrounding interpreting test results -- there are exceptions to what seem like straightforward rules. It is up to you, the genealogist, to investigate and reason out your conclusions based on a combination of what the scientific data suggests, and solid paper trail documentation. Sometimes you end up with more questions than answers. Sometimes when you hear hoof beats you have to think "zebras," not "horses" (or vice versa). But the bottom line is that in this example case, DNA showed us that we are searching for different direct-male ancestors for these two families, despite the same surname and the close proximity of the two groups.
In a more straightforward example but along the same lines, consider how we might have used a DNA test to break through a longstanding brick wall for the Burgess family of central North Carolina. After years of traditional research, no male Burgess ancestor could be identified, only a female who we had always assumed to have married a Burgess and produced three male Burgess children. A simple DNA test would have shown a mismatch with others of the Burgess surname, and just as likely would have pointed researchers to matches within other families. I say other families (plural) because in this case, even the DNA among the descendants of the three brothers would not have matched (yep, that's right - different fathers). In this case, before the advent of DNA testing, we had to do a lot more digging before we discovered a "bastardy bond" (yes, there really was such a thing) that named the father of our particular Burgess ancestor as one "Elias Swift." A DNA test had the potential to have saved us a lot of effort and shown us the correct path a lot sooner. In this case, it could have told us who we were not (Burgesses) and possibly who we were (Swifts?). If I could identify a reliable male tester from this line, I could next compare him to the genetic signature of Swift descendants to see if our lady of the alternative 19th-century lifestyle was telling the courts the truth.
In one last example, another lineage I'm working on has a long tradition that they are descended from a prolific family of the same surname in central Virginia. The central Virginia family has a number of existing tests currently on file with FTDNA that match at high marker levels, thus creating a well-established genetic signature for that group, with which we can compare our own line's results. Our line has three tests in FTDNA's lab as I write. The results of these tests will tell us once and for all whether we need to stay on this same central Virginia family's trail, or look elsewhere. A match with the family in question would delight us all and possibly help us better understand the origins of an ancestor who met a tragic fate far from home. By the same token, a non-match, while initially disappointing (or aggravating in the sense that our family history will have to be "re-written"), has the potential to shed just as much light on our elusive ancestor if not more, in another way. A match with a different established lineage could be equally helpful. We might get lucky...
If you get lucky, a Y-DNA test can tell you who you are.
Notice that I said "if you get lucky." There are no guarantees. When I submitted my original three test samples for three different surnames back in 2006, I had no instant matches. Not a single person with whom I could compare my results. A big fat zero. But as the popularity of genetic genealogy has grown, zero matches is a lot less likely (though not unheard of), and as the years have gone by, the matching tests have trickled in, each one providing new revelations as well as new mysteries.
Just as the examples above showed how DNA can help you stop wasting time chasing wild geese, let me give you an example of how a test can actually show you who you are, and hook you up with the right researchers.
First, my Brooks family line was always problematic. Brooks is a relatively common name and there were Brooks families scattered all over the eastern seaboard, many lines tracing back through centuries. It was overwhelming and demoralizing to spend hours and hours trying to sort out all of the red herrings and unwind error-laden genealogies and questionable family trees compiled by other equally frustrated researchers (some of whom had finally given up and fudged the documentation just to get 'er done). Year after year went by and individually we were getting nowhere, often laying the troublesome Brookses aside to focus on other families.
The Y-DNA test quickly established a closely-knit group of matching (and therefore proven-to-be-related) Brooks researchers who have since set about advancing our understanding of our family's origins and migration patterns. A very knowledgeable and involved project administrator for the group has encouraged us to upgrade our tests in order to track unique mutations which can be used to identify specific branches within our family cluster. This allows new high marker-level testers to compare their specific mutations and gives them a better idea of which branch their ancestor might have come from. Without the original tests and the subsequent upgrades, we'd still be flailing around, stabbing in the dark at hundreds of unrelated Brooks connections across America. Our information-sharing between members of the correct family group, and our ongoing combined efforts have allowed us to push our research back several generations. A recent 111-marker test has even identified this family's origins in Norway 4,500 years ago, an interesting little bit of trivia surrounding our ancient heritage that explains how our ancestors may have come to be in England. (A' viking we will go, a' viking we will go...)
In another example of a test telling you who you are, my Henderson family of coastal and central North Carolina had wondered for decades whether they were connected to an older group of Hendersons who had settled on the Delmarva Peninsula in the mid-1600's. There was no paper trail connecting the two families. Subsequent DNA testing of the two lines at 67-markers has indicated not only a connection, but potentially a close one. All that remains is to identify it. In the mean time, we know that at the very least, the two family branches should be looking for a common ancestor in Scotland or very early colonial America, and can combine our research efforts towards that purpose.
Hopefully these scenarios will fire your imagination and you can begin considering in what ways the benefits of a DNA test have the potential to far outweigh the costs in your own research conundrums.
In the final article in this series I'll talk about how many markers you should test, and why more is almost always better.
Important update 1/1/16: Although I already recommend the use of Family Tree DNA as the test facility of choice, a recent article on DNAExplained.com has raised serious ethical concerns in my mind about the privacy practices of Ancestry and 23andMe. Please read this before choosing to test through either of those two facilities.
Wednesday, April 15, 2015
Y-DNA Testing: Where to Do It, Why to Do It, and How Many Markers to Test - Part 1
Part 1 - Where to Do It
Important update 1/1/16: Although I already recommend the use of Family Tree DNA as the test facility of choice, a recent article on DNAExplained.com has raised serious ethical concerns in my mind about the privacy practices of Ancestry and 23andMe. Please read this before choosing to test through either of those two facilities.
The popularity of DNA testing for genealogical purposes has grown quite a bit over the last decade, with Ancestry.com jumping on the bandwagon and the advent of 23andMe, so I want to talk a little about choosing a testing facility, understanding what the test can and cannot do, and selecting a marker level when you're considering a Y-DNA test.
I only want to address Y-DNA tests in this article since mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) tests are much less useful for tracing specific lineages. Remember that the Y chromosome is passed directly from father to son, so the Y-DNA test will only give you information about the direct male line of the tester. If you, Mr. Jones, want to find out about the ancestors of your maternal Grandpa Smith, your DNA is of no use in that respect. It may tell you about your Jones line, but it knows nothing at all about the Smiths. You must find a direct-line male Smith cousin and persuade him to test. But I digress...
The potential for using DNA testing to unravel tangled knots of sloppy genealogy and break through decades-old (if not centuries-old) brick walls first dawned on me in 2005 when I became aware of National Geographic's Genographic Project. I wondered how one might go about finding a laboratory that would agree to test my older male relatives, and if I could find such a lab, what I would then do with the results to make any sense of them.
I started poking around online and to my surprise and delight, I saw that Family Tree DNA was already up and running for just that purpose. I quickly ordered three Y-DNA tests: one for my father, a second for my maternal grandfather, and a third for my maternal grandmother's brother. In all three cases, over the last decade, the DNA tests have paid off in spades, connecting me to relevant researchers with proven genetic relationships to the three tested surnames. There have been some surprises, but those are stories for another day. Suffice to say that funds spent on genetic testing have the potential to offer a greater return than those spent on gas and hotels in the fruitless pursuit of records that turn out to be irrelevant at the end of the day.
First to the game, Family Tree DNA (FTDNA) gained an edge with their established surname projects and robust marker-level testing, and they have become the "official testing facility" of National Geographic's Genographic Project mentioned earlier. Their surname projects are often managed by professional genealogists or those who have assumed the position of genealogist for various organizations such as Scottish clans or similar surname or heritage groups. They also offer a number of online learning tools to help testers understand their results, and the value of having access to a surname project administrator with experience in genealogy and DNA results interpretation should not be underestimated.
With FTDNA, there is a focus on the science and the independent collaboration of the testers to understand the implications of their results rather than the building of complex family online trees or providing a workspace for collecting paper documentation. You test, you fill in some basic information about your lineage, you're informed of your matches, you have access to the surname project's results for comparisons to others of the same name, you can communicate with the surname project administrator and your genetic matches, and then it is up to you to work with matching testers and carry your paper research to the next level.
Since I only do tests through Family Tree DNA, I am not in a position to comment on the efficacy of Ancestry.com's process or that of 23andMe, however, there is a DNA blogger who has done a comprehensive comparison of Ancestry vs FTDNA tests, and it appears that there may be enough reciprocity between the results that if you have already Y-DNA tested through Ancestry.com, it is possible to share your results with FTDNA (there is a small charge involved with sharing results, so be aware of that when choosing to test with Ancestry).
The two facilities provide similar marker results (similar - not the same), lists of matches with the ability to contact the matching testers, and tools to help you glean understanding from your results. Ancestry.com is generally agreed to be more user-friendly, but in my opinion, a DNA test should be a serious tool in an arsenal that includes copious paper documentation as well as collaboration with other researches through multiple online genealogical forums, so I prefer to go with the more scientifically robust testing facility that offers the higher test levels and the most cutting-edge tools for analysis. But that's just me. As I said, a level of reciprocity between these two facilities makes Ancestry's results usable for basic comparison with FTDNA's official surname projects, so while I encourage serious genealogists towards FTDNA, I recommend you read the comparison on DNAeXplained and come to your own conclusions.
As for 23andMe, I don't consider it the strongest player in the game of genetic genealogy. There are concerns about the company's "cut-rate genetic testing" that have put it in the hot-seat with the FDA, as well as potential privacy concerns that could trip up unwitting testers. They give top-level, generalized, narrative results (which may include sensitive information about potential health issues), so while that may be of interest to some testers, it is not as useful for cross-referencing marker results with FTDNA or Ancestry.com for family research purposes.
Since I brought up privacy issues, there are a number of misconceptions surrounding privacy and DNA testing, and you should go into the process in an informed manner. I consider FTDNA's privacy practices to be completely reasonable and they address some common concerns on their website. Unlike 23andMe, FTDNA's testing is not designed to give you health information or provide amusing trivia such as "you'd make an excellent surfer" -- the markers are analyzed and interpreted strictly to compare and discern genetic patterns and similarities between testers for the purpose of identifying common ancestors and ancestral origins. DO NOT take a Family Tree DNA (or Ancestry) test to learn if you carry a gene that makes you susceptible to diabetes or cancer - it will not tell you. It does not know.
DNA testing for genealogists is a complex and evolving science. For every absolute there seems to be an exception. Sometimes DNA testing can raise more questions than it answers. Sometimes those questions can be awkward. In some cases the results can rock the foundations of who you think you are. You have to be prepared to accept what you learn. Much of what you can learn depends on the level of testing, and higher marker levels are almost always better (for instance, higher levels can weed out random non-surname matches that can appear at lower levels and turn into time-wasting red herrings). The more we learn, the less certain we seem to become about things we thought we knew. So why do it? And how many markers should you test? I'll cover that in second and third parts this series, so stay tuned.
Continue to next article in series.
For more information on the subject of DNA testing for genealogy, visit FamilyTreeDNA.com's Learning Center. If you have comments that might be helpful to those considering testing, please add them below.
Important update 1/1/16: Although I already recommend the use of Family Tree DNA as the test facility of choice, a recent article on DNAExplained.com has raised serious ethical concerns in my mind about the privacy practices of Ancestry and 23andMe. Please read this before choosing to test through either of those two facilities.
The popularity of DNA testing for genealogical purposes has grown quite a bit over the last decade, with Ancestry.com jumping on the bandwagon and the advent of 23andMe, so I want to talk a little about choosing a testing facility, understanding what the test can and cannot do, and selecting a marker level when you're considering a Y-DNA test.
I only want to address Y-DNA tests in this article since mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) tests are much less useful for tracing specific lineages. Remember that the Y chromosome is passed directly from father to son, so the Y-DNA test will only give you information about the direct male line of the tester. If you, Mr. Jones, want to find out about the ancestors of your maternal Grandpa Smith, your DNA is of no use in that respect. It may tell you about your Jones line, but it knows nothing at all about the Smiths. You must find a direct-line male Smith cousin and persuade him to test. But I digress...
The potential for using DNA testing to unravel tangled knots of sloppy genealogy and break through decades-old (if not centuries-old) brick walls first dawned on me in 2005 when I became aware of National Geographic's Genographic Project. I wondered how one might go about finding a laboratory that would agree to test my older male relatives, and if I could find such a lab, what I would then do with the results to make any sense of them.
I started poking around online and to my surprise and delight, I saw that Family Tree DNA was already up and running for just that purpose. I quickly ordered three Y-DNA tests: one for my father, a second for my maternal grandfather, and a third for my maternal grandmother's brother. In all three cases, over the last decade, the DNA tests have paid off in spades, connecting me to relevant researchers with proven genetic relationships to the three tested surnames. There have been some surprises, but those are stories for another day. Suffice to say that funds spent on genetic testing have the potential to offer a greater return than those spent on gas and hotels in the fruitless pursuit of records that turn out to be irrelevant at the end of the day.
First to the game, Family Tree DNA (FTDNA) gained an edge with their established surname projects and robust marker-level testing, and they have become the "official testing facility" of National Geographic's Genographic Project mentioned earlier. Their surname projects are often managed by professional genealogists or those who have assumed the position of genealogist for various organizations such as Scottish clans or similar surname or heritage groups. They also offer a number of online learning tools to help testers understand their results, and the value of having access to a surname project administrator with experience in genealogy and DNA results interpretation should not be underestimated.
With FTDNA, there is a focus on the science and the independent collaboration of the testers to understand the implications of their results rather than the building of complex family online trees or providing a workspace for collecting paper documentation. You test, you fill in some basic information about your lineage, you're informed of your matches, you have access to the surname project's results for comparisons to others of the same name, you can communicate with the surname project administrator and your genetic matches, and then it is up to you to work with matching testers and carry your paper research to the next level.
Since I only do tests through Family Tree DNA, I am not in a position to comment on the efficacy of Ancestry.com's process or that of 23andMe, however, there is a DNA blogger who has done a comprehensive comparison of Ancestry vs FTDNA tests, and it appears that there may be enough reciprocity between the results that if you have already Y-DNA tested through Ancestry.com, it is possible to share your results with FTDNA (there is a small charge involved with sharing results, so be aware of that when choosing to test with Ancestry).
The two facilities provide similar marker results (similar - not the same), lists of matches with the ability to contact the matching testers, and tools to help you glean understanding from your results. Ancestry.com is generally agreed to be more user-friendly, but in my opinion, a DNA test should be a serious tool in an arsenal that includes copious paper documentation as well as collaboration with other researches through multiple online genealogical forums, so I prefer to go with the more scientifically robust testing facility that offers the higher test levels and the most cutting-edge tools for analysis. But that's just me. As I said, a level of reciprocity between these two facilities makes Ancestry's results usable for basic comparison with FTDNA's official surname projects, so while I encourage serious genealogists towards FTDNA, I recommend you read the comparison on DNAeXplained and come to your own conclusions.
As for 23andMe, I don't consider it the strongest player in the game of genetic genealogy. There are concerns about the company's "cut-rate genetic testing" that have put it in the hot-seat with the FDA, as well as potential privacy concerns that could trip up unwitting testers. They give top-level, generalized, narrative results (which may include sensitive information about potential health issues), so while that may be of interest to some testers, it is not as useful for cross-referencing marker results with FTDNA or Ancestry.com for family research purposes.
Since I brought up privacy issues, there are a number of misconceptions surrounding privacy and DNA testing, and you should go into the process in an informed manner. I consider FTDNA's privacy practices to be completely reasonable and they address some common concerns on their website. Unlike 23andMe, FTDNA's testing is not designed to give you health information or provide amusing trivia such as "you'd make an excellent surfer" -- the markers are analyzed and interpreted strictly to compare and discern genetic patterns and similarities between testers for the purpose of identifying common ancestors and ancestral origins. DO NOT take a Family Tree DNA (or Ancestry) test to learn if you carry a gene that makes you susceptible to diabetes or cancer - it will not tell you. It does not know.
DNA testing for genealogists is a complex and evolving science. For every absolute there seems to be an exception. Sometimes DNA testing can raise more questions than it answers. Sometimes those questions can be awkward. In some cases the results can rock the foundations of who you think you are. You have to be prepared to accept what you learn. Much of what you can learn depends on the level of testing, and higher marker levels are almost always better (for instance, higher levels can weed out random non-surname matches that can appear at lower levels and turn into time-wasting red herrings). The more we learn, the less certain we seem to become about things we thought we knew. So why do it? And how many markers should you test? I'll cover that in second and third parts this series, so stay tuned.
Continue to next article in series.
For more information on the subject of DNA testing for genealogy, visit FamilyTreeDNA.com's Learning Center. If you have comments that might be helpful to those considering testing, please add them below.
Monday, April 13, 2015
Was Alice Henderson, wife of James (b aft 1695 Somerset Co MD), a Kollock or a Pollock? Or neither?
In a recent article discussing the likelihood of a connection between James "Isaac" Henderson of 1732 Onslow County NC and the older group of Hendersons on the Delmarva Peninsula, I stated:
"John and Elizabeth [Henderson] had a son named James (b aft 1695 d bef Aug 1776) who married Alice Kollock (could this be "Pollock," a prominent name in early Bertie & Onslow Counties?) but from what I can tell of him and his descendants (including another son named James who m Sarah Merrill), this family stayed in the area of Somerset and Worcester Counties in MD and is pretty well accounted for."
To satisfy myself that "Kollock" was not a mis-spelling of "Pollock," I had a quick look this afternoon just to see if there was an actual "Kollock" family living in the vicinity of Somerset County MD in the late 1600's, and sure enough, Jacob Kollock had settled the area around Lewes and Rehoboth Bay as early as 1689. There is an 1865 book of the family's genealogy free to read online which does as decent a job of enumerating the family's generations as one might expect from an older work of genealogy.
Down the Kollock rabbit hole I went.
But the further I burrowed, the more I began to wonder at a Kollock connection with our group of Delmarva Hendersons. The information I was given in my database shows James Henderson, son of John & Elizabeth Barnaby Henderson, marrying an Alice Kollock in Somerset County MD about 1715. Estimated dates of birth for James and Alice are "about 1695." A birth around that time would have most likely made Alice a granddaughter of Jacob Kollock through his sons Simon, Cornelius or Jacob Jr. (Jacob Sr.'s seven children seem pretty clearly outlined and there is no Alice among them.)
Although I didn't see children of Cornelius or Jacob Jr. in the book, Simon did have a granddaughter named Alice who married a John Henderson (not James). Further investigation yielded a marriage date of 24 Jan 1763 in Lewes, DE -- too late to be the Alice Kollock who married James Henderson.
Additional digging online turned up the information that Alice was the daughter of Shepard Kollock (who was in turn son of Simon, and grandson of Jacob). Simon died intestate so there were subsequent court records in Sussex County DE which helpfully outlined the relationship of some of the Kollock family members. Of most interest to me, however, was this account from Land Records of Sussex Co DE, Deed Book L No 11 and M No 12:
George Kollock, ship joyner,
from Boaz Manlove, High Sheriff of Sussex Co.
4 May 1769.
Simon Kollock, Esqr., late of Sussex Co., died intestate, and 2/3 of his tract fell to Shepard Kollock, eldest son, admr. of his late father who left and bequeathed by his last will the afsd. land amongst his several heirs, which heirs exhibited a petition to the Court of Common Pleas for a division of the land and the above land was allotted to Alice Henderson wife of John Henderson, shopkeeper, being one of the heirs of Shepard Kollock, land in the suburbs of the town of Lewes, on the southeast side fo the main county road that leadeth from the town of Lewes to Rehoboth and on the northeast side and adjoining David Hall's land which he bought of Simon Kollock, one of the afsd. heirs and joining the afsd. George Kollock's land on the southwest side of his land, being part of the afds. dividend or tract surveyed and divided of 42 1/4 acres, which John Henderson as above mentioned by a certain obligation became indebted to John White and Samuel Coldwell of Philadelphia, merchants and sometime afterwards said White and Coldwell recovered a judgement against afds. Henderson for the sum of the afds. obligation and whereas his land was seized and sold by public sale to George Kollick for 40 shillings. Wit John Russel, Wm Prettyman. Within deed ackn. 4 May 1796
George Kollock, Sussex co., joyner, from Alice Henderson, Sussex Co., spinster. 4 May 1769 For 87. Parcel of land being part of a larger tract granted by patent to Alexander Molleston, late of afds co., dec'd, and by sundry deeds of conveyances became the property of Simon Kollock, Esqr. late of the county adsd., died intestate and Shepard Kollock admr. of afds. Simon Kollock and the land became the property of Shepard Kollock and the land fell to the heirs of afds. Shepard Kollock and a parcel was allottted to Alice Henderson, one of the daughters of afds. Shepard Kollock. Lnd being in the suburbs of the town of Lewes joining land of David Hall and George Kollock. 41 1/4 acres. Wit: Benjamin Miflin, John Haverlo. Within deed of sale ackn. 5 May 1769.
So it appears that John Henderson, shop keeper, had nearly let his wife's inheritance slip out of the family but it was rescued by Alice's brother, George.
I don't know what to make of the 1769 appellation "Alice Henderson, Sussex Co., spinster" -- did she leave him for what he'd done?
I have found several trees online that show Alice Kollock (w/o "James" Henderson) as the daughter of Simon and Comfort Shepard Kollock, however, the information above clearly calls Alice Henderson "one of the daughters of the aforsaid Shepard Kollock" -- not a daughter of Simon.
At any rate, it seems clear to me that the Alice Kollock who married a John Henderson in Sussex County DE is not the Alice Kollock we are looking for as a wife of James Henderson of Somerset Co MD. I have no idea who the younger Alice's husband John Henderson was, or whether he was even connected with the "Delmarva James" Henderson family. I am adding him to the database as husband of Alice Kollock, and I am adding Alice as daughter of Shephard, but I have no parents for this John. If anyone can shed any light on him, please do so in the comments section below.
I am developing a nasty little suspicion that there might not have been an Alice "Kollock" who married James Henderson circa 1715 in Somerset County MD. Still, have to explore every avenue. Maybe she was the daughter of Cornelius, or Jacob Jr.?
A quick search for further information on Jacob Kollock Jr. and Cornelius Kollock revealed that Jacob Jr. was likely too young to be father of an Alice born around 1695, he himself only having been born in 1692. Although he did marry an "Alice Shepherd," I don't think he's a candidate for our purposes.
Here is his obituary from the Pennsylvania Gazette, March 26, 1772:
JACOB KOLLOCK - On the 7th of last Month departed this life at Lewes-Town in the County of Sussex, in the 80th year of his Age, after a long and tedious illness which he endured with great fortitude and Christian Resignation, Jacob Kollock, Esq., who for upwards of forty years was annually chosen one of the Representatives in Assembly for said County; and for the same Length of Time he was President of the Court of Common Pleas, a Trustee of the Loan Office, Register of Wills, Clerk of the Orphans Court, and Treasurer of the County, all which Offices he executed with great Reputation. And in the various Stations of private Life his Conduct was irreproachable ; he was an affectionate Husband and Father, a faithful Friend, and a kind Master. His steady Perseverance in a virtuous Course of Life rendered him deservedly beloved by all his acquaintance. He was Colonel of the Sussex Regt. 1756. —The Pennsylvania Gazette, March 26, 1772
So scratch Jacob Jr.
Now, what about Cornelius? A search of the LDS records shows the children of Cornelius as: Simon b 1723, William b 1725, Sarah b 1727, Mary b 1729, Royal b 1721, and Samuel b 1733. No Alice, and all too born to late to align with the Alice we're looking for.
My guess at this point is that process of elimination has shown that Alice, wife of James Henderson b ca 1695 in Somerset County MD was unlikely to have been Alice Kollock since no Alice was found among the Kollock family during the correct time period. I believe that researchers may have mistaken the Alice Kollock who married John Henderson in Sussex Co DE in 1763 for Alice, wife of James Henderson of Somerset County MD -- although how that could have happened, considering the clarity of the records, is a mystery to me.
If anyone is aware of documents that can disprove my theory of a case of mistaken identity, please contact me and point me in the direction of the missing records! I would be delighted to be able to re-connect the Kollocks to the Delmarva Henderson tree, but at this point, I feel I must remove them.
"John and Elizabeth [Henderson] had a son named James (b aft 1695 d bef Aug 1776) who married Alice Kollock (could this be "Pollock," a prominent name in early Bertie & Onslow Counties?) but from what I can tell of him and his descendants (including another son named James who m Sarah Merrill), this family stayed in the area of Somerset and Worcester Counties in MD and is pretty well accounted for."
To satisfy myself that "Kollock" was not a mis-spelling of "Pollock," I had a quick look this afternoon just to see if there was an actual "Kollock" family living in the vicinity of Somerset County MD in the late 1600's, and sure enough, Jacob Kollock had settled the area around Lewes and Rehoboth Bay as early as 1689. There is an 1865 book of the family's genealogy free to read online which does as decent a job of enumerating the family's generations as one might expect from an older work of genealogy.
Down the Kollock rabbit hole I went.
But the further I burrowed, the more I began to wonder at a Kollock connection with our group of Delmarva Hendersons. The information I was given in my database shows James Henderson, son of John & Elizabeth Barnaby Henderson, marrying an Alice Kollock in Somerset County MD about 1715. Estimated dates of birth for James and Alice are "about 1695." A birth around that time would have most likely made Alice a granddaughter of Jacob Kollock through his sons Simon, Cornelius or Jacob Jr. (Jacob Sr.'s seven children seem pretty clearly outlined and there is no Alice among them.)
Although I didn't see children of Cornelius or Jacob Jr. in the book, Simon did have a granddaughter named Alice who married a John Henderson (not James). Further investigation yielded a marriage date of 24 Jan 1763 in Lewes, DE -- too late to be the Alice Kollock who married James Henderson.
Additional digging online turned up the information that Alice was the daughter of Shepard Kollock (who was in turn son of Simon, and grandson of Jacob). Simon died intestate so there were subsequent court records in Sussex County DE which helpfully outlined the relationship of some of the Kollock family members. Of most interest to me, however, was this account from Land Records of Sussex Co DE, Deed Book L No 11 and M No 12:
George Kollock, ship joyner,
from Boaz Manlove, High Sheriff of Sussex Co.
4 May 1769.
Simon Kollock, Esqr., late of Sussex Co., died intestate, and 2/3 of his tract fell to Shepard Kollock, eldest son, admr. of his late father who left and bequeathed by his last will the afsd. land amongst his several heirs, which heirs exhibited a petition to the Court of Common Pleas for a division of the land and the above land was allotted to Alice Henderson wife of John Henderson, shopkeeper, being one of the heirs of Shepard Kollock, land in the suburbs of the town of Lewes, on the southeast side fo the main county road that leadeth from the town of Lewes to Rehoboth and on the northeast side and adjoining David Hall's land which he bought of Simon Kollock, one of the afsd. heirs and joining the afsd. George Kollock's land on the southwest side of his land, being part of the afds. dividend or tract surveyed and divided of 42 1/4 acres, which John Henderson as above mentioned by a certain obligation became indebted to John White and Samuel Coldwell of Philadelphia, merchants and sometime afterwards said White and Coldwell recovered a judgement against afds. Henderson for the sum of the afds. obligation and whereas his land was seized and sold by public sale to George Kollick for 40 shillings. Wit John Russel, Wm Prettyman. Within deed ackn. 4 May 1796
George Kollock, Sussex co., joyner, from Alice Henderson, Sussex Co., spinster. 4 May 1769 For 87. Parcel of land being part of a larger tract granted by patent to Alexander Molleston, late of afds co., dec'd, and by sundry deeds of conveyances became the property of Simon Kollock, Esqr. late of the county adsd., died intestate and Shepard Kollock admr. of afds. Simon Kollock and the land became the property of Shepard Kollock and the land fell to the heirs of afds. Shepard Kollock and a parcel was allottted to Alice Henderson, one of the daughters of afds. Shepard Kollock. Lnd being in the suburbs of the town of Lewes joining land of David Hall and George Kollock. 41 1/4 acres. Wit: Benjamin Miflin, John Haverlo. Within deed of sale ackn. 5 May 1769.
So it appears that John Henderson, shop keeper, had nearly let his wife's inheritance slip out of the family but it was rescued by Alice's brother, George.
I don't know what to make of the 1769 appellation "Alice Henderson, Sussex Co., spinster" -- did she leave him for what he'd done?
I have found several trees online that show Alice Kollock (w/o "James" Henderson) as the daughter of Simon and Comfort Shepard Kollock, however, the information above clearly calls Alice Henderson "one of the daughters of the aforsaid Shepard Kollock" -- not a daughter of Simon.
At any rate, it seems clear to me that the Alice Kollock who married a John Henderson in Sussex County DE is not the Alice Kollock we are looking for as a wife of James Henderson of Somerset Co MD. I have no idea who the younger Alice's husband John Henderson was, or whether he was even connected with the "Delmarva James" Henderson family. I am adding him to the database as husband of Alice Kollock, and I am adding Alice as daughter of Shephard, but I have no parents for this John. If anyone can shed any light on him, please do so in the comments section below.
I am developing a nasty little suspicion that there might not have been an Alice "Kollock" who married James Henderson circa 1715 in Somerset County MD. Still, have to explore every avenue. Maybe she was the daughter of Cornelius, or Jacob Jr.?
A quick search for further information on Jacob Kollock Jr. and Cornelius Kollock revealed that Jacob Jr. was likely too young to be father of an Alice born around 1695, he himself only having been born in 1692. Although he did marry an "Alice Shepherd," I don't think he's a candidate for our purposes.
Here is his obituary from the Pennsylvania Gazette, March 26, 1772:
JACOB KOLLOCK - On the 7th of last Month departed this life at Lewes-Town in the County of Sussex, in the 80th year of his Age, after a long and tedious illness which he endured with great fortitude and Christian Resignation, Jacob Kollock, Esq., who for upwards of forty years was annually chosen one of the Representatives in Assembly for said County; and for the same Length of Time he was President of the Court of Common Pleas, a Trustee of the Loan Office, Register of Wills, Clerk of the Orphans Court, and Treasurer of the County, all which Offices he executed with great Reputation. And in the various Stations of private Life his Conduct was irreproachable ; he was an affectionate Husband and Father, a faithful Friend, and a kind Master. His steady Perseverance in a virtuous Course of Life rendered him deservedly beloved by all his acquaintance. He was Colonel of the Sussex Regt. 1756. —The Pennsylvania Gazette, March 26, 1772
So scratch Jacob Jr.
Now, what about Cornelius? A search of the LDS records shows the children of Cornelius as: Simon b 1723, William b 1725, Sarah b 1727, Mary b 1729, Royal b 1721, and Samuel b 1733. No Alice, and all too born to late to align with the Alice we're looking for.
My guess at this point is that process of elimination has shown that Alice, wife of James Henderson b ca 1695 in Somerset County MD was unlikely to have been Alice Kollock since no Alice was found among the Kollock family during the correct time period. I believe that researchers may have mistaken the Alice Kollock who married John Henderson in Sussex Co DE in 1763 for Alice, wife of James Henderson of Somerset County MD -- although how that could have happened, considering the clarity of the records, is a mystery to me.
If anyone is aware of documents that can disprove my theory of a case of mistaken identity, please contact me and point me in the direction of the missing records! I would be delighted to be able to re-connect the Kollocks to the Delmarva Henderson tree, but at this point, I feel I must remove them.
Friday, April 10, 2015
Richard Barnabe, Merchant of London, Makes a Wonderfully Helpful Will
I remember former Clan Henderson genealogist Dr. Horace Loftin once telling me that he had discovered a record that caused him to speculate that his Henderson ancestor, James Barnabe (later spelled Barnaby), had been a merchant sailing to and from the East Indies. Since I wasn't working on that line of Hendersons at the time, I neglected to ask for details, which has necessitated me finding them for myself.
Although I am doubtful of a connection between my James "Isaac" Henderson of Onslow County and the family of John and Elizabeth Barnaby Henderson of Somerset & Worcester Counties MD, I was still intrigued by the idea of a 17th-century merchant family settling the wilds of the Delmarva Peninsula so I went poking around to see what I could learn.
First, a little background on the Barnaby connection to the Hendersons of the Delmarva Peninsula...
On 1 Jul 1680, in Somerset County MD, Elizabeth Barnaby (b Feb 1661), daughter of James Barnaby (the younger) and his wife Mary, married John Henderson (b May 1661), son of James Henderson and his wife, also Mary. Their numerous children and grandchildren would for the most part stay in the Worcester County MD area with the exception of grandson Barnaby Henderson, who would move to Onslow County NC circa 1765.
Elizabeth Barnaby's father, James the younger, made his will on 26 Jan 1665/66 leaving bequests to wife Mary (executrix), and his minor children James (noted as under 16), Rebecca, and Elizabeth (both noted as under 15).
After James's early death, his widow, Mary Barnaby, would marry local planter Edward Jones. Mary's health (or luck) was apparently not much better than James's and a few months after giving birth to her first child with Mr. Jones (in 1669), Mary died too, leaving her three young children and an infant in the care of her second husband. I found an interesting abstract (See footnote 1) conveying the information that "James Barnebe" was "shott with a gun in the hands of Mercy Fountaine on the plantation where Edward Jones liveth the 3rd day of March 1681 and was buried there the 4th day of the same month." James would have been about seventeen, and Fountaine was only about fifteen years old at the time. I have not been able to find any additional details on the incident, so I assume it was accidental since there are no apparent trial records.
James Barnabe, father of the unfortunate orphans (and even less fortunate son), was in turn the son of James Barnabe the elder and his wife, Sarah. According to a deposition, James was in Northampton County, VA as early as 1637/38. In 1640 he and Sarah were headright settlers for John Holloway of Accomack County VA, and in 1651 they were the same in Northampton County VA for Roger Jones (not sure how that happened, but that's what my records say). I wonder if Roger was any relation to Edward...hmmm.
I have a notation that James Barnabe the elder was "of London" with an estimated birth date of 1610, so I decided to have a look and see if that held water. 1637 was a long time ago and there is a lot of room for error to develop in the records. I didn't really expect to find anything to connect this James Barnabe to any English merchants or shipping enterprises, but blow me down...
From the book Virginia Gleanings in England, by Lotrop Withington, page 135:
"Will of Richard Barnabe, London, Marchant, bound on a voyage by God's grace to the East Indyes with good shipp or vessell named the Mary of London of the burden of One Thousand Tunnes or thereabouts. Will 19 January 1630, proved 11 July 1636."
The will is lengthy and detailed (lucky for us all). This was obviously not an old man, and he had plenty of time to think things through and write it all down. His wife was already dead and buried (in the church of St. Katherine Colman of London, in case you are wondering), and he makes known his wish "to be buried neere late wief." He leaves "all to daughters Elizabeth Barnabe and Mary Barnabe, executrixes" but he appoints his brothers-in-law John Boulteel, Clarke and George Rookes, Marchant" as overseers to care for his goods until his daughters reach the age of 21.
In addition to naming other in-laws and outlining the relationships of several, he mentions: "To Loving brother John Barnabe (See footnote 2) resident in Virginia and Planter there 100 pounds, and my brother James Barnabe resident in Virginia 100 pounds, to be paid to them if living, or if dead to their sons and daughters. If none be living, then to the children of said brother in law George Rookes, Merchant."
George Rookes was married to the Barnabe's sister, Elizabeth, with whom he had seven children. Richard Barnabe also names sister Martha Barnabe "sometime weif of John Sargenson, vintner, dec'd and her sonn William," and another sister, Katherine Clarke and her son Robert and daughter Katherine.
Ever helpful to the future genealogist, he mentions Ann Barnabe, daughter of his brother John, married to _______ Edwards, Merchant, as well as a small bequest to servant, Elizabeth Rivers.
The rest of his estate he left to Masters and Wardens of Company of Drapers of London ("whereof I am a brother") to be used to enable "some godly and vertuous Preacher" to "preach five sermons yearly in church of St. Katherine Colman neere billeter lane, London." He's very specific about the sermons that be preached and obviously his heart lies with his dead wife and five (or six?) dead children in the churchyard.
He goes on to outline additional bequests in varying sizes to those who have served his family, as well as more distant relatives.
In April of 1635, he added an appendix to the "will made in England by me Richard Barnaby, Merchant, In good shipp Hart now bound for England," and in it he leaves bequests to friends including a "paire of Buffe gloves," and "one Capp wrought with silk and gold" and "one capp of lynnen with needle worke purles." To his nephew George Rookes he adds a bequest of an "imbroidered girdle with silver buckles." He leaves additional interesting bits and bobs to friends, servants and even the ship's surgeon and his mate. Apparently Mr. Barnabe's household was flush with treasures.
But that's all he wrote, folks. Sadly, his will was proved just over a year later on 11 July 1636. In a slightly depressing footnote to this piece, the church of St. Katherine Colman in London was demolished in 1925. No "godly and vertuous Preacher" shall evermore preach a sermon over the mortal remains of Ann and Richard Barnaby or their numerous departed children.
So it does indeed look like the Barnabes were a family of prosperous merchants of London. Richard and James's brother, John Barnabe, came to Virginia in 1621 and was "a servant in Governor George Yardley's house in Jamestown for two years" before going on to become a planter and a merchant with brother-in-law George Rookes. Although I have not been able to find any specific references to James Barnabe of Delmarva engaging in shipping or the merchant trade, it is clear that he was the third Barnaby brother in this scenario, and that he therefore very likely did come from London.
1. Somerset Co. MD, Liber J.K.L., Court Record, 3 Mar. 1681
2. Per a footnote at the bottom of the will, "The census of Virginia, 1624-25 gives the 'muster' of John Barnabe at Elizabeth City. It includes himself, aged 21, who came in the London Merchant in 1620 (Notten's Emigrants, p. 247.)" Additional details about John Barnaby (Barnabe) can be found in Virginia Immigrants and Adventurers, 1607-1635: A Biographical Dictionary, by Martha W. McCartney.
Although I am doubtful of a connection between my James "Isaac" Henderson of Onslow County and the family of John and Elizabeth Barnaby Henderson of Somerset & Worcester Counties MD, I was still intrigued by the idea of a 17th-century merchant family settling the wilds of the Delmarva Peninsula so I went poking around to see what I could learn.
First, a little background on the Barnaby connection to the Hendersons of the Delmarva Peninsula...
On 1 Jul 1680, in Somerset County MD, Elizabeth Barnaby (b Feb 1661), daughter of James Barnaby (the younger) and his wife Mary, married John Henderson (b May 1661), son of James Henderson and his wife, also Mary. Their numerous children and grandchildren would for the most part stay in the Worcester County MD area with the exception of grandson Barnaby Henderson, who would move to Onslow County NC circa 1765.
Elizabeth Barnaby's father, James the younger, made his will on 26 Jan 1665/66 leaving bequests to wife Mary (executrix), and his minor children James (noted as under 16), Rebecca, and Elizabeth (both noted as under 15).
After James's early death, his widow, Mary Barnaby, would marry local planter Edward Jones. Mary's health (or luck) was apparently not much better than James's and a few months after giving birth to her first child with Mr. Jones (in 1669), Mary died too, leaving her three young children and an infant in the care of her second husband. I found an interesting abstract (See footnote 1) conveying the information that "James Barnebe" was "shott with a gun in the hands of Mercy Fountaine on the plantation where Edward Jones liveth the 3rd day of March 1681 and was buried there the 4th day of the same month." James would have been about seventeen, and Fountaine was only about fifteen years old at the time. I have not been able to find any additional details on the incident, so I assume it was accidental since there are no apparent trial records.
James Barnabe, father of the unfortunate orphans (and even less fortunate son), was in turn the son of James Barnabe the elder and his wife, Sarah. According to a deposition, James was in Northampton County, VA as early as 1637/38. In 1640 he and Sarah were headright settlers for John Holloway of Accomack County VA, and in 1651 they were the same in Northampton County VA for Roger Jones (not sure how that happened, but that's what my records say). I wonder if Roger was any relation to Edward...hmmm.
I have a notation that James Barnabe the elder was "of London" with an estimated birth date of 1610, so I decided to have a look and see if that held water. 1637 was a long time ago and there is a lot of room for error to develop in the records. I didn't really expect to find anything to connect this James Barnabe to any English merchants or shipping enterprises, but blow me down...
From the book Virginia Gleanings in England, by Lotrop Withington, page 135:
"Will of Richard Barnabe, London, Marchant, bound on a voyage by God's grace to the East Indyes with good shipp or vessell named the Mary of London of the burden of One Thousand Tunnes or thereabouts. Will 19 January 1630, proved 11 July 1636."
The will is lengthy and detailed (lucky for us all). This was obviously not an old man, and he had plenty of time to think things through and write it all down. His wife was already dead and buried (in the church of St. Katherine Colman of London, in case you are wondering), and he makes known his wish "to be buried neere late wief." He leaves "all to daughters Elizabeth Barnabe and Mary Barnabe, executrixes" but he appoints his brothers-in-law John Boulteel, Clarke and George Rookes, Marchant" as overseers to care for his goods until his daughters reach the age of 21.
In addition to naming other in-laws and outlining the relationships of several, he mentions: "To Loving brother John Barnabe (See footnote 2) resident in Virginia and Planter there 100 pounds, and my brother James Barnabe resident in Virginia 100 pounds, to be paid to them if living, or if dead to their sons and daughters. If none be living, then to the children of said brother in law George Rookes, Merchant."
George Rookes was married to the Barnabe's sister, Elizabeth, with whom he had seven children. Richard Barnabe also names sister Martha Barnabe "sometime weif of John Sargenson, vintner, dec'd and her sonn William," and another sister, Katherine Clarke and her son Robert and daughter Katherine.
Ever helpful to the future genealogist, he mentions Ann Barnabe, daughter of his brother John, married to _______ Edwards, Merchant, as well as a small bequest to servant, Elizabeth Rivers.
The rest of his estate he left to Masters and Wardens of Company of Drapers of London ("whereof I am a brother") to be used to enable "some godly and vertuous Preacher" to "preach five sermons yearly in church of St. Katherine Colman neere billeter lane, London." He's very specific about the sermons that be preached and obviously his heart lies with his dead wife and five (or six?) dead children in the churchyard.
He goes on to outline additional bequests in varying sizes to those who have served his family, as well as more distant relatives.
In April of 1635, he added an appendix to the "will made in England by me Richard Barnaby, Merchant, In good shipp Hart now bound for England," and in it he leaves bequests to friends including a "paire of Buffe gloves," and "one Capp wrought with silk and gold" and "one capp of lynnen with needle worke purles." To his nephew George Rookes he adds a bequest of an "imbroidered girdle with silver buckles." He leaves additional interesting bits and bobs to friends, servants and even the ship's surgeon and his mate. Apparently Mr. Barnabe's household was flush with treasures.
But that's all he wrote, folks. Sadly, his will was proved just over a year later on 11 July 1636. In a slightly depressing footnote to this piece, the church of St. Katherine Colman in London was demolished in 1925. No "godly and vertuous Preacher" shall evermore preach a sermon over the mortal remains of Ann and Richard Barnaby or their numerous departed children.
So it does indeed look like the Barnabes were a family of prosperous merchants of London. Richard and James's brother, John Barnabe, came to Virginia in 1621 and was "a servant in Governor George Yardley's house in Jamestown for two years" before going on to become a planter and a merchant with brother-in-law George Rookes. Although I have not been able to find any specific references to James Barnabe of Delmarva engaging in shipping or the merchant trade, it is clear that he was the third Barnaby brother in this scenario, and that he therefore very likely did come from London.
1. Somerset Co. MD, Liber J.K.L., Court Record, 3 Mar. 1681
2. Per a footnote at the bottom of the will, "The census of Virginia, 1624-25 gives the 'muster' of John Barnabe at Elizabeth City. It includes himself, aged 21, who came in the London Merchant in 1620 (Notten's Emigrants, p. 247.)" Additional details about John Barnaby (Barnabe) can be found in Virginia Immigrants and Adventurers, 1607-1635: A Biographical Dictionary, by Martha W. McCartney.
Thursday, April 9, 2015
Looking for the Link Between "Delmarva" James Henderson (1661) and James "Isaac" Henderson of Onslow Co NC (1732)
Since we've had a few fresh DNA matches lately, I've resumed my efforts to discover the link between the Hendersons of the Delmarva Peninsula and their distant cousins of Onslow and Chatham Counties in North Carolina.
As researchers of the family will likely already know, James Henderson, the progenitor of the Hendersons of the Delmarva Peninsula, arrived in Accomack County VA as early as 1661, when his son, John, was baptized in Hungar's Parish (technically in Northampton Co VA). Although one great-grandson, Barnaby, moved south to Onslow County NC in the following century, many descendants of "Delmarva James" can still be found on Maryland's eastern shore today.
The other main branch of this genetically connected family begins with James "Isaac" Henderson, who in 1732 makes his first documented appearance in the earliest records of the Onslow Precinct on the central coast of North Carolina. Although DNA testing has shown that there is a connection between Onslow James "Isaac" Henderson and the Henderson family of the Delmarva Peninsula, we cannot find anything to indicate that Onslow James was descended from Delmarva James.
For these past many years since we first discovered the DNA matches, we have been working under the assumption that their common ancestor lived prior to 1661, probably in Scotland.
For decades both lines had wondered about a possible connection with the other, but lacking any sort of paper trail linking the the two families, we had all but dismissed the possibility. Barnaby's family didn't arrive in Onslow County until 1765 - more than three decades after James "Isaac" Henderson is found living on the New River. We have uncovered no hint of interaction between the two families, so they may not have even known of their kinship themselves.
Since new documents and records come online on an almost daily basis, I have decided to try again to discover a connection between Delmarva James and Onslow James "Isaac." Given the current lack of any sort of paper trail, it is a task fraught with difficulty, made harder since we don't even have firm birth dates for the progenitor of either of the two family branches.
We know that Delmarva James died between 1691-1692, and that Onslow James "Isaac" made his will in October of 1770, so likely died shortly thereafter. Researchers have estimated that Delmarva James was probably born 1630-1640, while I estimate that James "Isaac" of Onslow was born between 1690-1710. Given those date ranges, it is probable that if there was an ancestor/descendant relationship between the two, Onslow James would most likely have been a grandson of Delmarva James.
I believe we can safely rule out a father-son relationship based on the simple fact that Delmarva James did have a son named James (with second wife Alice). That James (b 10 Jun 1669 d aft 1696) married "Ester" and had one known child, Francis (b 30 Oct 1691 d 1762). That branch of the family appears to still be in Somerset County MD well into the 1700's, making it highly unlikely that James Jr. is the same James "Isaac" Henderson who died in Onslow County 101 years later.
So let's assume then that Onslow James "Isaac" was a grandson (or possibly even a great-grandson, making him roughly a contemporary with distant cousin and future Onslow neighbor, Barnaby). Where might he fit?
A quick look through my obviously incomplete data on Delmarva James's grandsons and even great-grandsons leaves plenty of room for possibilities.
The first possibility is that Onslow James "Isaac" might have been a previously unidentified son of James Jr. of Somerset Co MD (b 1669 MD - d aft 1696 MD), and brother to Francis (1691 MD -1762 MD). Francis is the only child I currently have listed for James Jr. and his birth and death dates correspond nicely to the range we might reasonably expect to see for our James "Isaac." It seems very likely to me that Francis was probably not an only child, and that James "Isaac" might have been a grandson of Delmarva James through this namesake James's line.
A second possibility is that Onslow James "Isaac" might have belonged to William Henderson (b bef 1668 d aft 1696), second son of Delmarva James Henderson and his first wife, Mary (Mary d bef 1668). We know nothing of William at all, apart from the name of his wife, Sarah. That possibility is wide open to exploration at this point.
A third (and less likely) possibility is that our Onslow James could have been a great-grandson of Delmarva James through a son of John and Elizabeth Barnaby Henderson. John and Elizabeth had a son named James (b aft 1695 d bef Aug 1776) who married Alice Kollock (could this be "Pollock," a prominent name in early Bertie & Onslow Counties?*) but from what I can tell of him and his descendants (including another son named James who m Sarah Merrill), this family stayed in the area of Somerset and Worcester Counties in MD and is pretty well accounted for. Neither do the names of their children correspond to the names of the children of Onslow County James "Isaac."
That leaves us with the possibility that Onlsow James "Isaac" might have belonged to one of the other sons of John and Elizabeth Barnaby Henderson:
Although John & Elizabeth Barnaby Henderson's line seems like the most direct and obvious connection to Onslow County, they are also the most well-documented, and they have been examined previously for this purpose and without success. The information I have on the Delmarva line was provided to me over the years by Dr. Horace Loftin, former genealogist for the Clan Henderson Society and a descendant of Barnaby Henderson of Onslow County. While the information he had may be incomplete on some lines, I have confidence that what he did provide is reliable.
So as you can see, there is a lot of investigating to do if I hope to systematically and conclusively rule out each candidates in order to eliminate once and for all a direct connection to that family. At this point, after having another look at our candidates, I confess there are more potential options than I realized and for the first time I am feeling optimistic. But it will take a considerable amount of time to run down all of the leads.
Delmarva James had four children. The first three, John, William & Jeane, he had by his wife Mary. The last, his namesake, James, he had by his second wife, Alice.
I took a quick look at Jane to see what was known about her. She married John Williams Jr. of Somerset County MD and had two known sons. Traditionally the first son was often named after the father's father, while the second was then named for the mother's father. (This wasn't always the case, but was a very common practice.) True to form, the elder son of John and Jeane Henderson Williams was called John, after his father and grandfather. So naturally one might expect the second son to be called "James," after the mother's father. Instead, he was called...
Isaac!
*Note: I have since discarded "Kollock" as the surname of the wife of James Henderson. There is currently no evidence that I can find to support the idea that the wife of James Henderson of Somerset County MD was a Kollock.
As researchers of the family will likely already know, James Henderson, the progenitor of the Hendersons of the Delmarva Peninsula, arrived in Accomack County VA as early as 1661, when his son, John, was baptized in Hungar's Parish (technically in Northampton Co VA). Although one great-grandson, Barnaby, moved south to Onslow County NC in the following century, many descendants of "Delmarva James" can still be found on Maryland's eastern shore today.
The other main branch of this genetically connected family begins with James "Isaac" Henderson, who in 1732 makes his first documented appearance in the earliest records of the Onslow Precinct on the central coast of North Carolina. Although DNA testing has shown that there is a connection between Onslow James "Isaac" Henderson and the Henderson family of the Delmarva Peninsula, we cannot find anything to indicate that Onslow James was descended from Delmarva James.
For these past many years since we first discovered the DNA matches, we have been working under the assumption that their common ancestor lived prior to 1661, probably in Scotland.
For decades both lines had wondered about a possible connection with the other, but lacking any sort of paper trail linking the the two families, we had all but dismissed the possibility. Barnaby's family didn't arrive in Onslow County until 1765 - more than three decades after James "Isaac" Henderson is found living on the New River. We have uncovered no hint of interaction between the two families, so they may not have even known of their kinship themselves.
Since new documents and records come online on an almost daily basis, I have decided to try again to discover a connection between Delmarva James and Onslow James "Isaac." Given the current lack of any sort of paper trail, it is a task fraught with difficulty, made harder since we don't even have firm birth dates for the progenitor of either of the two family branches.
We know that Delmarva James died between 1691-1692, and that Onslow James "Isaac" made his will in October of 1770, so likely died shortly thereafter. Researchers have estimated that Delmarva James was probably born 1630-1640, while I estimate that James "Isaac" of Onslow was born between 1690-1710. Given those date ranges, it is probable that if there was an ancestor/descendant relationship between the two, Onslow James would most likely have been a grandson of Delmarva James.
I believe we can safely rule out a father-son relationship based on the simple fact that Delmarva James did have a son named James (with second wife Alice). That James (b 10 Jun 1669 d aft 1696) married "Ester" and had one known child, Francis (b 30 Oct 1691 d 1762). That branch of the family appears to still be in Somerset County MD well into the 1700's, making it highly unlikely that James Jr. is the same James "Isaac" Henderson who died in Onslow County 101 years later.
So let's assume then that Onslow James "Isaac" was a grandson (or possibly even a great-grandson, making him roughly a contemporary with distant cousin and future Onslow neighbor, Barnaby). Where might he fit?
A quick look through my obviously incomplete data on Delmarva James's grandsons and even great-grandsons leaves plenty of room for possibilities.
The first possibility is that Onslow James "Isaac" might have been a previously unidentified son of James Jr. of Somerset Co MD (b 1669 MD - d aft 1696 MD), and brother to Francis (1691 MD -1762 MD). Francis is the only child I currently have listed for James Jr. and his birth and death dates correspond nicely to the range we might reasonably expect to see for our James "Isaac." It seems very likely to me that Francis was probably not an only child, and that James "Isaac" might have been a grandson of Delmarva James through this namesake James's line.
A second possibility is that Onslow James "Isaac" might have belonged to William Henderson (b bef 1668 d aft 1696), second son of Delmarva James Henderson and his first wife, Mary (Mary d bef 1668). We know nothing of William at all, apart from the name of his wife, Sarah. That possibility is wide open to exploration at this point.
A third (and less likely) possibility is that our Onslow James could have been a great-grandson of Delmarva James through a son of John and Elizabeth Barnaby Henderson. John and Elizabeth had a son named James (b aft 1695 d bef Aug 1776) who married Alice Kollock (could this be "Pollock," a prominent name in early Bertie & Onslow Counties?*) but from what I can tell of him and his descendants (including another son named James who m Sarah Merrill), this family stayed in the area of Somerset and Worcester Counties in MD and is pretty well accounted for. Neither do the names of their children correspond to the names of the children of Onslow County James "Isaac."
That leaves us with the possibility that Onlsow James "Isaac" might have belonged to one of the other sons of John and Elizabeth Barnaby Henderson:
- Charles (b ca 1687 MD - d 1762 Worcester Co MD) m Parthenia Merrill and had Levina ca 1719; Jessee ca 1712; William ca 1715; Barnaby ca 1720 (moved to Onslow Co NC 1765); and Levin ca 1727. No known son named James.
- William (b ca 1681 MD - d bef 1721 MD) about whom I currently know nothing, which makes him a reasonable candidate.
- John Jr. (b ca 1689 MD d bef 1742/43 Worcester Co MD) who m Sarah Houston and had John ca 1717; Sarah ca 1719; Elizabeth ca 1723; Rebecca ca 1725; and Samuel ca 1721. No known son named James, but as a side note, there was a large family of Houstons in early Onslow County.
- Benjamin (b ca 1697 MD - d bef May 1722) m Mary (?) and had Benjamin ca 1722; Leah ca 1725; Betty ca 1727; Mary ca 1729; Rhoda ca 1731; and Lemuel ca 1735. No James, but I do not have any additional info on this line.
- Joseph (b ? MD - d ? ?) - absolutely no info at all on Joseph, so another good candidate.
Although John & Elizabeth Barnaby Henderson's line seems like the most direct and obvious connection to Onslow County, they are also the most well-documented, and they have been examined previously for this purpose and without success. The information I have on the Delmarva line was provided to me over the years by Dr. Horace Loftin, former genealogist for the Clan Henderson Society and a descendant of Barnaby Henderson of Onslow County. While the information he had may be incomplete on some lines, I have confidence that what he did provide is reliable.
So as you can see, there is a lot of investigating to do if I hope to systematically and conclusively rule out each candidates in order to eliminate once and for all a direct connection to that family. At this point, after having another look at our candidates, I confess there are more potential options than I realized and for the first time I am feeling optimistic. But it will take a considerable amount of time to run down all of the leads.
 |
| Click to enlarge chart. |
One last very intriguing hint of a connection between the two familes...
Delmarva James had four children. The first three, John, William & Jeane, he had by his wife Mary. The last, his namesake, James, he had by his second wife, Alice.
I took a quick look at Jane to see what was known about her. She married John Williams Jr. of Somerset County MD and had two known sons. Traditionally the first son was often named after the father's father, while the second was then named for the mother's father. (This wasn't always the case, but was a very common practice.) True to form, the elder son of John and Jeane Henderson Williams was called John, after his father and grandfather. So naturally one might expect the second son to be called "James," after the mother's father. Instead, he was called...
Isaac!
*Note: I have since discarded "Kollock" as the surname of the wife of James Henderson. There is currently no evidence that I can find to support the idea that the wife of James Henderson of Somerset County MD was a Kollock.
Friday, April 3, 2015
In which I build a Google Map and attempt to plot 18th-century Kennedy families of the mid-Atlantic
A couple of months ago I began working in earnest to try to push my Kennedy family line back past ancestor David Kennedy, who died in the spring of 1800 while on a horse trading trip through the Carolinas.
Kennedy's young family in Russell County VA received a report that he had been taken ill during his travels and died suddenly. According to family lore, he was buried where he died, although the exact location has never been determined. Only a few months later his wife, Elizabeth Conway Kennedy, was killed in a dispute with a neighbor, leaving a young son and daughter orphaned. I wrote about that incident in a previous blog post.
We know very little about David Kennedy, but recent DNA testing has disproved the family tradition connecting him to the Augusta County VA family of Captain Joseph Kennedy (or, in fact, to any Kennedys currently participating in the Surname Project)
So I'm coming at the puzzle from both directions in time.
First I connected with modern Kennedy cousins to collaborate and share information on generations from the period of Kennedy's untimely death to the present. That work is ongoing and we will continue to pull together to try to discover the origin of our common ancestor.
Next I connected with Kennedy Surname and DNA Project Administrator James Kennedy to review the current results of the Kennedy Y-DNA tests to see if those could be of any assistance in identifying possible ancestors of our David Kennedy. After communicating with Jim Kennedy, it became clear that no comparisons could be made because no one from our Kennedy family had submitted a DNA test! Kennedy cousin Laura Smith identified three potential direct-line male testers and raised funds to pay for the tests, and after the typical delay of 10-12 weeks we had our answer. No matches. While this was discouraging news in one respect, it allowed us to sweep away decades of erroneous research and start with a fresh slate.
In the mean time, I have been plugging away at creating an interactive map (on Google) to help me sort out various clusters of Kennedys that I run across in my research. Who knew Kennedy was such a prolific surname!? The plotted points on the map are the results of logging the many random references in old books, stray Kennedys found in online data, already-researched Kennedy family groups from Ancestry and similar sites, and Kennedys whose locations can be discerned from the current chart of DNA test results.
The map will always be a work in progress, as there are still very likely hundreds (if not thousands) of markers to be added (I've charted less than 20% of the identifiable DNA tests at this point, for instance).
Bear in mind that this is a project intended to help my extended Kennedy family weed through, identify, and confirm or discard potential connections to our specific line. Therefore many of the comments that I've made in the plotted entries may not seem helpful to all Kennedy lines, however, it is my hope that just making a start at identifying and categorizing some of the known groups may be better than having no map at all.
Although the map is called "18th Century Mid-Atlantic Kennedy Groups" it has suffered from scope creep as descendants scattered to the wind and new immigrants arrived over the span of decades. In general though, I have tried to keep things contained the 18th century and the mid-Atlantic. There is an obvious focus on the families of PA/MD/VA/NC/SC, which is most relevant to my David Kennedy family project.
On the lefthand side of the live map you will see a key. I have tried to color-code the groups where possible to identify clusters that appear to be related. Dots indicate paper-trail research and teardrop-shaped markers mean we have a confirmed DNA test for the individual. So for instance, the light blue markers in the western NC area (refer to live map) are a mixture of dots and teardrops since we have several DNA tests for that line, but we also have a paper trail that allows us to identify additional individuals who are related to that same cluster.
Pale gray dots or teardrops indicate that the individual is not yet identified and/or matched with any other group.
An "X" before an individual's name means I have ruled that line out as being a potential match for my Kennedy family. The star-shaped markers indicate individuals that I feel may be strong leads for our group.
Again, this is a work in progress which is strongly tilted towards assisting descendants of David and Elizabeth Conway Kennedy of Russell County VA, but hopefully it can be of assistance to other families at the same time.
Kennedy's young family in Russell County VA received a report that he had been taken ill during his travels and died suddenly. According to family lore, he was buried where he died, although the exact location has never been determined. Only a few months later his wife, Elizabeth Conway Kennedy, was killed in a dispute with a neighbor, leaving a young son and daughter orphaned. I wrote about that incident in a previous blog post.
We know very little about David Kennedy, but recent DNA testing has disproved the family tradition connecting him to the Augusta County VA family of Captain Joseph Kennedy (or, in fact, to any Kennedys currently participating in the Surname Project)
So I'm coming at the puzzle from both directions in time.
First I connected with modern Kennedy cousins to collaborate and share information on generations from the period of Kennedy's untimely death to the present. That work is ongoing and we will continue to pull together to try to discover the origin of our common ancestor.
Next I connected with Kennedy Surname and DNA Project Administrator James Kennedy to review the current results of the Kennedy Y-DNA tests to see if those could be of any assistance in identifying possible ancestors of our David Kennedy. After communicating with Jim Kennedy, it became clear that no comparisons could be made because no one from our Kennedy family had submitted a DNA test! Kennedy cousin Laura Smith identified three potential direct-line male testers and raised funds to pay for the tests, and after the typical delay of 10-12 weeks we had our answer. No matches. While this was discouraging news in one respect, it allowed us to sweep away decades of erroneous research and start with a fresh slate.
In the mean time, I have been plugging away at creating an interactive map (on Google) to help me sort out various clusters of Kennedys that I run across in my research. Who knew Kennedy was such a prolific surname!? The plotted points on the map are the results of logging the many random references in old books, stray Kennedys found in online data, already-researched Kennedy family groups from Ancestry and similar sites, and Kennedys whose locations can be discerned from the current chart of DNA test results.
The map will always be a work in progress, as there are still very likely hundreds (if not thousands) of markers to be added (I've charted less than 20% of the identifiable DNA tests at this point, for instance).
Bear in mind that this is a project intended to help my extended Kennedy family weed through, identify, and confirm or discard potential connections to our specific line. Therefore many of the comments that I've made in the plotted entries may not seem helpful to all Kennedy lines, however, it is my hope that just making a start at identifying and categorizing some of the known groups may be better than having no map at all.
Although the map is called "18th Century Mid-Atlantic Kennedy Groups" it has suffered from scope creep as descendants scattered to the wind and new immigrants arrived over the span of decades. In general though, I have tried to keep things contained the 18th century and the mid-Atlantic. There is an obvious focus on the families of PA/MD/VA/NC/SC, which is most relevant to my David Kennedy family project.
On the lefthand side of the live map you will see a key. I have tried to color-code the groups where possible to identify clusters that appear to be related. Dots indicate paper-trail research and teardrop-shaped markers mean we have a confirmed DNA test for the individual. So for instance, the light blue markers in the western NC area (refer to live map) are a mixture of dots and teardrops since we have several DNA tests for that line, but we also have a paper trail that allows us to identify additional individuals who are related to that same cluster.
Pale gray dots or teardrops indicate that the individual is not yet identified and/or matched with any other group.
An "X" before an individual's name means I have ruled that line out as being a potential match for my Kennedy family. The star-shaped markers indicate individuals that I feel may be strong leads for our group.
Again, this is a work in progress which is strongly tilted towards assisting descendants of David and Elizabeth Conway Kennedy of Russell County VA, but hopefully it can be of assistance to other families at the same time.
 |
| Click here to visit the live map on Google |
Early NC/VA Hendersons: Edward Mosely's 1733 Map of North Carolina and 17th Century Maps of the Delmarva Peninsula
A couple of tools that I have found to be particularly helpful when trying to pinpoint the location of my Henderson families in the 17th and 18th centuries are Edward Moseley's 1733 Map of northeastern North Carolina (primarily the Chowan Precinct), and a collection of 17th-and-18th-century maps of the Delmarva Peninsula that can be found on the website of the Edward H. Nabb Research Center for Delmarva History and Culture.
Unfortunately, the earliest maps of the Delmarva Peninsula are so archaic and inaccurately drawn and oriented as to be nearly indecipherable, but by 1682, the one drawn by John Seller is at least recognizable. The 18th century maps are better. There is also an enlargeable one in the digital collection of the Library of Congress. I believe it dates from 1778 and is called "The Peninsula Between Delaware & Chesopeak Bays, with the said bays and shores adjacent drawn from the most accurate surveys." This one is particularly useful due to the zoom feature.
I stumbled across the Moseley map while trying to locate the Meherrin Creek referred to in this 1737 Bertie County land record witnessed by a JOHN HENDERSON:
Book 3 p. 363 William Moore to Benjamin Hill
19 January 1737 100 acres on N side Meheron Creek. Wit: J Bonde, John Laman, JOHN HENDERSON. "Know...that I Judith Moore...have for five pounds...by Coll Benjamin Hill relinquished all my Right Title and Interest to within land. 19 January 1737. Wit J Bonde, John Laman, JOHN HENDERSON. November Court 1738.
While I don't know that this John Henderson is connected in any way to the Delmarva Hendersons or to either of the two Onslow County Henderson groups, it is a point of interest that James "Isaac" Henderson's 1770 will was witnessed by John Bond and _____ Moor. The names Bond and Moor/Moore are frequently connected with the handful of other very early northeastern NC Henderson records I have been able to find.
The name Edward Moseley is well-known in the old Chowan and Bertie precincts of North Carolina. Moseley, the Surveyor General of North Carolina before 1710 and between 1723-1733, was born in England in 1683, and was active in the early politics of the colony. Moseley immigrated into Charleston and began his career as an Ordinary Court Clerk under Governor James Moore. He would marry judiciously (Anne Lillington Walker, widow of former governor Henderson Walker) and rise through the political ranks, ending up in Albemarle County where he began his surveying and legal careers. A feud between Moseley and Governor Charles Eden arose when Moseley accused Eden of collusion with the pirate Blackbeard (circumstantial evidence seems strong). As a result of the libel, he was heavily fined and banned from public office for several years.
Nevertheless...the man drew a good map.
Learn more about Edward Moseley's 1733 Map.
Learn more about Edward Moseley's life and political career.
Unfortunately, the earliest maps of the Delmarva Peninsula are so archaic and inaccurately drawn and oriented as to be nearly indecipherable, but by 1682, the one drawn by John Seller is at least recognizable. The 18th century maps are better. There is also an enlargeable one in the digital collection of the Library of Congress. I believe it dates from 1778 and is called "The Peninsula Between Delaware & Chesopeak Bays, with the said bays and shores adjacent drawn from the most accurate surveys." This one is particularly useful due to the zoom feature.
I stumbled across the Moseley map while trying to locate the Meherrin Creek referred to in this 1737 Bertie County land record witnessed by a JOHN HENDERSON:
Book 3 p. 363 William Moore to Benjamin Hill
19 January 1737 100 acres on N side Meheron Creek. Wit: J Bonde, John Laman, JOHN HENDERSON. "Know...that I Judith Moore...have for five pounds...by Coll Benjamin Hill relinquished all my Right Title and Interest to within land. 19 January 1737. Wit J Bonde, John Laman, JOHN HENDERSON. November Court 1738.
While I don't know that this John Henderson is connected in any way to the Delmarva Hendersons or to either of the two Onslow County Henderson groups, it is a point of interest that James "Isaac" Henderson's 1770 will was witnessed by John Bond and _____ Moor. The names Bond and Moor/Moore are frequently connected with the handful of other very early northeastern NC Henderson records I have been able to find.
The name Edward Moseley is well-known in the old Chowan and Bertie precincts of North Carolina. Moseley, the Surveyor General of North Carolina before 1710 and between 1723-1733, was born in England in 1683, and was active in the early politics of the colony. Moseley immigrated into Charleston and began his career as an Ordinary Court Clerk under Governor James Moore. He would marry judiciously (Anne Lillington Walker, widow of former governor Henderson Walker) and rise through the political ranks, ending up in Albemarle County where he began his surveying and legal careers. A feud between Moseley and Governor Charles Eden arose when Moseley accused Eden of collusion with the pirate Blackbeard (circumstantial evidence seems strong). As a result of the libel, he was heavily fined and banned from public office for several years.
Nevertheless...the man drew a good map.
Learn more about Edward Moseley's 1733 Map.
Learn more about Edward Moseley's life and political career.
 |
| Edward Moseley's Map of NC, 1733 |
Thursday, April 2, 2015
Revisiting the Rhodes Bible for Henderson Connections
Many years ago I became aware, although now I recall not how, that the Rhodes Family Bible contained references to several birth records that appeared to pertain to our Onslow County NC James "Isaac" Henderson family. Fortuitously, I also learned that the Bible was housed in the document collection of nearby Greensboro College, so I headed over to take a look.
Out of the case came a voluminous tome of archaic binding and musty, brittle pages. I went through that Bible with a fine-toothed comb, and although I did find many Rhodes notations, I couldn't find a single reference to a Henderson. I must have turned every page of that Bible, to no avail. Puzzled and disappointed, I photographed the Bible and returned it to the archivist.
I recently learned that there was a second copy of the Bible in the Cullen Hatch Collection in Kinston, NC (the Hatch family intermarried with that of Rhodes). It is this version of the Bible that contained the references to children and/or grandchildren of James "Isaac" Henderson.
Now that so much more documentation has become available online, I need to revisit this link, review the transcription of this alternate version of the Bible, and compare it to the one I reviewed over two decades ago. In the mean time, I would like to share this transcription by North Carolina historical and genealogical researcher Sloan Mason. All editorial comments are Mr. Mason's, but the red emphasis is mine.
I will follow up with a separate post of commentary.
Out of the case came a voluminous tome of archaic binding and musty, brittle pages. I went through that Bible with a fine-toothed comb, and although I did find many Rhodes notations, I couldn't find a single reference to a Henderson. I must have turned every page of that Bible, to no avail. Puzzled and disappointed, I photographed the Bible and returned it to the archivist.
I recently learned that there was a second copy of the Bible in the Cullen Hatch Collection in Kinston, NC (the Hatch family intermarried with that of Rhodes). It is this version of the Bible that contained the references to children and/or grandchildren of James "Isaac" Henderson.
Now that so much more documentation has become available online, I need to revisit this link, review the transcription of this alternate version of the Bible, and compare it to the one I reviewed over two decades ago. In the mean time, I would like to share this transcription by North Carolina historical and genealogical researcher Sloan Mason. All editorial comments are Mr. Mason's, but the red emphasis is mine.
I will follow up with a separate post of commentary.
The Rhodes Bible of the Cullen Hatch Collection - Transcribed by Sloan Mason
The New Testament
Of our Lord and Saviour
Jesus Christ
Oxford
Printed by Thomas BASKETT
Printer to the University
MDCCLVII
1757
An Acct. of the Ages of all the Children Belonging to Henry RHODES & Mary His Wife
Sarah RHODES was bornd March 22 1755.
Elizabeth RHODES was bornd Febr. 24th, 1756
Woodhouse RHODES borned Jany. 19th, 1759.
Oliff RHODES was bornd Febr. 16th, 1762.
Mary RHODES was bornd Aug. 20, 1766.
Henry RHODES & Eliz. WARD was married Aug. 5, 1770.
(there are 3 lines of written material circled out, unable to read,
but does have a date of 1771 on the 2nd line)
Henry RHODES son of Henry & Eliz RHODES bornd on Monday abt. 11 O'clock
in morning the 22nd of November 1773 & the 8thd day of the moons age.
Henneritta RHODES daughter to Henry & Eliz RHODES was bornd on Friday
the 4th Day of April 1777 & the days age of the moon.
(under the word April there is an arrow pointing to April, then the
word married? Than another arrow pointing to Eliz's name in line above)
Mary RHODES wife to Henry RHODES, 18 years departed this life on Monday morning about 3 O'clock the 5th day of June in the year of Our Lord 1769 in the 38th year of her age.
(page 2)
(The 2nd page of this bible is impossible to read-it may be slave records-but is impossible to know there are only a few words I can make out.)
(mid way down page)
son bornd
26th? Day of June -- Bot Him & His mother 1th May 1774
--- was bornd
in the Evening 1770
(page 3)
An Acct. of all the children Belonging to Woodhs. RHODES & Elizabeth his wife with the Ages of them.
1) Exilina RHODES was borne the 29 Day of May 1782.
2) John Hatch RHODES was bornd the 16 Day of March 1784 on
the 25 Day of the Moons Age.
3) Mary RHODES was bornd the 14 Day of September 1785
about one O'clock in the after hour?
4) Woodhs RHODES Jun. To Woodhs RHODES & Elizabeth his wife was borned
the 24 Day of Jany 1788 And the 16 Day of the Moons age about 2 O'clock
in the morning.
5) Asa Hatch RHODES was bornd the 6th Day of Jany 1790.
6) Lemuel Hatch RHODES was bornd the 19th of Febuary 1792.
7) Henry RHODES was born 25 Day of Jany 1794 Died Oct. 8th, 1849 in
the 56th year of his age.
8) Durant Hatch RHODES was bornd 9 Day of April 1797
9) Narsisey Hatch RHODES was bornd the 25 Day of December 1798.
10) Anthony Hatch RHODES was bornd the 9 Day of April 1801
11) Edmon Hatch RHODES was bornd 18th Day of Jany 1806
12) Margaret RHODES was bornd 17 Day of Feby. 1808.
(page 4)
(At bottom of page)
Zilpha FRANCK Daughter of Edward FRANCK and Elizabeth his wife, was born November 28 in the year of our Lord 1798 and was married to Henr. RHODES April 5th Day 1821.
(page 5)
(at bottom of page)
My Dear beloved Father Woodhouse RHODES departed this life on Wednesday 9th of May 1827 Just before sun down his age then was sixty eight years three months and twenty days.
----------------------------------------------------------------
(the next insertion was not in [the original] bible record, but it was in another copy
from the Cullen Hatch collection - view photocopy of record here)
Ezekiel HENDERSON and Arglus HENDERSON and Sary [Sucey?] his wife was bornd April
the 15 Day --- ---1751 177--
(page 7)
Bedence JENKIN daughter of William JENKINS and Bety his wife was bornd March the 18th day in the year of our Lord God 1771?
Charity JENKINS daughter of William JENKINS and Bety his wife was born Septem 21st day in the year of our Lord 1777 (or 1772?)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(page 6)
An account of the childrens ages Belonging to Henr. RHODES and Zilpha his wife.
1) Asa Franck RHODES was bornd the 17th of February in the year of our Lord 1822.
2) Durant Woodhs. RHODES was bornd the 1st of October in the year of our Lord 1823. No. 2 Departed Septr. 8th 1830.
3) Mary Elizabeth RHODES was bornd the 21st of September in the year of our Lord 1825.
4) Henry Emanuel RHODES was born the 7th of October in the year of our Lord 1827.
5) John Martin Franck RHODES was bornd the 2nd of July in the year of our Lord 1829.
6) Edward Haines RHODES was bornd 7th of March in the year of our Lord 1831.
7) Anthony Edmond RHODES was bornd December 13th in the year of our Lord 1832.
8) Bryan Shine RHODES was born January 12th A.D. this date 1836.
(page 7)
Hannah Rebecca RHODES was born 19th of June in the year of our Lord 1838.
Elizabeth R. HERRITAGE daughter of F. G. HERRITAGE and Penelope his wife was born Feb. 6th 1830. Was married to H. E. RHODES Nov. 9th 1848 Died Oct. 8th 1849 in the twentieth year of her age.
Henry Elizabeth (Koonce crossed out) RHODES child of the above couple was born Oct. 6th 1849. Died Nov. 7th 1849 aged one month.
Mary E. Hatch consort of Richard J. R. HATCH and daughter of Henry RHODES departed this life on the 27 Oct. 1851 in the 27th year of her age.
Henry E. RHODES & Martha PEARSALL was married April 10th 1851 being my second wife, her age being 18 years old, 3rd Day of March before,
James Henry Pearsall RHODES child of the above couple was born June 5th 1852 at 3 O'clock.
(page 8)
Benjamin Franklin RHODES was born June 15th 1854.
Martha Elizabeth RHODES was born Jan. 8th, 1856.
(page 9)
Elvy Daughter of Sam and Mehaley, his wife was born August 31st in the year of our Lord 1827.
Grace Daughter of the above was born July 24th in the year of our Lord 1829.
Daniel son of the above was born July 14th in the year of our Lord 1831.
Lear daughter of the above was born June 18th in the year of our Lord 1834.
Rilla Daughter of the above was Born June 28th in the year of our Lord 1838.
Alfred son of the above was born November 10th in the year of our Lord 1840.
Lewarer? Son of the above was born April 24th Day A.D. 1843.
Simon son of the above was born August 30th A.D. 1845.
Lucy Daughter of the above was born Nov. 5th 1848.
Jane Daughter of Elvy was born Jan. 1st A.D. 1854.
Becky daughter of Rilly was born March 19th A.D. 1857
Maria daughter of Elvy was born Aug. 11th A.D. 1857 died 1859.
Lewis on of Rilly was born April 1858.
(page 10)
Will, son of Charlot was born in November the day in the year of our Lord 1830 (day of the month forgotten)
Rose was born in September (the day forgotten) in the year of our Lord 1835 - Daughter of the above.
Thomas son of the above was born September 2nd in the year of our Lord 1839.
Hard son of the above was born May 6th A.D. 1842
Elizaan daughter of the above ws born December 3rd A.D. 1844.
Mary daughter of the above was born May 25th A.D. 1847.
(page 11)
Children of Harriet born since I bought her
Ann was born in May 1850
Venus? Was born 30th of May 1853
Lewis son of the above was born Aug. 2nd 1856.
Alfred was born in the spring 1847.
George was born in the summer 1844.
(page 12)
York son of Mitilda and York (her husband written above)
was borne A.D. October 5th 1843
Marthy daughter of the above was born June 27th A.D. 1845.
Carolina was born November 7th A.D. 1846 dead 47.
Calvin child of the above was born in the Spring 1850.
Maryann Child of Harriet was born in the Spring 1850.
END OF BIBLE RECORD
(This was in the Cullen Hatch collection, this bible was one record, several different hand writings)
Thursday, February 26, 2015
New Images Posted in the Kennedy & Talbert Photo Collection
Now that I've recently been connected with other researchers of the the Kennedy and Talbert families of southwest Virginia, I have been able to add significantly to the collection of family photos on Flickr. There was quite a bit of intermarriage between the Horne, Talbert and Kennedy families so many of the photos in the album will be of interest to more than one surname's researchers.
I'm trying to grow the album with "oldies-but-goodies," so I welcome your Kennedy, Talbert or Horne family photos that date prior to 1925 (or no later than 1950). Please email me if you have images that you would like to contribute.
I'm trying to grow the album with "oldies-but-goodies," so I welcome your Kennedy, Talbert or Horne family photos that date prior to 1925 (or no later than 1950). Please email me if you have images that you would like to contribute.
 |
| Click here to view the Kennedy & Talbert Family Photo Album |
Descendants of Edward Corder, "The Boys of Greenway Court" is Now Available as a Free Download
I've just stumbled across a happy little gift from the internet. The Boys of Greenway Court, a 19th-century morality tale by Hezekiah Butterworth, is out of copyright and available online. You can read the text version, or download the 16MB facsimile which contains beautiful illustrations.
I have to caution you that the story is florid and ponderous in the way of most late Victorian writers, but for those interested in reading it from the perspective of historian or genealogist, it can be fun in a novel (ahem) kind of way. I have several hard copies which I have purchased whenever they have become available on eBay, but original early editions can be scarce and pricey, so I'm glad to see that all interested parties may have a free digital copy.
I have to caution you that the story is florid and ponderous in the way of most late Victorian writers, but for those interested in reading it from the perspective of historian or genealogist, it can be fun in a novel (ahem) kind of way. I have several hard copies which I have purchased whenever they have become available on eBay, but original early editions can be scarce and pricey, so I'm glad to see that all interested parties may have a free digital copy.
Sunday, February 15, 2015
A "Swindled" Inheritance, and Other Kennedy Family Legends Examined
Through a happy coincidence, my last blog article on the Conway-Kennedy murder has brought me into contact with descendants of Forrest T. Kennedy (s/o John & Mary Horne Kennedy), who have long been involved with researching our extended Kennedy family.
My own connection to the family is at once distant and immediate. As a child, my grandmother would tell me endless stories of her childhood visits with "Grandma Brooks," a character who still looms large in Brooks family lore. Grandma Brooks was Ibbie Kennedy, daughter of Wiley F. Kennedy and Mary Elizabeth Talbert Kennedy of Russell and Wise Counties in southwest Virginia. Ibbie married my great-great-grandfather, Warren D. Brooks Jr. of Del Rio, TN, when he came to Wise County working on the railroads in the last quarter of the 19th century.
Sadly, Grandma Ibbie's father, Wiley F. Kennedy, died of epilepsy seven months before Grandma was born, and Mary Elizabeth Talbert Kennedy took Wiley's three small daughters to live with her parents, Thomas and Rebecca Gobble Talbert.
Mary Elizabeth later remarried to Squire Osborn, the girls' hated step-father (who Grandma referred to contemptuously as "Ol' Sqwar Ozburn"). I cannot tell how much contact the children had with their Kennedy relatives, but they must have had some. Grandma Brooks talked about her Kennedy cousins and I can remember my own grandmother speaking of an "Ackey Bud" (Ichabod) Kennedy, so there must have been some contact with her father's family, but no particular stories specific to the Kennedy family were among those passed down to my own grandmother. With one exception. And was it ever a doozie.
For a reason I could never quite understand, Grandma Brooks was under the impression that one of her cousins had traveled to Ireland and "swindled her out of her inheritance." (She didn't hesitate to name the cousin, but I do, as her accusations seem to be completely without foundation.) As a child, I accepted this story without question, obligingly imagining pots of gold covertly stashed, and castles sold away from the family by a scheming (and very distant) relation. In my teens when I started researching the Kennedy family, I quickly realized that while our ancestors of that name were not precisely poor, they were unlikely to have come from a family in Ireland of any particular prestige or wealth. I pressed my grandmother for more details, but she knew no more than she'd been told.
Years would pass, and life would happen, and I would lay my work aside. In the mean time, the internet went from a novel concept to the most powerful communication tool in the history of mankind. So here we all are, able to view thousands of obscure records and writings at the stroke of a few keys, which is how I happened across Wade Powers Kennedy's 1941 book, The Name and Family of Kennedy and Powers, which is viewable online and downloadable as a PDF.
The book is "Dedicated to Future Generations who, it is hoped, will expand and extend this record and beautify it by good deeds that shine like diamond dewdrops in a meadow of the finest kind of living."
I could tell right away that our author was an optimist. He did nothing to disabuse me of this impression as he launched immediately into a florid passage about the "worthy deeds of the marching generations giving [the surname] dignity and splendor." (Oh dear, such high expectations of us all.) After a short discussion of the history of surnames, Mr. Kennedy (my 1st cousin 4x removed) gets right to the point, asserting that Kennedy "is one of the very ancient names," possibly meaning "head or chief of the clan." Perhaps so, but our line? Optimist, optimist, optimist.
After a brief mention of a "Kenneth" associated with King Duncan of Scotland, he states that "It is probable however that the greater part of the family traces its descent from the EARLS of CARRICK" (his emphasis), a southern district of Ayrshire, Scotland, which lies south of the river, Deen. He goes on to mention Sir James Kennedy who married Mary Stewart, daughter of King Robert III of Scotland. Ohhhh, boy. Now I'm beginning to understand. Did someone show Grandma Brooks a copy of this book?
Mr. Kennedy is on a roll now. He posits a connection between this noble line of Kennedys and the ancestor of what I call the "adore" Kennedys: Theodore, Elmadore, Macadore, Shenadore, etc. In Section III (pg. 13) he moves to our own ancestor's line, David Kennedy "father of the Kennedy family scattered throughout the western part of Virginia and into other states."
He states that there are substantial reasons for believing that our ancestor, the David Kennedy who settled in Russell County, VA in the 1790's, "belonged to the Scotch line" of Kennedys coming down from Sir David Kennedy, the first Earl of Cassilis. In support of this he gives evidence such as "family resemblance, personal characteristics, accent in speech" (although how he became familiar enough to compare our family's qualities of speech with those of the long-dead Sir David, he does not explain).
Now, I'm not going to sport with your intelligence by entertaining a connection between the Kennedys of Russell County, VA and the purported ancient nobles of southwest of Scotland. I believe W.P. Kennedy did indeed have reason to believe there was a connection between our ancestor and a Scottish Kennedy line, and I will examine that later on in another blog entry. I do not believe he intentionally misled us about the origins of our family, but ever the optimist, he may have seen what he wanted to see, and made the connections that seemed most agreeable to someone of his obviously idealistic disposition. Time will tell, as research progresses. The old fellow might surprise me and turn out to be right. But don't hold your breath. If he is, I will write a blog entry titled "An Ode to Optimism," in which I give him his full due for very lucky guesses.
However, back to Grandma Ibbie's puzzling accusations. As of 1941, the story of the Kennedy family's glorious origins had just gone to print. I'm not sure how long prior to this, W.P. Kennedy's research into the family origins and resultant theories had been in circulation amongst the relatives. His family appeared prosperous by comparison to that of my Grandma Brooks (whose husband died when they were in early middle age, leaving my young great-grandfather to support her and his younger siblings). Wade P. Kennedy was obviously a scholarly author. His brother was a self-taught and successful local lawyer. Another brother started a franchise of Piggly-Wiggly stores in Wise County. I can just imagine Grandma's speculation about the source of their means and success. (Surely it could not simply have been the result of hard work? Much easier to believe it was the result of a stolen pot of gold...)
I cannot be sure -- truly I cannot -- but I believe that Grandma Brooks made some sort of connection in her own mind between the grandiose origin tales and the success of her Kennedy relatives and posited a covert trip to Ireland on the part of one of them, wherein the cousin in question had somehow located the exact origin of wealthy Kennedy relatives in the old country and had managed to secure and dispose of family property without the knowledge of a multitude of other state-side cousins. What alternative explanation could there be for her own circumstances to be so reduced when her ancestors had been Kings and landed gentry, and her own cousins so comparatively wealthy?
Not being one to stand on ceremony, I instantly questioned my new Kennedy relatives about whether or not any Kennedys had been to Ireland or had located our family's origins there. They were utterly bewildered to hear of such a trip and replied that as far as they knew, no one ever had.
My feeling is that had that trip actually been undertaken (probably in the early 20th century), it would have been much discussed within the family, especially within the line of the family that went to great pains to collect the family's history, and such a trip would have been nearly impossible to hide from the other cousins and their descendants. I can think of no other plausible explanation for Grandma's tale, other than she having leaped to conclusions based on Wade P. Kennedy's (very likely incorrect) assertions of connections to Irish and/or Scottish nobility. But what a bizarre conclusion to leap to!
If you are a descendant of John & Mary Horne Kennedy of Russell County VA and you can shed any light on my great-great-grandmother's fanciful tales of "swindled" (her word) Irish inheritances, or what might have given her such an idea, I hope you will add your comments below. I'm open to anything, but at the moment, this seems like the most plausible explanation I can contrive. I have long wondered what caused her to "tell such a tale" (to use the words of Prissy in Gone With the Wind), so any enlightenment would be welcome.
In the coming months I am going to examine other family stories from the W.P. Kennedy book and see how they hold up against new information that becomes available online and through the wonderful magic of DNA testing) The purpose of these examinations is not to detract from Wade Kennedy's priceless, wonderful preservation of our family's history, but to clarify and --to use his own words-- "to expand and extend [his] record" -- and if need be, to correct it based on new information that comes to light.
My own connection to the family is at once distant and immediate. As a child, my grandmother would tell me endless stories of her childhood visits with "Grandma Brooks," a character who still looms large in Brooks family lore. Grandma Brooks was Ibbie Kennedy, daughter of Wiley F. Kennedy and Mary Elizabeth Talbert Kennedy of Russell and Wise Counties in southwest Virginia. Ibbie married my great-great-grandfather, Warren D. Brooks Jr. of Del Rio, TN, when he came to Wise County working on the railroads in the last quarter of the 19th century.
Sadly, Grandma Ibbie's father, Wiley F. Kennedy, died of epilepsy seven months before Grandma was born, and Mary Elizabeth Talbert Kennedy took Wiley's three small daughters to live with her parents, Thomas and Rebecca Gobble Talbert.
Mary Elizabeth later remarried to Squire Osborn, the girls' hated step-father (who Grandma referred to contemptuously as "Ol' Sqwar Ozburn"). I cannot tell how much contact the children had with their Kennedy relatives, but they must have had some. Grandma Brooks talked about her Kennedy cousins and I can remember my own grandmother speaking of an "Ackey Bud" (Ichabod) Kennedy, so there must have been some contact with her father's family, but no particular stories specific to the Kennedy family were among those passed down to my own grandmother. With one exception. And was it ever a doozie.
For a reason I could never quite understand, Grandma Brooks was under the impression that one of her cousins had traveled to Ireland and "swindled her out of her inheritance." (She didn't hesitate to name the cousin, but I do, as her accusations seem to be completely without foundation.) As a child, I accepted this story without question, obligingly imagining pots of gold covertly stashed, and castles sold away from the family by a scheming (and very distant) relation. In my teens when I started researching the Kennedy family, I quickly realized that while our ancestors of that name were not precisely poor, they were unlikely to have come from a family in Ireland of any particular prestige or wealth. I pressed my grandmother for more details, but she knew no more than she'd been told.
Years would pass, and life would happen, and I would lay my work aside. In the mean time, the internet went from a novel concept to the most powerful communication tool in the history of mankind. So here we all are, able to view thousands of obscure records and writings at the stroke of a few keys, which is how I happened across Wade Powers Kennedy's 1941 book, The Name and Family of Kennedy and Powers, which is viewable online and downloadable as a PDF.
The book is "Dedicated to Future Generations who, it is hoped, will expand and extend this record and beautify it by good deeds that shine like diamond dewdrops in a meadow of the finest kind of living."
I could tell right away that our author was an optimist. He did nothing to disabuse me of this impression as he launched immediately into a florid passage about the "worthy deeds of the marching generations giving [the surname] dignity and splendor." (Oh dear, such high expectations of us all.) After a short discussion of the history of surnames, Mr. Kennedy (my 1st cousin 4x removed) gets right to the point, asserting that Kennedy "is one of the very ancient names," possibly meaning "head or chief of the clan." Perhaps so, but our line? Optimist, optimist, optimist.
After a brief mention of a "Kenneth" associated with King Duncan of Scotland, he states that "It is probable however that the greater part of the family traces its descent from the EARLS of CARRICK" (his emphasis), a southern district of Ayrshire, Scotland, which lies south of the river, Deen. He goes on to mention Sir James Kennedy who married Mary Stewart, daughter of King Robert III of Scotland. Ohhhh, boy. Now I'm beginning to understand. Did someone show Grandma Brooks a copy of this book?
Mr. Kennedy is on a roll now. He posits a connection between this noble line of Kennedys and the ancestor of what I call the "adore" Kennedys: Theodore, Elmadore, Macadore, Shenadore, etc. In Section III (pg. 13) he moves to our own ancestor's line, David Kennedy "father of the Kennedy family scattered throughout the western part of Virginia and into other states."
He states that there are substantial reasons for believing that our ancestor, the David Kennedy who settled in Russell County, VA in the 1790's, "belonged to the Scotch line" of Kennedys coming down from Sir David Kennedy, the first Earl of Cassilis. In support of this he gives evidence such as "family resemblance, personal characteristics, accent in speech" (although how he became familiar enough to compare our family's qualities of speech with those of the long-dead Sir David, he does not explain).
Now, I'm not going to sport with your intelligence by entertaining a connection between the Kennedys of Russell County, VA and the purported ancient nobles of southwest of Scotland. I believe W.P. Kennedy did indeed have reason to believe there was a connection between our ancestor and a Scottish Kennedy line, and I will examine that later on in another blog entry. I do not believe he intentionally misled us about the origins of our family, but ever the optimist, he may have seen what he wanted to see, and made the connections that seemed most agreeable to someone of his obviously idealistic disposition. Time will tell, as research progresses. The old fellow might surprise me and turn out to be right. But don't hold your breath. If he is, I will write a blog entry titled "An Ode to Optimism," in which I give him his full due for very lucky guesses.
However, back to Grandma Ibbie's puzzling accusations. As of 1941, the story of the Kennedy family's glorious origins had just gone to print. I'm not sure how long prior to this, W.P. Kennedy's research into the family origins and resultant theories had been in circulation amongst the relatives. His family appeared prosperous by comparison to that of my Grandma Brooks (whose husband died when they were in early middle age, leaving my young great-grandfather to support her and his younger siblings). Wade P. Kennedy was obviously a scholarly author. His brother was a self-taught and successful local lawyer. Another brother started a franchise of Piggly-Wiggly stores in Wise County. I can just imagine Grandma's speculation about the source of their means and success. (Surely it could not simply have been the result of hard work? Much easier to believe it was the result of a stolen pot of gold...)
I cannot be sure -- truly I cannot -- but I believe that Grandma Brooks made some sort of connection in her own mind between the grandiose origin tales and the success of her Kennedy relatives and posited a covert trip to Ireland on the part of one of them, wherein the cousin in question had somehow located the exact origin of wealthy Kennedy relatives in the old country and had managed to secure and dispose of family property without the knowledge of a multitude of other state-side cousins. What alternative explanation could there be for her own circumstances to be so reduced when her ancestors had been Kings and landed gentry, and her own cousins so comparatively wealthy?
Not being one to stand on ceremony, I instantly questioned my new Kennedy relatives about whether or not any Kennedys had been to Ireland or had located our family's origins there. They were utterly bewildered to hear of such a trip and replied that as far as they knew, no one ever had.
My feeling is that had that trip actually been undertaken (probably in the early 20th century), it would have been much discussed within the family, especially within the line of the family that went to great pains to collect the family's history, and such a trip would have been nearly impossible to hide from the other cousins and their descendants. I can think of no other plausible explanation for Grandma's tale, other than she having leaped to conclusions based on Wade P. Kennedy's (very likely incorrect) assertions of connections to Irish and/or Scottish nobility. But what a bizarre conclusion to leap to!
If you are a descendant of John & Mary Horne Kennedy of Russell County VA and you can shed any light on my great-great-grandmother's fanciful tales of "swindled" (her word) Irish inheritances, or what might have given her such an idea, I hope you will add your comments below. I'm open to anything, but at the moment, this seems like the most plausible explanation I can contrive. I have long wondered what caused her to "tell such a tale" (to use the words of Prissy in Gone With the Wind), so any enlightenment would be welcome.
In the coming months I am going to examine other family stories from the W.P. Kennedy book and see how they hold up against new information that becomes available online and through the wonderful magic of DNA testing) The purpose of these examinations is not to detract from Wade Kennedy's priceless, wonderful preservation of our family's history, but to clarify and --to use his own words-- "to expand and extend [his] record" -- and if need be, to correct it based on new information that comes to light.
Sunday, February 8, 2015
Elizabeth Conway Kennedy Shot Clean Off Her Horse. That'll Teach Her to Free-Range Her Cattle, I Reckon.
Recently a young cousin asked me for some information on her ancestry for a presentation she had been assigned in her honors civics class. Poor kid. She was deluged by pages of family history, charts and anecdotes, all straight from the Too Much Information Desk (a desk from which any avid genealogist writes at every possible opportunity).
One of the stories I related to her was the tragic tale of how our ancestor John Kennedy and his sister Mary Elizabeth Kennedy came to be orphaned in the year 1800. I didn't know very much about it myself, having only been told that one or both of the children's parents had been murdered, and having been unsuccessful in tracking down additional details.
Since new information comes online every day, I decided to have another look and this time I hit pay dirt. Allow me to relate to you the story of the tragic demise of David Kennedy and his wife Elizabeth Conway Kennedy, of Castlewood in Russell County, Virginia.
First, a word about the actors in our drama. It is believed that David Kennedy came from Ireland since, on the 1880 census, son John Kennedy gives his father's place of birth thus. David may have been widowed prior to his union with Elizabeth Conway. He had an older son, Samuel, who died in a tragic accident at Burton's Ford when a neighbor woman mistook him for a swan and shot him early one foggy morning as he was washing his face in the nearby river. I'm not making that up. Apparently the Burton family who lived across the river had been planning to shoot a wild swan that frequented the river bank, and when Samuel went down to wash (dressed in a white shirt in preparation for an impending trip to town), the trigger-happy Mrs. Burton fired away. (The Name and Family of Kennedy and Powers, W. P. Kennedy, 1941, p. 14-15)
Now, back to our story.
David and Elizabeth (called "Nancy" by son John) lived near the present-day town of Castlewood, close to the aforementioned Burton's Ford. Elizabeth Kennedy is generally believed to have been a daughter of Thomas Conway, whose property cornered with that of Henry and Elizabeth Kiser Hurst. According to the traditions of both families, a disagreement developed between the families when the Kennedys allowed their cattle to range free, resulting in damage to the Hurst crops. Elizabeth Hurst and Elizabeth Kennedy "engaged in bitter quarrels on more than one occasion" on account of the trespass.
Elizabeth Kennedy was a keen horsewoman and often rode out surveying her stock, or on errands. On the 10th of June of 1800, she rode into the local community and on her way back to her farm she encountered Elizabeth Hurst doing laundry in the creek just downstream from Bickley's Mill. Mrs. Hurst's infant son, Samuel, was laying on a quilt near his mother, and another son, Andrew, had just returned from hunting. The boy leaned his rifle against a large poplar tree and was trying to quiet his fussing brother when Elizabeth Kennedy rode into view on the road above the creek. As usual, the two women began to argue. One Hurst researcher says she has been told that Mrs. Kennedy "clubbed" Mrs. Hurst, which would imply that the two women were on equal footing, but most accounts agree that Mrs. Hurst snatched up her son's hunting rifle and shot Elizabeth Kennedy off her horse, which made it more likely that the victim was still on the road above the creek, and Mrs. Hurst was on lower ground within reach of the tree by the creek.
Mrs. Hurst was duly arrested for murder.
"The prisoner being arraigned at the bar, it was demanded of her whether she was guilty or not guilty. She answered she was not guilty. Whereupon divers [sic] witnesses being sworn and examined against her, and she being heard in her own defense: on consideration whereof it is the opinion of the court that the said Elizabeth Hursk [sic] for the offense ought to be tried at the next District Court to be held at Washington Court house on the 2nd day of October next, and thereupon she was remanded to jail." (Russell County VA Law and Order Book No. 3, Page 59, year 1800)
In case you're wondering how things went, she was acquitted, but her defense nearly bankrupted Henry, who had to sell part of his property to pay her way out of trouble.
Sadly, in the late winter or early spring of 1800, Mrs. Kennedy's husband, David, had gone south on his lucrative annual round of horse-trading through the Carolinas, never to return. According to his granddaughter Elizabeth Kennedy, as David was awaiting payment from the planters who had purchased his horses, he suddenly fell ill and died. There was no convenient way to return him to Virginia so he lies buried in an unknown location "somewhere in the Carolinas." (Kennedy, p. 17) Perhaps the stress of her husband's recent death added to Elizabeth's decision to engage in the fatal quarrel with her neighbor, although more likely, from the sound of it, it was force of habit.
Thomas Conway Sr. and Richard Price administered the estate of the unfortunate Mrs. Kennedy. The orphaned children, John (about 3) and his sister Mary Elizabeth (about 5) were probably initially taken in by the Conway family, although a grandson of John insists that David's old friend from his militia days, John Smith, took the boy when his mother died.
In December of 1800 and again in October of 1804 the court ordered that the "Overseers of the poor bind Mary Kennedy, an infant orphan of Elizabeth Kennedy, deceased, to John Holbrook, according to law." The children were by no means paupers since their parents were moderately prosperous farmers, but the Overseer of the Poor was the legal authority charged with settlement of guardianship and payment from the estate for an orphaned child's upkeep.
Young John was most likley raised into his teens by his Conway relatives (possibly by the widowed Mary Conway Fletcher, his mother's sister). A friend of the family remembers that the Conway farm abutted her father's farm, and "Johnnie Kennedy" frequently cut across her father's land on his way to the public road. (Kennedy, p. 24) In 1814 John Kennedy left home to enlist in the Federal Army and served in Company A of the Virginia Militia during the war of 1812.
According to Wade Powers Kennedy, the family records were passed to granddaughter Ann Fraley Murphy (who was raised in the household of John and Mary Horne Kennedy) and were subsequently lost. However, there was no shortage of grandchildren and great-grandchildren of the unfortunate couple who had not heard every detail of their tragic story from the time they were knee-high to a grasshopper. I suspect the only reason I had not heard it myself from my own grandmother was because her "Grandma Brooks" (Ibbie Kennedy Brooks, granddaughter of John and Mary Horne Kennedy) had been raised in her mother's family, the Talberts (after her father Wiley F. Kennedy died during her infancy 1867).
The Kennedys, I can assure you, have long...long...memories. If Grandma Ibbie Kennedy Brooks had known the story, I haven't the slightest doubt that I'd have heard it with my own ears from the time I could understand the words "shot off her horse."
One of the stories I related to her was the tragic tale of how our ancestor John Kennedy and his sister Mary Elizabeth Kennedy came to be orphaned in the year 1800. I didn't know very much about it myself, having only been told that one or both of the children's parents had been murdered, and having been unsuccessful in tracking down additional details.
Since new information comes online every day, I decided to have another look and this time I hit pay dirt. Allow me to relate to you the story of the tragic demise of David Kennedy and his wife Elizabeth Conway Kennedy, of Castlewood in Russell County, Virginia.
First, a word about the actors in our drama. It is believed that David Kennedy came from Ireland since, on the 1880 census, son John Kennedy gives his father's place of birth thus. David may have been widowed prior to his union with Elizabeth Conway. He had an older son, Samuel, who died in a tragic accident at Burton's Ford when a neighbor woman mistook him for a swan and shot him early one foggy morning as he was washing his face in the nearby river. I'm not making that up. Apparently the Burton family who lived across the river had been planning to shoot a wild swan that frequented the river bank, and when Samuel went down to wash (dressed in a white shirt in preparation for an impending trip to town), the trigger-happy Mrs. Burton fired away. (The Name and Family of Kennedy and Powers, W. P. Kennedy, 1941, p. 14-15)
Now, back to our story.
David and Elizabeth (called "Nancy" by son John) lived near the present-day town of Castlewood, close to the aforementioned Burton's Ford. Elizabeth Kennedy is generally believed to have been a daughter of Thomas Conway, whose property cornered with that of Henry and Elizabeth Kiser Hurst. According to the traditions of both families, a disagreement developed between the families when the Kennedys allowed their cattle to range free, resulting in damage to the Hurst crops. Elizabeth Hurst and Elizabeth Kennedy "engaged in bitter quarrels on more than one occasion" on account of the trespass.
Elizabeth Kennedy was a keen horsewoman and often rode out surveying her stock, or on errands. On the 10th of June of 1800, she rode into the local community and on her way back to her farm she encountered Elizabeth Hurst doing laundry in the creek just downstream from Bickley's Mill. Mrs. Hurst's infant son, Samuel, was laying on a quilt near his mother, and another son, Andrew, had just returned from hunting. The boy leaned his rifle against a large poplar tree and was trying to quiet his fussing brother when Elizabeth Kennedy rode into view on the road above the creek. As usual, the two women began to argue. One Hurst researcher says she has been told that Mrs. Kennedy "clubbed" Mrs. Hurst, which would imply that the two women were on equal footing, but most accounts agree that Mrs. Hurst snatched up her son's hunting rifle and shot Elizabeth Kennedy off her horse, which made it more likely that the victim was still on the road above the creek, and Mrs. Hurst was on lower ground within reach of the tree by the creek.
Mrs. Hurst was duly arrested for murder.
"The prisoner being arraigned at the bar, it was demanded of her whether she was guilty or not guilty. She answered she was not guilty. Whereupon divers [sic] witnesses being sworn and examined against her, and she being heard in her own defense: on consideration whereof it is the opinion of the court that the said Elizabeth Hursk [sic] for the offense ought to be tried at the next District Court to be held at Washington Court house on the 2nd day of October next, and thereupon she was remanded to jail." (Russell County VA Law and Order Book No. 3, Page 59, year 1800)
In case you're wondering how things went, she was acquitted, but her defense nearly bankrupted Henry, who had to sell part of his property to pay her way out of trouble.
Sadly, in the late winter or early spring of 1800, Mrs. Kennedy's husband, David, had gone south on his lucrative annual round of horse-trading through the Carolinas, never to return. According to his granddaughter Elizabeth Kennedy, as David was awaiting payment from the planters who had purchased his horses, he suddenly fell ill and died. There was no convenient way to return him to Virginia so he lies buried in an unknown location "somewhere in the Carolinas." (Kennedy, p. 17) Perhaps the stress of her husband's recent death added to Elizabeth's decision to engage in the fatal quarrel with her neighbor, although more likely, from the sound of it, it was force of habit.
Thomas Conway Sr. and Richard Price administered the estate of the unfortunate Mrs. Kennedy. The orphaned children, John (about 3) and his sister Mary Elizabeth (about 5) were probably initially taken in by the Conway family, although a grandson of John insists that David's old friend from his militia days, John Smith, took the boy when his mother died.
In December of 1800 and again in October of 1804 the court ordered that the "Overseers of the poor bind Mary Kennedy, an infant orphan of Elizabeth Kennedy, deceased, to John Holbrook, according to law." The children were by no means paupers since their parents were moderately prosperous farmers, but the Overseer of the Poor was the legal authority charged with settlement of guardianship and payment from the estate for an orphaned child's upkeep.
Young John was most likley raised into his teens by his Conway relatives (possibly by the widowed Mary Conway Fletcher, his mother's sister). A friend of the family remembers that the Conway farm abutted her father's farm, and "Johnnie Kennedy" frequently cut across her father's land on his way to the public road. (Kennedy, p. 24) In 1814 John Kennedy left home to enlist in the Federal Army and served in Company A of the Virginia Militia during the war of 1812.
According to Wade Powers Kennedy, the family records were passed to granddaughter Ann Fraley Murphy (who was raised in the household of John and Mary Horne Kennedy) and were subsequently lost. However, there was no shortage of grandchildren and great-grandchildren of the unfortunate couple who had not heard every detail of their tragic story from the time they were knee-high to a grasshopper. I suspect the only reason I had not heard it myself from my own grandmother was because her "Grandma Brooks" (Ibbie Kennedy Brooks, granddaughter of John and Mary Horne Kennedy) had been raised in her mother's family, the Talberts (after her father Wiley F. Kennedy died during her infancy 1867).
The Kennedys, I can assure you, have long...long...memories. If Grandma Ibbie Kennedy Brooks had known the story, I haven't the slightest doubt that I'd have heard it with my own ears from the time I could understand the words "shot off her horse."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)