Philip Jacob Miller (c1726-1799), Buried on a Missing Island?, 52 Ancestors #119

Philip Jacob Miller was born about 1726 in Germany to Johann Michael Mueller, spelled Miller here in the US, and Suzanna Agnes Berchtol (Bechtol, Bechtel) and was an infant or child when arriving in the colonies in 1727.

We don’t know exactly when Philip Jacob was born, but we do know he was born before his parents immigrated because he was naturalized in 1767, and had he been born after immigration, he would not have needed to be naturalized.  We also know that his parents were married in 1714 in Krotelback (Crottelbach), Germany, with their first child being baptized in the same church in 1715, so by process of elimination, Philip was born sometime between 1716 and 1727.

Philipp Jacob is a bit unusual, because parts of his life are virtually unknown, but others are well documented. His early life we can only infer because of what little we know of his parents.  His life after marriage and moving to Frederick County, Maryland is fairly well documented, comparatively speaking, but his final years in Campbell County, KY are a bit fuzzy.  He sort of drifts into and out of focus.

Philipp Jacob Miller was also somewhat unusual in another way too – in that he never seemed, with only a couple possible exceptions, to use solely his middle name, always using both his first and middle names.  Typically German men were called by and known by their middle name alone – for example Johann Michael Miller was Michael Miller.  That was unless their name was Johannes Miller, with no middle name, and then they would just have been called Johannes, or John.  Normally, Philipp Jacob Miller would be called Jacob, but Philipp Jacob wasn’t called Jacob – although when we see a Jacob I always have to wonder.  We can simply say that Philipp Jacob wasn’t your typical Brethren man and that would probably sum things up pretty nicely.  He seemed quite religiously faithful, except for these “tidbits” that creep up here and there – just enough to hint otherwise and make you really scratch your head and look confused.

Philip Jacob’s Childhood

Philip Jacob Miller would have spent the first part of his childhood after arriving in the colonies in Chester Co., PA where his father paid taxes until about 1744 when he bought land near Hanover, Pennsylvania, in the part of Lancaster County that would become York Co., PA in 1749. By 1744, Philip Jacob would be a young man of at least 18, perfectly capable of farm work and the manual labor required to wrest a living from the land.  Perhaps he drove one of the wagons as the family packed up and moved to the Brethren community near Hanover, PA in 1744 where his father bought land jointly with Nicholas Garber and Samuel Bechtol.

Philip Jacob’s wife, Magdalena

Philip Jacob Miller married Magdalena whose last name is stated to be Rochette, about 1751, probably in York County, PA.  Let me be very clear about one thing.  There is absolutely no confirmation or documentaion for her surname, despite hundreds of entries on Ancestry.com and other online resources that suggest otherwise.  I thoroughly perused the Frederick County, MD records and there are no Rochette’s or similar surnames there.  York County, PA records need to be reviewed in their entirety as well, but it would be very unusual to find a French surname in the highly German Brethren congregation.  There are no Rochette deeds in York County from 1749 forward and no Rochette records in any Brethren church reference.  I found no Rochette names in the Lancaster County records either, although I have not perused every record type.  Until or unless proven otherwise, I do not believe that Magdalena’s surname was Rochette.

Frederick County, Maryland

Philip Jacob moved to the Conococheague area (Frederick, then Washington Co., MD) by about 1751 or 1752 when an entire group of Brethren migrated from York Co., PA following years of bickering about land ownership and border disputes that turned violent and was subsequently known as the Maryland-Pennsylvania Border War and also as Cresap’s War.

PA-MD boundary issue

Brethren, being pacifists, tried to remain neutral but eventually, simply sold out and left for an area they thought would be safer and less volatile. Little did they know about what the future would hold.

The first Brethren, Stephen Ullerich, by 1738, and Philip Jacob’s father, Michael Miller, by 1745, had crossed into the Antietam Valley and Conococheague Valley (either side of Hagarstown) and purchased land.

Philip Jacob Miller is one of 3 confirmed children of Michael Miller as proven by a series of deeds and surveys to property called Ash Swamp near Maugansville in Frederick County, MD, northwest of Hagerstown. Philip Jacob obtained this land in October of 1751 from his father who had clearly purchased it speculatively in 1745.

In 1753, Philip Jacob Miller had his land resurveyed.

Miller 1753 Ash Swamp resurvey crop

This land, Ash Swamp positively belongs to “our” Philip Jacob Miller, although there is another survey (and resurvey) for one Jacob Miller for 50 acres on “The Swamp” adjacent Diamond Square. Is that our Philip Jacob Miller too?  We don’t know – it’s that ambiguous Jacob name again.  Ash Swamp is definitely our Philip Jacob as is later proven through subsequent transactions.

1753 Ash Swamp resurvey 2

1753 Ash swamp resurvey 3

Ash Swamp is where Philip Jacob Miller lived, adjacent to his brother John Miller to whom he deeded part of Ash Swamp.

Miller page 27

The resurvey documents were plotted on top of a contemporary map to isolate the location just southwest of Maugansville.

Miller farm west 3

I visited Philip Jacob’s land in the  fall of 2015.  This view of the area is from the location of the Grace Academy school, just about dead center in Philip Jacob’s land, looking west. This land is discussed in detail in Johann Michael Miller’s article.

The third brother, Lodowick purchased adjacent land to the south.

Lodowick's land

Sometime between 1748 and 1754, Philip Jacob’s mother died because his father remarried to the widow of Nicholas Garber, the man that he co-owned land with in York County, PA. We know this because in 1754, Michael Miller was administering the estate of Nicholas who had died in 1748, implying of course that Michael’s wife, Philip Jacob’s mother, Susanna Berchtol, had died as well, probably in that same timeframe.

We know very little about the years between the resurvey of Ash Swamp in the early 1750s and 1771 when Philip Jacob’s father died. Most of what we do know is due to a history of the area and not from the family directly.  However, when a war is being waged where you live and the entire county evacuates, you can’t not be affected.

Philip Jacob Miller, along with the rest of the residents of this region would have abandoned their farms for safety, twice, as difficult as that is for us to fathom today. The first time was in 1755 when General Braddock was defeated and the Indians descended on this part of Maryland, burning, killing and running the residents off of their farms and back east.

Based on the resurvey document, we know that the surveyor was working on May 15, 1755 in Frederick County, surveying Philip Jacob’s land, and you can rest assured that Philip Jacob was right there with him, watching every move.

Braddock was defeated on July 9, 1755, less than two months later, leaving the entire frontier exposed.

From 1755 to 1757, Alfred James writes, “Raid after raid from Fort Duquesne hit pioneer settlements along the Susquehanna and the Potomac.” It was unending and relentless. Another reports that “Frederick, Winchester and Carlisle became the new frontiers of the colony” and “Many even fled to Baltimore,” and “some to Virginia.”  Arthur Quinn writes that families went as far east as Bethlehem “where there was no more room in the inns, or the shops or even the cellars.”  Nead writes, “Terror and desolation reigned everywhere.” Repogle 106

In the fall of 1756, Indians scalped 20 people in Conococheague including one Jacob Miller, his wife and 6 children. Were they related?  We don’t know.  If they were Brethren, they would not have defended themselves.

Most settlers fled east from Monocacy. George Washington received a report in the summer of 1756 that “350 wagons had passed that place to avoid the enemy within the space of 3 days” and by August the report was that “The whole settlement of Conococheague in Maryland is fled, and there now remain only two families from thence to Fredericktown…..”

The settlements remained abandoned in 1757 and into 1758 when General Forbes actions served to end the war. Were it not for Forbes, we might all be speaking French today.

In 1758, General Harris extended a road from Harrisburg, PA to Fort Duquesne on the Ohio River (Pittsburg.) Highway 30 follows this road most of the way today. Replogle 55

Forbes road went from Cumberland to Bedford and by August 1758, 1400 men had completed the road to Bedford, just wide enough to get a wagon through. A contemporary writer said it took 8 days to travel from Bedford to Ligonier, a distance of about 45 miles.  This military tactic succeeded.  General John Forbes took Fort Duquesne, now Pittsburg, the French abandoned it, and ended the French and Indian War on November 25, 1758.  Indian attacks diminished and by 1762, the French had given up Canada.  Replogle 107-108, 110

Forbes Road

There is one item of particular significance – during the war, a small fort was built at Raystown, which would eventually become Bedford, PA, a location that would, in the 1770s, become quite important to the Brethren Miller family. It was indeed the next stop on the frontier and two of Philip Jacob’s sons would find themselves traveling that road and settling in in Bedford County, PA for a few years, at least until their father rallied the family round once again.

Philip Jacob Miller would eventually float down the Ohio River to Campbell Co., KY, and settle one last time, on one last frontier, across the river and a dozen miles upstream from Fort Washington, now Cincinnati. The Forbes road may have been part of the route he took.

Return to Frederick County

When did the settlers return to Frederick County? We don’t know.  Certainly not before the end of 1758, and probably not until they were certain things had settled down and the attacks had abated.  They likely had to rebuild from scratch, their homesteads and barns all burned.  As difficult as this must have been, they obviously did rebiuld and we have absolutely nothing in our family history reflecting this extremely difficult time.  You would think there would be stories…something…but there is nothing.  These hardy people simply did what needed to be done.

The only hint we have in terms of when they returned is that Michael Miller is back in Frederick County by 1761 purchasing land and in 1762, paying taxes. Given that he was by that time, 69 years old, you can rest assured that he was not alone and was in the company of his sons.  Wherever they had taken refuge – the family had been together.

Something else was afoot too, because in 1762, the Brethren began to be naturalized, and this from a group of people who disliked government and oaths and any processes of this type more than anything else. Brethren leaders even shunned their children if they obtained a license to marry.  However, in 1762, Nicholas Martin was naturalized in Philadelphia, PA, a state that did not require a citizen to “swear an oath” but allowed to them to “affirm,” instead.  Michael Miller and Jacob Miller (possibly Philip Jacob Miller although another Jacob Miller was present in Frederick County at this time) were witnesses for Nicholas.

If Philip Jacob and his family thought they could rest easy now, they were wrong. In fact, they had probably only been resettled a couple of years, were probably still rebuilding when they, once again, had to run for their lives.

Pontiac’s War descended upon them and from 1763 to 1765, the Brethren families in this area had to take shelter elsewhere.  According to historical records, the devastation and fear was even worse than the first time.  And true to form, we don’t know where they went, or for how long.  What I wouldn’t give for a journal…even just one sentence a week…anything.

The Maryland Gazette, written at Frederick on July 19, 1763 said, “The melancholy scene of poor distressed families driving downwards through this town with their effects…enemies…now daily seen in the woods….panic of the back inhabitants, whose terrors at this time exceed what followed on the defeat of General Braddock.”

Ironically it also reported that the season had been remarkably fine and the harvest the best for many years. Once again, Frederick County put together two companies of militia and once again, no Brethren names appeared on the list.  Replogle 113 – 114

Perhaps the entire group of Brethren returned to Conestoga. I suggest this possibility because we know that two Brethren, Nicholas Martin and Stephen Ulrich, are found attending the Great Council of the Brethren in Conestoga in 1763.  Where you find one Brethren, or two, you’re likely to find more.

Conestoga is near present day White Oak in Lancaster County, PA and both Conestoga and Conewago, another Brethren settlement, aren’t far from the Brethren settlement in Ephrata. It would make sense for the Brethren to return to areas they knew and relatives with whom they could shelter for as long as need be.

ephrata-to-hagerstown

In 1765, the Millers are once again back in Frederick County because Michael, now at least 73 years of age, is selling or deeding his land.  One must admit – the Miller’s didn’t give up and they were persistent.

Naturalization

In 1767, another surprising event took place. Michael Miller, Philip Jacob Miller and Stephen Ulrich (or Ulrick) all traveled to Philadelphia along with Jacob Stutzman (from Cumberland County) and were naturalized at the April term of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.  They were listed under the title, “Affirmers Names.”  This makes me wonder why Michael Miller wasn’t naturalized in 1762 when he witnessed Nicholas Martin’s naturalization?  He was already there and could have easily been naturalized at that time.  What had changed in those 5 years to make an entire group of Brethren men “affirm?”

Philip Jacob Miller naturalization 1

Philip Jacob Miller naturalization 2

Philip Jacob Miller naturalization 3

Philip Jacob Miller naturalization 4

Michael Miller, Philip Jacob’s father, had waited a long time to be naturalized. He was just a few months shy of 75 years old.  He must have felt a pressing need for the naturalization and it must have been very urgent for him to risk his religious affiliation he had so staunchly preserved throughout his entire life – even in the face of warfare and extreme adversity.  From the perspective of today, we’ll likely never know what exactly was so urgent that it prompted these men to make the trip from Frederick County, MD to Philadelphia, PA where they could do the lesser of two evils and affirm as opposed to swear their loyalty and become citizens.  Whatever it was, it had to be mighty important.

This was clearly a family group that included Jacob Stutzman, Johann Michael Miller’s younger “step-brother,” Stephen Ulrich whose daughter would marry the son of the fourth Brethren man, Philip Jacob Miller, less than a decade later. Oh course Philipp Jacob Miller was the son of Michael Miller.  Stephen Ulrich would also marry Hannah Stutzman, Jacob Stutzman’s widow in 1782.  So yes, indeed, these families where closely bound and would become even more so.  Of these men, Johann Michael Miller was the eldest, and Philip Jacob Miller, at just over 40 was part of the second generation of Brethren.  He was born in the old country, but was probably too young to remember. This list does beg the question of why John Miller, Philip Jacob’s brother wasn’t with this group, nor brother Lodowick.  It’s possibly that both John and Lodowick here born after immigration, and therefore did not need to be naturalized.

Map Frederick co to Philly

The trip from Maugansville, Maryland to Philadelphia, about 165 miles, was not trivial, then or now, and certainly not for an old man bouncing around in a creaky wagon. It makes me wonder if the reason that the entire group went was because Michael Miller, as elder statesman, got it in his head he was going and the rest of the men certainly weren’t going to allow him to go alone, at his age, so they all went and shared in the “shame” of taking an oath or affirmation, equally.  Or maybe Michael set the leading example.  Probably a matter of perspective!

New Frontiers Open

In 1768 and 1769, events began to unfold which did not necessarily affect the Miller family right then, but would have an profound affect upon them in coming years. Likely, the idea of more plentiful and less expensive land was alluring, at least to the younger generation.

In 1768, the defeat of Pontiac triggered mass migration westward over the mountains. Replogle 20

In November 1768, the British government bought large tracts of land from the Iroquois and Pennsylvania now owned all the land west of the Alleghenies to the Ohio River except for the northernmost part of the colony, opening the doors for a huge migration. However, the Delaware and Shawnee were left out of the negotiations, and the raids continued.  Replogle 115

1768-1769 – A list of persons who stand charged with land on Frederick County rent rolls which are under such circumstances as renders it out of the power of George Scott Farmer to collect the rents and there claims allowance under his articles for the same from March 1768 to March 1769: (Note there are several pages of these, so much so that it looks like a tax list, not a typical roll of uncollectibles.)

  • No Cripe, Greib, Ullrich, Ullery or Stutzman
  • Conrad Miller
  • Isaac Miller
  • Jacob Miller Jr
  • John Miller
  • Lodwick Miller
  • Michael Miller heirs
  • Oliver Miller, Balt Co.
  • Oliver Miller, Balt Co additional
  • Thomas Miller

Source: Inhabitants of Frederick Co. MD, Vol 1, 1750-1790 by Stefanie R. Shaffer, p 45

Philip Jacob Miller’s father died in 1771. A few years later, between 1774 and 1778, Philip Jacob’s sons, Daniel and David Miller would both set out on the road to Bedford County, wagons full, waving good bye to an aging Philip Jacob Miller and his wife who had probably crossed the half-century mark by this time.

It was about this time that Philip Jacob Miller bought a great Bible that was printed in 1770 in Germany. Perhaps he bought it when his father died in 1771, in his father’s memory.  Perhaps an earlier family Bible had been destroyed in the evacuations and depredations, or perhaps Philip Jacob Miller simply did not inherit his father’s Bible.  Whatever, the reason, Philip Jacob bought his own and began to fill in the important dates of his life.  He probably reflected on each occurrence as he wrote each child’s birth lovingly in his own handwriting.

Miller Bible cover

Philip Jacob Miller’s incredibly beautiful Bible is shown above.

The Revolutionary War

If Philip Jacob Miller thought his life was ever going to be peaceful and serene, he was wrong. Next came the Revolutionary War which began in 1775 and in many ways was just the continuation of the issues present in the Seven Years War, also known as Dunsmore’s War or the French and Indian War – the same beast that had run the Miller’s off of their land, twice now. They had only been back from the last evacuation for a decade before war raised its ugly head again.  Would there never be peace?

Philip Jacob Miller lived through the Revolutionary War in Frederick County, MD. This would have been his third war in 30 years, or fourth war in 40 years, depending on how you were counting.

Floyd Mason, in his book, “The Michael Miller and Susanna Bechtol Family Record,” tells us what he discovered about the Brethren in Frederick County during the Revolutionary War.

During the Revolution, the colonists held their national conventions and appointed certain committees of local leaders to carry out local responsibilities. In PA and MD, the main committee was the Committee of Observation who had the responsibility for raising funds to promote the war, select its leaders and furnish themselves with one committee member for each 100 families.  This committee had full power to act as it saw fit, answered to no one and there was no appeal of their decisions.

The militia groups were called Associations, later called Militia Companies. The Committee of Observation made lists of those not participating, whether Loyalist or members of the “Peace churches,” and they were called non-enrollers or Non-Associators.

The war issues divided the people’s loyalty. About one third favored the revolution, one third were Loyalists or Tories who favored the English and one third were neutral or did not believe in this manner of settling the issues.  This threw the Quakers, Mennonites and Dunkers in with the Tories or Loyalists and in opposition to the efforts of the Committee of Observation, at least as the committee saw it.

The churches were bringing discipline to bear on members who did not follow the historic peace teachings of the church. Annual Conferences were held each year and members were asked to remain true to the Church’s nonviolent principles, to refrain from participating in the war, to not voluntarily pay the War taxes and not to allow their sons to participate in the war.  This caused a lot of problems for the church members who wanted to be loyal to the church, loyal to the Loyalists who had brought them to the new country and loyal to the new government which was emerging.

As the war wore on and it looked as if the patriots efforts might lose, emotions raged. Non-Associators found themselves having to pay double and triple taxes.  Their barns were burned, livestock stolen or slaughtered and their crops destroyed.  They were often beaten and “tarred and feathered.”  Church members came to the aid of those who endured the losses.

Some members chose not to pay the war taxes or participate in the war activities and chose to wait until the authorities came and presented their papers to have taxes forced from them. This was in compliance with the Church of the Brethren Annual Conference Action. The Committee of Observation provided that non-Associators could take as much of their possessions with them as they could and then they would seize the property and remaining possessions and sell them to fill their war chests.

During this time, the Revolutionary War was taking place and the Brethren were known as non-Associators, those who would take an oath of loyalty, but would not belong to a militia unit nor fight. Many non-Brethren residents suspected them of secretly being allied with the Tories and resented their refusal to protect themselves and others.  Laws of the time allowed for the confiscation of property of anyone thought to be disloyal.  Records of this type of event have survived in the oral and written histories of some of the Brethren families, in particular some who migrated on down into the Shenandoah Valley.  Perhaps others thought it wise to move on about this time as well.

Taken from several sources, these are some of the names of non-Associators and others who were processed by the Committee of Observance that are descendants of Johann Michael Mueller (Jr.) who died in 1771.

  • Samuel Garber who may have married one of Michael Miller’s daughters, and their sons Martin and Samuel Garber
  • Jacob Good, Michael’s step-daughter’s husband
  • John Rife, Michael’s step-daughter’s husband
  • David Miller, the son of Philip Jacob Miller
  • Michael Wine, married Susannah, the daughter of Lodowich Miller, son of Michael Miller
  • Jacob Miller, son of Lodowich Miller
  • Abraham Miller, relationship uncertain
  • Another source lists Elder Daniel Miller, stated as Lodowick’s son, as being fined 4.5 pounds.

Susannah Miller Wine told her children and grandchildren that Michael Wine, Jacob Miller, Martin Garber and Samuel Garber had their property confiscated by the authorities for remaining true to the non-violent principles of their church.

Lodowich Miller’s family group removed to Rockingham County, VA about 1782 or 1783.

We know that in 1783, Philip Jacob Miller, John Miller and Lodowick were signing deeds back and forth in Frederick County. These activities may well have been in preparation for Lodowick’s departure.

William Thomas, on the Brethren Rootsweb list in 2011 tells us:

I have a copy of the 1776 non-enrollers list for Washington County, MD, that lists “Dunkars & Menonist” fines. The list includes Abraham Miller, David Miller, and David Miller son of Philip.  It goes onto list an appraisal of guns (whatever that means) in 1777 and includes a Henry Miller.

Point being there were several Miller’s in Washington County, some of who were Dunkers or Mennonites, a name common to both denominations.

If you move to the 1776 non-enroller list for Frederick County, MD, you have even more Millers. You have Jacob Miller, Jacob Miller s/o Adam, Abraham Miller, Peter Miller, Stephen Miller, Solomon Miller, Robert Miller, Henry Miller, Philip Miller, David Miller and Daniel Miller, all fined, and implying a Dunker/Mennonite/Quaker religious affiliation.

Washington County, Maryland was formed in September 1776 from the portion of Frederick County where Philip Jacob Miller lived.  Note that while David Miller, son of Philip is listed, Philip or Philip Jacob is not listed and neither is a Jacob.

However, there is also evidence that Philip Jacob Miller did participate at some level. Men 16-60 were required to participate in the local militia.

From the book, “Colonial Soldiers of the South, 1732-1774” by Murtie June Clark:

Capt John White’s Company Maryland Militia, 6 days, undated:

  • Michael Miller
  • Jacob Miller

Note that there were multiple Michael and Jacob Millers in the area, and not all of them appear to be Brethren.

Capt Jonathan Hager’s Company, Maryland Militia 6 days service, undated:

  • Jacob Miller
  • Conrod Miller
  • John Miller Jr.
  • John Miller
  • Jacob Miller Jr.
  • Zachariah Miller
  • Philip Jacob Miller
  • Jacob Miller (son of Conrad)

List of Militia 1732-1763 now before the Committee of Accounts lists John White’s militia as from Frederick County as well as that of Jonathan Hager.

Perhaps Philip Jacob Miller was trying, rather unsuccessfully it seems, to find a middle ground.

It’s difficult to understand how to interpret this information that seems to be conflicting.  To try to resolve or better understand the situation, I turned to the 1790 census where I found 2 Philips in Washington County, 5 Jacobs, 7 Johns and an Abraham in both Washington and Frederick County.  Unfortunately, the 1790 census did not add clarity.

The Sons Leave

Philip Jacob’s sons, Daniel and David, followed the migration to Bedford Co., PA about the time of the onset of the Revolutionary War. The brothers went to Morrison’s Cove (Juniata River) and possibly on to Brothers Valley, both early Brethren settlements.

Morrison's Cove fall

David and Daniel both moved to Morrison’s Cove (shown above) between 1774 and 1778, staying for about 20 years until they joined their father later in Kentucky, but Philip Jacob remained in Washington Co., Maryland, which was formed from Frederick County in 1776. There is a record of a Jacob and Daniel Miller taking the oath of fidelity to the State of Maryland in 1778 in Washington County (formed from Frederick County in 1776,) so perhaps they didn’t leave until after 1778.

It was a rough time for Philip Jacob Miller. In the 1760s, the family had to abandon their land for a second time, returning in about 1765.  We don’t know where they sheltered, but likely, the family group included Philip’s elderly father, Michael.  In 1771, Phillip Jacob’s father, Michael, died.  Between 1774 and 1778, Philipp Jacob’s two sons, Daniel and David left for Bedford County.  In about 1783, Philip Jacob’s other brother, Lodowick left for the Shenandoah Valley, possibly as a result of the Revolutionary War.  Family is getting scarce.  The final straw seemed to be when Philip Jacob’s brother, John, died a decade later, in 1794.  John had lived beside Philip Jacob for his entire adult life in Frederick (now Washington) County, and they assuredly depended on each other and helped one another farm.  Now John was gone too.

The Big Decision

I can see Philip Jacob and Magdalena talking by the fireplace one evening, perhaps as Philip Jacob stared out the window, over his land, pondering the bold and life-changing move he was considering. It would change his life, and death, and the lives of all of his children as well – not to mention Magdalena.

Philip Jacob had farmed with his brother John since they all moved from York County in 1751 or 1752 – more than 40 years earlier. They had likely all evacuated together, twice, and rebuilt together, twice.  When their father died, there were still the three brothers, but with Lodowick removed, now John gone to death, and both of Philip Jacob’s oldest sons having moved to Bedford County, Philip Jacob obviously felt uneasy and probably somewhat isolated.  Was he concerned that he wouldn’t physically be able to farm alone?  Was he concerned that there would be no one left to inherit Ash Swamp in Washington County while at the same time his two sons in Bedford County were renting land?

Was the allure of reuniting his family who was marrying and scattering, for once and for all, in a new location, strong enough to cause a man 70 years old, or older, to sell out?

On the new frontier, Philip Jacob could buy seven times as much land as he had in Maryland –  enough land for everyone.  Seven times the land.  That’s some powerful motivation.  Was this dream enough to make an elderly man sell most of his possessions, pack everything up in a wagon and head overland for the new frontier of Ohio, some 450+ miles distant, down rough roads, on a riverboat and through Indian territory?

That must have been his motivation, for I can think nothing other than the love of family that would uproot a man of that age from his well-deserved rocking chair beside the warm fireplace and propel him on to yet one final, untamed, frontier.

Map Mauganstown to Cincy

Philip Jacob Miller would succeed in leaving a legacy in land for his children.

Campbell County, Kentucky

Philip Jacob sold Ash Swamp in Washington County, Maryland in 1796 to the same man who bought his brother’s land from John’s estate. Michael then likely took a wagon overland to somewhere he could intersect with a river, probably Pittsburg, then floated down the Ohio River to Campbell Co., KY, a few miles upstream from Fort Washington that would one day become Cincinnati.

Conestoga wagon

The group would have moved by conestoga wagon. This conestoga wagon belonged to Jacob Miller who was found in Frederick County but had left by 1765 for Virginia. Later, this same Jacob Miller arrived in Montgomery County, Ohio about the same time that Daniel Miller, Philip Jacob’s son would arrive.  This wagon was supposedly built in 1788, so it would not have been the actual wagon used to move from Frederick County, it was used by the Brethren group on subsequent moves and did wind up in Ohio.  The wagons used by Philip Jacob Miller and his family would have been very much the same.

Brethren historian, Merle Rummel tells us more about the migration of the Brethren during this time.

Emigration came down the Ohio River from Western Pennsylvania by flatboats, but it was hazardous due to Indian depredations. These Brethren started on the Monongahela where Elder George Wolfe I is recorded to have been in the business of building flatboats (Wolfe and Sons) at Turtle Creek (just upstream from Pittsburg, Pennsylvania). When General Wayne defeated the Ohio Indians in 1795 (Treaty of Greeneville), the dangers of the Ohio River route were reduced, and it opened the way for others to follow the old Shawnee War Path, (the Kanawha Way) from North Carolina and the lower Valley of Virginia, through the (West) Virginia mountains to below the “Falls of the Kanawha.” There flatboats could come down the Kanawha River to Point Pleasant and down the Ohio. Others continued on the Trace by land into southern Ohio. Many more Brethren began coming west from the Old Frontier regions.

We know that Philip Jacob Miller arrived before August of 1796, because he was paying personal property tax and by then, he had acquired a horse and a cow.

Campbell County, Kentucky Tax Lists, posted by Dale Landon, March 2010, on the Brethren Rootsweb list.  These tax lists generallyonly counted males.

  • taken 16 Aug 1796, Philip Jacob Miller, 1 over 21, 1 horse, 1 cattle
  • taken 28 Aug 1797, Philip Jacob Miller, 1 over 21, 3 horses
  • taken 28 Aug 1797, Daniel Cripe, 1 over 21, 2 horses
  • taken 25 Aug 1797, Arnold Snider, 1 over 21, 2 horses
  • 1798, Daniel Cripe, 1 over 21, 2 horses
  • 1798, Philip Jacob Miller, 1 over 21, 3 horses
  • 1798, Arnold Snyder, 1 over 21, 2 horses
  • 1799, David Miller, 1 over 21
  • 1799, Arnold Snider, 1 over 21, 2 horses
  • taken 28 Aug 1800, Philip Miller, 1 over 21
  • taken 9 Aug 1800, Stephen Miller, 1 over 21, 1 horse
  • taken 23 May 1800, Arnold Snider, 1 over 21, 3 horses

It’s unclear whether Philipp Jacob Miller bought land in Campbell County, KY, or not. I don’t believe that a thorough sifting of available Campbell County records has been done by any researcher, although several researchers have done some.  A visit needs to be made and all of the available records thoroughly researched, including the estate packet, if one remains, for dates and signatures.

Phillip’s Death

We know that Phillip Jacob died before April 8, 1799 when his estate was probated, and probably after the first of the year.

Philip Jacob Miller estate probatePhilip Jacob Miller estate probate 2

There is a slight discrepancy in the documentation.  We have a tax list dated 9-1-1800 that lists Philip.  However, it’s also possible this is a list for what’s owed this year from the previous year or for his estate, although it doesn’t specify that it’s an estate and not an individual.

Philip Jacob Miller 1800 taxes

 

BullSkin Trace

Merle Rummell tells us the following, with the maps added by me:

Stonelick church today

The first Brethren Church north of the Ohio River was the Obannon Baptist Brethren Church (now Stonelick, above), near Goshen Ohio, on the Indian Trail north from Bullskin Landing (1795).

The old log Obannon Church Building (c1823) was at the Stoddard (Stouder) Cemetery, about a mile east of the south edge of Goshen – so these families were in the immediate Church area.

Stouder Cemetery

Daniel and David Miller lived at 132 and Woodville Pike, in the lower left hand corner.

Gabriel Karns lived about a mile on east of the Millers, on Manila Pike, the old Indian Road. They were forced to move north (1805, Dayton area, Montgomery County, Ohio) being forced off the Bounty Lands.  Daniel Miller was put into the ministry at the Obannion Church.

In eastern Ohio Territory, the land back from the River was not good farmland. It was Appalachia Hills, that crowded the River. David Horne travel 60 miles up the Muskingum River to the Forks of the Licking at the new Zane Trace, before he found land. John Countryman left the Massie Fort at Three Islands (now Manchester OH) and went 30 miles up the Ohio Brush Creek till he found farmland. It was at the Little Miami River, just before Cincinnati where the Brethren stopped at good farmland along the Indian Trace, the Obannon Church.

The Bullskin Landing was a goal for the Brethren migration down the Ohio River by flatboat. It was probably the best landing on the river, being a sunken valley back into the Ohio Hills.

Bullskin creek

Bullskin Creek is flooded by the Ohio River for half a mile back from the River, a wide valley opening. It was the first major landing for Ohio River flatboats above Fort Washington (Cincinnati). Here the flatboat was protected, off the river, with easy unloading facilities.

Bullskin landing

This settlement in Clermont County is called Utopia. The Brethren settled on the Bullskin about 1800. (Miller, Moyer, Metzgar, Rohrer, Hoover, Houser; the old Olive Branch Church. It converted en-mass to Church of Christ in the New Light Revival of 1830’s.) Being farmers, they lived mostly on the level lands above the high riverbank hills, at the head of Bullskin Creek.

The major Indian Traces north, one going to Old Chillicothe on the east of Dayton, continuing on to Fort Detroit, left from there. Another went to the ford of the Great Miami at Franklin Ohio and up the west side of Dayton. The Bullskin Trace, the old Indian Road to Detroit, became the first State Road in Ohio.

Most of the settlers on the New Frontier were frontier folk from the Old Frontier, very few were from the Settled East. The River brought them from Old Fort Redstone (now Union and Brownsville PA), Brothers Valley and Washington Co PA in the west; from Penns Valley, Brush Valley and Northumberland Co PA in the north; from the Conococheague, Middletown Valley MD; from Morrison’s Cove, Cambria Co and the Juniata Valley PA. The Kanawha Trace brought them from the Carolina settlements on the Yadkin; from Franklin and Floyd Cos and the lower Valley VA. These areas were the Old Frontier. It showed in the type of people who came, in their self-reliance and independent thought. They didn’t just accept being told something was true, they tried it out for themselves, and used it. They had to, or they died on the frontier. They were not stupid, while some were illiterate, most could read their Bible -maybe a Berleburg Bible, some read Greek. The Brethren knew what the Bible said, and lived it. They were definitely Brethren, and they took their Brethrenism with them, making a real Christian witness to their neighbors!

To this area near Cincinnati came the Aukerman Family in 1789, to “Columbia” at the mouth of the Little Miami River. The 11 year old son was John, who eventually would be the first settler at Gratis, in present day Preble County, in 1804, on Aukerman Creek, named in his honor. The John Bowman family came near that same time. They settled north on the trace probably in now Warren Co OH, between Lebanon and Goshen OH.

South of Goshen, came first David Miller, then his brother, Daniel. Daniel was put into the ministry there about 1798. The first minister was Elder John Garver, from Stony Creek in Brothers Valley PA, by way of Virginia, to North Carolina, to Kentucky. In 1805 he moved to the Donnels Creek Church, up the Indian Road. By tradition, the founding of the Obannon Baptist Church was 1795, Elder David Stouder. He seems to have come over from Kentucky, and by research, may be the David Stover near Limestone, probably from the Log Union Church. This was the beginnings of the Obannon Church, but these families weren’t allowed to stay.

These were the Bounty Lands, claimed by Virginia as payment for service to their Veterans of the Revolution. Government survey of the lands began in 1802, and it did not matter to the Government or the surveyors if people already lived on these lands, if there were homes built and fields cleared. That the Dunker custom often included getting title from the Indians to homesteads gave them no claim to their lands in the eyes of the surveyor or state. Legally, they were squatters. There was no appeal for their claim to the land, all they could do was leave. They moved north, beyond the Bounty Lands, to the little Village of Dayton. Their move was easy, they went up the Indian Trace. From Little’s Bounty Lands Survey (1802) we have been able to identify the adjoining farms of David and Daniel Miller,  they were surveyed as cleared lands.

Now other Brethren families came to Bullskin Landing. These were the second line of Brethren, moving west from the Old Frontier lands in Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia or Carolina, and some moved up from the churches in Kentucky. They used Bounty claims to get land, Bountys purchased back home, by self or through kin, from those who had no wish to leave for the west. The families at Obannon were mostly from Maryland and Pennsylvania: Binkley, Cripe, Grossnickle, Frey, Karns, Maugans, Miller, Moler, Pringle, Stouder; Elder John Garver and Frederick Weaver as ministers. Stonelick was a meeting house of the Obannon Congregation. This was good farmland, but it was a heavy clay and many Brethren soon moved north to better lands on the Great Miami headwaters near Dayton Ohio, where they remain strong today.

 Philipp Jacob Miller’s Land in Warren County, Ohio

After arriving in Kentucky, Philip Jacob Miller bought 2000 acres of land that lay along O’Bannon Creek in Warren County, Ohio, across the river from Campbell Co., KY and north about 45 or 50 miles, for $1.10 an acre, near where his sons, David and Daniel, may already have been living.

Philip Jacob’s 2000 acres were north of Goshen some 8 miles – being on the Clermont-Warren Co line, extending east beyond Cozaddale.

After Philip Jacob’s death in September 1799, his children made an agreement among themselves to divide this land into ten 200 acre parcels. Magdalena, his daughter, decided to take her share in cash. The other children drew lots for these 200 acre parcels, but only a few of them ever lived on their land in Warren County, Ohio. Stonelick covered bridge, shown below, now closed and undergoing renovation is located near the Stonelick Brethren Church where several of Philip Jacob’s children were founders.

Stonelick bridge

Philipp Jacob Miller lived in Campbell County, Kentucky, not Clermont County, Ohio, across the river nor in Warren County, Ohio, where he purchased land, which was located about 40 miles north of the Ohio River on the Warren County/ Clermont County border.  It’s unclear whether or not Philip Jacob purchased land in Campbell County, or not, or why he settled and stayed in that location as his children were settling further north, although the tax lists do indicate, at least initially, that some of his children did live in Campbell County.

Philipp Jacob’s sons Daniel and David Miller settled in Clermont County, Ohio across the Ohio River and Philipp Jacob himself acquired land about 10 miles north of his son’s land on the border of Clermont and Warren Counties, but apparently none of those three families ever lived on Philip Jacob’s land.

This was also a time of some confusion, because the settlers who had acquired land in this region, which became designated as military bounty land for Revolutionary War veterans, often lost that land when veterans or those they sold their rights to subsequently patented that land.

To Philip Jacob, this must have smelled too much like what happened back in York County, PA in the 1740s with the disputed land involved in Cresap’s War, claimed by both states, and granted by both states as well – to different settlers.

Troy Goss tells us the following about Philipp Jacob’s land, with maps and documents added by me:

Ohio land magnate William Lytle (1770-1813) obtained a patent from the United States government on May 2, 1803, which included the lands that Philip Jacob Miller had acquired.

Phillips two sons, David and Abraham, serving as administrator of his estate purchased his land for a second time from Lytle later in 1803. That was apparently better than losing the land altogether.

They purchased 1,800 acres and an adjacent lot of 200 acres for a total of $2,200. These tracts conform to Virginia Military Reserve Survey tracts 3790 and 3791 in the southeast corner of Hamilton Township, Warren County, and with about 162 acres crossing over into Goshen Township, Clermont County. They are roughly bounded in the north by the community of Comargo, on the east by Cozaddale and Stony Run, and encompassing the community of Dallasburg in the southwest.

Philip's land satellite

As you can see, this area is about 45 miles north of Bullskin Creek on the Ohio River. However, Daniel and David’s land are right on the way, shown with the red pin below.

Philip's land map

Troy continues:

Philip’s children made an agreement among themselves to divide this land into ten 200-acre lots of 163-1/3 by 196 poles (~2,695 by 3,234 feet). Daughter Magdalena Cripe decided to take her share in cash. The children designated John Ramsey and Theophilus Simonton to appraise the lots and stipulate compensation between the varying values of the lots, whereupon the children drew lots for the parcels and David and Abraham, as estate administrators, began deeding each in April 1805 for the nominal sum of $1. Arbitrarily numbering the lots from the northwest to southeast, we find the following among the ten surviving children and one widower son-in-law:

Will-Philip Jacob Miller p1

????????????????????????????

Document filed in Warren County, Ohio.

The document is transcribed by cousin, Marian, as follows:

Articles of agreement between the children of Philip Jacob Miller

Warren County, Ohio Deed book, vol 14, page 21-22

[Starts part way down the page]

Articles of Agreement made and concluded upon this nineteenth day of December one thousand Seven hundred ninety nine betwixt we the under named Sons and Daughters of Phillip Jacob Miller deceased in manner and form following viz

First We Daniel Miller, David Miller, Abraham Miller, Susannah Miller, Christena Miller, Elizabeth Miller, Sarah Miller, Esther Miller, Mary Miller, Magdalen Miller, and Hannah Miller for ourselves our heirs executors administrators and assigns have positively and finally covenanted and agreed betwixt each other to divide a certain tract of land containing two thousand acres in lots beginning with No one, two three &c until said lands (which now lays and is situate in the north Western Territory upon O’Bannions Creek or near the same) is equally and justly divided into Ten equal Shares in regard to quantity and quality or rather to have sd lands equally divided into Ten two hundreds acre lots

Secondly we do finally agree to have John Ramsey Theophilus Simonton and one more person if required to appraise and divide sd lands into ten Shares so as each of the above named Sons and Daughters of the above deceased person (except one daughter named Magdalen Gripe wife of Daniel Gripe now in being which here hath finally agreed to take her Share in cash and hath given their bond for the same) Shall have an equal share of said lands,

Thirdly and lastly we do firmly & finally covenant and agree with each other to stand to and abide by the final and appraisment and determination of John Ramsey Theophilus Simonton and another if required concerning sd lands. For and in consideration of which covenant and agreements well and truly to be made and done we bind ourselves our heirs executors Administrators and assigns in the Penal sum of One Thousand Dollars Specie each firmly by the

[page 22]

Presents in Testimony whereunto we have set our hands and seals this day and year above written as also at the back part of the above covenant, N.B. we do furthermore finally agree to pay all debts that might come against the above deceased Person hereafter viz each of us one equal Share of sd debts.

Daniel Miller (seal)
David Miller (seal)
Abraham Miller (seal)
Jacob (his x mark) Shott
Elizabeth (her x mark) Shott (seal)
Daniel & Mallalnon Greib
David Miller and Abraham Miller (seal),Trustees for Sarah Millers Children
John (his x mark) Cremar and Mary (her x mark) Cremer (seal)
Arnold (his x mark) Snider and Susanna (her x mark) Snider (seal)
Henry Snell & Cristena his wife (seal)
Gabriel (his x mark) Magens
Ester (her x mark) Magens
Daniel Ulrich (German script) Susannah Ullrich[?]

Test. Prest.
Leonard Raper
Temperance Raper

[written sideways up the page] Recd for record Jany 19th 1829 & recorded Feby 17th 1829 Asabel Brown RWC

Test prst
David Posoy
George Muchlin

Test prst
John Alinn
James Crawford
Conrad Brombaugh
Eamsel [?]
Jacob [?]
[?]

We whose names are hereunto Subscribed being appointed by the heirs of Phillip Jacob Miller decd to divide a Two thousand acre tract or tracts of land into Ten Equal lots and also to equalize the lots in the following manner (Towit) The Tenth lot to pay fifty five dollars to the fourth, the Seventh to pay thirty eight dollars to the Second, the Sixth lot to pay thirty three dollars to the third lot, the eighty lot to pay Twenty eight dollars to the first lot, the ninth lot to pay Twenty four dollars to the fifth lot, Given under our hands this 29th March 1800.

John Ramsey
Theos Simonton Apprs.

The siblings divided the land as follows:

1 – Northernmost 200 acres adjacent to the 1,800 survey; estate sold to Francis Eltzroth for $200, 22 Sep 1809; quit claim from the heirs of Daniel Miller to Benjamin Eltzroth (son of Francis and grandson-in-law to Philip Jacob) for $500, 7 May 1828; the town of Comargo lies in the northeast corner

2 – Northwest 200 acres; estate sold to Gabriel [& Esther] Morgan for $1, 22 Apr 1805; Gabriel had purchased an adjacent 200-acres lot from Richard & Mary Cunningham two months earlier

3 – North-central 200 acres; estate sold to John [& Mary] Creamer for $1, 22 Apr 1805

4 – Northeast 200 acres; estate sold to Henry [& Christina] Snell for $1, 22 Sep 1809; the town of Cozaddale lies along the southeastern boundary

5 – West-central 200 acres; estate sold to Arnold [& Hannah] Snider for $1, 22 Apr 1805

6 – Central 200 acres; estate sold to Daniel [& Susannah] Ullery for $1, 22 Sep 1809

7 – East-central 200 acres; Abraham sold his lot to William Spence for $400, 22 Apr 1805

8 – Southwest 200 acres; estate sold southern half (100 acres) to Jacob Wise for $200, 6 Dec 1806; and northern half (100 acres) to Jacob Creamer, perhaps a brother of John Creamer, for $200, 16 Jan 1807; the western half of the town of Dallasburg lies in this tract

9 – South-central 200 acres; estate sold to Andrew [widower of Sarah] Nifong for $1, 22 Sep 1809; the eastern half of the town of Dallasburg lies in this tract

10 – Southeast 200 acres straddling the Warren-Clermont county line; estate sold to Gabriel [& Esther] Morgan for $1, 22 Apr 1805

Lots 8, and either 2 or 10, may have been designated for David or Elizabeth, whose names do not appear among the deeds. On the other hand, Esther and Gabriel Morgan somehow managed to acquire both lots 2 and 10.

Only the families of four Miller daughters, Christina Snell, Esther Morgan, Mary Creamer, and Hannah (Snider) Shepley, ever lived on their land in Hamilton Township, Warren County. An 1867 map of the area shows Snells, Cramers, and Eltzroths still living in the area.

Magdalena Miller reportedly died in in Campbell County nine years after Philip in 1808.

Following Philip Jacob’s and Magdalena’s deaths, a few Miller children remained in Warren and Clermont counties, while others moved north to more fertile lands in Montgomery and Preble counties. Daughters Susannah Ullery and Magdalena Cripe migrated into northern Indiana, settling in Elkhart County.

Sources

  • Agree 1799: 19 Dec 1799, Articles of Agreement, Warren County Deed Book 14, Ohio
  • Deed 1803: 7 Sep 1803, Warren County, Ohio; recorded 9 Nov 1803
  • Deed 1803: 7 Sep 1803, Clermont County, Ohio; recorded 14 Dec 1803
  • Deed 1803: 28 Dec 1803, Warren County, Ohio; recorded 11 Apr 1804
  • Deed 1803: 28 Dec 1803, Clermont County, Ohio; recorded 28 Apr 1804
  • Deed 1805: 22 Apr 1805, Deed Book 1, Warren County, Ohio
  • Deed 1809: 22 Sep 1809, Deed Book 2, Warren County, Ohio

I was able to locate Philipp Jacob’s actual land thanks to a combination of sale information and the Warren County Maps and Atlases website which documents the military land grants and where they were located in Warren County.

Warren county maps

Hamilton Township is in the lower portion of Warren County bordering Clermont County on the south.

Hamilton twp map


“Map of Warren County Ohio With Municipal and Township Labels” by US Census, Ruhrfisch – taken from US Census website [1] and modified by User:Ruhrfisch. Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 via Commons

Below we see track 3790 in 1867, still in the Cramer and Snell families. Part of grant 3790 extended southward into Clermont County.

Miller 3790 tract map

In 1867, we can see that the land in grant 3791 also remains in the Eltzroth family that purchased this section from Daniel Miller.

Miller 3791 tract map

Grant 3791 is located just above 3790.

Miller 3790 and 3791

Philipp Jacob’s Burial

We know where Philipp Jacob’s land was located, and we know he never lived there. When he died in early 1799, he was living in Campbell County, KY, across the Ohio River.  Had he planned to move to his land in Warren County?  We’ll never know.

There is a persistent family rumor that Philip Jacob was buried in an old cemetery that was on an island in the mouth of 12 Mile Creek (Campbell Co KY) that was washed away in an Ohio River flood. I find this hard to believe, given the difficulty of burying someone on an island.  The Brethren were practical if anything, and burying someone on an island is not practical from any standpoint.   On the other hand, if you can’t farm the island, at least it could serve as a cemetery.  So who knows.

12 Mile Creek crop

Merle Rummel, Brethren minister and historian visited the site of the “Twelve Mile Regular Baptist Church Island” cemetery. This cemetery is not on an island, and still exists, such as it is.  So perhaps Philip Jacob Miller was not buried on an island after all?

You might notice that 12 Mile Creek is about 20 miles downriver (northwest) from Bullskin, and assuming there was a ferry crossing, significantly closer to Philipp Jacob’s land which was northeast of present day Cincinnati.

12 Mile Creek to Warren Co

Merle Rummell visited the 12 Mile “Regular Baptist Church” Island Cemetery in either 2007 or 2009. He was kind enough to provide me with photos taken and information gathered during that visit.

Merle said:

All that remains on this site are 6 tombstones, none with death dates before 1849.

Ball, Mildred-died 28 Mar 1862; age 30 yrs 3 mo 8 days; wife of John Traver
Beagle, Wife of Jesse-June 1869/only date listed
Henderson, John-28 June 1828-21 Feb 1905
Stephens, Eleanor-22 Aug 1777-1 Sep 1849 wife of John Stephens
Stephens, John-1774-1849
Walker, daughter of J&M-died 18 July 1868 age 2y

Those buried earlier, and there seem to be several, are in unmarked graves.

Several field stones were found on end protruding out of the ground.  Several bases of headstones were also found.  The area around the foundation is heavily covered with Vinca or Periwinkle vines.  I suspect there may be more stones beneath this vegetation.  It also seems apparent that graves were placed on two sides of the old church.  This leads me to believe there are many more graves at this site than previously believed.  There appears to be foundation remains of two smaller outbuildings.

Based on the information and photos provided by Merle, the location of this cemetery and original church is where the red pin is shown below, utilizing Google maps.

12 Mile Church

This suggests that Philipp Jacob Miller probably lived in close proximity to this location.

12 Mile Church larger

Google street view shows us the area near the church, back in the gently rolling hills.  12 Mile Creek is to the right, paralleling the road.

Campbell Co near church

This picture shows the crossing of 12 Mile Creek.

Campbell Co. 12 Mile Creek

The cemetery would have been in the hills to the right.

Campbell Co viewing hills

If Philipp Jacob Miller truly was buried on an Island in the Ohio River at the mouth of 12 Mile Creek that washed away in a flood, it would have been near this location, where the divit marks the mouth of 12 Mile Creek.

Campbell Co 12 Mile map

A satellite view of the location.

Campbell Co 12 Mile satellite

The final resting place of Philipp Jacob Miller is one of the more interesting family mysteries that will, of course, never be solved.

Philip Jacob Miller’s Estate

I have always felt that looking at what someone left behind at their death tells us a lot about their life. In essence, it tells us the story of their life – except in Philipp Jacob’s case, he had gotten to start over several times.  Philip Jacob’s estate spoke of a farmer, but one that wasn’t entirely poor despite having “sold out” three years before when he left Maryland.

The family used glass. They had a looking glass, which is actually rather amazing considering the fact that they were Brethren, and a coffee mill.  All of the kitchen goods were included in the estate inventory as well, and of note, the value of the Bible and “sundry other books” is valued highly, equal to the box of glass, the cow and calf and the saddle.  And what were those “other books?”  My guess is that they were religious books.  Clearly, Philip Jacob Miller knew how to read and his books were important enough to him for them to be brought along to the new frontier, probably in the two trunks.

Nothing is found in Philipp Jacob’s estate inventory that speaks to anything but a simple, plain lifestyle that would be expected of a Brethren church member – except that pesky looking glass, which is very, very un-Brethren. A looking glass would have been considered very vain.

The amazing thing is that this is that an estate inventory lists ALL that the family owned, not just what they wanted to dispose of – and included everything – even things that were the wife’s.  So we have a complete picture – as unfair as that is to the spouse.

I shudder to think of cooking for a family with the utensils Magdalena had at her disposal.  There was no cook stove, so she cooked in the fireplace.  There was only one bed – but of course Philipp Jacob sold off anything extra before leaving Pennsylvania, so one bed was all that he and Magdalena needed.  They probably had more in Pennsylvania, or, the children slept on hay in the corners, a common practice at the time.

As a matter of course, family members often “bought” items at an estate sale, along with the neighbors. The widow was often allowed to take some kitchen things on credit against her “share,” which was one third of the value of the estate.

Persuant to an order of Campbell County Court, We the undersigned after being sworn appraised the Personal Estate of Philip Jacob Miller, Deceased. The articles contained in the Inventory are listed with the value of each respective article being placed opposite to it.

Philip Jacob inventoryPhilip Jacob Inventory 2

Campbell September Court 1799

Dale Landon was kind enough to provide the original estate documents from his visit to Campbell County, KY.

Estate Appraisal Page 1 crop

Estate Appraisal Page 2 Part 1

Estate Appraisal Page 2 Part 2

As I look at his estate, I wonder how much Philipp Jacob brought with him in 1796 as he migrated down the Ohio to Campbell County and how much be bought after arriving.

It’s odd that he had an old wagon and an old horse too. Did they come all the way from Pennsylvania in that wagon and horse?  One horse could not have pulled a loaded wagon alone.  Of course, the “grey stud” was probably a horse (given his value) and could have been teamed with the mare.

One thing we know for sure, the Bible came along with Philip Jacob from Washington County, probably packed into one of those two trunks. And in those two trunks were packed the cumulative results of a lifetime – all condensed into just two trunks.

If I had two trunks to pack, what things would I take with me?

Philip Jacobs’ sons, David and Abraham administered his estate. Estate packets are extremely interesting and sometimes hold many hints as to the life of the person whose estate is being administered.  In this case, we know that Philip Jacob’s wife, Magdalena became ill, was treated for her illness, but it “carried her off” anyway.

Debts of the estate of Jacob Miller deceased in account with David and Abraham Miller administrators:

Philip Jacob estate accountPhilip Jacob estate account 2

Campbell County to wit: Agreeable to an order of the Court of Campbell County we the undersigned being appointed commifsioner to examin and settle with the administrators of Philip Jacob Miller dec.’d as to the personal estate of the deceased and do report to the court of Campbell County that the above is a true statement given under our hands this 19th day of Sep’r 1808 James Noble George Porter Written on the right edge of the page. Campbell September Court 1808 This Report of the commifsioners appointed to settle with the Administrators of Philip J. Miller dec’d was returned to Court and ordered to be recorded and is recorded. Test James Taylor clk

Estate inventory and debts posted to the Rootsweb Brethren list by Dale Landon on March 11, 2010 and he provided originals below, as well.

Estate Inventory Page 1 Part 1

Estate Inventory Page 1 Part 2

Estate Inventory Page 2 Part 1

Estate Inventory Page 2 Part 2

There are couple items of interest on this list. The money from John Schnebly was likely for the land back in Washington County.  He bought both John’s and Philip Jacob’s land, and he may have also bought all of the farm and household goods that Philip Jacob wanted to sell before leaving as well.

I had to laugh at the entry for whiskey at the estate appraisal.  I have seen whiskey provided at the sale and I’m guessing it loosens up the bidding and makes the net sales much higher!

At first glance, it looks like Jacob had a son Jacob who had an estate, but that’s not the case. The court referred to Philip Jacob as Jacob, crediting the balance of his estate sale to his estate account to be settled by the administrators at a later date.

Philip Jacob’s wife, Magdalena does pass away and the estate pays for her doctor bills and funeral as well.   I’d love to see the date on that receipt.

The Philip Jacob Miller Bible

Philip Jacob Miller probably sat in front of his fireplace in his home on Ash Swamp, about the time of his father’s death in 1771, reminded of his own mortality, and dutifully wrote the names and dates of his children’s births into his new Bible.

Philip Jacob Miller Bible front page

On February 11, 2009, I was fortunately enough with some hints and sleuthing to find the Philip Jacob Miller Bible in Elkhart, Indiana. The custodial family, who has no idea how the Bible originally came to be in their family, has taken wonderful care of the Bible and allowed it to be photographed.

Both the custodial family and I spent a significant amount of time trying to figure out how they came to be in possession of the Miller family Bible, which is greatly cherished as a family heirloom. I suspected a second marriage or something of that sort, but the only connection we could find was that their family bought a house that was in the John Miller family – and perhaps, just perhaps, the Bible got accidentally left in that home, perhaps to be discovered a generation later in the attic – and of course, cherished as a family heirloom – not realizing it wasn’t from their family.  Thank goodness they cherish it, because that’s the only reason it still exists today.

Upon arriving to visit the Bible, another surprise was awaiting me, as the front section holds the children’s birth records of Philip Jacob Miller, and the back holds the same for the children of Daniel Miller, son of Philip Jacob Miller, also my ancestor. It was a double hitter day!  Given a signature in the Bible, I also believe that Daniel’s son John was likely the next custodian, taking the Bible to Elkhart County, Indiana.

This Bible was printed in 1770, but the first child’s birth recorded is in 1752, and Philip Jacob’s children are not entered in birth order. Furthermore, the handwriting in the back matches Daniel’s exactly.  This tells us that this Bible is probably not the original Philip Jacob Miller Bible.  One look at what happened in Frederick County, MD in 1750s and 1760s and we’ll quickly understand why.

The residents all evacuated twice and their houses were burned. If the family Bible didn’t manage to somehow get put in the wagon as the family was evacuating, then it was burned.  The Miller family was back in the region by 1765 when Michael Miller, Philip Jacob’s father, was deeding land, but I’m guessing a new Bible didn’t get purchased until after Michael’s death in 1771.  Perhaps Philip Jacob thought the purchase of a new Bible would be a fitting remembrance for funds received after his father’s death.  Or maybe Michael bought it for Philipp Jacob before his passing.

Regardless of how Philipp Jacob acquired this Bible it was obviously precious to him and cherished by the family.

A single entry unquestionably identifies the owner.

Beside the first entry in the Bible, which is the birth of Daniel in 1755, there is another entry which says “1775 Daniel Meines Sohn Sohn zur Welt geboren” (my son’s son was born into this world). In the back portion, we show the birth indeed of Stephen in 1775, the eldest son of Philip Jacob’s eldest son Daniel.  An earlier 1947 translation (apparently before the tape was applied) says “my grandson was born March 7, 1775”, which was obviously translated before the tape was applied, and matches exactly with Daniel’s own entry of his son’s birth.

Philip Jacob Miller Bible Daniel entry

The following photo is me holding the Bible. What a glorious day.  I am extremely grateful to the owners for very graciously allowing me to visit.

Philip Jacob Miller Bible and me crop

The following page is the front page with Philip Jacob’s children’s birth recorded.

Philip Jacob Miller Bible children

The births are recorded as follows:

  • Lizabeth Miller was born in April 1752.
  • My daughter Lidia was born at 3 o’clock at night, Junee 18, 1754. The zodiac sign was the Waterman (Aquarius).  (Note that the name and date were struck out.)
  • My son Daniel Miller was born at 4 o-clock at night April 8, 1755. He died August 26, 1822.
  • My son David was born December 1, 1757, at 3 o-clock at night. The zodiac sign was he lion (Leo).
  • My daughter Susannah was born March 2, 1759, at 7 o’clock in the morning. The sign was the Bull (Taurus).
  • My daughter Christine was born December 4, 1761 at 10 o’clock in the forenoon, the sign was the Fish (Pisces).
  • My daughter Mariles was born — 1762 at 8 o’clock in the morning. The sign was the Virgin (Virgo).
  • My son Abraham was born April 28, 1764.
  • My son Solomon was born March 20, 1767.
  • My daughter Ester was born February 13, 1769.

Daughter Hannah, as reflected in the 1799 agreement between Philip Jacob’s heirs is not reflected in this list of Philip Jacob’s children.  We’re also left to presume that Mariles is Mary.

As little as this is, it’s absolutely the only thing written in Philip Jacob’s own hand, showing any of his personality at all. It’s extremely interesting that he recorded the astrological signs for many of his children.

The following page is the back page recording the births of Daniel’s children.

Philip Jacob Miller Bible Daniel children

However, the first entry is that of Daniel himself, again, and the second entry is that of his sister Lizbeth born in 1752 who was not recorded on the front page. Of course, we know this was a recopied Bible. This Bible survived the trip west in a wagon, then floating down the Ohio River.  This Bible has been wet one or more times.  We know that in the early 1800s, this Bible went to Warren or Clermont County, Ohio, then Montgomery County, Ohio, then in the 1830s, to Elkhart County, Indiana where it remained for the next 177 years or so.

The top back entry for Daniel also has his death entry beside it to the right in a different hand and ink.

Following those entries we find Daniel’s children. Oddly, we find no other deaths recorded nor marriages.

We do find his son John’s signature in the Bible twice, once at the bottom of the back page (shown above) and once a few pages inside the front.

Philip Jacob Miller Bible John signature

It looks like Philip Jacob Miller and his wife lost a child in 1756, as there is a child born in April 1755 and then not another one until 2 and a half years later, suggesting that they lost a child about September 1756. 1756 was the year that the Brethren were evacuated and was reported to be the worst of that time. Did Magdalena have that child in a wagon perhaps?  We are left to wonder what happened.  One thing is for sure, that child’s death and the grief it brought to the family made whatever else was happening in 1756 even worse.  For all we know, that child may have had to be laid to rest along the roadside someplace in an anonymous grave.

Daughter Lidia died, probably as a child – as the only record of Lidia is this Bible.

We don’t know what happened to Solomon either, so the presumption would have to be that he passed away.

A Remarkable Life

As I think of Philip Jacob’s life, I think if what an undauntable spirit this man must have had. He was undefeatable and seemingly tireless.  If you look at his life, he repeatedly faced incredibly difficult challenges that would be overwhelming to most of us, yet he overcame them all in one way or another, in spite of, or perhaps because of his overarching Brethren faith.

Here’s a brief timeline review of Philip’s life:

1726 or before – born in Germany
1727 – immigrated to America
1727 – ?? uncertain
17?? – 1744 – Chester County, PA
1744 – 1751 – York County, PA and the Border War
1751 – married Magdalena, probably York Co, PA
1754 – his mother has died by 1754 when his father has remarried
1751 – 1755 – Frederick County, MD on Ash Swamp
1755 – 1761? – Evacuated to someplace
1761 – 1763 – Frederick County, MD on Ash Swamp
1763 – 1765 – Evacuated to perhaps Conewago in Lancaster Co., PA
1765 -1796 – Frederick Co., MD on Ash Swamp
1767 – Naturalized in Philadelphia, PA
1771 – his father dies, Frederick County, MD
1775 – 1782 – Revolutionary War, Frederick Co. MD on Ash Swamp
1782 – 1783 – brother Lodowich moves to the Shenandoah Valley
1780 – sons Daniel and David move to Bedford County, PA
1794 – brother John dies
1796 – Sells Ash Swamp, moves to Campbell County, KY
1799 – Dies, leaves 2000 acres in Ohio across the river from Campbell County, KY to his children

In 1796, Philip Jacob Miller, at age 70 (or older), sold Ash Swamp, 290 acres and probably rode the Ohio River to the next frontier where he bought 2000 acres. What a fine grand hurrah and legacy for the German man who began with nothing.  America truly had been the land of opportunity, albeit with a few pretty significant speed bumps along the way.

I would love to have known this man with the irrepressible spirit. Even in his golden years when other men his age want nothing more than to be left alone drowsing in sun puddles in the rocking chair on the porch, he sold everything, packed up, probably bought a flat boat and set out on one final adventure.  His sons Daniel and David had been in Morrison’s Cove now for about 20 years.  His daughters were marrying and moving away too.  Was this Philip Jacob’s way of bringing the family together in one place for his final years?  If so, it worked.  Land has a way of doing that.

Oh yes, and did I mention that the Revolutionary War veterans who received grants for this Ohio land that Philip Jacob had already claimed felt it was too risky and dangerous to claim, so they sold it to land speculators, or privately to frontiersmen willing to take risks, like Philip Jacob Miller. Philip Jacob Miller never seemed to shy away from challenges.  In some cases, he had no choice, but this time, he set forth willingly and embraced an uncertain future – even in the golden years of his life.

Ironic that Philip Jacob Miller, as a pietist Brethren, lived through being caught in the midst of 4 separate wars that spanned his entire adulthood. We’ll likely never know the full price of his decision to remain true to the Brethren principles.  The Jacob Miller family that was slaughtered could have been his brother.

DNA

The Miller family genealogy has been particularly difficult because so much ambiguity remains about the children of Johann Michael Miller, the original American immigrant, and then about his grandchildren as well. For example, his son, Philipp Jacob Miller’s children are documented, thanks to his Bible and his estate record, but his brothers’ Lodowick and John don’t have Bibles to document their children, and neither are the descendants of their children documented in many cases.

To make matters worse, any person with the surname of Miller in that time and place, or even nearby got appended to this family.

In order to help sort through this, the Miller-Brethren DNA project at Family Tree DNA welcomes not only Miller males of Brethren heritage, but anyone who descends from a Miller Brethren line, male or female.  Miller males need to take the Y DNA test.  These men and everyone descended from any Brethren Miller line needs to have taken the Family Finder autosomal test.

One challenge with autosomal DNA is that so many of the Brethren lines are so highly intermarried. When you match another Miller descendant, it’s difficult to know if you’re matching through your Miller line, or maybe through a different Brethren line that you both share.  Unfortunately, since the Brethren frowned on things like marriage licenses, many wives’ surnames are unknown.

For example, we don’t know who Philip Jacob’s wife, Magdalena’s parents were, but a number of Miller descendants do match with a whole group of Mumaw descendants who don’t appear to have a common ancestor with the Miller line. Clearly we do have a common ancestor, someplace, so either they have a Miller, or Miller wife’s line in the Mumaw woodpile, or we have a Mumaw or Mumaw wife’s line in the Miller lineage woodpile.  And yes, the Mumaw’s were indeed in the right places at the right time.  It’s a much better bet than Rochette – but only time and more testing by more descendants will tell.

We don’t have all the answers, by any stretch, but we have proven one thing. The Elder Jacob Miller of Maryland, Virginia and Ohio does not share a common paternal ancestor with Johann Michael Miller.  That’s a very valuable piece of information, moving forward.  This also helps us sort descendants.  Let’s face it, Miller is a German trade name and there are just too many men with the same first names.  We need all the help we can get.

If you descend from anyone in a Brethren Miller line, please join the Miller-Brethren DNA project through Family Tree DNA.

References and Acknowledgements

Lots of researchers have written about and compiled information about the Miller family, and I have drawn liberally from their work. Suffice it to say that they don’t all agree – and in fact some contradict each other. So I’ve gone through each and compiled the information I found credible by evaluating the sources, where possible.  Where doubt remains or work needs to be done, I have said so.

Replogle – “Ancestors on the Frontier: Miller, Cripe, Ulrich, Replogle, Shively, Metzger” by Justin Replogle, self-published in 1998

Mason – “The Michael Miller and Susanna Bechtol Family Record” compiled in 1993 by Floyd R. and Catherine Mason, now deceased

Miller – “A History and Genealogy of David Y. Miller 1809-1898” by Gene Edwin Miller, self-published

Goss, Troy – The Miller Family History

Stutesman – “Jacob Stutzman (?-1775); His Children and Grandchildren” by John Hale Stutesman, Jr.

Tom and Kathleen Miller’s Johann Michael Miller Family History

I want to offer a special thank you to Reverend Merle Rummel for his numerous and ongoing contributions, not just to me personally, and there have been many, but to the Brethren research community at large. His insight and knowledge of the Brethren history and families is one of a kind.  He is a living tribute to the spirit of our ancestors.

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Concepts – Parental Phasing

I recently used a technique called parental phasing as part of the proof that one Curtis Lore found in Pennsylvania was the same person as Curtis Benjamin Lore, found later in Indiana.  Given that I’ve already used parental phasing as part of a proof argument, I’d like to break it down further and explain the concepts behind parental phasing, what it is, why it is so important, and why it works so well.

For those of you who don’t have at least one parent available to test, I’m truly sorry, and not just because of the lost DNA opportunity. But please do read this article, because you may be able to substitute other family members and derive at least some of the benefits, although clearly not all.

What is Parental Phasing?

The fundamental concept of parental phasing is that the only way you can obtain your DNA is through one or the other of your parents, so every one of your matches should match you plus one of your parents. Right?

Should, yes, but that’s not exactly how autosomal matching works in real life.

You can match someone in one of two ways:

  1. Because you received the matching segment from one of your two parents, and they received that same segment from one of their two parents, a circumstance that is called identical by descent or IBD.
  2. Because your match’s DNA is zigzagging back and forth between the DNA you inherited from both of your parents, or your DNA is zigzagging back and forth between their parents, either of which is called identical by chance or IBC.

I wrote about his in the article titled, Concepts – Identical by…Descent, State, Population and Chance.

Here’s the matching “Identical By” cheat sheet since you may find it helpful in this article as well.

Identical by Chart

How Does Parental Phasing Work?

Parental phasing works by comparing your DNA against your matches DNA, then comparing your matches DNA against your parents DNA, and telling you which, if either, or both, parents they match in addition to you. Oh yes, and there’s one more tiny tidbit – they must match you and your parent(s) on the same segment(s).

As bizarre as it sounds, sometimes your match will match you on one segment, and match your parents on an entirely different segment.  While this was not an expected finding, it does happen, and frequently enough that it was found in every parental phasing test run – so it’s not an anomaly or something so rare you won’t see it.

Therefore, parental phasing may be a two part process, where:

  • Step 1 is determining whether or not your match matches either or both of your parents.
  • Step 2 is determining if your match matches you and your parent on the same segment(s), or at least part of the same segment? If not, then it’s not a phased IBD match – even though they do match you and your parent.

Conceptually, each of your matches will fall nice and cleanly into one, or both, of your parent’s buckets. Let’s look at a couple of examples.  For each of the people who match you, they will also match your parents on the same segment as follows:

Match Matches Your Mother Matches Your Father Matches Neither Parent Comment
Susie Yes No From Mom’s side, IBD
John No Yes From Dad’s side, IBD
Bob Yes Yes Matches both parents lines, IBD and may be IBP
Roxanne No No Yes Identical by Chance, IBC

Please Note: Your match list will change if you change your matching threshold, and so will your phased matches to your parents.  In other words, while someone might not match you and a parent both on the same segment at 15cM, you might well match on a common segment at a 10, 7 or 5cM threshold.

So in essence, parental phasing puts your matches into very useful buckets for you and helps eliminate false positives – or matches that appear real but aren’t.

How Can Someone Match Me But Not My Parents?

That’s a really good question. Sometimes you match someone because you received common DNA from an ancestor, through your parents, which means you’re identical by descent (IBD), a legitimate genealogical match.  But other times, you match someone just by chance because their DNA is matching pieces of both of your parents’ DNA, and not because you actually share a common ancestor.

Let’s take a look.

This first graphic shows you with an identical by descent match to your match’s father’s DNA. Your match’s father shares a common relative with (at least) one of your mother’s lines.

Phase IBD

In the most basic terms, an identical by descend (IBD) match looks like this, where your match is matching you on one of your parent’s strands of DNA. Both matching strands are colored green in this example.

Of course, your DNA does not come labeled as to which side is mother’s and which side is father’s. You can read more about that here. If it did, we wouldn’t even need to be having this discussion at all – because that’s what parental phasing does.  It tells you which side of your family your DNA match came from.

You can see in the above example that you and your match both share an actual strand of DNA. You inherited yours from your Mom and your match inherited theirs from their Dad, which means your Mom and their Dad share a common ancestor.  However, to be able to discern that fact, that your Mom and your match’s Dad share a common ancestor, you need to be able to phase the DNA of both you and your match to know which parent that strand came from.

In reality, your DNA and their DNA is entirely mixed in each of you, shown in the chart below, and without additional information, neither of you will know which strand of DNA you match on, or who you inherited it from.  Initially, you will only know THAT you match.

Phase IBD2

So here’s what your DNA really looks like. It’s up to the DNA matching software to look at the two strands of your DNA that’s mixed together, and the two strands of your match’s DNA that’s mixed together and see if there is a common grouping of DNA at each location that extends for at least 10 locations in length, which is the “threshold” for our example that signifies a match that is likely to be “real” versus IBC, or identical by chance.  In my example, that common grouping is the green “Matching Portions” column, above.

An identical by chance match looks like the chart below. You can see that the green matching DNA is zigzagging back and forth between your parents’ DNA.

Phase IBC

It can even be worse where your match’s Mom’s and Dad’s DNA is also zigzagging back and forth, but you can certainly get the idea that there are all kinds of ways to NOT match but only three ways to legitimately match – Mom’s side, Dad’s side, or both.

So you can see that indeed, you do technically match, but not because you share a DNA segment of any size with one parent, but because your match’s DNA matches part of your Mom’s DNA and part of your Dad’s, which means that DNA segment does NOT come from one common ancestor, meaning not IBD. However, the matching software can’t tell the difference, because your strands aren’t coded to Mom and Dad.

What parental phasing does is to assign your matches to “sides” or buckets based on whether they match your Mom or Dad in addition to you.

One Parent Matches

In my case, I only have one parent whose DNA is available. Therefore, all of my matches will either match both my mother and me, or not.  The balance that do not match me and my mother, both, will either match to my father or will be IBC, identical by chance matches.  Unfortunately, just by utilizing one-parent phasing, I can’t tell if the “non-Mom” matches are really to my father or are IBC.

Let’s look at an example.

Match Mom’s Side Dad or IBC Comment
Denny Yes Probably not Mom’s side, could also match on Dad’s side but we have no way to tell. My parents lines come from different parts of the world except that they both married into Native American lines.
Sally No Yes Can’t tell whether Dad’s side or IBC
Derrell No Yes Also matches cousin on Dad’s side on same segments, so Derrell is assigned to Dad’s side pending triangulation.

By using the ICW tool at Family Tree DNA, shown below, I can see who matches me and my matches, both – in this case, me and my mother.

No Parent Matches

If I have no parents in the system, but several other close family members, like uncles or cousins, I can easily see who else I match in common with my match.

In other words, without my mother to match, Denny will either match my Mom’s side family members, and I can tentatively group him there, my Dad’s side family members, and I can tentatively group him there, or neither, in which case I can’t do anything with him except note that fact.

An Example

I’m going to use my proven cousin Denny for my examples, because that’s who I used in my Curtis Lore case study and our connection is proven both genetically and genealogically.

Here’s Denny’s match list. My mother is Denny’s closest match and I’m his second closest.

Phase match list

Therefore, I can use the ICW technique to effectively put my matches into buckets that divide my DNA in half, if I have both parents.

If I have one parent, I can fill one bucket for sure by putting everyone who matches both my mother and me into the “mother” bucket. The balance will be in the “Father +IBC” bucket.

This is easy to do at Family Tree DNA by using the crossed arrow ICW tool to find everyone who matches me in common with my mother.

Phase iCW

If I don’t have either parent, but I have an uncle or a cousin, I can still assign some matches to buckets by utilizing this same ICW tool. What I can’t do without both parents is to eliminate IBC or identical by chance matches from my match list.  I need both parents or at least well fleshed out match groups to do that.  There are examples of using match groups to identify IBC matches in the article, Identical By…Descent, Chance, Population and State.

Furthermore, I will need to download my match lists for both my mother and myself to verify that each person matches both my mother and myself on a common segment.

Testing the Theory

Let’s use my real life example and see how this works. I’m going to utilize three generations, because this gives us the ability to see the parental phasing work twice.  In this illustration, below, four people have tested, Denny, Mother, Me and My Child.

Phase pedigree

Denny and my child, who are 3rd cousins once removed, match on the following DNA segments, utilizing the Family Tree DNA chromosome browser.  We are comparing against Denny, meaning he is the “background” black chromosome.  The orange illustrates where my child matches Denny.

Phase browser denny child

There are no matching segments on chromosomes 18-22.  I have not included X chromosome matching.

Here’s the same information in chart format.

Phase chart denny child

You can see that Denny and my child have several fairly significant segment matches, along with some smaller ones too. The question is, which of those segments are legitimate, meaning IBD and which are not, meaning IBC?

Let’s phase my child against my DNA and see which of these segment matches hold up.

My child is orange, and I am blue and we are both matching against cousin Denny.

phase browser denny child me

As you can see, many of those segments are legitimate because Denny matches both me and my child on the same segments. So they are not IBC, or identical by chance, but IBD, identical, literally, by descent – because my child received them from me.

In some cases, Denny matches only me, blue, which is fine because all that means is that either our matches are IBC or I didn’t pass that DNA to my child. Both matches on chromosome 3 are to me (blue) and not to my child (orange).

However, in the cases where Denny matches my child (orange,) and not me (blue,) on the same segments, that means that either Denny and my child share an ancestor that is through my child’s father or the matches are IBC.  Those matches are not through me.  In other words, those segments did not pass phasing.  You can see examples of that on chromosomes 1, 4 and 14, and partial matches on 11 and 12.

Chromosome 16 shows a really good example of a crossover event where my child, orange, received part of my DNA, blue, but about half way through my segment, it was divided and my child inherited part of mine and the other half from their father.  So, visually, you can see that my child only matches Denny on about half of the segment where I match Denny.

Matches Spreadsheet

I downloaded the results of both Denny’s matches to me and Denny’s matches to my child into one Matches Spreadsheet and have color coded them so that you can see the relationships.  If Denny matches both me and my child, you will see a common segment on that chromosome for both me and my child in the spreadsheet.  Rows where Denny matches my child are light orange and rows where Denny matches me are light blue, similar to the chromosome browser colors.

Denny Me Child

There are only three possible conditions and I have colored the chromosome column accordingly:

  • Denny matches me only – dark teal – may be a legitimate match but we don’t have enough information to tell at this point
  • Denny matches my child only, but not me – red – NOT a legitimate match – identical by chance (IBC)
  • Denny matches me and my child both – boxed green – a legitimate identical by descent (IBD) match

You’ll note that some of these matches are exact. For example on the first matching segment of chromosome 2, below, my child received this entire segment of my DNA.  It was not divided at all.

Denny Me Child 2

However, in the next two matching groups on chromosome 2, my child received most of the DNA I share with Denny, but some was shaved off, but not half.

Denny Me Child 2 shaved

On chromosome 16, my child received almost exactly half of the DNA segment that I share with Denny.

Denny Me Child 16

On chromosomes 11 and 17, my child shares more DNA with Denny than I do, which means that all of that DNA isn’t ancestral though me. In this case, either there are some fuzzy boundaries, a read error, part of the DNA is IBD and part is IBC or part of the DNA is matching through both parents.

Denny Me Child 17 c

On chromosome 14, I match Denny, but my child received none of that DNA, which is why I’ve added the color teal.

Denny Me Child 14 c

Now, let’s phase me against my mother and see how the DNA matches hold up in a third generation.

Adding the Next Generation

The view of the chromosome browser below shows Denny matching my child, in orange, me in blue and my mother in green.

Amazingly, many of these segments follow through all three generations.

phase browser denny child me mother

Let’s see how the various matches stacked up, pardon the pun.

I’ve added Denny’s matches to mother to the Matches Spreadsheet and her rows are colored green.

On the Matches Spreadsheet from the first example, there were several segments where Denny matched only me and not my child. They were colored teal.  In the chart below, so we can track those segments, I have colored them teal in the matchname column, and you can see the resolution of how they did or didn’t survive phasing against my mother in the chromosome column.

Of those 11 segments, 2 phased with my mother, the rest did not. That makes sense, since none of those are segments I passed on to my child, so they would be more likely to be IBC.

Denny me Child Mom SS

The legend for the spreadsheet above is as follows:

  • Dark teal in chromosome column – Denny matches Mom only – may be a legitimate match but we don’t have enough information to know (chromosomes 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 12 and 15)
  • Dark teal in matchname column, plus red in chromosome column – previously Denny matched only me, now I do not phase against my mother, so this is an IBC match (chromosomes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 12 and 17)
  • Dark teal in matchname column, plus green box in chromosome column – previously Denny only matched me, but now this segment is parentally phased and considered legitimate (chromosomes 2 and 10)
  • Red in chromosome column – does not phase against parent, so not a legitimate match – IBC (chromosomes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 14 and 17)
  • Green box indicates a phased match – considered IBD and legitimate (chromosomes 1, 2, 10, 14, 15, 16 and 17)

Anomalies

*So what the heck happened with chromosome 11?

In the first example, this segment received a green box because Denny matched both me and my child on a partial segment, which means that partial segment is phased and considered legitimate.

denny me child mom ss 11 grn

When we moved to the next generation, phasing against my mother, Denny does not match my mother on this segment, so it could NOT have arrived in me and my child via my mother, so it is not IBD, even though it appeared that way initially. Because of this, I’ve changed the box color to red for a non-IBD match.

Denny me Child Mom SS 11

How could this happen?

First, it’s a very small segment overlap match, and second, Denny matched more to my child than to me, which is a neon warning sign that this segment match is suspect, especially those two conditions in combination with each other.

Here’s an example of how, genetically, a match could phase with a parent in one generation, but not hold into the next generation.

phase n o phase

This match matches both me and my child (gold), but not my mother, who has no gold. As you can see, the match does accrue 10 gold location matches in a row, but not 10 green ones, so doesn’t match my mother.  The larger the number of locations in a row required to be considered a match, the less likely this type of random matching will be to occur.

This is both the purpose and the quandry of thresholds.  Finding that sweet spot that doesn’t eliminate real matches, but is high enough to be useful in eliminating false positive (IBC) matches.  And I can tell you, there are just about as many opinions on what that threshold number should be as there are people giving opinions – and everyone seems to have one!  You can read more about this in the article, Concepts – CentiMorgans, SNPs and Pickin’ Crab.

Segment Survival

Let’s take a look and see how many of which size segments survived parental phasing.  Are some of those smaller segments legitimate matches, or did we lose them in phasing?

The chart below shows the results in segment size order, color coded as follows:

  • Red = segments that did not phase and were IBC
  • Teal = segments that match Mom only and may or may not be valid. We don’t have any way to know without additional matches.
  • Green = segments that phased and are IBD

Phased cMs by size

As you would expect, all of the larger segments phased, but surprisingly, so did several of the smaller segments, through three generations.

Given the fact that teal matches did not phase, for the most part, in the previous example, and given that the teal segments are mostly small, my suspicion would be that most of  these teal segments would not phase (with the probable exception of the 10.27 cm segment), if we have the opportunity to find out – which we don’t.

This example is for a non-endogamous line, or better stated, with distant endogamous groups in multiple lines. Endogamous results would probably be different.

Statistics

What do our statistics look like?

There were 58 matching segments between Denny, my child, me and my mother.

  Match To Whom # Segments # Phased %
Denny My Child 12 8 75
Denny Me 22 11 50
Denny Mother 24 Probably at least 11
Total 58

Of those 58 total matches, 16 were IBC meaning they did not match up through my mother.

  Total

Segment Matches

IBC (no phase) IBD (phase) Just Mother Match Groups 2 gen Groups 3 gen Groups
58 16 29 13 12 3 9
% 28% 50% 22% 25% 75%

Thirteen match just to mother (teal), of which one, on chromosome 12 for 10.27 centiMorgans, is the most likely to be legitimate, or IBD. The rest were smaller segments and none were passed to a the child, so they are less likely to be legitimate, or IBD.

There are a total of 12 matching groups, of which 3 are for only two generations, me and mother. In other words, not all of that DNA got passed on to my child, but at least some of it did 9 of those 12 times.

Does Size Matter?

I wanted to see how the small versus large segments faired in terms of three generations of parental phasing. Are smeller segments legitimate or not?  Do they stand up?  The “Phased cMs by Size” chart above was sorted in chromosome order, with teal being a match to mother only (so we don’t know if it phased), green meaning the segment DID phase and red meaning it DID NOT phase with the parent.

Removing the teal blocks, which match to mother only, meaning we don’t know if they would parentally phase or not, leaves us with the blocks that had the opportunity to phase, and whether they passed or failed. 100% of the blocks 3.57cM and above phased.  A natural dividing line seems to occur about the 3.5 cM level, shown below.

phased cms by size less teal

It’s interesting that all matches above 3.36 cM phased, several of them twice, through three generations or two transmission (inheritance) events. Of those, 9, or 43% were under the 10cM threshold suggested by some, and 7, or 33% were under the 7cM threshold.

Most of the segments 3.36 cM and below, did not pass phasing. Of those, 6 or 26% did pass phasing, while 17, or 74%, did not.  Note that this cM level is with the SNP threshold set to 500 SNPs, which is generally the lowest number I use.

Segment Size # of Segments # Segments Phased %
Larger than 3.5 cM 21 21 100
Smaller than 3.5 cM 23 6 26

Are these results a function of this particular family, or would this hold if more parental generational phasing studies were performed?

Let’s see. 

The Threshold Study

I was surprised by the seemingly low threshold of 3.5 cM that appeared to be the rough dividing line for cMs that passed parental phasing and those that did not. I undertook a small study of four additional 3 generation non-endogamous families.

I’ve included the Lore study that we discussed above in the first column.

I have also removed all duplicates in the results below, since the duplicates were an artifact of matching groups where we had three generations to match.

I completed 4 different three-generation studies in 4 unrelated non-endogamous families and noted the rough threshold for where matches seem to pass or fail phasing – in other words, the fall line. In all 4 examples below, the threshold was between 2.46 and 3.16 cM.  You could move it slightly higher, depending on what criteria you use for the “fall line,” which is why I’ve included the raw data.  In all cases, the SNP threshold was at 500 so you would not see any matches with fewer than 500 SNPs.

The black bar in the results below marks the location where the shift from fail to pass occurs in the various studies.

4 family phasing

Additionally, I have one 4-generation study available as well. The closest related of the 4 generations that were being matched against were first cousins, then first cousins once removed, then first cousins twice removed (equal to 2nd cousins) then 1st cousins three times removed (equal to second cousins once removed).

You can see, below, that the pass/fail threshold for this 4 generation, 3 transmission study was also at 3.69 cM for valid segments that survived. The segments labeled “2 match” mean that they did not get passed to the younger generations, so they only matched in the oldest two generations, 3 match the oldest 3 generations and 4 match meaning the match survived through all 4 generations.

It’s interesting that even some of the smaller segments held through all 4 generations.

4 gen phasing

Ethnicity Matters

Clearly, parental phasing is only successful when you have matches. Of the three data bases available for autosomal DNA comparisons today, Family Tree DNA and 23andMe likely have the largest representation of non-US participants, because the Ancestry.com test was not sold outside the US for quite some time.  The Family Tree DNA Family Finder test was sold in the most locations outside the US.

Family Tree DNA probably has the best representation of Jewish DNA of all of the data bases.

Family Tree DNA projects facilitate the grouping of individuals by self-selected interest which includes ethnic categories, making those relationships visible by virtue of project membership wherein they are not readily evident in other data bases.

Therefore, by virtue of who has tested, if your ancestry is not “US” meaning a melting pot type of environment who are not recent arrivals, then you are likely to have less matches, so less phased matches too.  If you have a high degree of any particular ethnicity, even if your ancestry is “US,” you may still have fewer matches.  For example, 3 of 4 of my mother’s grandparents were either German or Dutch, and she has 710 matches, or roughly half the matches that I have.  My father’s heritage was Appalachian, meaning Colonial American.

Here’s a quick chart showing the total matches as of April, 2016 for a number of individuals who contributed their match totals in Family Finder and who carry either no US heritage or a specific ethnicity.  For purposes of comparison, three individuals with typical mixed colonial US heritage are shown at the top.

Ethnicity match chart

People with high percentages of African heritage tend to have few matches today, as do those of purely European heritage. Unfortunately, not many Africans or African-Americans test their DNA and DNA testing is not as popular in Europe as it is in the US.  Many people in Europe are leary of DNA testing or don’t feel they need to test, because “we’ve always lived here.”   I’m hopeful that the sustained popularity of programs like Who Do You Think You Are and Finding Your Roots will encourage more people of all ethnicities and locations to test from around the globe.

People from highly endogamous populations have a different issue to deal with, as you can see from the very high number of Jewish matches in the chart above. Since these people descend from a common founder population, they share a lot of ancestral DNA that is identical by population, meaning they did receive it from an ancestor, so it’s not IBC, but they received that segment because that particular segment is very prevalent within that population.  Determining which ancestor contributed that piece of DNA is exceedingly difficult, if not impossible because several ancestors carried that same segment.

Therefore, while the segment is identical by descent, it’s probably not genealogically useful in a 100% endogamous scenario.

In an unpublished study, we discovered that while working with parentally phased Jewish results, it’s not unusual for up to half of the matches to not match the participant plus either parent on the same segments. Or conversely, they may match both parents, but the segments are comparatively small.  Matching to both parents in an endogamous population, without a known familial relationship, and without at least one relatively large segment, is an indicator of IBP, identical by population, matches.  For Jewish and other endogamous people, parental phasing is very promising, and will help them sort through irrelevant “diamond in the rough” matches indicated by no parent matches or smaller both parent matches to find the genealogically relevant gems.

In all parental phasing groups studied, no one lost less than 10% of their matches utilizing parental phasing and most people lost significantly more, up to half.  I would very much like to see these same kinds of 3 or 4 generation parental phasing studies done for groups of Jewish, other endogamous and African American families.  In order to do a study of one family, you need at least 3 generations who have tested and another known family member, like a first or second cousin perhaps, to match against.

In Summary

Dual parental phasing works wonderfully.  One parent phasing works pretty well too.  Even close relative phasing works, just not as well as parental phasing.  You can only work with the people you have available to test, so test every relative you can convince!

If you have one or both parents to test, by all means, do. You’ll be able to phase your matches against both of your parents individually and eliminate the majority of IBC matches.

If you have grandparents or their siblings available to test, do, and quickly so you don’t lose the opportunity. Test the oldest person/generation in each line that you can.

If you don’t have both parents, test your half and full siblings, all of them, the more the better, because they inherited parts of your parents DNA that you didn’t.

Find your closest relatives and test them, yes, all of them.

If you are testing parents, you don’t need to test their children too, because their children will only receive half of their parent’s DNA, and you already have the parents DNA.

Even if you can’t phase your matches utilizing your parents DNA, you can use the combination of your matches with other relatively close family members to assign or suggest matches to both sides of your family along family lines – creating match groups. For example, if your match matches you and your great-uncle Charlie on the same segment, then it’s very likely that match is from the common ancestral line shared by your common ancestor with great-uncle Charlie – your great-grandparents.  Triangulation, of course, will prove that.

Some of your relatives will be quite interested in DNA testing and others will be happy to test simply because it helps you, and they like to hear about the result of the genealogy research. I’ve discovered that providing a scholarship for the testing, especially for those people you really want to test, goes a very long way in convincing people that DNA testing for genealogy is something they might be interested in doing.  If you can’t personally afford a scholarship for everyone, try the old fashioned collection jar.  And no, I’m not kidding.  It works wonders and gives everyone an opportunity to participate and invest as well, as much as they can afford.

Ethnicity testing has a lot of sizzle for some folks too – so don’t just deliver the dry facts – be sure to talk about the sizzle too. Sizzle sells!  People get excited about the possibilities and of course, you’ll explain the result to them, so they get to visit with you a second time as well.  Something to look forward to at next summer’s picnic!

Be sure to take swab kits to family events; picnics, reunions, graduation parties, weddings and holiday gatherings. Believe me, I have a DNA kit in my purse or car at all times.  And maybe, if your extended family lives close by, resurrect the old-time Sunday afternoon tradition of “going calling.”  Not only can you collect DNA, you can collect family memories too and I guarantee, you’ll make a new discovery with every visit.  Take this opportunity to interview your relatives.

It’s amazing isn’t it, the things we do for this “DNA phase” that we’re all going through!

Acknowledgements

I want to thank Family Tree DNA for their ongoing support of projects and citizen scientists which makes these types of research studies possible. I also want to thank several individuals in the genetic genealogy community who provided their information and gave permission for me to incorporate their results into this article.  Without sharing and collaboration, these types of efforts would simply not be possible.

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Concepts – CentiMorgans, SNPs and Pickin’ Crab

In autosomal DNA testing, you’ll see the terms centiMorgans, represented as cMs and SNPs, which stands for single nucleotide polymorphism, combined.

These are two terms that are used to discuss thresholds and measurements of matching amounts of autosomal DNA segments.

These two terms, relative to autosomal DNA, are two parts of a whole, kind of like the left and right hand.

CentiMorgans are units of recombination used to measure genetic distance. You can read a scientific definition here.

For our conceptual purposes, think of centiMorgans as lines on a football field. They represent distance.

football fabric 2

SNPs are locations that are compared to each other to see if mutations have occurred.  Think of them as addresses on a street where an expected value occurs. If values at that address are different, then they don’t match.  If they are the same, then they do match.  For autosomal DNA matching, we look for long runs of SNPs to match between two people to confirm a common ancestor.

Think of SNPs as blades of grass growing between the lines on the football field.  In some areas, especially in my yard, there will be many fewer blades of grass between those lines than there would be on either a well-maintained football field, or maybe a manicured golf course.  You can think of the lighter green bands as sparse growth and darker green bands as dense growth.

If the distance between 2 marks on the football field is 5cM and there are 550 blades of grass growing there, you’ll be a match to another person if all of your blades of grass between those 2 lines match if the match threshold was 5cM and 500 SNPs.

So, for purposes of autosomal DNA, the combination of distance, centiMorgans, and the number of SNPs within that distance measurement determines if someone is considered a match to you. In other words, if the match is over the threshold as compared to your DNA, meaning the match is deemed to be relevant by the party setting the threshold.  Think of track and field hurdles.  To get to the end (match), you have to get over all of the hurdles!

hurdles

By Ragnar Singsaas – Exxon Mobil ÅF Golden League Bislett Games 2008, CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=5288962

For example, a threshold of 7 cM and 700 SNPs means that anyone who matches you OVER BOTH of these thresholds will be displayed as a match.  So centiMorgans and SNPs work together to assure valid matches.

Thresholds

These two numbers, cMs and SNPs, are used in conjunction with each other. Why?  Because the distribution of SNPs within cM boundaries is not uniform.  Some areas of the human genome have concentrations of SNPs, and some areas are known as “SNP deserts.”  So distance alone is not the only relevant factor.  How many blades of grass growing between the lines matters.

Each of the vendors selects a default threshold that they feel will give you the best mix of not too many false positives, meaning matches that are identical by chance, and not too many false negatives, meaning people who do actually match you genealogically that are eliminated by small amounts of matching DNA. Unfortunately, there is no line in the sand, so no matter where the vendor sets that threshold, you’re probably going to miss something in either or both directions.  It’s the nature of the beast.

Company Min cMs Min SNPs Comment
Family Tree DNA 7cM for any one segment + 20cM total 500 After the initial match, you can view down to 6 cM and 500 SNPs to people you match
23andMe 7cM 700
Ancestry 8cM after Timber and associated phasing routines Unknown Timber population based phasing removes matches they determine to be “too matchy” or population based
GedMatch User selectable – default is 7 User selectable – default is 700

2022 Update: MyHeritage began offering DNA testing and matching after this original article was published. Matches must have at least one 8 cM matching segment, but they show additional segments to 6 cM. There is no specified number of SNPs. Note that their imputation calculations sometimes cause the reported number of cM to be larger than for the same two people at other vendors.

As you might guess, there many opinions about the optimum threshold combinations to use – just about as many opinions as people!

These are important values, because the combined size of those matches to an individual allows you to roughly estimate the relationship range to the person you match.

As a general rule, the vendors do a relatively good job, with some exceptions that I’ve covered elsewhere and amount to beating a dead horse (Ancestry’s Timber, no chromosome browser). Of course, one of the big draws of GedMatch is that you can set your own cM and SNP matching thresholds.

Having said that, if you come from an endogamous population, you may want to raise your threshold to 10cM or even higher, depending on what you’re trying to accomplish

Effectively Using cMs and SNPs

Your personal goals have a lot to do with the thresholds you’ll want to select.

If you are new at genetic genealogy, you will first want to pursue your best matches, meaning the highest number of matching centiMorgans/SNPs, because they will be the low-hanging fruit and the easiest matches to connect genealogically. Said another way, you’ll match your closer relatives on bigger chunks of DNA, so concentrate on those first.  Successes are encouraging and rewarding!

Your match to a second cousin, for example, will have a significant amount of shared DNA, and second cousins share common great-grandparents – 2 of 8 people in that generation on your tree – so relatively easy to identify – as these things go.

The chart below shows the expected percentage of shared DNA in a given match pair, in this case, first and second cousins with a first-cousin-once-removed thrown in for good measure. Also shown is the expected amount of shared centiMorgans for the given relationship, the average amount of shared DNA from a crowd-sourced project titled The Shared cM Project by Blaine Bettinger, and the range of shared DNA found in that same project.

A pedigree chart of my family members fitting those categories is shown below, plus the actual amount of shared cMs of DNA to the right.

shared cM table

The chart below shows my DNA matches to my first-cousin-once-removed (1C1R), Cheryl.

Since we do match at Family Tree DNA above the match threshold, I can view all of my matching segments to Cheryl down to 1cM and 500 SNPs.

Cheryl chart

Just as a matter of interest, I’ve color coded the cM segments:

  • >10 cM = green
  • 7-10 cM = yellow
  • <7 = red

This means that if these were the largest matching segments, you would or would not be able to see them at the various thresholds of 7 and 10 cM.

If the matching threshold is at the default of 7cM, the green and yellow segments would be displayed.

If the matching threshold was set at 10, only the green cM segments are going to be shown.

At Family Tree DNA, you can select various threshold display options when using the chromosome browser tool, but not for initial matching. In other words, you have to match at their default threshold before you can see your smaller segments or alter your threshold display.

Some people want to see all of their DNA that matches, and some only want to see the large and compelling pieces, those green segments.  Neither choice is wrong, simply a matter of personal preference and individual goals.

The “large and compelling” part of that statement brings me back to why you’re participating in genetic genealogy in the first place, those individual goals.  The larger segments are going to lead to common ancestors who are generally easier to find and identify, unless you have an unidentified parent or a misattributed parental event.

You would never start with smaller segments in terms of matching, but that does not mean those smaller segments are never useful.  In fact, after you’ve managed to analyze all of your low hanging fruit, and you’re ready to research or concentrate on those ugly brick walls, groupings of those smaller segments in descendants may just be your lifesaver.

Surviving Phasing

However, now I’m curious. How many of those smaller segments do stand up to the test of parental phasing, meaning they match both me and my parent?  If my match (Cheryl) matches both me and my parent, then Cheryl does not match me by chance on that segment, so the match is genealogical in nature, the matching DNA proven to have descended to me from my mother.

Let’s see.

Cheryl Mom me chart

In order to phase my results with Cheryl against my mother, I copied Mother’s results into the same spreadsheet, above, color coding our rows so you can see them easier. “Cheryl matching Mom” rows are apricot and “Cheryl matching me” rows are yellow.

You can see that in some cases, like the first two rows, the two rows are identical which means I inherited all of Mom’s DNA in that segment and Cheryl inherited the same segment from her father, matching both Mom and me.

In other cases, I inherited part of Mom’s DNA on a particular segment.  I could also have inherited none of a particular segment.

In fact, of the 27 segments where I match Mom on any part of the segment, I match her on the entire segment 18 times, or 66.6% and on part of the segment 9 times, or 33.3%.

I left the color coding in the cM column the same as it was before, in my rows, to indicate small, medium and large segments. The small segments are red, which would be the most likely NOT to phase with my mother, in other words, the most likely to be Identical by Chance, not descent.  If Cheryl and I are Identical by Chance on these segments, it means that the reason I’m matching Cheryl is NOT because I inherited that chunk of DNA from mother. If Mom and I both match Cheryl, then Cheryl and I are Identical by Descent, meaning I inherited that piece of DNA from my mother, so the match is not because Cheryl’s DNA is randomly matching that of both of my parents.

In the spreadsheet below, I removed mother’s rows to eliminate clutter, but I color-coded mine. The rows that show red in the CHR and SNP columns BOTH are rows that did NOT phase with my mother, meaning these matches were indeed identical to Cheryl by chance.  The rows that are red ONLY in the cM column (and not in the CHR column) are small segments that DID phase with my mother, so those are identical by descent (IBD).

Cheryl Me phased chart

Here’s the interesting part.

  • All of the large segments, 10cM and over passed phasing. They are legitimate IBD matches.
  • One of 2 of the medium cM matches passed phasing.
  • Of the 15 smaller segments, ranging in size from 1.38 cM to 6.14 cM, more than half, 8, passed phasing. Seven did not. The smallest segment to pass phasing was 1.38 cM. I suspect that part of the reason that the smaller cM segments are passing phasing is that the SNP threshold is held steady at 500 SNPs. In another (unpublished) study, dropping the SNP threshold below 500 results in a dramatic increase in matches (roughly fourfold) and a very small percentage of those matches phase with parents.

Small Segments Guidelines

There has been a lot of spirited debate about the usage, or not, of small segments, so I’m going to provide some guidelines.  Let me preface this by saying that none of this is worth getting your knickers in a knot, so please don’t.  If you don’t want to include or utilize small segments, then just don’t.

  • What is and is not a small segment can vary depending on who you are talking to and the context of the conversation.
  • Small segments CAN and do survive parental phasing, as shown above.
  • Small segments CAN be triangulated to a particular ancestor. Triangulated in this sense means that this segment is found in the descendants of a group of people (3 or more) proven to descend from the same ancestor AND who all match each other on the same segment.
  • Not all small segments can be triangulated to a common ancestor.  But then again, the same can be said for larger segments too.  It’s more difficult and unlikely to be successful with smaller segments unless you are starting with a group of people who descend from a common ancestor and are looking for “ancestral DNA.”
  • Small segments, even after triangulation, can be found matching a different lineage. This is an indicator that while the descendants of the first group share this DNA segment from a specific ancestor, it may also be prevalent in a population in general, which would cause the same segment to show up matching in a second lineage from the same region as well. I have an example where my Acadian line also matches a different German line on a particular segment – which really isn’t surprising given the geography and history of Germany and France.
  • Small segments without the benefit of other tools such as parental phasing, triangulation and match groups are, at this time, a waste of time genealogically. This may not always be the case.
  • Never start with small segments.
  • Never draw conclusions from small segments alone, meaning without corroborating evidence.
  • Use small segments only in context of a combination of parental phasing, triangulation and match groups.
  • Just because you match a group of people, out of context, on a segment (small or otherwise) doesn’t mean that you share a common ancestor. The smaller the segment, the more likely it is to be either IBC or IBP. Situations where the DNA is exactly the same from both parents, meaning everyone has all As in that location, for example, are called runs of homozygosity and the smaller the segment, the more likely you are to encounter ROH segments which appear as phased matches.  Yes, another cruel joke of nature.

As a proof point relative to how deceptive small segment matching out of context can be, I ran my kit against my friend who is unquestionably 100% Jewish. I have no Jewish ancestry.  At 7cM/700 SNPs we have no matches, at 3cM/300SNPs we have 7 matching segments.

Me to Jewish match

However, matching this individual to my phased parents, none of these segments match both me and either one of my phased parent. Phased parent kits, at GEDMatch are kits reflecting the half of my parents DNA I received from that parent.  If you have one or both parents who have tested, you can create phased kits with instructions from this article.

Lowering the match threshold even further to 100 SNPs and 1cM, my Jewish friend and I match on a whopping 714 tiny matching segments, over 1100 cM total, but all very small pieces of DNA. Because of the absolute known 100% Jewish heritage of my friend, and my known non-Jewish heritage, these matches must be either IBC, identical by chance or perhaps some small segments of IBP, identical by population from a very long time ago when both of our ancestors lived in the Middle East, meaning thousands of years ago.  Bottom line, they are not genealogically relevant to either of us.  I repeated this same experiment with someone that is 100% Asian, with the same type of results.  You will match everyone at this threshold, including ancient DNA matches tens of thousands of years old.

The message here is that you can work from the “top down” with small segments, meaning in a known relationship situation like with my cousin and other relatives, but you cannot work from the bottom up with small segments as you have no way to differentiate the wheat from the chaff.

In the Crumley study, there are groups of small segments (greater than 3cM/300SNPs) that persist in multiple descendants of James Crumley, born in 1712.  In this case, because you can separate the wheat from the chaff with more than 50 participants, others who triangulate with those small segments and match the group of Crumley descendants may well share a common ancestor at some point in time, especially if they can phase with their parents on those segments to prove the match is not IBC.

  • Remember, your match on any segment to one person can be IBD, meaning you have identified the common ancestor, your match to another person on that same segment IBC, and yet to a third person, IBP where your match survives generational phasing, but you may never find the common ancestor due to the age of the segment or endogamy.
  • When utilizing small segments, I generally don’t drop the SNP threshold below 500, as the number of matches increases exponentially and the valid matches decrease proportionately as well. I’ll be publishing more on this shortly.
  • I do fully believe, within this set of cautionary criteria, that small segments can be useful. I also believe that small segments can be very easily misinterpreted. The use of matching segments has a lot to do with combining different pieces of evidence to build confidence in what the “match” is telling you. I wrote about the Autosomal DNA Matching Confidence Spectrum here.
  • Small segments should only be utilized after one has a good grasp of how genetic genealogy works and by utilizing the tools available to restrict those segments to genealogically descended DNA. In other words, small segments are for the advanced user. However, maintain those small segment groupings and triangulations in your spreadsheet, because when you have the level of experience needed to work with those small segments, they’ll be available for you to work with.  You may discover that most of your DNA triangulates by using large segments and you don’t need to utilize those small segments at all.
  • If you send me a list of matches from GedMatch with the cM set to 1 and the SNPs set to 100 and ask me what I think, I would simply to refer you to this article. But if I did reply, I would tell you that unless you have corroborating evidence, I think you’re wasting your time, but it’s your time and you’re welcome to do what you want with it. Life is about learning.
  • If you tell me you’ve drawn any conclusions from those types of matches (1cM and 100 SNPs), I’m going to be inconvincible without other tools such as genealogical proof,  parental phasing and triangulation groups that prove the segments to be valid to a specific ancestor for the people about whom you’re drawing conclusions. I might even suggest you look at the raw data in those segments to see if you’re dealing with runs of homozygosity.

Netting It Out

The net-net of this is that small segments can be useful, but it takes a lot more work because of the inherent questionable nature of small segment matches. This goes along with that old adage of “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”  Just be ready to roll up your shirt sleeves, because small segments are a lot more work!

Now having said all of that, I very much encourage continuing to triangulate your small segments and pay attention to them. You may notice patterns very relevant to your own genealogy, or you may learn that those patterns were somewhat deceptive – like IBD that turned into IBP.  Still useful and interesting, but perhaps not as originally intended.

Without continuing and ongoing research, we’ll never learn how to best utilize small segments nor develop the tools and techniques to sort the wheat from the chaff. Just be appropriately paranoid about conclusions based on small segments, especially small segments alone, and the smaller the segment, the more paranoid you should be!

There is a very big difference between working with small segments along with larger matching data and genealogy, which I encourage, and drawing conclusions based on small segment data alone and out of context, which I highly discourage.

Let’s hope that all of your matches come with large segments and matching ancestors in their trees!!!

Pickin’ Crab

You know, working with different cM levels and SNPs, especially as segments get smaller and more challenging, I’m reminded of “picking crab” at a good old North Carolina crab bake. You would never start out with a crab bake for breakfast.  You kind of have to work your way up to pickin’ crab – the same as small segments.  And you never pick crab alone. It’s a group activity, shared with friends and kin.  So is genetic genealogy.

You’ll need lessons, at first, in how to “pick crab” effectively. There’s a particular technique to it.  Friends teach friends.  You’ll find cousins you didn’t know you had, like Dawn in the brown shirt below, giving lessons to Anne.

Dawn lessons

A little practice and you’ll get it.

Just because it’s not easy doesn’t mean it’s not productive, especially when everyone works together!  And the results are “very good,” if you just have patience and work through the process.  If you decide that you “can’t pick crab,” then you’re right, you can’t pick crab, and you’ll just have to go hungry and miss out on all the fun!  Don’t let that happen.  Hint – sometimes the fun is in the pickin’!

Here’s hoping you can solve all of your brick walls with large cMs and large SNP counts, and if not, here’s hoping you enjoy “picking crab” with a group of friends and cousins and who will contribute to the ongoing research.

Pickin’ crab, or working on identifying difficult ancestors is always better when collaborating with others! Find cousins and fellow collaborators and enjoy!!! Genetic genealogy is not something you can do alone – it’s dependent on sharing.

crab pickin

Sometimes it’s as much about the friends and cousins you meet on the journey and the adventures along the way as it is about the answer at the end.

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Abigail “Nabby” Hall (1792-1874), Pioneer Settler in “Little Fort,” 52 Ancestors #117

Finding Nabby’s first name, at least her nickname, was easy, deceptively easy as it turns out.  Her nickname was recorded on her daughter’s birth record in 1815 in Bristol, Vermont.  However, at that time, we didn’t know for sure that it was a nickname, although I suspected.

Rachel Hill birth

Finding Nabby’s real name and her surname was anything but easy. What’s even worse is that I had a hunch about the surname, followed it, and was entirely wrong.  Yep, so I sent myself on a wild goose chase right down a rat hole.  Let me explain…

My ancestor, Curtis Benjamin Lore, known as “C.B.” Lore, was born in 1856 to Nabby’s daughter, Rachel Levina Hill Lore. He named a daughter by his second wife Curtis Lore, and he named a son by his first wife John Curtis Lore.  Given the repeat nature of this name in the family, and given that Curtis’s father was Antoine Lore, an Acadian Canadian with no Curtis in that line, my reasoning was that the name “Curtis” had to originate with Curtis’s mother, Rachel Hill, and given his attachment to a name he never used, it had to be a family name, perhaps Rachel’s mother’s surname.  Rachel’s mother was Nabby. This all made sense.

Given that I had checked all of the normal resources for Nabby (also spelled Naby) Hill’s surname, and had come up entirely empty handed, I figured that the search for Curtis families in Addison County, Vermont seemed reasonable. It was reasonable, it’s just that it was also wrong.  I still think it’s a family name, but it was not Nabby’s surname, as I later discovered.

On the other hand, a cousin, William, had a theory about Nabby’s surname, that I thought was very far-reaching – but as it turned out, he was right.  I’m just glad one of us was right, and truthfully, I didn’t care which one.  More about that later.

I did know a few more things about Nabby that helped track her family.

She was born in Connecticut, according to the 1850, 1860 and the 1870 census. That’s three confirmations of her birth in a state where she was not living, so mistaken ditto marks are not a factor.

We know from those same census records as well as her obituary that Nabby was born in the early 1790s. As it turns out, 1792.

This means that Nabby was probably not married to Joseph HIll before 1812 or so, and perhaps slightly later, and Rachel may have been her first child, or maybe her second.

We know that Nabby and Joseph Hill were still living in Addison County in 1831 when daughter Rachel married Antoine Lord/Lore who in the US became known as Anthony Lore.

Joseph Hill was shown in the 1820 census records living in Starksboro, VT with his wife, plus 1 young male and one young female under the age of 10. In addition, there is an unknown male age 16-26 who is too old to be the child of Joseph and Nabby.

By 1830, we have two additional Joseph Hills in Addison County of about the same age, so I reconstructed the various families, and by process of elimination of the other families, in 1830, Nabby had the following children according to the census:

  • Rachel Levina b 1814/1815
  • Female born 1821-1824
  • Lucia born 1827
  • Female born 1826-1830
  • Male born 1821-1824
  • Male born 1821-1824
  • Male born 1816-1820

Shifting this to a chronological view, and adding additional information, we have the following:

1814-1815 – Rachel Levina HIll

  • 1816-1820 – male child
  • 1821-1824 – female child
  • 1821-1824 – male child
  • 1821-1824 – male child
  • 1827 – Lucia P. Hill
  • 1826-1830 – female child
  • 1831 – ?
  • 1833 – ?
  • 1835 – ?
  • 1836-1837 – Rollin C. Hill

We also know from the 1850 census that Nabby had a son, Rollin, born in about 1837, so I’ve added him to the list above.

Given that Nabby had Rollin in about 1837, she very likely had other children between 1830 and 1837, probably 2 or 3.

I can’t find Nabby and Joseph in 1840, so by 1850, it’s likely that most of their children born before 1830 are on their own. Only Lucia and Rollin are living with them in the 1850 census.  This means that other than my ancestor Rachel, their other children remain “lost,” at least for now.  Perhaps several died, in particular, any children born after 1830 and before Rollin, given that they aren’t shown in the 1850 census, although some could have been 18 or 20 so technically old enough to be on their own.  I have tracked the parents for all Hill marriages pre-1850 in Lake County – and they don’t track to Joseph and Nabby Hill as parents.

The process of finding, identifying and tracking Nabby and Joseph was not trivial, and involved at least one “gift” of extremely good luck that sent me from Addison County, Vermont to Waukegan, Illinois, a leap I would never had otherwise made. I detailed this process and journey in Joseph Hill’s article.

At this point though, in my search for Nabby and the identity of her parents, I had data, but I still didn’t really know much about her and what her life was like. I still don’t even know the names of half of her children.  I know she had at least 8, probably more like 11, but I can only identify 3.

Let’s see if we can get to know Nabby a bit better.

Starksboro, Vermont

We know that Nabby was born in Connecticut, but we didn’t initially know where. Our first record of Nabby is found in Addison County, and we know from the town historian, Bertha Hanson that the Hill families lived in an area called Hillsboro, just to the east of the main village of Starksboro.

Often you can verify information like this via where early people with that surname are buried using Find-A-Grave and sometimes you can also find a cemetery associated with a particular surname. In this case, there were two cemeteries with Hill burials, both near Hillsboro, one named the Mason-Hill Cemetery.

First of all, Starksboro isn’t a village like I think of villages. Addison County is mountainous and the roads snake one at a time through the valleys that are passable.

The village of Starksboro where Nabby’s daughter Rachel was married is really only a location in a valley on the road where a few houses were built.  Bristol where Rachel was born is a little larger, but not a lot.  Where I grew up, we would have classified them as “wide spots in the road.”  The surrounding area that would normally be called a township elsewhere is still part of the “town” in Vermont, so the towns include a lot of undeveloped and originally unsettled land.

Here’s a satellite view of Bristol today. Bristol grew up on the banks of the New Haven River, harnessing river power for saw mills.

Bristol, VT

Route 116 connects Bristol with Starksboro. The Green Mountains lie to the east and farmland lies between Bristol and Lake Champlain about 15 miles to the west.

Bristol and Starksboro

I found a goldmine of old photos at the University of Vermont, among them this topographical map of Bristol and Starksboro. The history of Bristol tells us that it was settled mainly with families from Connecticut and among them we find Nabby’s father – after we figured out who he was of course.  By the year 1800, Nabby, then age 8, was living in Bristol among 97 families totaling 665 people.  Her own family consisted of 2 males under the age of 10, 4 females under the age of 10, plus her parents.  I bet that was one noisy household.

Bristol 1910 topo

Date:

1910

Description:

Topographical map of Bristol done about 1910 showing all the streets in the village and town with locations of buildings existing at the time.

Road 116 is considered the border between Starksboro and Bristol, although it actually connects them.

Starksboro map

The picture below is of the actual village of Starksboro itself in 1950 or 1960 and as you can see, the village itself is very small. You can imagine how much smaller it was in the early 1800s. The Meeting House, with the cupola, built in 1840, in shown in the lower right area.

Starksboro 1950 aerial

Date:

1950 – 1960

Description:

The historic image shows a dirt road with electric lines traveling through town. Gardens are visible between houses and a school building (or church) in the lower, right corner of the photograph. There are more gardens, a barn, a silo, houses, a two-story industrial or commercial building (lumber mill?) and several stacks of lumber in the lower left corner. There is a church in the center of the photograph. There is a set of farm buildings and farm machinery just past the church. The landscape on the left side of the photograph has been cleared and is used for field crops and pastures. There are more farm buildings, houses, and gardens at the top of the image. It looks like summer. Esther Munroe Swift writes on 2005-4-12: Despite minor damage to this image, it is by far one of the best aerial views in the collection. Not only do the buildings show clearly, the terrain, trees and crop plantings also are clearly defined.

Hillsboro road

Thanks to cousin Rick Norton, we have a photo of Hillsboro Road, today, in a location where he says it’s in good condition as compared to the rest of the road.  Samuel Hill, a brother to Nabby’s husband Joseph, built a mill another mile and a half on up this road at Twin Bridges in about 1805.

Addison County was founded upon the lumber industry. People cut lumber, worked lumber and sold lumber.  There wasn’t much else you could do, because there was little flat area and it couldn’t be farmed until it was logged, if then.

Starksboro was first settled in 1787 and by 1800 there was a sawmill, 71 residences and 359 people, according to the census. Lumber was the big industry and probably the only industry for a very long time.

Starksboro lumber

There were several lumber mills in Starksboro and surrounding area. Starksboro had a shingle factory in 1840 which produced shingles from Hemlock. Nabby’s husband, Joseph listed himself in 1850 in Waukegan, Illinois as a shinglemaker.

According to the Town Report, Starksboro had 40 residents in 1791, about the time Nabby was born, and 1263 in 1840 by the time she and Joseph had already climbed into their wagon and set out for the wide open west. I guess the town must have gotten too crowded!  It’s not much larger today.  In 2010 the population was 1777 and 5.3 miles of road are paved, with 42 remaining unpaved.  Nabby would probably recognize it.

What did Starksboro look like? The camera was not in used until about the time of the Civil War, and not in wide use until the 1880s.  However, it doesn’t seem like Starksboro changed rapidly, so let’s see what we can find.

One of the old photos I found was the Hill farm. There were several Hill males that settled in this area, so this is most likely not Joseph’s farm, but we really don’t know, and it was assuredly the farm of a relative.

Starksboro Hill farm

Date:

1890 – 1950

Description:

A caption at the bottom of the historic image reads, “Elmwood Farm, Starksboro, VT — Hill and Miles Prop.” The image shows silos and barns near a farmhouse. A small stream passes through the lower, left corner of the image. There are scrap piles near the silos and a stonewall uphill of the scrap piles. There is a forested hill in the background of the image. Esther Munroe Swift writes on 2005-4-12: Hamilton Childs Gazetteer & Business Directory for Addison County c.1882 lists 19 members

Starksboro, Hill store on left

Cousin Rick tells us that this picture of Starksboro in 2012 includes an old store that was run by a Hill family member at one time, on the left.

I think Rick’s picture below looks like a Normal Rockwell type of painting.  Thank you to cousin John Burbank for photoshopping out the poles and wires.

Starksboro look toward village 116 and Hillsboro rd crop

Moving on down the road a bit to the south, Rick took this picture of Starksboro from the intersection of 116 and Hillsboro Road.  Nabby would have been very familiar with this land and with Lewis Creek, below.

Starksboro covered bridge

Date:

1887

Description:

This black and white photograph depicts an elderly gentleman fishing in Lewis Creek just below a covered bridge. The covered bridge is set on a stone foundation. The man fishing is standing on a rock outcrop along the water. Both banks of the creek are grassy and dotted with deciduous trees. On either side of the frame, the edges of wooden framed buildings are visible.

Lewis Creek runs through Starksboro and alongside Hillsboro Road.

Hillsboro road looking at hill where Hills settled

Cousin Rick turned the corner and took a picture of the Hill hill overlooking Starksboro where the Hills first settled.  Say that 10 times fast.

I was putting myself in Nabby’s shoes, looking back at these black and white photos of yesteryear, trying to put myself in her place back in a black and white existence when she married, just over 200 years ago. I was happily browsing photos, when I got extremely lucky.  I noticed that a property was for sale on Brown Hill Road.  Yes, that’s the location of one of the Hill Cemeteries, in the area where the Hill family lived, so I had to google the location.

Here’s what the realtor has to say:

Highland Farm is the classic Vermont Hill Farm on 256 acres of ponds, streams, fields, woodlands and highlights some of the best views of the Green Mountains. Full-on views of Camels Hump and the Appalachian Gap with a swimming pond in the foreground, a 10,000 tap sugar bush, a mobile home and a separate apartment in the large Post and Beam barn. Highland Farm is the ideal in Vermont Hill Farm retreats.

  •     256 +/- Acres of Classic Vermont Hill Farm
  •     End-of-the-road privacy
  •     Full-on views of Camels Hump, the Green Mountains and the Appalachian Gap
  •     10,000 tap sugarbush (possibly more)
  •     Over 175 acres of managed woodlands and approximately 60 acres of open fields
  •     A nice combination of open, sloping southeasterly facing fields fenced for livestock
  •     Two swimming ponds, one with covered deck
  •     Post & Beam barn with a one bedroom apartment
  •     Two 4-bay storage barns and two ponds
  •     An active brook with waterfalls runs through the property

See more at: http://www.landvest.com/property/22275752/75-brown-hill-east-road-starksboro-vt-05462#sthash.WeHFDZMU.dpuf

So, let’s see what the countryside Nabby would have seen outside her window everyday looks like.

Mason Hill 13 Mason Hill 12 Mason HIll 11 Mason Hill 10 Mason Hill 9 Mason Hill 8 Mason Hill 7 Mason Hill 6 Mason Hill 5 Mason Hill 4 Mason Hill 3 Mason Hill 2 Mason Hill 1

I’m telling you what, I don’t want to buy the place, but I assuredly want to rent it for a couple of weeks.  I wonder if it’s vacant???

There are just no words to describe some levels of majesty and beauty. The only thing I can think of to say is “breathtaking.”

I truly look at this and wonder how one could ever leave. Then I remember the backbreaking physical work of the lumbermen, and perhaps that is why Nabby and Joseph left.  Maybe its remoteness only looks enticing today because it’s a quick car ride to town, to obtain food, and one doesn’t have to hunt the food, kill it, skin it, cook it, or go hungry.  Neighbors, and assistance, are a phone call away and not miles through deep snow.  Maybe flat land would have been preferable because it’s farmable and those beautiful mountains only represented obstacles and challenges to our ancestors.  Maybe by 1840, when Joseph would have been about 50 years old, he was old and tired and wasn’t able to do lumbering anymore.  Maybe he had hurt himself, or just worn himself out over the years.  Maybe the westward bug was catching.  Maybe they knew it was now or never, and decided it was now.

How Nabby must have cried as they left, leaving everything and everyone that she knew behind, including her aged father whom she knew she would never see again.

And what about Nabby’s children? By 1840, her children had been marrying since 1831.  How many living children did Nabby leave behind?  How many are buried in small unmarked graves in a clearing in one of the two Hill cemeteries?  Did she visit them all one last time?

We don’t know exactly when they left, but Rollin consistently gives his birth location as New York in 1836/1837 from 1860-1910, 5 different census enumerations. The only one that is different is the 1850 census, where his parents would have provided the information, and they say Rollin was born in Vermont.

Oswego, NY to Little Fort, Illinois

Nabby spent a few years in Oswego, New York after leaving Vermont and before moving on to Little Fort, Illinois, later renamed Waukegan.  Nabby’s obituary says they arrived in 1842, which seems likely to be accurate.  They arrived sometime before her daughter, Lucia, married Henry Weaver in Waukegan on November 8, 1844, which, ironically is the same day Joseph and Nabby purchased a lot in Little Fort.  There must have been some celebrating going on that day!  Everyone would have been happy!

We don’t know how Joseph and Nabby arrived in either Oswego or Little Fort, but there is at least a possibility that they took the Erie Canal, completed in 1825, and joiner canals at least as far as Lake Erie and from there steamers around Michigan to Little Fort, Illinois. That would have been the long way, but it might have been preferable to going by wagon.

The map below shows the canal system in New York and connecting the regions around lakes Ontario and Erie.

NY Erie Canal

It’s also possible that they took a steamer the entire distance from Oswego to Little Fort. On the other hand, perhaps they took water as far as Toledo and switched to wagon to cross across the top of Ohio and Indiana to Chicago where they rounded the southernmost tip of Lake Michigan.  I wish we knew and if they had a steamer trunk for their trip, I surely wish I had that today.  I can’t imagine packing all of my family’s worldly belongings in trunks or a wagon and heading west.  The only good news by that time would have been that Nabby wasn’t pregnant like so many pioneer women who bounced around in those old wagons.

I can’t imagine that Nabby was looking forward to this trip, or setting up housekeeping all over again at age 50 or so. I wonder if she was fearful or resigned, or maybe a different mix of emotions.

When Nabby and Joseph with however many children they had in tow arrived in Waukegan, it was named Little Fort, and it was little, about 150 people. I don’t know if that number included children or not, but if it did not, that’s still only 75 couples or roughly 75 houses.  It that number included children, there were maybe 15 or 20 households.

Little Fort was a trading post, initially with the Potawatomie Indians – in fact it was the Indians who originally lived where “Little Fort” was established until 1829 when they ceded the land. Little Fort remained a trading town however, first fur trading, then shipping products to Chicago and other locations.  Little Fort was growing rapidly, however, with many new settlers and by 1849 it boasted 2500 residents. Not being “little” anymore, it was renamed Waukegan, the Potawatomie word for “fort” or “trading post.”  So, ironically, Waukenan went from an English word to a Native word for the same thing signifying “progress.”

Nabby and Joseph purchased land in the original town of Little Fort in November 8, 1844, lot 2 on block 39 from Elmsley and Sarah Sunderlin recorded in Deed Book C page 233.

Joseph Hill Little Fort Deed

When I visited in 2009, I obtained a plat map of the City of Waukegan created in 1861. This has been an extremely useful tool, several times.

Little Fort 1861

My 1861 plat map saved me once again, because the original blocks were numbered. On the section of the map below, the original Little Fort is to the right of the dotted line, and block 39 is shown below with the red arrow.  You can see 38 above it and 40 below.  The left half, on the other side of the dotted line is an addition to “Little Fort” at a later time and numbered within that addition.  Of course, since the lot was lot 2 block 39 and sold to them by Sunderlin, now I’m wondering if Joseph and Nabby owned the second “half” of this lot in the Sunderlin addition on the left side of the dotted line.

Little Fort 1861 Lot 39

Today, this property would be on the south side of Lake Street between County and Genessee. I doubt that either of these homes are original to the 1840s.

Little Fort Lot 39 Lake Street

Below is the view today from the Belvidere side.

Little Fort Lot 39 Belvidere side

And the County Street side.

Little fort lot 39 County street side

I’m sure this block probably looks nothing like it looked initially.  I wonder if anything is original to that timeframe.

Little Fort block 39

Regardless of exactly where they lived on this block, it’s fun to see it in context with the rest of the area.

Little Fort block 39 larger

Their “block” is marked with the grey pin above. In essence they were about 2 blocks from the public square and a couple blocks from the waterfront, the perfect location for everything in the small 1840s trading post town.

This drawing of Little Fort isn’t wonderful, but it’s all we have of that timeframe.  Those are pretty substantial docks.

Little Fort, Illinois

Nabby and Joseph lived in this area the rest of their lives. We know very little about Nabby except through Joseph and the census, with only one exception.

In the fall of 1846, Joseph and Nabby took what I believe is a mortgage on this property. Perhaps they were building a house.  The document is in poor condition, but the County Registrar’s office has this transaction labeled as a mortgage, not a sale.  Truthfully, I don’t care what it is because it tells me that Nabby’s name is Abigail, something I had long suspected but never been able to prove.

Little Fort lot 39 mortgage

It also tells me one other thing, both Nabby and Joseph can write. These are not their actual signatures, they are versions “sealed” by the clerk, but the fact that Nabby’s doesn’t have an “X” with “her mark” tells me she knows how to write so, someplace, she had some education.

Little Fort Lot 39 mortgage 2

We’re fortunate that Nabby had an obituary when she died in 1874. Joseph, three years earlier in 1871 only had a death announcement.

Nabby HIll obit

I was still disappointed to discover that there was no birth name for Nabby, but now I know she was Methodist. Better yet, because of the 1861 map once again, I know where the Methodist Church was located.

Little Fort Methodist church

The First United Methodist Church stills stands there today, at the intersection of Martin Luther King, formerly Utica Street, and Clayton Street. Obviously this building has been expanded over the years, but this is where Nabby attended church.

Little Fort Methodist church today

If any of the old church remains, it’s likely this center section on the Clayton side, based on the map and the building itself.  The “Bazaar” banner hangs under the window in the old part of the church.

Little Fort Methodist church original

This Christmas Eve service inside the historic part of the church today is different, I’m sure than when Nabby attended, but this was the very same place she prayed and likely where her funeral was held, 142 years ago. I wonder if she sang in the choir.

Little Fort Methodist church inside

Nabby’s history gets a little fuzzy between the year of the mortgage in 1846 and her death. In 1850, the census shows Joseph and Nabby as owning $200 of property.  That’s less than some, more than others.  Interestingly enough, they live beside the “brewer” who owns $1000 worth of property, which was a lot by comparison.

1850 Waukegan census

The 1850s would have been a time of change for Nabby. Rollin, her last child at home married in about 1853 or 1854.  Nabby had already buried her daughter, Lucia’s, first child in 1846 when he was just a few days over 4 months old.  Lucia’s husband died on August 13, 1854 and just 2 months later, on October 12th, Lucia’s youngest son died as well.  Without a husband and with 3 children under the age of 6, you know that Nabby was surely quite involved with helping Lucia and her grandchildren.

Given that daughter Rachel was in Pennsylvania, Nabby would have been unaware of her trials and tribulations, unless she was kept informed by letter. Regardless, there was nothing Nabby could do to help Rachel, so far away.

The 1860 census shows Joseph and Nabby with no property, which begs the question of whether the census was incorrect or if they had somehow lost or sold their property – neither of which is reflected in the deeds.

Waukegan 1860 census

The 1870 census, if this is the right couple, shows them living about 35 miles away in neighboring Cook County, with Joseph at age 79 still working as a laborer.

1870 joseph hill

I could have found the wrong couple in 1870, as the surname is spelled unusually, but it seems unlikely to have two Joseph and Nabby’s of the same age with her being from Connecticut, living in Illinois. There is no sign of them in Waukegan in 1870.

Nabby was probably unaware of the Hell that daughter Rachel was living in Pennsylvania. Several of Rachel’s children died, along with her husband, Anthony Lore in the 1860s, followed by more children’s deaths and then her own between 1870 and 1880.  We don’t know if Rachel died before Nabby or after.

Joseph Hill died less than a year after the 1870 census, on March 16th, 1871 with the local paper saying he was 80 years and 6 months old, which would correlate exactly with age 79 in the census the year before.

I have to wonder, what happened to the land-owing American dream that Joseph and Nabby obviously held at one time. What happened to their property?  Where did Nabby live when she died?

The Lake County Historical Society has been extremely helpful. They have an 1874 City Directory that listed Mrs. L. W. Weaver, widow, who would be Lucia Weaver, Nabby’s daughter.  Her address was given as “living the south side of Julian, two doors east of Utica.”  Houses didn’t have numbers yet at that time.  It’s amazing that we’ve gone from houses without numbers in the 1870s to seeing the location “virtually” today, both by satellite and via Google Street View.

That location tidbit was all I needed and off I flew to Google Maps, the genealogists friend – except there were a couple minor snafus this time.

I knew where Julian Street was located, but Utica was on the south side of the city running parallel with Julian. Those two streets don’t, didn’t and never had intersected.  What was going on?

I referred back to my 1861 map of Waukegan, and sure enough, the street names have changed.  Some streets that used to be through streets aren’t any longer.

On the map below, you can see the area today on the left and that section from the 1861 map on the right. Utica has been changed to Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue.

Little Fort Lucia street change

The location of Lucia Weaver’s house where Nabby lived her last few years is shown with the top red arrow in both.

Waukegan Lucia Weaver

On this enlarged version of this map (north is right), I can easily see the actual house location, which means I can then go to Google Maps and see if the house is still standing. We’re in luck, it is.  You can see all 5 houses in this photo on Julian between Martin Luther King (Utica) and County Street.

You might notice that this looks a bit different than the hand drawing. Hmmmm…..

Waukegan Lucia WEaver today

Is the second house then the second house from the right, today?

According to realtor records, discovered by googling, house number 315, the second house from the right, was built in 1901. House number 313 was, next door, was built in 1900.  The yellow house, 311, is also a possibility, but I could not determine when it was built.  However, looking at the 1861 map, I’m not all sure the yellow house is in the correct location on the lots, so while this IS the location, none of the houses may be original to the time when Nabby would have been living here with daughter Lucia.  I wonder if prior to 1900/1901 there was one house where there are now two, 313 and 315, today.

According to Peterson Funeral Home records, we know the following about Nabby’s death:

  • Age 82
  • Died of old age
  • Died Sept 30, 1874
  • Buried at Oakwood, nothing more listed
  • Book A Sept 30 1874

Nabby is buried in an unmarked grave in Section 23, Lot 10 of the Oakwood Cemetery, likely beside Joseph, probably beside the Weaver plot where Lucia, her husband Henry, and son Wallace are buried. The local Historical Society volunteer, Ann, was extremely helpful to me both before the visit and in terms of helping me find the graves.

Waukegan Oakwood

Volunteers are wonderful. What would we do without them and their giving spirit.  Ann met me at the cemetery to be sure I found the graves and brought me some historical goodies too…like Nabby’s obituary!

Oakwood Waukegan Ann and me

Stuck in the Mud

Now, it’s 2009. I’ve been searching for Nabby’s surname for years and I’ve overturned every rock I can think of to overturn.  There are just no records left, or at least I don’t think there are – and I’m stuck.  Seriously stuck, mired in the mud and never going to get out stuck.

I know all about that. I did it to a tractor once, Ok, twice…but that’s another story entirely.  After that, every time there was any mud anyplace near me my mother had to point it out – for years – actually for the rest of her life.

“Watch that mud over there.”

“Mom, it’s a mud puddle an inch deep on pavement in a parking lot.”

“Well, Ok, but I just wanted to be sure you saw it.”

Thank you so much mother:)

Desperation Sets In

I really didn’t think anyone knew Nabby’s surname, but then again, Nabby died in 1874, not so long ago that a descendant might not have a Bible, a paper, something. I was actually hoping for one of those unknown children to pop up with an obituary, a death certificate, a Bible, something to identify Nabby’s parents.

I set about to salt and pepper with breadcrumbs everyplace – rootsweb lists, boards, checking GenForum and last of all, as much as it pains me to say, I checked Ancestry for Nabby’s surname. Now, in my defense, I didn’t want to just adopt a surname and hook it on my tree, I was searching for information, hints, anything of use.

I did find something quite interesting. Here’s what I posted on the rootsweb lists:

“I recently found a tree at Ancestry, with no documents, that says that Nabby’s parents were Gershom Hall and Dorcas Richardson of Addison County, Vermont. I tried to contact the tree owner with no luck.  Does anyone have any information about the Hall family and if they had a daughter, Nabby (or Abigail) who married a Joseph Hill?  Did Gershom Hall have a will of any sort that might name his children?  Any help is gratefully appreciated.”

Truthfully, I didn’t think there was a snowball’s chance in hades that this was accurate, but it was the one and only lead I had.

William Wheeler, a cousin who descends from Lucia that I didn’t know previously, answered me and he said that he felt there was evidence to support this Hall connection, provided as follows:

  • Gershom Hall Jr. & Dorcas Richardson Hall have a daughter Nabby, born CT 10/7/1792; Mansfield, Tolland, CT records.
  • Gershom Hall, Jr. is in Bristol, VT 1799/1800; 1800 census as Gershom Noll, Bristol town records is a freeholder 9/5/1809, lived in Bristol through 1840 census.
  • Gershom’s son Edmund moved to Lake Co. IL in the 1840’s the same period as Joseph and Nabby.

The 1850 census does confirm an Edmund Hall born in 1791 in Connecticut , wife Hannah, living in Lake County, Illinois.

That’s good information, but nothing to draw conclusions from. It is, however, something to work with.

From the book, “The Halls of New England” by David B. Hall, 1883, on page 237, I found:

(Family 81.) Gershom Halls(5) Gershom(4), James(3), William(2), John(1) b. Sept. 6, 177O; m., May 9, 1791, Dorcas Richardson of Wellington, Conn. Residence Mansfield. Children were :

  1. Edmund, b. Sept. 6. 1791.
  2. Nabby, b. Oct. 7, 1792.
  3. Joel, b. Feb. 13, 1794.
  4. Orilla, b. Sept. 30, 1795.
  5. Polly b. Oct. 13, 1797.

Well, that’s a Nabby alright, with a brother Edmund, but is this our Nabby?

Then I discovered that Polly Hall, the daughter of Gershom married David Gates and had a son named Rollin Cone Gates. Ok, this is now too much coincidence, given that the name Rollin and Rollin C. repeats in Nabby’s children as well.

Not only that, but Polly’s first daughter’s name was Alvira, a name also found in Nabby’s daughter Rachel’s line.

I contacted the historical society in Addison County, Vermont and they were unable to find any burial, will, estate or other information for Gershom, although they did find one tidbit that made me quite sad, actually.

“Rachel, dau. of Gershon and Dorcas Hall died April 21, 1809, age 11.”

Rachel Hall would have been born in about 1798 and the 1800 census does support 4 daughters, instead of the three shown for Gershom above in the Hall book. Rachel would have been Nabby’s little sister, younger than Nabby by maybe 5 or 6 years or so.  In 1809, when Rachel died, Nabby would have been 17 and it probably broke her heart to bury her baby sister.  I can see her standing beside the grave and promising to Rachel that she would indeed live on, and then just 5 years later, in 1814, Nabby naming her first daughter Rachel Levina.

This information falls into the “preponderance of evidence category,” but it isn’t proof.  I turned to DNA.

Autosomal DNA

In order to obtain DNA+tree matches at Ancestry.com, I needed to add Gershom Hall and Dorcas Richardson and as much of their Ancestry as is documented in the books I had found onto my Ancestry tree. If you are cringing a bit, so was I, because I hate to add anything speculative.  However, I needed to know if the DNA evidence also supports Nabby being the child of Gershom Hall and Dorcas Richardson and the only way to do that was to add Gershom and Dorcas to my tree.  In other words, I needed to know if my “ancestor trap” would provide any shakey leaf DNA matches.  It did, so Gershom and Dorcas are still branches on my tree.

Today I have 4 matches to the Gershom Hall line other than through Nabby – three through Gershom’s sister, Rachel’s line and one through Gershom’s other daughter Amelia Orilla. I have two additional matches through Gershom’s grandfather, James Hall and wife Mehitable.  I have yet another match through James’ parents William Hall and wife Hester Matthews.

Unfortunately, most of these folks have not uploaded their results to GedMatch, so I’ve been unable to triangulate, but I’m willing to call provisionally “safe” on this one with the non-DNA evidence backed up by 7 different DNA matches to multiple lines other than my own through the Hall family.  It’s still not proof.

Maybe someday I’ll get to triangulate and call this absolutely, positively, a home run.

Nabby’s Children and Mitochondrial DNA

While we are using autosomal DNA to confirm Nabby as a member of the Hall family, we can also utilize Nabby’s mitochondrial DNA to learn more about Nabby’s direct maternal line.

Mitochondrial DNA tells a story hundreds to thousands of years old, but of just one line, the direct matrilineall line. Women pass mitochondrial DNA directly to their children, but men don’t pass theirs on.  So anyone, male or female, descended from Nabby or her sisters through all females can test their mitochondrial DNA, which is the same mitochondrial DNA as Nabby carried.  From that, we can learn about Nabby’s ancient origins, before the advent of surnames.

We can still only identify 3 of Nabby’s children, although through those three children she had 28 or 29 grandchildren, several of whom, the ones in Pennsylvania, she probably never knew, and may not have known of:

  • Rachel Levina Hill, born in April 10, 1814 or 1815 in Bristol, Addison County, Vermont, married Anthony Lore October 13, 1831 in Starksboro, VT, moved to New York, then to Warren County, PA by 1850 where she died between 1870 and 1880. She had a total of 12 children that we know of, with daughters as follows:

Maria Lore born 1844 who married Elisha Stephen Farnham and had daughter Jennie Farnham who married a Goss and had one daughter Ethel Goss.

Mary or Minerva Lore (or both) may have married Henry Ward and had daughters Lillie Ward, Myrtle Ward, Daisy Ward and another daughter whose name is unknown

  • Rollin C. Hill born April 16, 1836, probably in Vermont, married Louisa Jane Wright about 1853, died December 24, 1918 during the flu epidemic in Waukegan, Illinois. He had 9 children who lived, of 11 born: Rollin Cullin (1869-1944), Alice May (1872-1953), Leroy Frank (1877-1923), Harry Wright (1855-1949), Charles Oliver (1873-947), Herbert B. (1872-1942), Joseph (1869-before 1880), Ellen Louisa (1857-1940), Cornelia (1865 and (1865-1937) Lewis (1860-before 1880).  Rollin’s children do not carry Nabby’s mitochondrial DNA since males do not pass mitochondrial DNA to their offspring.
  • Lucia P. Hill born October 27, 1827 in Addison County, Vermont, married Henry Weaver November 8, 1844 in Waukegan, Illinois. He died in 1854.  Lucia never remarried, worked as a seamstress and died on January 13, 1917 in Chicago, Illinois.  She is buried in the Oakwood Cemetery in Waukegan.  Her children, based on the Bible pages shown below which are known as the “Weaver-Norton Bible,” in combination with census records, are Edwin Alonzo born and died in 1846, Wallace born in 1848 who lived and died in Waukegan, Sarah born in 1850, Adella “Della” born in 1852 and Charles Cullin born in 1853 and died two months after his father in 1854.  1854 was a terrible year for this family.

Lucia’s daughters who would carry her mitochondrial DNA are:

Sarah Prince Weaver born May 14, 1850 in Waukegon, Illinois, moved to Hunters, Stevens County, Oregon where she died on October 29, 1929.  Her second husband was William George Simpson who she married in 1872 in Michigan.  She had children Adolph born in 1872, Edward born in 1875 and died in 1877, Guy born 1879, died 1899, Gary born 1881, died 1884, and Lillie born in 1883. Lillie Simpson carries Sarah’s and Nabby’s mitochondrial DNA.  She married William Wheeler had a daughter Stella Wheeler who died in 1972 and daughter Claire Wheeler who died in 2003.  If Stella or Claire had children, they would also carry Nabby’s mitochondrial DNA.

Sarah Prince WEaver

Nabby’s granddaughter, Sarah Prince Weaver.

Adella “Della” N. Weaver born March 30, 1852, married Duncan Kier about 1880 and had daughter Edna A. Kier born in July of 1880.  Della moved to Independence, Missouri where she died in 1935.  Edna carries Nabby’s mitochondrial DNA as do her children.  If Edna had female children, anyone descended from those female children through females carries Nabby’s mitochondrial DNA too.

Lucia Hill Weaver Bible

Lucia Hill Weaver Bible 2

We do have an opportunity to test individuals who carry Nabby’s DNA today. I will provide a testing scholarship to anyone who descends from Nabby (or her sisters) through all females to the current generation where the individual can be male or female.

A special thank you to the Waukegan Historical Society volunteers, Beverly and Ann for going that special distance, both when I visited and after I left.

Furthermore, Google Maps has opened a huge door of opportunity for genealogists.  I hope you’ve seen some different ways to use this tool, especially in conjunction with old maps.

I could not have written this article without the help of cousins Rick Norton and John Burbank who provided Vermont information and cousin William Wheeler who researched and speculated correctly about Gershom Hall.  It’s because of the collaborative efforts of all of us that we know Nabby Hall Hill just a little bit better today and got to peek into her life through the magic of records and pictures, both old and new.

And Nabby, if you’d like to tell us who the rest of your children are, we’re all ears…

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Joseph Hill (1790-1871), The Second Joseph, ShingleMaker, 52 Ancestors #116

I was so thrilled when I discovered the birth record of Rachel Levina Hill in Bristol Township, Addison County, Vermont with her parent’s names, Joseph Hill and Naby.

Rachel Hill birth

How tough could the next generation be? The name wasn’t John Smith and this document gave both parents names.  Addison County wasn’t heavily populated.  This should be a slam dunk.

HA!

Little did I know.

When I started my search for Joseph Hill, my only real piece of data to go on was that Joseph and Nabby were married by 1814 or 1815 when Rachel Levina was born, and were still living in the same area in 1831 when she was married.

So, the 1830 census in Addison County, Vermont seemed like a good starting point.

1830 Census

In the 1830 census, we already have a challenge. There is a Joseph Hill in Bristol Township, a Josephus in Cornwall and two Josephs in Starksboro.

Four Joseph Hills??  Seriously.  In that small area.  How can that be?  Big groan!

Josephus doesn’t seem to fit, either by virtue of his name or location, so I tentatively eliminated him to focus on the three Josephs. All three Joseph’s are age 30-40 in 1830, which is very un-useful, and all the wives are 30-40 as well, so born between 1790 and 1800.  Really?  Really not helpful.

The best I could do was to begin to map the children of the various Josephs in documentation against the children noted on the census. Unfortunately, there would not be an exact fit.

Maybe we’ll have better luck with 1820.

1820 Census

In the 1820 census, we should find Joseph since we know that Rachel Levina was born in Bristol Township in 1815. Joseph Hill does not appear in Bristol Township where Rachel was born, but does appear in the Starksboro group of Hills living beside Ruby Hall, with:

  • one male under 10 (born 1810-1820,) probably a son
  • 1 male 16-26 (born 1794-1814) identity unknown, possibly a son
  • one male 26-45 (born 1775-1794,) Joseph Hill, unless he is the unknown person above
  • one female under 10 (born 1810-1820), has to be Rachel
  • 1 female 16-26 (born 1794-1814), has to be Nabby

Two people are engaged in agriculture.  This means that this Joseph was born between 1775-1794 and living in Starksboro in 1820. It also means that Rachel probably had a brother given the male under 10 and possibly a second brother given the male 16-26, although given Nabby’s age, she could not have a 16 year old child.

1810 Census

In the 1810 census, we find scattered Hill families, with a grouping in Starksboro: Samuel, John, William, Thomas, Latham? and Lemuel.  Joseph is not yet in the census by his own name, suggesting that he either didn’t live in Addison County yet or was not yet married and that one of these Hill men was probably his father or a close relative.

In 1810, Joseph would have been between 16 and 20 years old, depending on which birth year is accurate.  The only Starksboro Hill men in the census, below, who have a male of that age (ages 16-26, third column to the right of the names) or 10-16 (second column to the right of the names) were William, Samuel and Lemuel.  So Joseph is likely living in one of these households, who we later discover are his brothers.

1810 Addison County Vt census

1800 Census

The 1800 census becomes even more difficult. There are several groups of Hill men, one in Bristol Township and 4 in Starksboro.  Given that Joseph was born around 1790, his father, if here, would have been one of these men with a male child of around 10.  The only man in the Bristol/Starksboro group to have any male children of that approximate age is Samuel, but we later determine that Joseph is not Samuel’s son, but his brother.  In fact, all of the Starksboro men except John are brothers.

  • Lewis Hill, Bristol Twp, 1 male 16-25, 1 female under 10, 1 female 26-44
  • Thomas Hill, Starksboro, 1 male 16-25, no females
  • John Hill, Starksboro, 1 male 26-44, 1 female 16-25
  • Samuel Hill, Starksboro, 4 males under 10, 1 26-44, 1 females under 10, 2 26-44
  • William Hill, Starksboro, 1 male 26-44, no females
  • Ambrose Hill, Cornwall, 1 male 10-15, 1 male over 45, 1 female 10-15, one female over 45
  • Titus Hill, Cornwall, 2 males under 10, 2 10-15, 2 16-25, 2 over 45, 1 female under 10, 1 16-25, 1 26-44, 1 over 45
  • Moses Hill, Cornwell, 1 males under 10, 1 26-44, 1female 16-25
  • Elias Hill, Middlebury, 3 males under 10, 1 16-25, 1 26-44, 1 over 45, 1 female 26-44
  • Festus Hill, Middlebury, 1 male under 10, 1 16-25, 1 26-44, 1 female under 10, 1 26-44
  • Calvin Hill, Monkton, 3 males under 10, 1 10-15, 1 16-25, 1 26-44, 1 female under 10, 1 26-44
  • Billiom Hill, New Haven, 1 male over 45, 1 female over 45
  • Reuben Hill, (next door), New Haven, 1 male under 10, 1 10-15, 2 16-25, 1 26-44, 1 female under 10, 1 16-25

On the flip side, 1790 looks significantly easier, because most Hill men aren’t there yet. Perhaps the Hill migration from New Hampshire took place between 1790 and 1800.

1790 Addison Co., Vermont Census

  • Billius Hill, New Haven, 2 males over 16, 2 females under 16

The Blacksmith Ledger

I realize a blacksmith ledger is a really unusual resource, but this one is chocked full of interesting information, representative of that time and life in Vermont.

James Barton, a blacksmith from Ferrisburg Hollow, Addison County, Vermont which appears to be 7-11 miles from Starksboro, kept a ledger from 1828-1832.

James Barton’s descendant tells us the following about the ledger:

Kept by my great-great grandfather and brought to Crawford County, Pennsylvania about 1843, when the family settled in Beaver Township. Other account books may exist, but this was the only known one at the time I photocopied it for my own use in the 1970’s.  The current location of the original book is unknown.

Excerpt transcribed by
Judith Smith Magons
Wadsworth OH
ivjuma@aol.com

I extracted all of the Hill information, with the hope that somehow I could tie something together. I also found it fascinating that this blacksmith wound up in Crawford County, PA, adjacent to Warren County, where Rachel Levina Hill and her husband Anthony Lore would find themselves in 1850.  Was there some connection or was the Warren County/Crawford County area simply a popular migration location from Vermont?

Blacksmith Ledger:

Page 1

July 14 1828      Richard Hill Dr to Shoeing                .34

Page 3

August 12 1828 Samuel Hill Dr to repairing

Single Waggon                                         8.00

15             Richard Hill Dr to mend chains                    .42

Wm Worth 2d to fix saddle trace

By C Hill                                                     .34

Page 5

August 27th 1828  Richard Hill Dr to Shoeing                           .25

Richard Hill Dr to Shoeing                           .50

30              Wm Hill 2d  To Shoeing                              .12

Page 6

Sept 9               Wm Hill 2d to Shoeing                                .25

Page 7

Sept 15th 1828 Thomas Hill Dr to repairing

Wm Worths Waggon                                1.00

20th            Thomas Hill To staple                                 .25

Thomas Hill to reparing wagon                    .75

Wm Hill 2d Dr to mending chains                 .19

Page 8

Sept 26, 1828     Wm Hill 2d Dr to Shoeing                            .13

Richard Hill Dr to Shoeing                         1.00

Do fixing whiffletree                                    .35

29th            Wm Hill 2d Dr to Shoeing                            .67

Oct 1st               Samel Bushnell Dr to Ironing

to horse wagon for John Hill

with extra bands                                     31.50

Do Irons for Box                                       1.50

Page 9

Pct 15th 1828     Richard Hill Dr tp Shoeing                           .60

Page 10

Oct 20 1828       Wm Hill 2d to Shoeing                                .25

Richard Hill to mend Chains                        .32

Do Apple Knife                                           .10

Page 11

Nov 1st 1828      Joseph Hill Dr to making 6 knives               .60

Page 13

November 5th 1828 John Hill 2d Dr to drawing

ox Shoe Iron on credit 60 lb 3 Cents          1.80

Page 14

Nov 12th             Joseph Hill Dr to Laying hatchet               1.00

Page 15

Nov 23 1828      Wm Hill 2d to Shoeing a horse                  1.06

Page 16

Dec 5th 1828      John Hill Dr to Shoeing                             1.17

16              Linal & John Hill Dr to mend chain               .10

Do Cart hook    lb

Page 17

Dec 17th 1828    Wm Hill 2d to horse shoeing                       .92

Do to Ironing a whiffletree                         1.00

Thomas Hill Dr to 6 butter rings                   .36

Richard Hill Dr to horses shod                   1.60

Page 18

January 1st 1829           Thomas Hill Dr to fixing __led Stamp          .25

Wm Hill 2d Dr to Shoeing                            .25

Page 20

January 19 1829                       Wm Hill 2d Dr to 25 nails        .13

Page 21

January 26 1829                       Jos Hill Dr to fix Steel gards          .13

W Hill Dr to a T on Sleigh                            .37

Page 22

January 20th 1829  Munson & Moon Dr to mending

Iron bar by Jos Hill                                    .25

Richard Hill to key for ax Staple                   . 6

Page 23

Feb 6th 1829      Jos Hill Dr to upset ax

and fix a Teakettle bail                                .32

10th            Richard Hill Shoeing 1 toed 3 Set                .54

Page 25

SS March 6 1829 Wm Hill 2d To 1 new Shoe Sett                 .34

9th              Due John Hill Dr to repair trap                     .12

Page 27

March 21st 1829 Wm Hill 2d to Shoeing 1 Set                       .13

23              Wm Hill 2d to mend Chain                          .15

Richard Hill Dr to mend Shovel                    . 8

Page 28

April 1 1829       Jos Hill Dr to baile one for Ellsworth            .53

(meaning bail five pail kettle, as done for another’s entry above)

Page 33

May 1st 1829      Richard Hill Dr to Setting one Shoe              .13

Page 34

May 10th 1829    Joseph Hill Dr to 6 Spikes                          . 9

Richard Hill Dr to a Clevey Bolt palent          .25

Wm & Joseph Hill Dr to mending Dung fork          .17

Wm Hill 2d Dr to Shoeing                            .13

Page 36

June 4th 1829     Joseph Hill Dr to Sharping 2 bars               .17

Do Sharp another bar                                 . 8

Page 38

July 15th 1829    Richard Hill self Dr to Shoeing

2 New 5 old ones                                      1.29

30              John Hill Dr to horse Shoeing                      .30

Lionel & John Hill Dr to

Ironing pari of Whiffletrees                        2.00

Thomas Hill Dr to 24 Spike                          .34

Page 42

Sept 21st 1829   Thomas Hill Dr 2 pair of hinges                  1.00

Do 2 hasps hooks staples                           .34

Do 65 Nails                                                .34

Page 44

January 1830     Richard Hill Dr to mend skimmer                 .25

Page 45

Jan 22 1830       L & John Hill 3d Dr Ironing Sley               18.00

Do Sley wood  $8

L & John Hill 3d to fifty nails                        .37

Page 46

18 Feb 1830      L & J Hill Dr to shoeing 1 new 3 set  .71      .71

Page 47

April 8 1830       Jonth Hill Dr to Bolt & Rivet for plow            .17

Page 48

April 1830          John Hill Dr to 6 bolts & nuts for plow          .75

Wm Hill Dr to 1 bolt & nut                           .13

NOTES

  • “Dr” indicates “Debit”
  • “Do” indicates “Ditto”
  • “Cr” indicates “Credit”
  • “SS” indicates work done by Seaman S. Bushnell, a blacksmith working in Barton’s shop
  • “palent” unknown word
  • “self” indicates Richard did the work himself in Barton’s shop

Keep in mind, there were four Joseph Hills in Addison County in 1830, but even if this isn’t “our” Joseph, this record of the place and time is likely the same kinds of things any farmer in Addison County would have been doing.

Bertha Hanson

Bertha Hanson was a lifelong resident of Starksboro, Vermont, the local genealogist and historian. She was born in 1917 and seemed to be a history sponge.  While she clearly didn’t know Joseph Hill herself, she knew of him.  Unfortunately, Bertha died in 1994 without publishing her works.  If you’re groaning, so was I.  In fact, I’m still groaning because so very much information died with her or is scattered and inaccessible.

In 1998, a book titled “Bertha’s Book, A View of Starksboro’s History,” was published, but it was mostly her annual “town reports” from 1954-1994, which isn’t to diminish its value. It’s just such a small portion of her body of work.

However, various people who have been long-time genealogists seemed to be in possession of select pieces of her research. Obviously, she shared generously.  I was hopeful that I would be able to tie into something she had already done.

I was lucky enough to stumble across John Burbank, a genealogist living in Bristol, in Addison County, who was in possession of some of Bertha’s work on the Hill family. While the Hills weren’t her primary focus, she had still managed to amass enough information that I was able to begin putting together family groups and a timeline, thanks to information sent by John which was a combination of both his and her work.

Hill Family History

According to Bertha, Samuel Hill was the first Hill to settle in Addison County. She originally reported John Hill who settled in Starksboro to be his brother, then later corrected the relationship to be a “cousin of some sort.”

I have extracted this information from John Burbank’s information, much of which was from Bertha’s writings.  The John Hill, below, is the father of Samuel Hill and also of several other men who settled in the Hillsboro section of Starksboro in Addison County.  William, John, Lemuel, Thomas and the Second Joseph were all founders among the Hillsboro Hill families, although the Second Joseph moved westward.  Just wait until you hear about the Second Joseph!

JOHN HILL (#5) (Henry #3, William, William), b. 19 Feb 1737, d. 9 Oct 1804, m. 26 Nov 1761 Catherine, dau. of Capt. Samuel & Elizabeth (___) MITCHELL, b. 9 Oct 1738, bp 16 Aug 1743, d. 21 Jul 1827. The Mitchell’s were from Kittery, ME.

John and his father bought the farm in Barrington, NH and according to Barrington historians, John is the Captain John Hill who had a company at Seaney’s Island in the Revolutionary War.

Bertha (Brown) Hanson of Starksboro indicated in a note to John R. Burbank that she had located the old Hill farm in Barrington, NH:

“Large boulders wall the family cemetery which is at the top of a hill with fields sloping away from it on two sides. Two large, plain, unlettered stones mark the graves of John and Catherine.  The original house, located at the foot of the hill burned many years ago.”

Mrs. Hanson has also done considerable research in the history of Starksboro and has had printed vignettes appearing in the annual Starksboro Town Report for many years. One such from 1957:

“The section of Starksboro known as ‘Hillsboro’ originally included roughly the area between the Hannon farm now owned by the town and the corner above the Ireland school house. The first deed to property in this area was to Samuel Hill of Barrington, New Hampshire, on June 22, 1798.  This was to land near the former Hillsboro school house. The following year his brother, John purchased land near the twin bridges.  {Note: Bertha later indicated that this John was not Samuel’s brother, but probably a cousin of some sort.  Actually he was a second cousin.  When this vignette was published posthumously in 1998 as Bertha’s Book, A View of Starksboro’s History, the word brother was changed to cousin.]

This John Hill of Starksboro is not our Joseph’s father.  The father of our Joseph is John, who died in 1804 in Barrington, NH, John #5 above.

The Ryan, also known as the Hillsboro Cemetery is located “on Hillsboro Road just before reaching Twin Bridges in District #5.”

Hillsboro cemetery

This cemetery holds the graves of many Hill family members including Joseph Hill who died in 1853 and Lemuel and Sylvanus’s adopted children. There are many graves marked only with fieldstones.  The earliest stones seemed to have been placed in the 1840s.

Cem where Samuel Hill buried

Cousin Rick took a photo of Hillsboro Road leading to the cemetery, which he says is in good shape compared to other sections of this road.  Another mile or so beyond the cemetery is the location where Samuel Hill built his grist mill at Twin Bridges.

Hillsboro road

Bertha continues:

The exact date when the brothers (John and Samuel subsequently corrected to cousins) moved their families to Vermont is not clear. However, by the time the U. S. census for 1800 was taken, Samuel, his wife and their six children, John and his wife, and also two other brothers, William and Thomas, who later purchased land near-by, were living in Starksboro.  That year another brother, Lemuel, settled on the farm now known as the Morton Hill place.  The last of the family to locate in town was Francis who, in 1810, purchased land above the present location of the Ireland school house.

Hillsboro was isolated by its location from activities in other parts of town. As early as 1817, Rev. Bowles, an itinerant Baptist minister, began holding church services in the homes of families in that neighborhood.  In September, 1821, the Baptist church was organized with 17 members.  No church building was erected, however, until the present one was built at the village in 1868.

Changing social and economic conditions led many of the second generation to move away from the hill farms. Some went west, some went to other towns, others bought land in the valley.  By 1870 there was only one Hill family living in Hillsboro.  Many of our townspeople, however, number one or more of the Hill brothers among their ancestors.

John Hill (#5) made out his will on 12 Apr 1804 and on 6 Nov 1804, a month after his death, it was entered for probate (Roberta’s note – in Stafford County, NH, probate Volume 14, page 22 and 23,) with his son, Henry, appointed executor as John had ordained.  Henry accepted that trust and “gave bonds for the faithful performance of the same in the sum of $7000 with two sureties.”  The will is interesting and sheds some light on members of the family not otherwise widely known. John starts off by giving one dollar to his oldest living sons and daughters: Samuel, William, John, Lemuel, Thomas, Betsey, Polly, and Susannah.  Many of these were already in VT by the time John wrote his will.  Perhaps the provisions for these was what John had previously given the older boys when they reached maturity.

John’s eldest son, Joseph, was dead, but John still had at home two minor sons, Francis and another Joseph, and an unmarried daughter, whom he remembered as follows:

And I give to My Son Francis Hill three hundred and fifty dollars and one yoke of oxen and one cow when he is twenty one years old and he is to stay his time out and I give to my son Joseph Hill three hundred and fifty dollars and one yoke of oxen and one cow to be paid to him when is is twenty one years old and he is to stay and serve his time out and I give to my daughter Hannah Hill one cow and three sheep to be delivered to her at my desire and to be kept on the place summer and winter and for her to have their income of them, and for her to have the privilege of the back room with the fireplace, and wood to keep as much fire as is nesary while she remains single.”

By far the greatest benefits were bestowed on his wife and son, Henry, age 23, who evidently was running the farm:

I give to my beloved wife all my real estate and three cows and six sheep and half the swine; all the household frunery, the household furnitry is to be for her to dispose of as she shall think best and allso one half of the dwelling house to be for her use during the time that she remains my widow and after she seases to be my widow, I give to my beloved son Henry all my real estate and all my stock and all my farming tools and I appoint and ordain my beloved son Henry Hill my only executor or administrator.

To his grandchildren, James, John, and Catrine, who were probably the children of his deceased son, Joseph, he made the following provision:

And I give to my granson James Hill one hundred dollars to be paid in neat stock or money when he is twenty two years old and I give to my granson John Hill one hundred dollars to be paid in neat stock or money when he is twenty two years old and I give to my grand daughter Catrine Hill fifty dollars in neat stock or house furnitry to be paid when she is twenty two years old.

John’s Children:

  1. Joseph, b. 31 May 1763, d. 24 Sep. 1790, m. possibly Sarah, dau. of ___ & ___ (___) Caverly (this needs further research). He evidently is the Joseph listed on the NH 1790 census of Barrington having in his household 1 male age 16 or older including the head of household (that would be Joseph), 2 males under age 16 (James and John), and 2 females (probably his wife and a dau., Catrine). Joseph is probably buried in the Hill family cemetery on the old Hill farm in Barrington.
  2. Samuel, b. 10 Apr. 1765 Great Barrington, NH (moved to Addison Co., VT)
  3. William, b. 21 Jan. 1767 Barrington, NH (moved to Addison Co. VT)
  4. Elizabeth “Betsey”, b. 2 Feb. 1769 Barrington, NH, d. 17 Mar. 1856, m. 10/12 Feb 1791 Barrington, NH to Samuel Bunker, son of Dodavah & Martha (Smith) BUNKER. Betsey and Samuel settled in Huntington, VT. They were gr. gr. grandparents of Bertha (Brown) Hanson of Starksboro.
  5. Mary “Polly/Molly”, b. 16 Mar. 1771 Barrington, NH, d. 19 June 1859 Cabot VT of pleursy, m. Daniel Smith, son of ___ & ___ (___) Smith, b.___, d. 1 Jan 1828 Cabot VT. Mary and Daniel settled in Cabot VT supposedly because of the Hazen Road. He was said to be the owner of the largest tract of land in the town. They were among the founders of the Methodist Church there. Early meetings were at the “center of town” and to save shoes, the children carried theirs until they had crossed the brook near the meeting place. Their pew in church was the third from front on right hand aisle.
  6. John, b. 28 June 1773 Great Barrington, NH, d.___. As far as is known, he stayed in NH. His birth is the only one among all his siblings which can be verified by NH public records. For a long time he was confused with a second cousin, the John Hill who m. Laura Bushnell in Starksboro.
  7. Susannah, b. 7 May 1775 Great Barrington, NH, d. 12 Mar. 1848 Stratford, NH.
  8. Lemuel, b. 10 Apr 1777 Barrington, NH (moved to Addison Co., VT)
  9. Thomas, b. 31 Jul 1778 Barrington, NH (moved to Addison Co., VT)
  10. Henry, b. 29 Mar 1781 probably Barrington, NH. He inherited the farm in Barrington, NH. Bertha (Brown) Hanson said that a loose paper in the record book gave the following data: Henry Hill d. 7 Oct 1876, m. Anna, dau. of ___ & ___ (___) Young, b.___, d. 26 Sep. 1854.
  11. Hannah, b. 10 Apr. 1783 probably Barrington, NH
  12. Francis, b. 31 Mar 1785 Barrington, NH
  13. Joseph, b. 2 Sep. 1791 probably Barrington, NH (moved to Addison Co., VT, known in this article as The Second Joseph)

John Burbank adds that the date of 1787 for the birth of the second Joseph was found in the papers of Bertha (Brown) Hanson which would mean that his oldest brother, Joseph was still living. Why name another child Joseph when the first has not died? Bertha’s mother told her that it was common to leave a child unnamed for two or three years. If that were true in this instance, then the younger Joseph would have received his name after September 1790 when the first Joseph died. However, family records made in 1880 and preserved by descendants of Marinda Betsey Hill give the date of 1791 for the second Joseph’s birth.

The census subsequently shows dates of 1792 and 1793 for Joseph’s birth and his obituary indicates 1790.

Note that patriarch John Hill’s burial is likely in the Hill Farm Family Cemetery listed on FindAGrave. He never migrated to Vermont although at least five of his sons lived, at least for some time, in Addison County.

SAMUEL HILL (John #5, Henry, William, William), b. 10 Apr 1765 Great Barrington NH, d. 14 Dec 1843 Starksboro VT, m. 31 May 1791 Louden NH, his cousin, Sarah “Sally”, dau. of Lionel & Martha (Mitchell) WORTH, b. 23 Nov 1768 Louden NH, d. 26 Apr 1843 Starksboro VT. The Hill burial plot is in the Harry Hallock-Brown Hill Cem. in Starksboro. His tombstone reads: Far from affliction toil & care // The happy soul is fled // The breathless clay shall slumber here // among the silent dead.”  Her tombstone reads:  “Beneath this clod in peaceful sleep // Her mortal body lies // Surviving friends for her do weep // For virtue never dies.”

Brown Hill cem

Cousin Rick Norton tells us that marker above is not a gravestone for an individual, but a monument to the early Hill family members and looks like a tree with it’s limbs cut off.  He calls this the Hillsboro Road Cemetery.

Samuel Hill d 1843

The Brown Hill Cemetery is in a fairly remote location.

Brown hill cem map

Bertha Hanson in writing about the Hillsboro section of Starksboro which was quoted previously under John Hill #5, said of Samuel that “The first deed to property in this area was to Samuel Hill of Barrington, New Hampshire, on June 22, 1798, recorded in Sep.  This was to land near the former Hillsboro school house.”  To that same article was added the following:

According to tradition, Samuel moved his goods through the woods from New Hampshire on a hand sled. At the time he began clearing his land, the nearest neighbor was three miles away.  In 1805 he became the second man to represent Starksboro in the state legislature.

A similar account is also found in H. P. Smith, ed., History of Addison County Vermont, (D. Mason & Co., Syracuse NY, 1886), p. 632:

Samuel Hill, from Barnstead, N.H., moved his goods through the forest on a hand-sled in 1805, and located upon the farm now occupied by Patrick Leonard and the latter’s son-in-law, John Welch, in the locality now known as ‘Hillsboro.’ Here three miles from any human habitation, he cut the first stick of timber on that farm.  During his long life in Starksboro he held most of the town offices and was the first captain of the militia.  His son Richard reared a family of eleven children, ten of whom survive, their aggregate ages amounting to over 566 years.”

He lived in Starksboro for a while with no family. He owned and operated a saw mill at the “Twin Bridges” in Hillsboro.  The story is told that he worked for someone in the Starksboro village area (possibly a Mr. Bushnell) for a sheep which he carried home on his shoulders.

The Samuel Hill house which no longer exists was similar to the Lemuel Hill house being a large two story building with a central doorway opening into a small hall from which the stairs ascended to the second floor. The Thibault family when they lived in Hillsboro called this house in their neighborhood “the hotel.”  It was still standing in the 1920’s forlorn and empty.

Samuel was a man of strong and marked characteristics, and an earnest working in whatever effort was made to advance the interest of the town. In 1805 he became the second man to represent Starksboro in the state legislature.  Although Free Will Baptist Quarterly Meetings were held in his barn on occasion, Samuel & Sarah were faithful and earnest members of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Starksboro.  He was elected as Grand Juror 1808-9, selectman 1808-10.

An attempt to solidify the family was evidently made at one time as there is a monument of the Hill Reunion erected on top of the ledges going south on Route 116 from Starksboro village. The monument reads:

Hill Reunion – Organized in 1890 – The first settlement of Hills in Starksboro, Vermont, in 1805, in memory of and in honor to past, present, and future Hills and their kindred.

Hill Reunion

Photo by Don Shall

Rich Norton during his visit took a picture of the Hill hill overlooking Starksboro from Hillsboro Road where the Hill family members settled.

Hillsboro road looking at hill where Hills settled

John Burbank’s Hill Family Research

The following information was provided in various communications with John Burbank.

The Hill family is numerous in this area.  Starksboro, the next town north of Bristol on Rt. 116 has an area known as Hillsboro.  Of the numerous Hill’s in that town some have been connected but others have not.  Joseph is one of our unconnected branches and I don’t know any more about his family other than Rachel’s marriage date and the record that her mother was Naby.

John Hill’s sons moved from Barrington, New Hampshire to Addison County, Vermont.

The cemetery is now pretty much in the woods and not too far from my Dad’s farm going up over the mountain by foot or by a jeep road. The Mason Hill Cemetery is also located on a rather primitive hill road in another part of Starksboro. Joseph Hill II and his wife Sarah Mason are buried there.

Process of Elimination

Sometimes genealogy turns into sleuthing work, and that’s exactly what happened in “The Case of the Three Joseph Hills.”

We know that Joseph was in New Hampshire when his father died in 1804 and was age 10 or older, possibly as old as 17, but not yet 21. Some of Joseph’s brothers subsequently settled in Addison County, Vermont.  He likely came with one of his brothers sometime between 1804 and 1813 or 1814 when he was married.  He may have been living in Vermont in the 1810 census, but we don’t know.  Given his father’s verbiage in his will, “stay and serve his time out,” he may have stayed in New Hampshire until he obtained his inheritance, which means he would have come to Vermont between 1811 and 1814, about the time he married, given that what few records we do have indicate he was born between 1790 and 1793.

I set about to try and find Joseph.

First, I found all of the Joseph Hills in 1820 in Maine, Vermont and New Hampshire and accounted for them in 1830, removing men who did not have a daughter in 1820 that was born circa 1815 (which would be the under 10 category in 1820). The one and only piece of information we knew about Joseph in 1820 is that he had at least one daughter who was 5 or 6 years old.

That leaves only two men found in the 1820 census as the candidate for Joseph Hill, father of Rachel. Those men were the Joseph living in Caladonia and the one in Starksboro, Vermont.  Caladonia is roughly 90 miles from Starksboro, and we know that in 1815 Rachel was born in Bristol, so this eliminates the Caladonia Joseph.  In 1820, our Joseph was in Starksboro, probably in the Hillsboro part of Starksboro.

In 1830 there was no Joseph in Caledonia and there were 3 in the Starksboro area, as compared with 1 in 1820, so they had to come from someplace.

The 3 Starksboro area Josephs as extracted from the Hill genealogy compiled by Bertha Hanson:

1. Joseph D. Hill – (William #8, John, Henry, William, William), b. c1793 Barnstead, NH, d. 2 Mar 1869 Lincoln, VT of fever, m. Sarah Mason, dau. of David & Jemima (French) Mason, b. c1800 VT, d. 20 Apr. 1841 Starksboro VT. Joseph and Sarah are buried in the Mason Hill Cem., Starksboro VT. He was a farmer and stone mason.

In 1850 census, this Joseph is living with William W. and his wife Mandana and his son Cyrus. He is age 56 and is reported to be born in Vermont.  His wife is apparently dead and his other children not in the household.

Utilizing Bertha’s information about his children, incorporated into the chart below, and the 1830 census records, I reconstructed his family.  In the 1830 census in Starksboro, he is listed as Joseph 2, probably indicating that is the younger of the two Starksboro Joseph’s.

Joseph D Hill family reconstruct 2

Joseph 1 is not Rachel’s father.  Rachel’s mother’s name is not Sarah.

Let’s look at the second man named Joseph Hill in Addison County, according to Bertha and John’s records:

2. Joseph Hill, Parents unknown, born 1790 Farmington, NH, d. 10 Nov 1853 Starksboro VT. m. 1 Apr 1817 Starksboro VT Catherine/Katherine Hill, dau. of Samuel & Sarah (Worth) Hill. She was b. 15 Apr 1796 Farmington NH, d. 13 Mar 1872 Starksboro VT. They were married by Samuel Hill, JP. They are buried in the Hillsboro Cem., row 2, Starksboro VT. Her name is spelled as Katherine on the gravestones of her children but as Catherine on her own.

Joseph Hill d 1853

Photo contributed by Rick Norton.

An obituary written by R. M. Minard in The Morning Star, a Freewill Baptist paper said:

In 1823 she gave her heart to the Saviour and united with the M. E. church and remained in it until 1844, when she left it and joined the F. B. church in this town and continued a worthy member of it until death. God gave her seven children, and in answer to her fervent prayer she saw them all converted and united with the church she loved so well.

The statement about seven children obviously must refer to those who made it to maturity.

Joseph and Catherine, his wife, were probably cousins but his line has not been established. Bertha (Brown) Hanson says that his picture leads her to believe that he was a fairly close relative to the other Starksboro Hill’s.

The following is a summary Bertha Hanson’s information plus the 1850 census information mapped to the 1830 census for this Joseph in Starksboro. There is a smudge for females “under 5” as if they weren’t sure they could count this child, plus they seem to be one short in that category if the birth dates we have are correct.

Joseph 1790 Family reconstruct

Joseph 2 is not Rachel’s father because Rachel’s mother’s name was not Katherine.

1840 and 1850 for Joseph 1 and 2

By 1840, the Joseph in Bristol Township is showing with 8 family members, probably Joseph 2, above.  The Joseph in Starksboro with 11 children living beside William, likely his father, is most probably Joseph 1.

In 1850, we also have two Joseph’s. One is clearly Joseph 2, living with wife Catherine with six of his children still living at home. He is noted as being born in New Hampshire, so we know this is one of the Joseph’s who arrived between the 1820 and 1830 census.

The other 1850 Joseph appears to be Joseph D., a stone mason born in 1793 because we find him living with his son William D. who had married a woman named Mandana.

This makes sense, because we know that by 1850, our third man named Joseph, below, has moved west.

Joseph 3, Known as “The Second Joseph”

Now for the confusing part.  The third Joseph in Addison County is nicknamed “The Second Joseph” because he was the second son named Joseph born to his parents.  Yes, I know it’s confusing, especially for the ancestor who was supposed to be easy!

3.  The Second Joseph (second Joseph, the son of John#5), b. 2 Sep. 1791 (Roberta’s note – or 1790, 1792 or 1793) probably in Barrington NH.

This is the strangest naming situation I think I’ve ever come across. John Hill (#5) had a son, Joseph, who was born in 1763 and who died Sept. 24, 1790.  He and his wife then name another son, possibly born before the death of the first Joseph in 1790, or about that time, Joseph.  It’s not terribly unusual for a couple to name a second child the same name as a child who died young, but I’ve never seen someone name their last child after their first child who lived to be 27 years old and had a family.

I began the identification of this Joseph by reconstructing the 1830 census.

In 1830 there are two other Joseph Hills living in Addison County. One is identified as living in Bristol Township who, based on census reconstruction, is my first choice, but neither the Bristol nor Starksboro families fit our information exactly.  Neither show a daughter as Rachel’s age of 15, so apparently Rachel was counted as age 14.  Neither shows a daughter in the 15-19 year old female column but both have a younger daughter in the age 10-14 column.

By process of elimination of Joseph 1 and Joseph 2, above, the family of Joseph 3 aka The Second Joseph, is accounted for as follows in 1830.

second Joseph family reconstructed

This family had 7 children, 3 boys and 4 girls, including Rachel.

Mrs. Hanson’s papers state concerning Joseph Hill, the younger, now also known as “The Second Joseph,” is “said to have settled in Waukegan, Ill. and died there.”

My first reaction when I saw that statement was that it certainly needs to be researched – by someone, not me. Then I wondered who said it!  My next reaction was that it was probably wrong.  But then I reconsidered, thinking that no one would pull the location of Waukegan, Illinois out of thin air, and it’s very specific.  It’s not like Waukegan was next door or even a name someone in Vermont would know.  Chicago, maybe, but Waukegan, not likely.

This Second Joseph seemed to be the best bet and only fit left for my Joseph especially since he just happened to be the only stone left unturned after the other two Joseph’s had been eliminated by virtue of their wives.  It slowly dawned on me that it was going to be me to do that research after all. I decided to take the “long shot” look in Waukegan, Illinois. I knew, just knew, I was going on a wild goose chase, but there were no local geese left to chase.

So off to Waukegan, I half-heartedly went, in the census.

What I found stunned me.

Lo and behold, I found Joseph Hill and his wife Nabby, the parents of Rachel Levina Hill, in Waukegon, Lake County, Illinois in the 1850 and 1860 census. I was simply dumbstruck.  This was the last thing I expected to find and the last place I expected to find them.

Thank you Bertha!

Joseph and Nabby’s youngest child was with them in 1850, Rollin C. Hill born April 16, 1836 in Vermont and died December 24, 1918 in Waukegan, Lake County, Illinois. In 1851 he married Louisa Jane Wright.

Joseph and Nabby Hill are not the parents of a Thomas E. Hill also found in Waukegan, Lake County, Illinois born in 1832 in Vermont. He was an author and his bio states that he was born in Bennington, Vermont.

I cannot find Joseph and Nabby in the 1840 census.

In 1850, Joseph and Nabby are in the city of Waukegan, Lake County, Illinois. He is a shingle maker and they own $200 worth of real estate.  He tells us he was born in New Hampshire in 1793.

1850 Waukegan census

In 1860, Joseph still lives in the same city and he is shown as a laborer with no property, born in 1792.

Waukegan 1860 census

But, is this our Joseph Hill, for sure?  It would seem unlikely that two Joseph Hills in Addison County, Vermont, out of 3, would have a wife named Nabby – and a family oral history of going to Waukegan, Illinois.  In fact, we know the wives names of the other Joseph Hills in Addison County, and their wives are not named Nabby, which is one of the pieces of information we utilized to eliminate them as “our” Joseph.

Rachel’s Father is Joseph 3, Known as The Second Joseph

So in summary, by process of elimination, Rachel is the daughter of Joseph number 3, above.  He was known as “The Second Joseph” and moved west sometime after 1836 but probably before 1840.  He was probably the Joseph in Bristol Township in 1830, although the Joseph in Starksboro and in Bristol Township had families who were very similarly constructed.  The Joseph of Starksboro had 4 sons and 3 daughters and the Joseph of Bristol had 3 sons and 4 daughters. There is very little difference in these families and it’s difficult to tell them apart in the 1830 census.  I also found it remarkable that Rachel’s middle name is Levina and Joseph of Starksboro’s eldest daughter’s name is Alvina.  This could be a family naming pattern.  I will watch for a female of a similar name upstream.

Regardless of who was who in 1830, Rachel’s father, Joseph, by process of elimination, had to have been the Joseph in 1820 living in Starksboro.

I have a feeling that if these families could have been further clarified, Bertha would probably have done so.

The Landscape

Starksboro farm

A farm garden in Starksboro, Vermont taking advantage of the rock outcroppings in the beautiful landscape.  Cousin Rick says the land here is very rocky and claylike, not good for farming.

Rick Norton took several photos during a visit in 2012.  In the photo below, he is looking north into Starksboro from Big Hollow Road.

Starksboro N from 116 and Big Hollow Road

Looking towards the village of Starksboro from Hillsboro Road and 116.

Starksboro look N toward village at 116 and Hillsboro rd

Rick says that in this view of Starksboro, the building on the left was once a store operated by the Hill family.

Starksboro, Hill store on left

Starksboro from the south.

Starksboro from south

Sylvanus Hill

I originally thought that Sylvanus Hill might have been the brother of Rachel Levina Hill.  That has been proven untrue.  Sylvanus is the son of Joseph 2 whose wife is Catherine Hill and whose father is unknown.  However, Sylvanus and his father are obviously related in some way to Second Joseph, son of John #5.

However, since I have photos of Sylvanus and his wife, and no photos of any other early Hill family members, I have included Sylvanus’ information here.  He and Second Joseph who moved to Waukegan, Illinois are definitely cousins, but to what degree is undetermined.  Based on what we do know, they are at least first cousins once removed or more distantly related.

Sylvanus Hill tree

The photos below are labeled Sylvanus Hill and Mrs. Sylvanus Hill. They were purchased at the Champlain Valley Antique Center.  Hopefully, their descendants will find these photos and they will find their way back home.

Sylvanus Hill and wife

I wonder if The Second Joseph looked anything like Sylvanus?

Starksboro, Vermont to Otsego, New York to Waukegan, Illinois

The next place to research was Waukegan, Illinois, where I ventured in July of 2009.  But the path to Waukegan was not direct for Joseph.

Their journey to Waukegan, based on information found in Illinois, began in about 1842, in Oswego, New York where they lived after leaving Vermont and before arriving in Illinois. The move from Vermont to Illinois apparently was done in segments and not all at once.

Starksboro to Waukegan

Joseph Hill and Nabby Hall were married sometime about 1814 most likely in Starksboro, Addison County, Vermont where Nabby’s parents, Gershom Hall and Dorcas Richardson lived.

Joseph and Nabby’s daughter, Rachel Levina Hill was born in Addison County, Vermont in April 1814 or 1815, depending on which record you believe.  Rachel married Anthony Lore in 1831 in Starksboro, Vermont.  Rachel and Anthony moved to New York by 1835, but we’re not sure where.  Perhaps they were with or near her parents, although her parents were still in Vermont in 1836 when their son Rollin was born.

We can presume that in 1831 when Rachel Hill married Anthony Lore, her parents were still living in Addison County, Vermont.

However, from 1831 until I found their obituary information, and that of their son, in Waukegan, Illinois in 2009, no one knew anything more about Joseph and Naby (also spelled Nabby, probably short for Abigail) Hill.  Their obituaries informed us about time spent in Oswego, New York.

Two hundred and fifty miles by wagon is not a comfortable trip.  Wagons tend to travel about 10 miles a day in hilly terrain.  That entire region between Starksboro and Oswego is hilly to mountainous.  It would have taken them roughly 25 days to travel from Starksboro, Vermont to Oswego, New York.  They might have lived there in the 1840 census, but although there are Hill families in Oswego, we don’t’ find Joseph, or at least not one that appears to be the correct age.  There are two Josephs back in Addison County, but they appear to be Joseph 1 and Joseph 2, so we don’t know where our Joseph 3, aka, The Second Joseph, was living in 1840. Maybe they were literally “on the wagon” rolling westward when the 1840 census was taken.

Oswego 1855

This old map from 1855 shows what Oswego, on the shores of Lake Ontario, looked like about the time that Joseph and Nabby lived there.

Oswego was an important military town in its early days. The British occupied the area during the early 1700’s and built Fort Oswego and later Fort Ontario. Fort Ontario is clearly visible on the left cliff of the map. In the mid-1800’s, Oswego quickly adapted to the current hydrotherapy movement and established the Oswego Water Cure health spa.  I have never thought of an ancestor as potentially connected with a spa or spa area of any sort.  I wonder if Joseph had any connection.

The steamer “Northerner” is featured in the foreground. It’s possible the next leg of Joseph’s journey was by steamer, but that would have been the “long way” around through all of the Great Lakes.  More likely, the next leg of his journey was by wagon as well.

If the trip from Vermont to New York was long, the one from New York to Waukegan was worse.  That second trip was about 725 miles and would have taken them about 72 days (more than 10 weeks), maybe slightly less if they made good time, or longer if they had trouble, like wagon wheels breaking or mud or other hazards.  Everything they owned would have been packed in that wagon, plus at least the two children that we know made the journey with them.  They likely had more children that we don’t know about, as indicated by the 1830 census.  They may also have left married children behind, never to see them again.

We can be sure they never saw Rachel again, as she died in Warren County, PA between 1870 and 1880, around the same time as her parents.  We don’t know if they said their goodbye’s to Rachel in New York in the mid-1840s as they left for Illinois or in Vermont in the early 1830s as she left for New York with her new husband.

Regardless, Rachel would have been someplace between 15 or 16 and 29 years old when Joseph and Nabby last saw a daughter that had a lot of life left before her – and who would desperately need her parents and family in years to come.  I wonder if they were notified of her death, or she of theirs, and if they wrote letters in the intervening years.

Both Nabby and Rollin’s obituaries in Waukegan give us more information, although neither gives us Nabby’s maiden name.  One tells us that they came to Waukegan in 1842 and the other says they arrived in 1845.  Their daughter, Lucia was married in Waukegan in November of 1844, so they assuredly lived there by that time and Lucia had time to meet an eligible young man, fall in love, and become engaged.  Of course, remembering back when I was a teenage girl, that could all have occurred within about 2 weeks.

Joseph and Nabby would have traveled west from Oswego which was located on Lake Ontario to Buffalo, New York, then circled South around Lake Erie, crossed from Lake Erie to Lake Michigan at about the Indiana/Michigan border, then rounded the tip of Lake Michigan until they reached Waukegan, which at that time was called Little Fort, Illinois.  In May of 1847, someone drew a picture of what Little Fort looked like. In 1849, Little Fort was renamed Waukegan.

Little Fort, Illinois

The population in Little Fort in 1844 was 150, 152 in 1845, 759 in 1846, 1237 in 1847 and 2025 in 1848.  They had a veritable population explosion in 3 years.  Whether Joseph and Naby arrived in 1842 or 1844, there weren’t many people in Little Fort at that time – so Lucia didn’t have a lot of bachelors to choose from.

One of Waukegan’s largest imports was shingles and shingle bolts.  Joseph Hill was a shingle maker, so this was probably a great opportunity for him and probably why they selected Waukegan, although I wonder how they even heard of such a small village in Illinois in the first place.

Wooden shingles were hand made to cover both roofs and the outsides of homes.  Joseph’s handiwork was probably installed on many of the homes that were built for the new residents descending on Little Fort.

wooden shingles

This 1840s building sports a wooden shingle roof.

Joseph and Naby were also recorded in the 1860 census, but Joseph was in his late 60s, nearing 70, by that time.  He was born between 1790 and 1793 in New Hampshire and Naby was born in 1792/1793 in Connecticut.  Joseph gives his age in the 1860 census as 68 years of age.  He has no real estate and no personal cash or anything of value.  He lists himself as a laborer, so at age 68, he is still working.

In the 1870 census, I found a Jo and Nabba Hilon in Hanover, Cook County, Illinois, age 77 and 79, respectively, he born in England and she born in Connecticut. Hanover is  about 35 miles from Waukegan.  I’m not positive this is them, but I hate to think of Joseph performing farm labor at age 79.

Joseph died in 1871, on March 16th.  Waukegan’s paper says he was 80 years and 6 months, which would put his birth in September of 1790 if that was accurate.  This month and year also answers one of the long-standing questions about The Second Joseph. His oldest brother, the first Joseph, died on September 24, 1790.  The Second Joseph was named in honor of his brother, Joseph, just recently deceased.  Now a part of me has to wonder if the two Joseph’s departed and arrived on the same day, hence, why The Second Joseph was named Joseph.  The elder Joseph did not have a son named Joseph.

An aha moment. This “naming” is no longer “strange” but makes sense, well, more sense anyway.

In 1871, there was no obituary as we think of them today, for Joseph, just a death announcement in the local paper.

The Waukegan Weekly Gazette published March 18, 1871 states that “Joseph Hill, of this city, age 80 years and 6 months, died on the 17th instant.”  Instant means this month.

Peterson Funeral Home

Waukegan had a funeral home by then, Peterson’s, which still exists in a wonderful grand old home. Their records indicate that Joseph was buried in Oakwood Cemetery, but no lot number is given.

Peterson Funeral home information:

Age 80
Died of old age.
March 16 1871
lived in Waukegan
buried at Oakwood, nothing more
Book A March 16 1871

Joseph’s daughter, Lucia lost her husband in 1854, before either of her parents died and after only a decade of marriage.

A cemetery lot had been purchased for the family in 1851 when the cemetery was first organized.  The lot had room for 8 graves, so it’s very likely that indeed Joseph and Naby are buried on the same lot with Lucia, her husband and at least two of their children.  The stone of one of the children is shown, below.

Cemetery Weaver

Based on what is known about the cemetery, the burials and the locations with no stones, it’s most likely that Joseph and Nabby are buried in this lovely patch of grass, below.

Cemetery Hill

Within sight, just a few feet away, Rollin is buried as well, having died in the 1918 flu epidemic.  He is buried with his wife who predeceased him in death on her family’s plot.

Cemetery Rollin

Naby died in 1874 and had been living with her daughter Lucia at the time of her death, according to her obituary. The 1871 City Directory even tells us where the daughter was living.  The house still stands.  Peterson’s Funeral Home again tells us she was buried in Oakwood, but no lot number unfortunately.

When you can’t find the location in the cemetery, just set up shop and check FindAGrave on the trunk of your car! Genealogists do whatever is necessary!

Cemetery findagrave

The cemetery is beautiful, overlooking Lake Michigan in the distance. Joseph spent his entire life, it seems, bordering one lake or another.  Rollin is buried in the clump of day lilies, below with the lake in the background.

Cemetery Lake Michigan

Rollin’s obituary tells us more though, as it tells us that Rollin was the last mail stage driver from Waukegan to Chicago.  We know that the train began running in 1855, so he would have no longer driven the stage back and forth to pick up mail.  After that, Rollin became a carpenter and lived most of his life across from the old Court House.  I’m sure he wanted to be right downtown, as the courthouse square was the center of activity in towns of yesteryear.  Everyone went to town to transact business and downtown was a lively bustling place.

Waukegan downtown

Rollin’s obituary also tells us that his first residence “in this vicinity was on a farm on the present site of Great Lakes.”

Great Lakes refers to the Naval Station built in 1906, and this could be where Joseph and Nabby first lived when they arrived. It’s about 3 miles south of present day Waukegan.

Great Lakes Center

For early settlers, this would have been a prime location because it’s located on a creek.

Great Lakes map

Mysteries Remain

While we’ve pieced as much of the life of Joseph together as we can, some mysteries still remain.  Did Joseph and Nabby have other children besides Rachel born in 1815 and Lucia and Rollen born in 1827 and 1836?  Assuredly they did. The census tells of at least 7 by 1830.  Surely some of those children survived.  Women tended to have children every 2 years or so during that timeframe, so we could assume that they had approximately 9 children, given that at least one was born after 1830.  We can probably also presume that not all of those children survived to adulthood.

Based on the 1830 census numbers and their known children, we know of 4 male children and 4 female children, and that’s assuming that only Rollin was born after the 1830 census, which is probably not a legitimate assumption. They could have had 2 or 3 additional children between 1830 and 1836.

In the 1860 census in Waukegan, we find 3 other male Hills who might be connected, although I’ve eliminated at least one of those.  However, there is a Thomas E. Hill who lived one door from Lucia who is a writing teacher who might very well be related, possibly a brother.  He was born in 1832 in Vermont, so is a promising candidate, although I’m unable to find him in the 1850 census.

On an 1861 map, his residence is draw at the corner of Hoyt and Julian. Hoyt is today North Street.  This small house looks to have been his and Lucia lived on one side or the other.

Julian at Hoyt

In the 1900 census, Lucia is shown at 315 Julian Street, so either she moved or the houses have been renumbered, because today the homes above are in the 500 block.

The rest of the Hill men in Waukegan in 1860 were born in New York, and while Joseph and Naby did live there, if indeed Rollen was born in Vermont, and was their youngest child, then it’s unlikely that they moved back and forth from VT to NY to VT to NY.  Moving was not simple.

It’s unlikely that Joseph or Naby Hill had a will.  Joseph had nothing of value in the 1860 census, and he probably didn’t acquire anything between 1860 and 1870 as he got older and could work less.  Naby lived with her daughter, Lucia, before her death in 1874 and likely had contributed anything she had to their household.

I know I checked on wills and probate before, although I do not have a specific note in my files, so I am re-verifying this information.  I have discovered while doing these ancestor articles that by revisiting and confirming my own information, I have found and corrected errors, and sometimes information that was not available before is available now.

Today, Waukegan is a thriving community made up of a harbor, port authority, beach, Abbott Labs and the Great Lakes Navel Training Station.  Although it is north of Chicago, and clearly a Chicago suburb, it has a flavor of its own and a redevelopment effort has revitalized much of the downtown area.

By Éovart Caçeir - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0

By Éovart Caçeir – Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0

This lovely town was built with the labor of our ancestors, beginning back when it was Little Fort.  It’s nice that the cemetery is peaceful and overlooks the harbor.  Joseph and Naby Hill lived most of their lives, it seems, in close proximity to one of the Great Lakes.  It’s fitting that they spend eternity overlooking the shimmering blue waters of Lake Michigan as well.

Lake Michigan

Military Service

Trying to obtain additional information about the Joseph Hill from Vermont who served in the War of 1812 had been an exercise in frustration. I ordered his records from the National Archives in November of 2014, only to be informed they could not find his records.  However, on Fold3.com, records for a Joseph Hill from Vermont are listed thus with file number 55-34054 and the bounty land warrant as well.

Joseph Hill 1812

Of course, the question remains as to whether our Joseph Hill served in the war, or if it as one of the other Joseph Hills. Given that there is a Bounty Land warrant, when the War of 1812 file scanning is completed, I should be able to obtain this information.  The National Archives may not be able to find the file, but apparently Fold3 did.

Joseph Hill 1812 records

The Lake County, Illinois GenWeb site has a list of military pensioners, and Joseph is not among them, but then again, he may never have applied for a pension.

It’s also possible Joseph might have served out of New Hampshire, but I did not find any evidence for service there.  The one Joseph Hill who did serve from New Hampshire also requested a pension from there in 1878.

If he was born in September 1790, he would have been 22 years old and unmarried, ripe pickins in 1812.

One tidbit that may or may not be relevant is that this is the same unit in which Joseph’s wife’s brothers, Joel and Edmund Hall served.

DNA Matching

DNA suggestions that we actually do have the correct Hill family has come in two different forms.

At Ancestry, I have matches with descendants of Joseph Hill and his wife, Nabby. Unfortunately, they have not downloaded to GedMatch, so I can’t tell you how we match, which means I also can’t triangulate that DNA to others.  This comes in the category of “so close but so far away” or a new form of genealogical torture that should be probihited in the Geneva convention.

For a while at Ancestry, I was part of the Joseph Hill and Nabby Hall Circle too. I don’t know if I’m simply not a member anymore, or if the Circle has gone away entirely, but regardless, the Circle is gone from my page and has been for months.  Wonderful…now I have Circle anxiety.

However, I do match several other people who descend from Nabby Hall’s line as well as Joseph’s father’s line, and not just at Ancestry thankfully.

Between these various pieces of DNA and other evidence, I do feel confident we have identified the correct couple as the parents of Rachel Levina Hill – after tracking them from Starksboro, Vermont to Waukegan, Illinois, a place I would never have looked without the notes from Bertha Hanson’s work.

Sometimes, that one critical sentence is all that it takes, even post-humously. Thank you Bertha!!!

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Family Tree DNA and GedMatch Dustup

crystal ball

The Crystal Ball by John William Waterhouse

It’s really unfortunate that a “conversation” that should have been private has gone public, but it has and there is no closing the barn door after the cow has left.

Genetic genealogy, and genealogy, is a highly emotional topic. Many of us feel very strongly, myself included.  After all, it’s our ancestors, flesh and blood we’re talking about.

I know that many people look to my blog for direction and commentary on these matters, so I feel obligated to say something.

For those who are not aware, in the past few days, GedMatch has stopped accepting Family Tree DNA autosomal data file uploads.  Circumstances and timing of events beyond that are murky at best and involve a bit of a “he said – she said” type of situation.  So, I’m not going to fuel any flames by reposting anything because I can’t verify the timing or order since I was not online when it occurred.  If you are a GedMatch user, you can see their announcement and commentary, which is what sparked the public portion of this issue, after signing on to your account and you can see Family Tree DNA’s responses and commentary to GedMatch’s posting on their Facebook page.

In summary, Family Tree DNA became aware of a potential security issue relative to their customer information at GedMatch and reached out to GedMatch to resolve the issue.  From that point forward, what actually happened is unclear, is only known to the “people in the room” at the time and judging from the outcome, may well involve some confusion or misinterpretation.  In any event, the resolution did not occur and GedMatch posted that they were no longer accepting uploads from Family Tree DNA.  (For the record, I am not one of the “people in the room,” so I, like you, don’t know.)

Unfortunately, this announcement fueled rampant speculation and outrage online and does nothing to resolve the potential problem for people whose kits are already being utilized on GedMatch.

So, here’s what I can and can’t tell you, and why.

What I can tell you:

This is not an issue with an individual having or sharing their DNA files.  You can still download your autosomal DNA files from Family Tree DNA.  This is not about paternalism or someone telling you what you should or shouldn’t do.  This is not about the DNA itself.  This is about security and privacy.  Period.

What I can’t tell you:

Having worked in a technology industry for years, I cannot responsibly tell you “the problem,” at least not until it’s resolved, or why it’s a potential problem, because it would then become open season for people to attempt to exploit the potential problem. And yes, they would try, in a heartbeat – just because.  This is why neither GedMatch nor Family Tree DNA have elaborated on this part of the issue.  They are being responsible, but unfortunately, their intentional and responsible ambiguity is feeding rather wild speculation in the larger community – and none of it positive.

No Crystal Ball

No one has a crystal ball. What is perfectly fine one day may not be the next due to changes beyond any one individual or firm’s control.  What is completely secure under one circumstance may not be when you add another vendor or service into the mix.  It happens continually in our high-tech world and it’s not intentional or due to negligence on anyone’s part.  Sometimes issues or potential issues don’t become evident immediately.  When they do, it’s incumbent upon the involved parties to resolve the problem or potential problem.  Where there is more than one party involved, it makes the situation inherently more difficult and calls for cooperation, which is where we are today.

What To Do

The good thing about social media is that it makes communications immediate. The bad thing about social media is that it’s very easy for misinformation and speculation to run like wildfire and to quickly take on the context of fact, fuel everyone’s emotions, and for a mob mentality to take over.  Don’t believe me?  Just look at the political rhetoric and associated “spin” this year, regardless of your position.

Here’s the bottom line. No one really knows what is going on.  Even the parties on both sides really only know “their” side and there are two sides to every story.  For outsiders, which means all of us, to jump into the fray is like the distant family taking sides in a family squabble.  Almost everyone has the information wrong, or only part of the information, but everyone has a very strong opinion based on what they think they know.  Agendas come into play and it gets ugly, very ugly, very quickly, which is again, where we are today.  I have been utterly horrified at some of the vitriol I’ve seen online.

The people who have figured out the problem, and there are a few, generally technology professionals, are doing what they should do and keeping their mouths shut. Let me translate this – they are more concerned for our security and well-being than the perception of the online community that they were “right.”   To those people, from all of us, thank you for your professionalism.

The other bad thing about social media is that even when the problem goes away, the hard feelings generated by speculation and misinformation don’t. The damage done by jumping to early, incorrect conclusions and fueling vilifying social rhetoric may never be undone either.  Damaging, or attempting to damage either party socially or otherwise is not beneficial to a resolution and may actually hinder the resolution that we want to see.  This ultimately damages all of genetic genealogy.

What I’m saying is this: We can’t do anything to actively “help” but we can certainly negatively impact the situation.  We really don’t know what is going on, and as such, should not be speculating or arriving at premature conclusions.  Rampant speculation is not helpful, is inaccurate and has the potential to make the situation much worse.  As a community, we need to give these firms some time and space without fueling the emotional flames which may indeed make their negotiations or communications, or whatever needs to happen, more difficult.

So, in the vernacular of my parenting, I’m asking us all to calm down, take a deep breath and a personal timeout:)  Let’s find something else fun and productive to do for a few days and leave GedMatch and Family Tree DNA alone, relative to this topic.  They have both stated that they want to resolve this situation.  Both of the companies are listening to us, are well-intentioned and engaged, which is far more than we receive from other companies in this field.  What more can we ask at this point?

I have every confidence that both of these firms are committed to genetic genealogists and want to resolve this issue – and that they will, given some time and space out from under the microscope and spotlight.  I’m sure they understand how the community feels regarding this issue – so at this point there is no need to say any more unless the issue isn’t resolved.

In this same vein, I apologize to my sane and rational commenters, but the comments portion of this blog posting is closed. I do not want to add to the online rhetorical issue.  If you have something to say to either party, then send it, in a polite and civil manner that would not embarrass your grandmother, directly to the parties involved.

Update 3-19-2016 – A joint announcement from GedMatch and Family Tree DNA this afternoon:

Family Tree DNA and GEDmatch jointly announce that we are in serious conversations regarding issues that have resulted in GEDmatch discontinuing uploads of FTDNA data. Both companies recognize the importance of these talks to their customers and are committed to quickly resolve differences. We regret any inconvenience that may have been caused and assure our users that our primary focus and efforts are geared toward your benefit.

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Closing Up Shop at 23andMe and the Trap

How could a DNA testing company be more unfriendly towards genealogists? I don’t know, but if you can think of something, I’m sure 23andMe will implement it.

23andMe has always been the “difficult” company to deal with, adding layers upon confusing layers of authorizations and requests to communicate and share DNA matching results, but the last few months, as far as I’m concerned have put lots of nails in their coffin.

Recently, the final nail went in.

The “upgrade,” and I use that term very loosely, began months ago at 23andMe amid something akin to a meltdown.  Four months later, nothing has improved.  None of the accounts that I manage have been transferred to the new format, communications have been nil and needless to say, any genealogical work has died on the vine for lack of water.

The transition that was supposed to be done by year end isn’t, and no word from 23andMe.

I’ve decided that with the other two testing companies, meaning Family Tree DNA and Ancestry, combined with GedMatch, that I really don’t need the hassles and frustrations inherent in 23andMe anymore.  This is, after all, supposed to be fun.

I signed on at 23andMe to clean up one of my accounts in preparation for deleting it.  The reason I was going to delete my kit is because you cannot opt out of their research entirely, and I didn’t want to simply abandon the kit at 23andMe, allowing their continued use but giving up on my end due to their decisions and business practices relative to genetic genealogy.

So, I signed in like normal, using the e-mail account that I used for this kit as my user ID and then my password.

23andme signin

Little did I know the trap 23andMe has set, but I soon found out.

I decided to check matches one last time and download the V2 data file.  I don’t ever expect to need this data, but just in case.  So I started by downloading the raw data.

In order to download a raw data file, first you have to find the option, hidden under the the drop downs, under your name, under “browse raw data.”

23andMe browse raw data

When you click on the download option, you then have to re-enter your password (hint, you could not be at this screen had you not already entered your password correctly) and then you also have to answer a secret question.

23andMe secret question

Apparently you need to be “extra protected” against yourself and downloading your own raw data.

But next comes the trap.

The Trap

Apparently 23andMe has implemented some sort of “internal timer” and if you haven’t signed in for awhile, they refuse to allow you access to your data, even AFTER you have signed in with the correct e-mail and password, then entered your password again, then entered your secret answer correctly. That’s 4 times you’ve authenticated that you are you – but that is apparently not good enough.

They insisted on sending an e-mail to my e-mail account to verify access. Well, I hate to tell you, but I abandoned that e-mail account long ago.  But there was no reason to change the login at 23andMe to something different because the person who initially took this test is no longer interested in the results and hasn’t been in quite some time.

23andMe confirm e-mail

So I clicked on “send the verification” because I had no choice, hoping that perhaps I could then go and recover the password for that old e-mail account and sign in to that old account just long enough to verify the password. No such luck.

23andme not receiving e-mail

So, the next day, I decided to sign in to 23andMe again to see if I could somehow figure out how to change the e-mail to my current e-mail, but now I’m effectively locked out of my own account until the verification comes back…which of course it never will because it was sent to the old e-mail address that I couldn’t recover.

I clicked on the option for “not receiving the confirmation e-mails.”

23andme reset e-mail

Great – it gave me the option of resetting the e-mail. I entered my current e-mail, which is the same e-mail for the rest of the accounts I manage and received this lovely error message.

23andMe e-mail in use

I can’t use my current e-mail because it’s already in use. It’s already in use because I manage other kits at 23andMe.  And around and around we go.

In order to overcome this obstacle 23andMe has put in the road, I would have to go to a service where I don’t have an e-mail account and create one just to let 23andMe send me a confirmation e-mail so that I can access my account. Really?

So, let me get this right. 23andMe still has the DNA, is still selling and using the DNA with impunity and will forever unless I delete this kit, but I can’t have account access after entering 4 different security challenges correctly plus a new valid e-mail account?  Seriously?  And they somehow think this is acceptable?

Well, all I can say is that it’s a good thing I was already closing up shop at 23andMe, because this is the very last nail in that coffin. They couldn’t make this experience more difficult or painful if they tried.

I absolutely refuse to let them win.  They are not going to gain unfettered permanent access to this DNA because they’ve made it too difficult for me to access.  This overly aggressive “security” is nothing more than a way to exclude legitimate access and retain what they really wanted in the first place, your DNA to utilize and sell.  If you can’t gain access, you can’t opt out of research, as much as one can opt out at 23andMe, and you can’t delete your kit.  This is somehow poetic injustice at its worst.  In other words, yes, it’s a very effective exclusionary trap.

So, I did in fact set up a new e-mail account, and I did confirm the e-mail address, and now I’ll set about deleting the account.  We’ll see how that goes.

Goodbye 23andMe, forever. My only regret is that I waited so long to leave – kind of like a bad marriage.

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Concepts – Identical by…Descent, State, Population and Chance

In genetic genealogy, what does it mean when someone says they are “identical by” something…and what are those various somethings?

In autosomal DNA, where your DNA on chromosomes 1-22 (and sometimes X) is compared to other people for matches of a size that indicates a genealogical relationship, you can actually match people in different ways, for different reasons.

But first, let’s make one thing perfectly clear. There is only one way to obtain your autosomal DNA – and that’s through your parents, 50% from each parent.  However, how much of their (and your) ancestor’s DNA you receive is not necessarily half of what they received from that ancestor.

If you receive ANY DNA from that ancestor, it MUST BE through your parents. There is no other way to inherit DNA.

Period.

No. Other. Way.

If you would like to read the Concepts article about inheritance and matching, click here. If you don’t understand autosomal DNA inheritance and matching concepts, you won’t be able to understand the rest of this article.

Identical by Descent (IBD)

When you match someone because you share DNA from a common ancestor, that is called Identical by Descent, or IBD. That’s what you want.  That’s a good thing, genealogically speaking.

Let’s take a look at how an IBD segment of DNA works. In the graphic below, the strand location is in the first column.  The next two pink columns are the two strands that your mother carries, one from her Mom and one from her Dad – and the values in each location from each parent.  Columns 4 and 5 are the two blue strands of DNA carried by your Dad, one from his Mom and one from his Dad.  The final two columns are what you inherited from both your mother and your father.  In this case, we made it easy and you simply inherited one of each of their strands entirely.  Yes, that does happen in some cases for a particular chromosome segment, but not all of the time.  Conceptually, for this example, it doesn’t matter.

Identical 1

Your Inheritance

In this example, you inherited strand 1 from your Mom, all As and strand 2 from Dad, all Gs. Your match, shown in the graphic below, matches you on all As, so also matches your mother.  This phenomenon is called parental phasing, which means we know it’s a legitimate match because the person matches both you and one of your parents.

For purposes of this conceptual discussion you must match on all 10 locations for this to be considered a matching segment. So in this case, your matching threshold is “10 locations.”

Identical 2

Your Match Matches You and Your Mother’s DNA – Identical by Descent

Now, understand that while I’ve shown “You” with your strands color coded so you can see who you received which pieces of DNA from – that’s not how your DNA really looks. There is no color coding in nature.  I’ve added color coding to make understanding these concepts easier.

This is how you and your parents DNA really look:

Identical 3

Notice that in your parents, their parent’s strands are mixed back and forth, so you really can’t tell which DNA came from whom.  It’s the same for you too.

What the matching software has to do is to look for a common letter between you and your match.

So, at location 1, you inherited an A and a G from your parents. Your match has an A and a T, so you and your match share a common A.  If you look at all of your matches locations, they share a common A with you on all of those locations.  It just so happens you received that A from your mother – but without your Mom to compare to – you have no way to know which parent that particular DNA value came from.  So, the best matching software can do is to tell you that indeed, you do match – on 10 locations in a row – so this is considered a match and will be reported as such on your match list.

Why you match is another matter altogether.

And, ahem….there is another way to match someone, aside from receiving ancestral DNA from your parents. I know, this is a bad joke isn’t it.  Yes, it is, but it’s real.

So, to summarize, there is no other way to obtain your DNA except 50% from one parent and 50% from the other.

However there are two ways to match someone:

  • Identical by Descent, IBD, meaning you match someone because you share the same DNA segment that you received from an ancestor through a parent, as shown above.
  • Identical by Chance, IBC, meaning that you match someone, but randomly – not by inheritance.  How the heck can that happen?

Let’s look at how that can happen.

Identical by Chance (IBC)

Because you receive a strand of DNA from each of your parents, but that DNA is all intermixed in you, you can possibly match someone else by virtue of the fact that they aren’t actually matching your ancestral DNA segment inherited from an ancestor, but by chance they are matching DNA that bounces back and forth between your parents’ DNA.

Identical 4

Your Match Matches Neither of your Parents’ Strands of DNA – Identical by Chance

In this example, you can see the that you inherited the same strands from your parents as in example 1 above, but your match is now matching you, not on your mother’s strand 1, all As, but on a combination of A from your mother and G from your father. Therefore, they don’t match either of your parents on this segment, because they are matching you by chance and not because you share a strand of DNA that you received from a common ancestor on this segment with your match.

This is easy to discern because while they match you, they won’t match either of your parents on that segment, because the match is not on an ancestral DNA segment, passed down from an ancestor. Using parental phasing, you compare your matches to your parents to see which “side” they fall on.  If they fall on neither parents’ side, then they are IBC or identical by chance.

Identical 5

Identical By Chance Identified Through Parental Phasing

In this example, you can see that you match all of these people. By using parental phasing, you can tell that you are identical by descent (IBD) to everyone except John, who matches neither of your parents, so your match to John is identical by chance (IBC).  We will talk more in an upcoming article about Parental Phasing.

If you don’t have your parents to compare to, and you match multiple people on the same segment, there should be 2 groups of people who all match each other on that segment – one group from your Mom’s side and one from your Dad’s side – even if you can’t identify your common ancestor. If there are people who don’t fit into either of those two groups, because they don’t match those group members, then the misfits are identical by chance.

Even if your parents are unavailable, this is a situation where testing other relatives helps, and the closer the better, because those relatives will also fall into those match groups and will help identify which group is from which side of your family, and which ancestral line.

In the example below, using the same people from the phased parent example above, we no longer have our parents to compare to, but we do have an aunt, Mom’s sister, and an uncle, Dad’s brother. By comparing those who match us to our close relatives – if everyone in the match group matches each other, then we know they are IBD and the come from Mom’s side of the family or Dad’s side of the family.

Identical 6

Identical By Chance Identified Through Close Family Match Groups

In general matching, meaning not on specific segments, just on your match list, if John and I match, but John doesn’t match mother’s sister, it could mean that John matches me on a different segment that my aunt didn’t inherit from my grandparents but that my mother did. So the match could be valid, even though he doesn’t match my aunt.

However, moving to the segment matching level, shown above, we can differentiate, at least for that segment.  This is yet another example of why segment analysis tools are so critically important.

If we only had one matching group, the green above, we would not be able to say that John was IBC on this segment, because John might be matching me on Dad’s side.

But in this case, we have proof points on both sides of this same segment, with two match groups, green from Mom and blue from Dad.  Mom’s side has a match group of 4+me (including her sister) who all match each other on this same segment, indicating that they all descend through my mother’s side of my tree.  On Dad’s side, we have his brother and two other people who match each other and me on those same segments.

Since John matches no one in either match group on either side, his match to me on this segment must be IBC.  You can read more about match groups and confidence here.

Identical by chance segments tend to be smaller segments, because the chances of matching more locations in a row by chance diminish as the number of locations increases.

Ok, so now you’ve got this – the two ways to match. Identical by descent (IBD) and identical by chance (IBC,) nature’s cruel joke.

So, what the heck are identical by state (IBS) and identical by population (IBP).

Good questions.

Identical by State (IBS)

Identical by state is really an archaic term now, but you’ll likely still run into it from time to time. Understand that genetic genealogy is still a really new field of discovery.  Initially, terms weren’t defined very well and have since evolved.  IBD was used to mean a match where you could find a common ancestral line.  IBS, or identical by state, was often used when one could not find the ancestral line.  What this implied was that the match was not genealogical in nature.  But that often wasn’t true.  Just because we can’t determine who the common ancestor is, doesn’t mean that common ancestor doesn’t exist.  After we have more matches, we may well figure out the common ancestor at a later time.

What are some reasons we might not be able to figure out who our common ancestor is?

  • There’s a NPE or undocumented adoption in one line or the other.
  • The pedigree chart of one or both people doesn’t go back far enough in time.
  • The pedigree chart of one or both people is incorrect.
  • Not enough people have tested to connect the dots between the DNA. For example, we may share a common surname, Dodson, but be unable to actually pinpoint which Dodson line/ancestor we share.
  • The match is identical by population (IBP) and not in a genealogical timeframe. We see this most often in highly endogamous populations.
  • The match is identical by chance (IBC) and there is no common ancestor.

The tendency in the past has been to assume that if you can’t find the ancestor, then the problem MUST be that the match is Identical by State. But the problem is that identical by state includes two categories that are mutually exclusive; Identical by Chance and Identical by Population.

Identical by chance means there is no common ancestor, as we illustrated above.

Identical by Population means there IS a common ancestor, and you did receive your DNA from that ancestor, but you may not be able to figure out who it was because it’s too far back in time and many people from that same population base share that DNA segment.

So, today, we don’t say IBS anymore, we say either IBD and if it’s not IBD then it’s either IBC or IBP, but not IBS. If someone says IBS, you need to ask and see if you can determine whether they mean, IBC or IBP, or if they are trying to say something else like “I can’t identify the common ancestor so it must be IBS.”

Identical by Population (IBP)

Identical by population means that a large portion of a population group shares a particular segment of DNA. Some people feel IBP segments are not useful and want all of these segments to be stripped away by population (or academic) based phasing software.

In some cases, if an individual is 100% Jewish, for example, they will have many IBP segments from within the highly endogamous Jewish population. They don’t have any other ancestral DNA segments from ancestors who aren’t Jewish to contrast against in their DNA, so their IBP segments are not useful to them, and are in fact, just in the opposite.  There are too many IBP segments and they are in the way – often referred to as “noise” because they are not genealogically useful, even though they are descended from an ancestor (IBD).  So, yes, IBP is a subset of IBD.

However, for someone who has the following genealogy, these same population based endogamous segments can be extremely useful and informative.

Identical 7

In this conceptual pedigree chart, the Jewish person married a non-Jewish person with deep colonial American ancestry. Their child “Colonial Jew” married someone who was mixed “Irish Asian.”  The person at the bottom, “me,” is not themselves endogamous but has several widely variant lines in their heritage including endogamous lines.

If I’m lucky enough to have an African population segment, that tells me very clearly which genealogical line that match is probably from. But if those IBP segments are removed, they can’t inform me in this situation.

Same with Jewish, or Asian, or Native American.

Let’s see how this might work in real matching.

Let’s say your mother’s A value is only found in African populations, and it’s found in very high proportions in African populations and much less frequently anyplace else in the world, except for where Africans settled.

Identical 8

Identical By Population Example Where Mother’s A Equals African

A few match outcomes are possible:

  1. You match with someone and you can discern a common ancestor or at least an ancestral line because you have only one African genealogical line – an ancestor in your mother’s line, like in the pedigree chart above.
  2. You match with someone and you cannot discern a common ancestor because many or all of your lines are African, similar to the Jewish example.
  3. You match with someone and you identify a common ancestor, but later a second genealogical line matches on that same segment because the segment is so common in the African population. This means you could have received that actual DNA segment from either ancestral line.
  4. Some DNA testing company runs academic or population based phasing software against your DNA and removes that segment entirely because they’ve decided that it occurs too frequently in a population to be useful. In this case, you won’t match that person at all.
  5. Some DNA testing company runs academic or population based phasing software against your DNA and removes that segment entirely because they’ve decided that particular segment in your results is “too matchy” so it must therefore be “invalid” and population based. This is often referred to as a “pile-up” and means that you have proportionally more matches on that segment than you do on other segments. If your “pile-up” segments are removed in this case, again, you won’t match at all. This is exactly what happened to my Acadian matches when Ancestry implemented their Timber phasing software, which removes pile-ups.

The graph below was provided to me at Ancestry DNA Day as an example of my own “pile-up” areas in my genome.

genome pileups

Ancestry with their Timber routine uses population phasing and removes your areas they deem “too matchy”? This helps Jewish and other heavily endogamous people by removing truly population based matches that are spurious and the contributing ancestor impossible to discern.  An endogamous individual could achieve much of the same effect by utilizing a higher matching threshold for their own matches, although that’s not an option at Ancestry.

However, for those of us who are not entirely endogamous, but who may have endogamous lines or lines from different parts of the world, population based phasing removes valuable informational segments and therefore, prevents valuable matches. When Ancestry ran Timber against my results, I lost all but one of my Acadian matches.  Yes, Acadians are heavily endogamous, but in my case, that line accounts for 1 of my 16 great-great-grandparents.  Believe me, if I had a tool to put all of my autosomal matches in one of 16 buckets, I would think it was a wonderful day!!!

16 gggrandparents

Because of endogamy, I actually carried MORE Acadian DNA that I would otherwise carry from a non-endogamous population – so yes, I am very matchy to my Acadian cousins, especially on smaller segments – or I was until Ancestry stripped all of that way.  Thankfully, I still have all of my matches at Family Tree DNA.

Why is endogamous DNA more matchy? Because endogamous populations only have the founders’ DNA and they just keep passing the same founder DNA around and around.

Ironically, another word for this kind of phasing is called “excess IBD” phasing. This means that “someone” decides unilaterally how much matching one “should” have and just chops the rest off at that threshold.  Clearly, that threshold for a fully Jewish person and me would be very different – and one size absolutely does NOT fit all.

I want to show you one more example of what population based phasing does. It chops the heart out of segments that would otherwise match.

People whose parents also test should match their parents on exactly 22 segments, one for each chromosome – because each child is a 100% match to their parents. If there is a read error or two (or three), then let’s say they could have as many as 25 matches, because some chromosomes are chopped in two because of a technical issue.  It occasionally happens.

At Ancestry, we’re seeing 80 to 120 matches for each parent/child pair, which means Timber is removing 58 to roughly 100 legitimate segments that you received from your parent.  One individual reported that they match one parent on 150 different segments, meaning that Ancestry removed 128 segments they decided are “too matchy” but are very clearly ancestral, or IBD, because all of your DNA must match your parents DNA on the strand they gave you.  However because of Timber’s removal of “too matchy” segments, the person no longer matches their parent on that removed segment – or on any of those 58 to 128 removed segments.  And remember, there is only one way to receive your DNA, so all of your DNA must match that of your parents.  You have no invalid matches to your parents DNA.  You can read more here.

Here’s a visual of what IBP phased matching does to you. Recall in our example that you need 10 contiguous matching locations to be considered a match.  I’m showing 20 locations in this example.

Identical 9

Normal Matching – No Population or Academic Phasing

In this first example, the DNA you inherited from your mother is a combination of T and A, where A=African. Notice that only part of what you inherited from your mother is the A this time.

In normal matching without IBP phasing, above, the matching threshold is still 10, but you match your match on a segment that totals 20 locations or units. Now it’s up to you to see if you can identify your common ancestor.

In the IBP phased example, below, your African DNA is removed as a result of population based phasing software. Your African DNA used to be where the red spot with no values is showing in the You 1 column.  Therefore, you still match on the Ts, but you only have a contiguous run of 7 Ts, then the 7 As phasing deleted, then 6 more matching Ts.  The problem is, of course, that instead of a nice matching segment of 20 units, above, you now have no match at all because you don’t have 10 matching locations in a row.  Of course, the same IBP phasing would apply to your mother, so your match would not match your mother either, which means that a valid parentally phased match is not reported.

Identical 10

Population Based Phased Matching Example Removing African

What’s worse, you’ll never have that opportunity to see if you can find your common ancestor, because you and your match will never be reported as a match. This is a lost opportunity.  In the first “normal matching” example, you may never BE able to find that common ancestor, but you have the opportunity to try.  In the second IBP phased matching example, you certainly won’t ever find your common ancestor because you’re not shown as a match.  When population based or academic phasing is involved, you’ll never know what you are missing.

This chopping phenomenon is not a rare occurrence with population based phasing. In fact, if you divide 100 removed segments by 22 chromosomes, there are approximately 4 artificial “chops” taken out of every one of your 22 chromosomes with each parent at Ancestry, and in some cases, more.  The person who now matches their parent on 150 segments has an average of 5.8 artifical phasing induced chops in each chromosome.  When Ancestry implemented Timber, many people lost between 80% and 90% of their total matches.  Mine went from 13,100 to 3,350, a loss of about 75%.  At least some of those were valid and we had identified common ancestral lines.

So, identical by population (IBP) doesn’t necessarily mean bad, unless you’re entirely endogamous. If you’re entirely endogamous, then IBP means challenging and can generally be overcome by looking at larger matching segments, which are less likely to be either IBP or IBC.

Identical by population can be very useful in someone not entirely endogamous in that it preserves ancestral DNA in a given population. In people who carry a combination of different endogamous lines, such as Jewish and Acadian, this phenomenon can actually be very useful, because it increases your chances of matching other individuals from that ancestral line – and being able to assign them appropriately.

Identical by What?

So, in summary, you are either identical because you received DNA from a common ancestor (IBD) or identical by chance (IBC) because nature is playing a mean joke on you and you match, literally, by chance because your match’s DNA is zigzagging back and forth between your parents’ DNA.  And by the way, you can match someone IBD on one segment and the same person IBC or IBP on others.

If you match someone but that person does not also match either of your parents, then it’s an IBC, identical by chance, match. Measuring a match against both yourself and your parents to determine if the match is IBC or IBD is called parental phasing.  We will have a Concepts article shortly about Parental Phasing, so stay tuned.

If you don’t have parents to match against, your matches on any segment should cleanly cluster into two matching groups where you match them and your matches also match each other on that same segment. One group for your mother’s side and one group for your father’s side.  Those who match you but don’t fall into one group or the other are identical by chance, like John in our example.  Of course, you won’t be able to sort these out until you have several matches on that segment.  This is also why testing all available upstream family members is so useful.

If you’re not IBC, you’re IBD meaning that you and your match received that DNA segment from a common ancestor, whether or not you can identify that ancestor.

Identical by population (IBP) is a type or subset of identical by descent (IBD) where many people from that same population group carry the same DNA segment. This is seen in its most pronounced fashion in heavily endogamous populations such as Ashkenazi Jews.

If you are from a highly endogamous population, you will have many IBP matches, generally on smaller segments that have been chopped up over time, and you will want to use a higher matching threshold, perhaps up to 10cM, for genealogical matching, or higher.

If you have endogamous lines in your tree, but are not entirely endogamous, IBP segments may actually be beneficial because you may be able to attribute matches to a specific line, even if not the specific ancestor in that line.

The smaller the segment, the more likely it is to be less useful to you, whether IBD or IBP – but that isn’t to say all small segments should be disregarded because they are assumed to be either IBC or not useful. That’s not the case.  Some are IBD and all IBD segments have the potential to be very useful.  Kitty Cooper just recently reported another wonderful success story using a 6cM triangulated segment.

If you’re highly endogamous, or only looking only for the low hanging fruit, which is more likely to be immediately rewarding, then work with only larger segment matches. They are less likely to be IBC or IBP and more likely to yield results more quickly.  I always begin with the largest matching segments, because not only are they easier to assign to an ancestor, but those matching people may also have smaller matching segments that I can tentatively (pending triangulation) attribute to that specific ancestor as well.

Here’s a handy-dandy cheat sheet if you’re having trouble remembering “Identical by What.”

Identical by Chart

Understand that working with genetic genealogy and autosomal DNA is much like panning for gold. You may get lucky and find a large nugget or two smiling at you from on top the pile, but the majority of your rewards will be as a result of hard work sifting and panning and accumulating those small golden flakes that aren’t immediately obvious and useful.  Cumulatively, they may well hold your family secrets and the keys to locks long ago frozen shut.

Here’s hoping all your matches are IBD!!!!!

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Anthony Lore (1805-1862/1867), River Trader or Pirate?, 52 Ancestors #114

Anthony Lore, or more accurately Antoine Lore, who was actually baptized Antoine Lord was one of the toughest genealogical nuts I’ve ever had to crack. Of course, it didn’t help any that he also moved from one country to another, neither of his names was accurate after he arrived, and he left no bread crumbs for me.  In fact, I’m of the mind that  Anthony may have very specifically tried NOT to leave any breadcrumbs while he was alive, and he did a damned fine job, I must say.

I know this probably sounds corny, but I’m going to say it anyway. Sometimes ancestors want to be found, and sometimes they don’t.  I know that sounds ridiculous, but in the case of Anthony, had it not been for several, not just one, but a series of events that were extremely unlikely to happen individually, let alone in series, I would never have found him, nor verified that the Antoine Lord baptized in the Catholic church records in Canada was one and the same Anthony Lore in Warren County, PA half a century later.

I could not have done this without synchronicity, sheer and utter stubbornness, err, I mean perseverance, DNA…and a lot of help from several people who just happened to pop up at the exact right time – including Santa Clause.  I’m serious.  In the flesh.  Just wait…you’ll see.

As brick walls go, this was probably the largest brick wall to ever fall, because Antoine was the gateway ancestor to my Acadian line, but of course, I had no idea before the wall fell. Antoine was the last full blooded Acadian in my line.  And as my cousin Paul says, if you’re related to one Acadian, you’re related to all Acadians.  Finding Antoine opened up a whole new world for me, historically and genealogically as well.  To put this discovery in perspective, with the help of others, I now have identified more than 100 ancestors of Antoine Lore.

Now the sad part. My mother never knew.  She was Antoine’s great-granddaughter.  Mom passed away just a couple years before the big breakthrough.  I like to think she had a hand in this discovery since she and I spent a nontrivial amount of time out beating the bushes for ancestors together.  So I don’t really know if she knows or not, or if she helped from the other side or not, but I tell myself she did.

That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.

Benjamin

Anthony didn’t start out, in my world, to be Anthony. His son, Curtis Benjamin Lore told the family that his father’s name was Benjamin Lore.  That’s also what his wife put on Curtis’s death certificate.  So of course, given that Curtis’s daughter told me that Curtis’s father’s name was Benjamin, which agreed with his Curtis’s death certificate, I set off looking for Benjamin Lore.

Guess what. I looked for years.  I didn’t find him.  That’s because he didn’t exist.

Curtis’s daughter, my “Aunt Eloise” who was actually my great-aunt, thought Curtis’s mother’s name might have been Elvira or Elvina. Eloise knew of two siblings, a sister that died and a brother, “Uncle Lawn.”  The only other thing she knew, aside from Benjamin’s name, which was wrong of course, was that Curtis’s father had died young, drowned in the Allegheny River.  Following Benjamin’s death, the family was desperately poor.  The mother and sister subsequently died as well, and Curtis was on his own from about the age of 10 or 12.  That was all she knew, or at least all she ever told.  She was an incredibly positive person, even in the face of adversity, and she didn’t much care to discuss anything negative.

Have you ever talked to someone about a topic where there was no need for them to be uncomfortable, but they clearly were? That’s how Eloise was about Benjamin Lore.  I could never figure this out.  There was no one left to ask but her, as her entire generation had gone on to the other side.  So it’s not like I had any other options.

Finally, one day, the source of her discomfort was revealed. It seems that Benjamin Lore was a river pirate, and he drown as a result of that “occupation.”  She didn’t go so far as to say he died in the act of pirating, but that was certainly the inference.  That little river pirate issue was certainly the family scandal and secret – and knowing how guarded the family was about “premature” births of babies after weddings, those paled by comparison to her discomfort over this scandalous pirate information.  Holy cow!!!

I should have taken that information and run with it while she was alive, but I had two small children, worked full time and was earning a master’s degree on top of everything else. So, that information languished in a folder for more than a decade.  Ok, so a lot more than a decade.

When I got that folder out again and blew the dust off, after Eloise’s death, here’s what I had to work with. Curtis Benjamin Lore was born in 1860 or 1861 in Pennsylvania to Benjamin Lore whose wife’s name might have been Elvira or Elvina.  Benjamin was a river pirate who drowned when Curtis was about 10 or 12, so about 1870 to 1872.  Curtis also had a younger sister and a brother, “Uncle Lawn.”  Curtis had come to Indiana in the 1880s as a well driller and met Nora Kirsch while drilling for gas wells near Aurora, Indiana.

Given this information, I should be able to find Benjamin Lore in 1860 and 1870 in Pennsylvania in the census, but that wasn’t the case because Benjamin didn’t exist.

Finding the Family

There was no single aha moment. I was looking for that smoking gun, but there never was one.  There were a lot of pieces of suggestive evidence but nothing that either individually or together let me draw any conclusion, at least not until that final DNA testing.  Thank Heavens for DNA testing, my mother’s willingness to take every available test while she was alive, and cousin Denny.

However, before the days of DNA testing, I did what all genealogists do – I began with the census.

Knowing, or thinking I knew that Curtis Benjamin, known as C. B. Lore, was born in 1860 or 1861 in Pennsylvania, I checked in the 1870 census – on microfilm, not on Ancestry like today.  So, I had to order those index and census rolls in to the local Family History Center or go to a major library that might have them on site.  I still have those index card printouts in my files.  If you’re shuddering, you too are a long-time genealogist.  If you have no idea what I’m talking about, just say a little prayer of thanks:)

1870 census Warren co

The 1870 Warren Co., Pennsylvania census shows us that Curtis Lore, age 14 is a farm hand in Columbus Township, born in PA – living with the George Morrison family, his wife and 19 year old son.

Finding Curtis Lore on his own at age 14 reinforces the story that Eloise told about his father having died young and the kids “raising themselves” but there are a couple flies in this ointment. First, Curtis was supposed to have been born in 1860 or 61 and this Curtis was born in 1856.  Second, if Curtis was born in 1860 or 1861, and his father died when he was 10 or 12, he probably would not have been dead by June of 1870, although it’s possible.  Things that make you go hmmmm….

On another page, we find Curtis’s mother, but at that time, I couldn’t connect those dots and didn’t know it was his mother.

Lore, RL age 54 – female born Vermont, keeping house
Margaret 12 b Pa

R.L. and Margaret are on census page, 25, living with the Elisha Farnham family.  Elisha Farnham is age 54 and a farmer.

I remember thinking at that time that if RL was Curtis’s mother, he would surely have been living with her. More hmmm….

Then I moved back to the 1860 census, not expecting to find “my” Curtis who was born in 1860 or 1861, but one never knows. He could have been a baby, less than a year old.

The 1860 census shows the Lore family living in Spring Creek Township. They don’t own any real estate, but they do have $75 in personal assets.  This is not a wealthy family, but they seem to be holding their own.

1860 census Warren Co

However, there is Curtis, born in 1856, which matches exactly with the Curtis in 1870, but since my Curtis was born in 1860 or 1861, I still had my doubts that this was the right family. The birth year was wrong, the father and mother’s names were both wrong.  Just too much was wrong.

In the 1900 census in Indiana, Curtis’s father is reported as being born in France and his mother in New York. So nothing was matching, except the name Curtis.  The problem was that he was the only Curtis Lore in Pennsylvania.

I looked back to the 1850 census, knowing Curtis wouldn’t be there, but hoping to gain some perspective on this family.

The 1850 census is below. As late as 1848 this family was living in New York.

1850 Warren co census

Questions are introduced by this census. Was Franklin really the child listed as Nathaniel in 1850?  Two of their daughters died between 1850 and 1860.  That must have been heartbreaking.  Five more children were born, including Curtis, clearly before 1860 or 1861.  Although their other children’s names and ages are not consistent, Curtis’s name and age are both confirmed in the 1870 and 1880 census.

Are there really 2 sets of twins, or two sets of children born within 12 months of each other?

Note that in the 1850, Anthony cannot read and write. I suspect this is reading and writing English, as their boarder. Francis Brewer, also cannot read and write and he too is French.

Is Francis Brewer a relative, or has he simply found a family to live with who speaks French and with whom he can communicate?  Brewer is not a French name?

So many questions and no answers.

Was this the right family? Was this Curtis the same Curtis that came to Indiana in the 1880s?  How could I ever tell?

I moved forward to the 1880 census, hoping to learn more. What I learned about Curtis was shocking.  In fact, it pretty well convinced me I had the wrong Curtis.

1880 Warren Co census

In 1880, Curtis Lore, now age 24, is married to a Mary and has 2 children. When I found this, I was very nearly positive this was NOT our Curtis, because our Curtis had never been married before, plus the little age discrepancy and parental names issues.

I was within a hair’s breadth of throwing in the towel on Curtis of Warren County – but the problem was that I had no other Curtis to research, so I just held onto a tiny shred of hope. I know this sounds hokey too, but something told me not to give up.

Out of other options, I resorted to scattering genealogical breadcrumbs on various Rootsweb and GenForum lists and message boards to see if anyone anyplace knew anything useful.

Denny Lore and Warren County

In 2003, the first of several breakthrough’s happened when I met Denny Lore, who just happened to have grown up in Warren County, PA.

One of Denny’s friends happened to read the Warren County rootsweb list and noticed the Lore surname. A few days later, at his class reunion, he saw Denny and mentioned that coincidence.  Denny was interested and followed up, contacting me and asking me what information I was looking for.  Little did I know at the time, but this “chance encounter” would be one of the lynchpins in this search.

Denny had some wonderful pieces of information, but nothing compelling enough that either of us could confirm we were working with the same family.  We were so close it seemed, but no cigar.

Denny and I researched together, passed information back and forth and talked on the phone for hours – but despite our best efforts – we could not connect those elusive dots. Just like everything else about this family – tantalizingly close, but out of reach.  I just know our ancestors were sitting someplace watching us and have a jolly laugh!

In 2004, I decided it was time to visit Warren County, full well knowing it could have been a wasted trip genealogically – but I would meet Denny and that would be fun.

Unbeknownst to me, the Warren County courthouse was in the midst of a remodel and let’s just say no one was happy about anything. The staff wasn’t happy that we were there asking questions and wanting to see records.  I wasn’t happy because I had just driven hundreds of miles and wasn’t about to be turned away.  Denny, who, by the way, has been Warren County’s Santa Clause for decades now, just wanted everyone to be happy.  In retrospect, had he worn the suit, our quest might have been easier.  I mean, who in their right mind is going to tell Santa “no”?

Denny Santa

Based on the 1850 and 1860 census, we knew that Anthony was born in Canada between 1806 and 1810, so I knew to look for immigration papers and an application for citizenship. The staff tried to tell me those papers were unavailable and I’d have to come back later.  Denny was trying to convince the “nice lady” that we needed to see the records now – I was asking someone else for help while Denny bent her ear trying to reason with the unreasonable.

I think it took two supervisors and a lot of arm twisting (me) and sweet talking (Santa,) but between us, we finally got access to those records. They assured me there would be no records and I was wasting my (and their) time, but alas there were records. Thankfully.

Anthony applied in Warren County on June 2, 1862 for citizenship. The brief entry in the book says “In the matter of Anthony Lore, a native of Canada, declaration of Anthony Lore of his intention to become a citizen of the United States filed and certificate given.”  It gave his birth as 1806 in Canada.  He would have been eligible to become a citizen on June 2, 1867, but he never returned to complete that task.  And of course, the 1867 form would have contained a lot more information.

In his citizenship application, Anthony Lore stated that he was born in 1806 in Canada. We had suspected this, as his native language on a census was listed as French, but in a later census, the native language of the parents was switched.  However, Anthony did not say where he was born in Canada, and Canada is a very large place.  He had apparently died before his 5 year waiting period expired, so the second set of papers was never filed.  At least we now had a bracket for his death date which just happens to be dead center on top of the Civil War.  Is that relevant?  I don’t know, but it’s an interesting coincidence.

Given that Anthony had been in the US since at least 1835, why did he wait until 1862 to apply for citizenship? Was there something prompting him in 1862 or deterring him previously?

By the 1880 census, R.L. (Rachel Lavina) is no longer listed, so she has passed away, and Curtis’s “younger sister” that died may well have been Margaret, age 12. Let’s take a look at the family of Anthony and Rachel and see if we can rebuild their family using various census and other records.

Anthony Lore children*Maria is age 24 and married to Stephen Farnham in 1870 with son Henry, age 3.
**Mary is age 31 and married to Henry Ward who works in a tannery.

Alonzo isn’t shown in any census with Anthony or Rachel, but there is enough other evidence to add him as a child, given that Anthony died between the 1860 and 1870 census, and the family was terribly scattered in 1870. If nothing else, writing this article has caused me to reevaluate the evidence and realize one of Anthony’s children was missing.

C.B. Lore’s obituary said that he was survived by 4 brothers and said nothing about sisters. Of course, obituaries can be very wrong.  We know that William, Franklin, Adin and Solomon are living in 1909.  We don’t know about Alonzo.  If Henry Ward’s wife is Mary or Minerva Lore, she died in 1921.  So perhaps we should say that in 1909, at least 4 of Curtis’ siblings were living, and those 4 were brothers.

Stuck

We now have Anthony in Pennsylvania, but we don’t know where he came from, aside from Canada. Furthermore, we still have no record at all connecting Curtis Lore of Warren County to Curtis Benjamin Lore in Indiana.  That is, until we found the divorce records of Mary Bills Lore and Curtis Lore.

In those records, it doesn’t say that Curtis went to Indiana, but it does say that he left his wife and family in June of 1886, abandoning them, and Mary was divorcing Curtis in November 1887. Curtis Lore of Indiana got Nora Kirsch pregnant in November of 1887 and married her in January of 1888, before the divorce from Mary Bills was final.  Of course, the fact that  Nora’s father, Jacob, was a crack shot and had been involved with a lynching about 18 months earlier might have influenced that decision.  But were those two Curtis’s one and the same?

At this point, I was stuck. Really stuck.  How do you bridge a gap like that?

Adding to this mystery, we had been unable to discover Anthony’s wife’s last name, but the census indicated she was born in Vermont. I didn’t want to spend too much time on his wife before I knew if this was the right family.

Small hints would appear, but lead no place. In an old box in his aunt’s attic, Denny found Canadian coins and paper money drawn on a bank in Montreal.  That was very interesting because research revealed that Canadian banks began issuing notes that could be redeemed for coins in 1817 – in particular the Bank of Montreal.  In the 1830s, large numbers of banks were doing this.  The note Denny found was for the Bank of Montreal, which suggested we should look in that direction.

?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

However, Canadian research proved very difficult for me and I was unable to find anything useful.  Ancestry.com, for all the strength it has in American records was, at that time, pitifully silent on Canadian records.

Another important clue was a researcher who provided the last name for Anthony Lore’s wife, Hill, and my subsequent discovery of a birth record for her in upstate Vermont near the Canadian border, if it was the same person. That helped substantially and at least gave me a “path” but once, again, tantalizing tidbits but no confirmation.  I kept wanting to scream, “Where’s the meat?”

Other research avenues were pursued unsuccessfully, until I was at a complete loss. This line after nearly 30 years of genealogical research stood as my largest challenge and the line I had made the least progress with by several generations.  I had not been able to get even as far back as 1800 and I still didn’t know if the Warren County Lore line was mine.  At that point, I clearly had not seen Curtis Lore’s obituary where it stated he was born in Warren County.

Y DNA

In 2004, Denny Lore submitted a DNA sample hoping we would match other Lore males. He did not, although at that time, there were few Lore males who had tested.  He also did not match anyone else by any other surname.

That’s not the case today. Denny matches two Lore/Lord men and two by other individuals who carry another surname as well, but it took several years of patient (or impatient) waiting for that to happen.

Life Moved On

While this research was at a standstill, life moved on. Mother, sadly, passed away in April of 2006. I had remarried, moved, and the economy forced unanticipated changes.

In the early summer of 2007, I established the Lost Colony DNA projects and along with others, The Lost Colony Research Group which was and is a loosely knit group of individuals with an interest in the history and genealogy of Eastern North Carolina, specifically with the goal of determining whether or not Sir Walter Raleigh’s Lost Colonists who had been stranded on Roanoke Island survived. To facilitate collaboration of our research, we set up a newsgroup so we can share information and visit.  Not only did we share Lost Colony related information we also got a bit chatty from time to time.

One day, a gentleman mentioned, in passing, his research along the Canadian-Vermont border. That is the area where my Lore research had been so unfruitful.  He suggested a resource I had never found, a woman, Marlene Simmons, with a very large data base of records she has extracted and compiled for nearly 30 years.

I contacted Marlene and indeed, she did have an Antoine Lore birth record. My heart nearly stopped.  How many years had it been now with no new information and no hope?

Blairfindie

I cautiously optimistic that we had broken the 30 year wall. Marlene sells her services and of course waits for checks to clear, so I mailed my check and prepared to wait for 2-3 weeks.  Every day that I waited, I felt increasingly hopeful and confident.  I felt sure she would reply by e-mail, but instead a letter arrived, just like the old days.  Indeed, there were several Lore and Lord records in her data base of an extended family in the area between Montreal and the Vermont border, and the names were the right names, BUT, it was a generation too late – those births occurring in the 1840s and 1850s.  The neighbors probably heard my screams of anguish.

However, I knew this had to be the right family because the names like Antoine, Solomon and Francois (Franklin) are so unusual and repeated in that family and they were the names of the sons of our Anthony Lore. More research was in order, and I tried diligently.  French and old scripted handwriting are both severe deterrents, aside from the fact that the records are organized differently than they are here and many are missing.  Can you sense my mounting level of frustration?

I discovered that there was an 1825 census, but unlike the states, the census districts are separate from the counties, and both the census districts and the county names have changed names many times between now and then. I could not figure out what census to search, and none of them were online or had been transcribed, so I would have to order original microfilm again.  Finally, I decided to ask Marlene which census I should order.  She also mentioned that she had burial records for two Lore families so I asked about that information as well as it would provide an important clue to where they lived.  People aren’t buried far from where they lived.

Another check left in an envelope, and the days waiting seemed interminable, but at least this time Marlene replied via e-mail, saying that she did in fact have a Lore family in Blairfindie in the 1825 census. Blairfindie.  What an unusual word.

What is Blairfindie?

Where is Blairfindie?

Googling very quickly told me that the location is a historical location and extinct today, but it also showed me where it was and it is in the middle of an area called l’Acadie which is where the church records for Antoine Lore in the 1850s (a generation too late) are located. So now I have a location.  I also discovered that the protestant church in Grande Ligne, l’Acadie where Antoine was born in the 1850s was only established in 1838 when Methodist missionaries arrived.  Before that everyone was Catholic.

An old Catholic Church exists called Ste Marguerite de Blairfindie, established in 1768. There’s that word again.  Further research shows that this was the only Catholic church in this very sparsely inhabited area until after the year 1800, and, tells us that this church served the French Acadian families that streamed into the area about 1768.  They were refuges from the forced relocation and extermination of the Acadians called the Dispersion or “Le Grand Derangement” which occurred in 1755 by the English in Port Royal, Acadia.  Many of these exiles were sent to various locations in the US, and the group that founded L’Acadie in 1768 found themselves deported to Massachusetts in 1755.

Marlene had indicated that there were several other families of French extraction that were allied with the Lore family, including one named Commeau.  This was determined through the earliest records which begin for the Lore family in the early 1800s, as determined by their marriage and death records in the protestant church. As Marlene said, the records are sketchy, and she had not transcribed the Catholic Church records.  She suggested I look in the Catholic records for earlier births.  Those records were available online, but unreadable due to language and handwriting barriers, but I would overcome those shortly.

Googling further using combinations of words, Blairfindie, the church name, Acadian, Lore, Lord and Commeau brought me to the Acadian.org history and genealogy research site. They have census records from as early as 1686 from Port Royal, the original Acadian colony established on the east coast of New France (Canada) in 1604, predating both Jamestown and Plymouth.  So, a quick check for Commeau and the records are full of this name.  And then, entering the name of Lore and Lord into the search engine and holding my breath.  YES, Yes, yes.  There was Lore, and Lord and L’Or and Lor and Laure, all pronounced the same way.  And even better yet, Julien Lore, the first Lore/Lord immigrant, is listed in the census, born in 1653, married to Charlotte Anne Girouard, with their 4 children, living with her mother, Jeanne Aucoin, widow of Francois Girouard.

OMG. Could it be?  Is this the beginning of our Lore family?  This Lord family is  Acadian, part of a small group of founders of the nation called Canada today.

I marvel at the synchronicity here and wonder if there is really such a thing a coincidence. How the Lost Colony led me to Marlene who led me to L’Acadie that led me to  Blairfindie which led me to Acadia where I found Julien Lord.  It’s amazing how one word, just one word, unlocked the gate to solve the 30 year old mystery in my family.  Blairfindie.  Amazing.

Indeed, the power of one word.

Perseverence.

The Real McCoy

St Marguerite de Blairfindie

Above, St. Marguerite de Blairfindie from the book, Histoire de L’Acadie, Provence de Quebec, published in 1908.

In the Catholic church records, we find that Antoine Lord, born March 24, 1805, is the son of Honore Lord and Marie Lafaille and was baptized at St. Marguerite de Blairfindie, above.

His actual baptism record is shown below.  What, you can’t read that?  Well, neither could I.  Thank goodness for genealogy friends.

????????????????????????????

The baptismal record for Antoine is on the top of the second page.

????????????????????????????

Baptismal act of Antoine Lord.

Le vingt cinq mars mil huit cent cinq, par nous pretre soussigné, a été baptisé Antoine, né hier du legitime mariage d’Honoré Lord, menuisier, et de Marie Lafay de cette paroisse.  Le parrain a été Antoine Crotteau et la marraine Rosalie Guerin, qui ont déclaré ne savoir signer.  Le père a signé avec nous.

s/Honoré Lore
s/R.P. Lancto, Ptre.

Translation:

The 25th of March 1805, we the undersigned have baptized Antoine, born yesterday of the legitimate marriage of Honoré Lord, joiner, and of Marie Lafay of this parish.  The godfather was Antoine Crotteau and godmother was Rosalie Guerin, who (both) declared they did not know how to write.  The father has signed with us.

s/ Honoré Lore (sic)
s/ R. P. (Rev. Père) Lancto, Priest

St Marguerite de Blairfindie and cem

But is this our Anthony?

Rootsweb Fishing

I’ve used Rootsweb message boards and lists extensively over the years. The great thing about Rootsweb and GenForum for that matter as well is that they are searchable and were designed to archive discussions.  Today, they also appear in Google search results, so if you’re looking for “Anthony Lore of Warren County, Pennsylvania” and he appears in any Rootsweb forum, you can find him.

In this case, I not only used the surname forums, but the location forums too, so I would use the Lore and Lord groups for Anthony, along with Warren County, PA and anyplace else I could think of that might be relevant.

One forum that would become particularly useful, later, would be the Acadian group, although as I write this, the rootsweb lists are hopefully only temporarily inoperable. The archives of this list do appear to be available.

I didn’t know anything about the Blairfindie family, and I was constrained by a language issue, and a surname issue. It was time once again for breadcrumbs.

I posted a query including the information that I had about Anthony Lore/Antoine Lord and hoped that someone, someplace had some research that would tie into this family. Perhaps the Antoine Lord in Blairfindie wasn’t the correct Antoine Lore/Lord.  There could be more.  One Antoine Lore or Lord, someplace, had been born about 1806 and had come from Canada to the US.

Before too long, I received a wonderful message from a Sylvain Lord in Canada. Little did I know he had researched the Lord family for decades, in essence, conducting a “one name” study.  Sylvain said:

In my records, I have a Antoine Lord born and baptized March 24, 1805. Antoine was the 13th child of Honore Lord and Marie Lafaille from l’Acadie (parish Ste-Marguerite-de-Blairfindie); Honore and Marie had 17 children. That Antoine is my closest match to what you’ve described. The ascendance of Antoine is as follows: Antoine -> Honore -> Honore -> Jacques -> Julien. I have all the details about his siblings and ancestor up to Julien Laure dit Lamontagne born in France about 1654. I am the author of the book “La descendance de Julien Laure dit Lamontagne”. If you need more information I will be glad to provide it to you.

Finding Sylvain, or Sylvain finding me, was a jackpot!

This information seemed reasonable, but still, I needed something to connect the Blairfindie family with Anthony Lore who was found near Starksboro, Addison County, Vermont in 1831.

L’Acadie, where Antoine Lore was baptized was located about 90 miles North of Starkesboro along the highway today that borders Lake Champlain all the way from L’Acadie on the Richlieu River in Quebec which is the headwater for Lake Champlain to Addison County. At that time, the lake would have been the highway.

Lacadie to starksboro

This was a dream come true, except for one tiny little tidbit. While Sylvain spoke impeccable English, his book was written in French.  The good news was that Sylvain was willing to translate critical sections for me and I still retained some minimal memory of French class taken a life-time ago.  Had I know how important French was going to be, I would have paid more attention!

I suspect that the Antoine born to Honore is indeed the correct one, but I’d surely like to make that connection for sure in some way. Does the Antoine born to Honore and Marie disappear from that area?  Maybe there is a notation in the church books. I asked Sylvain.

Sylvain said that Antoine Lord/Lore disappeared from the Catholic records in L’Acadie when he was about 20 years old, which would have been about 1826 or so.

Sylvain checked the Catholic church records, looking for Antoine and perhaps Rachel, but if they had not married Catholic, they would not have been allowed to witness baptisms or other events in the Catholic Church. Bless his heart, Sylvain adopted this “finding Antoine” project as his personal mission.  He wanted to complete his records, and I wanted to find Antoine.

Sylvain wrote:

This week, I spent a few minutes checking for witnesses in the records of Grande-Ligne (Baptist church of l’Acadie). Unfortunately, the minister did not indicate any witness or godparents. I did not have the time to check the catholic records; I will next week. While looking at the Grande-Ligne records, I noticed that Antoine’s siblings moved quite a lot; they were once in Vermont, New York and Quebec. It seems that they always came back to Grande-Ligne for church events.

If there is a part of you wondering how an Acadian Catholic family turned protestant, I assure you, there is one whale of a story behind that door, but it will have to wait for the article about Antoine’s mother, Marie Lafaille.  Stay tuned.

DNA

Sylvain descended from Julian Lore, one of the founding Acadian settlers who arrived in Port Royal sometime before his marriage there in 1675.

If our Anthony Lore line was indeed Antoine Lord born in 1805, then we too descended from Julian, but through another son.

The good news is that if Denny’s Y DNA and Sylvain’s Y DNA matched, it confirmed that the common Y DNA marker values held by both Denny and Sylvain indeed did come from Julien. So not only were we descended from a common ancestor, but there had been no adoptions in the lines between Julien and either Sylvain or Denny.

Julien to Denny and Sylvain

Even though Denny and Sylvain were 7th cousins, Y DNA, unlike autosomal doesn’t “wash out” with time.  Sometimes mutations do occur and accumulate, but within 8 generations, the two men should still match satisfactorily.  Besides that, Denny’s marker values were rare, as in very rare, and we still had no matches to anyone.  Today, Denny only has 4 matches total at 12 markers, and two of those are to Lore/Lord men – and the other two are to another French family.

Sylvain agreed to test, and I excitedly had a kit sent to him. A few weeks later, we confirmed that at 12 markers, Denny and Sylvain’s DNA matches exactly.  Denny finally had a match, and our ancestor was confirmed to have the same Y DNA as Sylvain’s ancestor – Julien Lor/Lord/Laure, the Acadian founder.  Why just 12 markers?  because Denny’s DNA is so rare that a match would be evident and there was no need to test more markers out the gate.

Given all of these pieces of evidence, the opportunity for the common ancestor to be anyone but Julien Lord was remote, and given that Sylvain had spent years tracking down all of the Lore and Lord descendants he could find, along with their lines, the likelihood of there being another Antoine Lore born in 1805 or 1806 in Canada, who disappeared from the records but did not die, and who appeared in America about the time the man from Canada disappeared, is extremely remote.  Sylvain didn’t know of any other candidates.

Still, I wanted to know for sure, plus we still had that pesky little issue of whether or not my Curtis was the same Curtis as the Warren County Curtis. This paternal identity issue seems to run in the family doesn’t it!

Autosomal DNA

About this time, autosomal DNA testing became available, and even though Mother had passed away, her DNA was archived at Family Tree DNA, and she was one generation closer to Antoine than me, meaning she would carry more of his DNA. I had mother and Denny’s DNA both upgraded to the Family Finder test.  I wanted to see how closely Denny and mother matched, if at all, and if the size match properly indicated the expected “cousin level.”

Denny Mom pedigree

If Mom and Denny were second cousins once removed. They could be expected to share at least some autosomal DNA.

concept generational match

According to Family Tree DNA, 90% of third cousins share DNA and more than 99% of second cousins, so Mom and Denny would be extremely likely to share autosomal DNA if their common ancestor was Anthony found in Warren County. Indeed, if their common ancestor was not Anthony, here were no other Lore men in Warren County and no other Curtis males that I could find – so there was no OTHER way for Mom and Denny to legitimately match at the 2nd or 3rd cousin level.  If they were more distantly related, then the chances of them sharing measurable DNA were dramatically reduced.

The ISOGG wiki focused on autosomal statistics reflects that second cousins once removed could be expected to share about 106.25 centiMorgans of DNA, on average, although there is a significant range in actuality. Second cousins share approximately 212.50 cM and third cousins, 53.13.  So, let’s see how Mom and Denny did.

Sure enough, Mom is Denny’s closet match and they share a total of 198.39 centiMorgans of DNA, so well above the 106 expected and nearly to the 212 cM of full third cousins. That’s fine, because in matching, more is always better and reduces doubt!

Denny Mom match 2

This does in fact confirm that our Curtis Benjamin Lore is one and the same as the Curtis found in the 1860, 1870 and 1880 records in Warren County, PA before leaving for the gas fields of Indiana where he met and married his second wife, from whom my line descends. Curtis was the son of Anthony, whose other son was Solomon, from whom Denny descends.

This part of the equation is now proven, or as well proven as it would be until some years later when additional people from the Lore line would test and match both Denny and Mom.

It would be this same autosomal matching process that would also prove that Anthony Lore in Warren County is one and the same as Antoine Lore in l’Acadie. Thank goodness for those wonderfully large Catholic families who have many descendants to test today!

From finding Anthony, and confirming that Curtis in Indiana was most likely the Curtis in Warren County, in about 2004, until final proof via autosomal DNA of Anthony’s connection to his family in l’Acadie took all of a dozen years. Unfortunately, sometimes all you can do is wait for the right person to test!

So now that we’ve confirmed that Anthony left l’Acadie and wound up in Vermont, let’s take a look at what we know about him after L’Acadie and before Warren County in 1850.

Vermont and New York

We don’t know what brought Antoine Lord to Vermont where he became Anthony Lore. However, the Richelieu River runs right through the center of L’Acadie, widening as it flows southward and after crossing the border between the US and Canada, becomes Lake Champlain which divides New York from Addison County, Vermont.

Rachel Levina Hill’s family is well-documented in Addison County, but the only record of Anthony Lore I’ve ever found in Addison County is his marriage record in Starksboro, Addison County, Vermont on October 13, 1831 to Rachel Levina Hill. Rachel would have been 16 and a half years old, and Antoine was 26.

Given their first child in the 1850 census was born in 1835, it looks to me like they lost their first two, if not 3, children.

By 1835, they had left Addison County and were living someplace in New York, where the 1850 census tells us their oldest child was born.

Anthony and Rachel lived in New York someplace, possibly Chautauqua County until at least 1848, but they were in Warren County, Pennsylvania by the 1850 census.

lacadie to spring creek

I have not been able to locate this family in New York, in spite of having read the Chautauqua County 1840 census in its entirety page by page, although I suspect they were probably in or near Chautauqua County which borders Warren County, PA on the North and also borders Lake Erie and includes the town of Jamestown, often associated with this family. It’s only about 20 miles from Blue Eye, PA to Jamestown, NY.  Rugged terrain, water and forest continues to be a recurring theme in this family and the areas where we repeatedly find them, so this would be an area that fits that description.

For all intents and purposes, the 19 years between Anthony and Rachel’s marriage in 1831 and their re-emergence in the 1850 census in Warren County are lost to us, with the exception of a few hints along the way.

We know that all of the children born to Rachel and Anthony before 1850, beginning with William born in December of 1835, were born in New York State, although I have been unable to confirm a location.

Perhaps part of the reason they were transparent was because Antoine Lord aka Anthony Lore did not want to be found.

Was Antoine Lore a Pirate?

The rivers provided easy and accessible transportation. They were the highways before highways.  Indians used them, settlers used them, traders used them, pirates used them.

Were it not for Aunt Eloise’s recanting what her father told her about his father, we would never have known the river pirate story. However, other family lines also had stories of Anthony drowning, but the circumstances were always different.

Eloise didn’t even know C.B.’s father by his correct name. She called him “Old Benjamin.” It seems, retrospectively, there was always something shady about the situation but neither Eloise nor I knew that at the time. Eloise has been on the “other side” now for 20 years. I wonder if she is amused as I write this.

According to what Eloise had been told, C.B.’s father, Anthony aka Benjamin was an “Indian Trader” on the Allegheny river and drown. After discussing this for a while, Eloise fessed up that C.B.’s father was really a “river pirate.”  I had never heard of river pirates, but later research revealed the fact that river pirates on the Allegheny River did exist in that timeframe.  That much of the story was accurate.

Eloise clearly thought that the river pirate part of the story qualified as the “black sheep” story in the family, so why would she, or her father, make up something that was obviously portrayed and perceived as negative?

Those river pirates weren’t pirates in the traditional sense with a patch over one eye, a sword and a peg leg, but were bootleggers and traders – not really a “profession” one could be proud of, at least not in this context.  They flew under the radar, as tavern keepers had to be licensed to sell liquor in a fixed location.  The “traders” produced their own liquor, had no permanent location, as their business was from their boats providing their illicit wares to rafts and the bored men on those rafts traveling the Allegheny. The traders would wait by the sides of the river, hidden in alcoves and when they saw a raft approaching, they would row out to “meet” the rafts as they drifted downriver.  Whether they conducted illegitimate business in a legitimate way, or coerced the men on the rafts to part with their money in whatever means necessary is open to speculation.  Hence, perhaps, the term “pirate.”

In the article, ‘River Pirates-Old Time Tales of Warren County,” we hear the following:

In the years when Warren County’s great green forests of pine were crashing to the woodsman’s axe and logs and planks were being borne away on the river, to the expanding markets of the south and west in endless processions of gliding rafts; in the years when rafts were running on every rise and “following the river” was a regular trade with hundreds of hard-fisted, leather-booted men who liked their whiskey straight, and plenty of it; there were abroad on the waters of the Allegheny, “river pirates”, pioneer bootleggers, who moved from place to place in rowboats and sold liquor, both good and bad to the raftsmen.

Goodness knows there was no particular need for any man to deal with bootleggers in the earlier days. Whiskey, brandy, rum, gin and wine were sold in grocery stores as well as in saloons and no man with the money to buy a quart, need go thirsty long. But the “river pirates” as they were called knew their raftsmen well. They knew the three day trip down the river from Warren County to Pittsburgh was often tedious and provocative of deep and insistent thirst. Also they may have realized that to bring the market to the consumer is to stimulate trade, and in addition may have understood enough of human nature, to know that an added tang is attached to indulgence in illicit things, be they stolen fruits, kisses or illegal whiskey.

The nearer the raftsmen approached Pittsburgh the more numerous were the river pirates. They would row out from some obscure landing in their skiff, make fast to the raft, come aboard and offer their wares to the crew. If there was any money among the men, the river pirates usually made a sale. Sometimes when they couldn’t sell their bottled goods for money they traded for something or other.

Based on Antoine’s connection to the Richelieu River and Lake Champlain, and the mixed race Acadians, I have often wondered if Antoine began by being a “voyageur” in Canada, one who traded with the Indians. Voyageurs were often of mixed heritage. Antoine may simply have transported his known occupation to a new location and slightly different circumstances. Research shows the history of Lake Champlain is also replete with pirates and smuggling.

When Antoine died, he was no inexperienced youth. According to Eloise’s story, Anthony was murdered, and it apparently wasn’t under good circumstances, as that was just another chapter to the dark side of the story she wished she didn’t have to tell. Eloise seemed to be embarrassed that he WAS a pirate and additionally embarrassed that he was murdered being a pirate. There seemed to be no redemption for Anthony, who she knew as Benjamin.

Perhaps Eloise felt that way because Curtis felt that way. Maybe there is more to this story that we don’t and never will know.

And maybe there is another side to the story. Eloise was Curtis’s youngest child. She was 6 when he died, so much of what she remembered was probably repeated to her by her mother or sisters.

Mildred was 4 years older than Eloise, born in 1899, so she was 10 and a half when her father died. Mildred also used to ride along with Curtis Lore as he made his rounds in his buggy checking on his horses, wells and other projects.

A few years ago, I met Mildred’s granddaughter who told me the following, as told to her by Mildred:

“Curtis Lore’s father drown on a raft on the river, possibly the Ohio River. He was a tradesman and traded off of the raft. He was trading with the Indians and he was drown and never found. His raft was found capsized. After that, Curt’s mother died.”

This tidbit calls several things into question. First, I don’t think there were any organized Indians left to trade with on the Allegheny in the 1860s, but the word trader may have been equated with Indian trader. Most of the river trade seemed to be focused towards wood and other wares in Pittsburg.  Or, perhaps, Anthony has previously been an Indian trader, a Voyageur.

Second, the fact that she used the word “raft” may be an important clue. A man on a raft would not have been a pirate, but he would have been a trader. Pirates used swift moving canoes, not rafts meant to accommodate both people and loads for several days. You can see various photos of log rafts here including one from the Allegheny River in 1885. Rafts were reported to be very dangerous because they were extremely difficult to steer.  And I expect that got even more tricky with whiskey added to the mix. I read one man’s comment to the effect that the oceans were much safer than the rivers from the perspective of a rafter.

log raft

Log rafts near Clearfield, PA, photos from Lycoming County Museum.

log raft 2

The fact that she said “raft” and not “boat” suggests to me that this term is likely a historic term used by Curtis, because raft is not a term one would normally associate with either a trader, a pirate or a river – in that context. Raft implies floating downriver, which is exactly what the traders did.  It was a three day “float” from Warren County to Pittsburg.

Eventually I would find three additional descendant lines of Anthony Lore’s family. All three lines would share a “death by drowning” story, but the circumstances were different in each version.  One would have him die at sea, one murdered while returning to or from France for his inheritance, Mildred’s version of drowning while trading on the river, but with no mention of being a pirate, and finally, our family line’s pirate version where he was either murdered or drown, or both.  The fact that my grandmother never told this story in any form to my mother causes me to suspect the worst.

Knowing what we know now, we can discount that “going back to France for his inheritance” story, because Anthony’s Acadian ancestor’s had been in Canada (and deported from Canada to the US, then back to Canada) since the mid-1600s, so no French inheritance for Anthony.  That ship sailed 200 years before, pardon the pun.

Maybe Anthony was going back to Canada for his inheritance, on Lake Champlain. That doesn’t work either, because Anthony’s father and mother had died in 1834 and 1836, respectively, so any inheritance would have been disbursed long before 1862/1867.

Maybe he went to get Rachel’s inheritance? Nope. Her parents were still living and had moved to Illinois, and her grandparents were long dead, so we’ve just struck out entirely on the inheritance story from every reasonable angle.

One thing seems certain, Anthony probably did drown. That part is consistent.  All stories involved water and travel.  Two included murder.  Eloise and Mildred both said his body was never found.  Perhaps that is where the murder theory arose. Perhaps he simply drown. Perhaps his raft flipped over. Or, perhaps he was indeed robbed and murdered, his raft found adrift and upsidedown.  A flipped raft would be the perfect cover for a murder.  No one would give it a second thought.

Allegheny bend

When I visited Warren County, Pennsylvania, I fully expected to find this family having lived on or near the Allegheny River, above, the county’s only major water thoroughfare.  This was not the case.  The Lore family lived in a very remote area of the county near a small stream, Spring Creek and a slightly larger waterway, Brokenstraw Creek that Curtis could have floated down to the Allegheny. All streams in that area do eventually empty into the Allegheny, so this does not preclude the raft story, but it certainly wasn’t what I expected.  Or, maybe Anthony kept his family safely away from the river and pirates. Back in that secluded area would have been a good place to distill liquor.

Eloise went on to say that after C.B.’s father’s death, when he was young, that C.B. and the other children “pretty much raised themselves.” There was one sister apparently, and the story says that both the mother and sister died.  The impression I had from this story was that they died under very dire circumstances, were desperately poor, and  on the doorstep of starvation, if not across that threshold.  This may indeed have been true.  Records found later do indicate that Rachel, C.B.’s mother and younger sister indeed did have to live with another family after Anthony’s death.

Certainly Anthony’s death had a devastating effect on his family, and in particular, on Curtis who was hired out as a farm hand by the age of 14. Apparently Anthony had died when Curtis was 10 or 12, so he could have been hired out already in 1870 for several years. Not much of a childhood.

Anthony’s son, A.D. Lore had a daughter, Georgia, who wrote a letter – quoting in part: “My Grandmother and Grandfather died when their family was young and they [the children] were raised by relatives. They [the children] seemed to be strangers to each other.”

A. D. Lore would have been 4 years older than Curtis, according to the census.

Anthony Lore’s Children

Much of what we know about Anthony actually does come from his children. Thankfully, Denny Lore had rescued his Uncle Stanley’s genealogy from sure and certain destruction, literally from the curb after his death.

Uncle Stanley who also descended from Anthony’s son, Solomon, documented this family by using existing family records. Stanley was born in 1911 and died in 1998, so his research was completed post 1930.  Instead of doing “research” like I was doing, Stanley was documenting what he knew.  The challenge for Denny and I was to connect the dots between the two methodologies and see if these were indeed the same family.

We began with Uncle Stanley’s records, added what I had accumulated about Curtis Lore, and began to build from there.

Anthony’s Widow, Rachel and Daughter, Marilla

In 1870, Rachel is keeping house for the Farnham family with her daughter, Margt., age 12. Marie, Rachel’s older daughter, is age 25 and married to Stephen Farnham.  Sadly, we find nothing more about Margaret or her pet name, Marilla.  With as much sadness as Rachel has already endured, it would be very sad to think this youngest daughter died too, but that too would be right in line with the oral history, that CB’s mother and sister both died.

Let’s take a look at what we know about each of Anthony and Rachel’s children.

Curtis Lore

In 1870, Curtis at 14 is hired out as a farm hand. His very interesting story can be found here.

William Henry Lore

We know William Henry Lore, the eldest, survived because we find him in many records including his obituary.

In 1863, his descendant Hugh Lavery find his Civil War draft card in Saybrook-Ashtabula, Ohio, but by 1866, he was back in Warren County, PA where he paid tax as a 3rd class peddler, working along the Allegheny River with one horse or mule.  This makes me wonder if he learned the “trading” trade from working with his father.  Hugh wrote about William here.

William had his first child in 1865 in Ohio and his second in 1866 in Pennsylvania.

William  would go on to marry a total of 4 times and have at least 14 children.  Among them we find the names of Ben, Frank or Francis, Lavina and Evaline.  He died in 1914 in Petrolia in Butler County, Pa.

Uncle Stan’s records are somewhat vague about William. He clearly did not have a lot of information on him directly.  The information on that page seems to be a mixture of William (01) Lore’s children and their children and descendants.  It’s very difficult to tell the difference.  Before presenting Stan’s information, I’ve included census and other information from various sources in hopes of clarifying Stan’s information.  William (01) refers to William son of Anthony and Rachel.  William (02) refers to his son William.

We eventually know from the census and obituaries that William was married a total of 4 times, and he had children by each one of his wives. We don’t really know what happened to the children of his first wife.

William (01) Lore married Eliza Mary Davis who was born in April 1847 in New York. Her parents were Ezra and Eunice Davis.  William and Eliza had 4 children:

  • Eunice Lavine (Vine) born Oct 1865, died Sept. 6, 1945 in Corry, Erie Co, Pa., was married to James R. Apps in 1882 and married second Eli Bender.
  • Eveline Lore born 1866
  • Betsy Lore born 1869 (probably real name Elizabeth)
  • Alice Oliva Lore born July 5, 1870, died Mary 23, 1913 in Union City, Erie, Pa. She married Andrew Henry in about 1888 and married secondly to Henry Perry in 1893.

We never do find either Evaline or Betsy. However, in the Warren Co. Historical Society, we found a very interesting letter dated October 1987 from a Mary P. Lavery, 7 Paris Avenue, Corinth, NY 12822, inquiring as to the birth, marriage or death certificate in Warren County prior to 1906 for Evaline and Betsy Lore who she thought might possibly have been in the asylum in Conewago Township and who were possibly involved in the murder of a caretaker or caretakers in the asylum.

Mary also mentions in her letter that there is a William J.H. Lore in the asylum in the 1910 census but she does not think he is related. I looked at this record as well, and there is no family slot for this person, and I’m not sure his name is Lore.  We can probably dismiss him, at least for now – although with this family, you never really know for sure.

Given what Uncle Stan’s sheet tells us, if we are reading it correctly, it seems that the 4 daughters of William all married, so if Mrs. Lavery was looking for them by the last name of Lore, she would never have found them.

In 1870 I don’t find William, but we do find his wife and children living with her parents in Corry, Erie Co, Pa.

  • Ezra Davis, 56
  • Eunice 53
  • Alice 15
  • Samuel 13
  • Alonzo 12
  • Betsy 10
  • Eliza Lore 23
  • Louisa 6
  • Eveline 3
  • Betsy 1

In 1880, William is listed in Butler Co. as a widower with 3 children as follows:

  • William Lore, age 36, boarder, widower
  • George age 8 (born 1872)*
  • William (02) age 6 (born 1874)*
  • Frank age 4 (born 1876) – seems to be John and or Joseph Francis Lore found later.*

We also find Eliza in Waterford in Erie Co, Pa as follows in 1880:

  • Eliza Lore 33
  • Eunice 15
  • Evaline 14
  • Betsy 11
  • Alice 9

*Indicates that the child is mentioned in William’s obituary.

William and Eliza appear to be divorced, judging from the births, between 1871 (Alice’s birth) and 1872 (George’s birth). No grass grew under William’s feet.  William apparently remarried and his wife who is unknown subsequently died.

In 1910, William H. Lore is listed in Butler Co. in the census as born in 1840. W. H. (probably William H.) Lore is born in 1875, John Lore* is born 1878, and George W. is born in 1875.  Given the above census info, are John and Frank the same person, or was there a 2 year old child missing from William in 1880?

William Henry Lore died on May 22, 1914 in Petrolia, PA.

William lore obit

Homer and Mary, mentioned in the obituary, are not listed in any census document. William Henry apparently had a total of 14 children.  Even though they are not mentioned, several children from his earlier marriages were living at the time of his death.

William’s wives and children were:

  • Mary Eliza Davis born in 1847, married before 1865 and divorced after 1870 – 4 children: Eunice Lavina, Evaline, Betsy and Alice Oliva
  • Rachel Salmon born about 1840 in Ireland or England, died before 1880 – 4 children: William Henry, George W., Joseph Francis “Frank”, John Francis
  • unknown spouse, died, had 3 children between 1881 and 1888: Lillian, Gordon, Ben
  • Sarah Zimmerman born 1870, married 1898, died 1931 – 3 children: Samuel, Mary Homer

William Henry Lore is buried in the Bear Creek Cemetery in Petrolia, Butler County, PA without a stone, according to family members.

In a very confusing turn of events, a descendant provided this Record of Veteran Burial provided by the State of Pennsylvania in the 1940s for one Frank Lore who served for 3 years in the same Unit as William Henry Lore’s brother Frank aka Franklin aka Francis Lore who unquestionably died in Wisconsin.  The burial record for this Frank Lore is in the Bear Creek Cemetery, with no marker.  This causes me to wonder if they is some confusion of identity, or if multiple people were using the name Frank Lore.  This family is assuredly confusing.

Frank Lore PA Civil War Burial

Maria Lore

Maria was born June 27, 1846, died in 1892 and is buried in the Spring Creek Cemetery, probably near her mother and other family members. She was married on August 8, 1862 to Steven Farnham 1844-1935.  They had the following children:

  • Henry Anthony born 1861, died 1916, had at least 2 sons.
  • Jennie Mae born 1873, married first a Goss and then a Moore and is widowed again by 1930.
  • Frank Arnold born April 1, 1873 and died Oct. 12, 1948, buried in Spring Creek, married Emma Mable Brundage
  • Jessie b 1884 married about 1802 to a Bassett, a widow in 1930 in Boylan, Skamania, Washington.
  • Charlie b 1882, in 1930 in Columbus Twp. in Warren Co with wife Minnie and no children. Died 1955.

The historical society card file shows that Maria was born 1846 and died in 1892. It also shows that Elisha S. Farnham, her husband, was born in 1844 and died in 1935.  He served in Company C – 16th Pa. in the Civil War.  This is the same unit where Franklin Lore served.

The Spring Creek Cemetery transcription in Warren Co. Pa shows several Farnham graves, but I was unable to find them when I visited. The list is in alphabetical order and it does not say if these graves are together.  Graves are as follows:

  • Alton Farnham, 1883-1884 (with Elisha and Maria)
  • Elisha S. Farnham 1844-1930 Co C 16th Pa Cav. G.A.R.
  • Frank A. Farnham 1874-1948 (next to Maria Z. Farnham)
  • Maria Farnham 1846-1892 Wife of Elisha S
  • Marie Z. Farnham 1907-1908

Rachel may be buried with or near Maria, her daughter, and Elisha.

Tunis, Nathaniel, Francis (the female) and Mary Lore

We find nothing more about these three. They probably died as children.  I do wonder if Tunis was a nickname for Antoine Jr.?

Adin or A.D. Lore

Given the oral history of the Indiana Curtis family involving an “Uncle Lon” or “Uncle Lawn,” and knowing that Curtis (CB) had a brother A.D., noted in one census as Adin, could Adin be Alonzo D. Lore?  This is certainly possible, but I believe that’s not the case, because in at least one census, they are both listed separately..

Uncle Stanley shows that A.D. Lore married Sophia B. Morley, daughter of Alonza Morley and Polly Hopkins. He shows one daughter:

  • Maria Lore born about 1878. She is also known as Mina apparently. She marries Charles Griffits (Griffis).

Stan’s records show (parenthesis mine):

A.D. Lore – deceased (born in 1852 according to 1860 census)
Mrs. “ – Albion, Pa (Erie Co.)
A girl
Mrs. Charles Griffits (is this the girl or is this another person?)

In the 1930 census, we show Sophia Lore, 76, born 1854, married in 1877, born in PA, parents in NY. She was living in the town of Albion in Erie Co., Pa. on Cherry St.  She is widowed and was first married at age 23.

In 1880 we find in Conneaut Twp of Erie Co., Pa:

  • D. Lore, 28, (so born 1852), farmer, born Pa, father born Canada, mother born Maine
  • Sophia 27 born Pa, parents NY
  • Mina 2, her and parents born Pa

A.D. Lore died in 1913, still married to Sophia, so A.D. Lore is not Alonzo Lore.

Denny sent a copy of Georgia R. Lore’s marriage application on October 14, 1922 where she gives her parents’ names as A. D. Lore and Sophia. Father is deceased but was born in Spring Creek, PA.

A.D. Lore’s letters of estate administration were filed in Erie County, PA on November 17, 1913 listing his death date as October 30, 1913 in Albion, PA. Sophia is his wife, Mina Griffis is his daughter who lives in Albion, Gertrude Prussia is his daughter who lived in Springboro and Georgia Lore is his daughter who lives in Albion.  He apparently worked in the oil fields because he has drilling tools and carpenter tools, and that was pretty much it.

According to Sylvia Lore’s estate papers in 1938, Georgia married a Heath and lives in Albion.

Alonzo Lore

I originally believed that A.D. Lore and Alonzo were one and the same person, but they aren’t.

Based on what Aunt Eloise said, “Uncle Lawn” came to visit his brother, Curtis Lore, one time in Indiana. Eloise’s sisters, Edith and Mildred, quite the mischievous pranksters, put a pin in the horsehair soft so that “Uncle Lon” would sit on it, and he did.  He got up, enraged, told Curtis that his girls were awful, and stormed out, never to return.

So, Curtis did have a brother “Lon” or “Lawn.”

We know this event had to happen between 1895, or so, and 1903. Curtis was the youngest of those two sisters, born in 1891.  Eloise, who was born in 1903, said the incident occurred before she was born.

In 1880 we find Alonzo Lore, age 18 so born in 1861 or 1862, a laborer born in PA, father born in Canada, mother in Canada, living with the Wilson Wells family in Spring Township, district 11, Crawford County.

This Alonzo could well be Rachel’s last child, although if these dates are correct, she would have been 47 when he was born.

The name Alonzo Lore is interesting. It is a very unusual combination.  Other Alonzo Lore’s include:

  • 1860 Alonzo Lore age 5 born 1855 in NJ, living in Downe, Cumberland NJ
  • 1870 Alonzo 14 born 1855 living in Ward 8 Dist 24 Philadelphia Pa
  • 1880 A.D. Lore born 1852, farmer, married to Sophia, father born Canada and mother born in Maine (this is CB’s brother)
  • 1880 Alonzo 19 born 1861 living in Spring, Crawford Pa, born Pa, parents Canada (ironic that both men’s father’s are born in Canada)
  • 1900 Alonzo Lore born 1855 in Indiana (could be last name of Love), parents born KY
  • 1910 Alonzo Lore age 52 born 1857 in NJ, living in 15-WD, Philadelphia Pa, wife Marie 48, daughter May
  • Social Security Death Index – Alonzo C. Lore born Mar. 12, 1888, issued in Pa, last resided in Upper Darby, Delaware, Pennsylvania, died January 1974, SS181-22-1865. WWII draft registration says he was born in Dividing Creek, NJ.

Ancestry.com lists Joseph C. Lore b 1831 in Cumberland Co NJ as the father of Alonzo F. Lore born in 1856 in NJ. Source is given as the Glouchester Co. Historical Soc. in Woodbury NJ, Vol. 1 page 64 in the James, John and Thomas Sheppard book.  His wife’s name was Cornelia Sheppard, born Dec. 3, 1833 in Cumberland Co NJ.  Provided by rwilson154@prodigy.net in July 2004.

The Alonzo Lore in Crawford Co. in 1880 is a mystery, but the other Alonzo in NJ is accounted for.

We find a Mary Lore divorcing Alonzo Lore Feb. 3, 1898 in Warren Co. in the following court record:

Book 59-49 – Mary Lore libellant vs Alonzo Lore respondent.

  • 3, 1898 – Subpoena filed and returned unable to find respondent
  • Feb 8th – Alonzo is served in Warren Borough.
  • April 9, 1898 – Libellant bill of particulars filed. I hunted for this document in court house when I visited during the court house remodeling in 2004. They were to find and mail when the remodel was done, but subsequently “forgot” and then refused.
  • April 11, 1898 Case heard and respondent not appearing.
  • April 12, 1898 Respondent files answer.
  • April 13 1898 Divorce granted.
  • 1901 and 1903 fees finally paid

It looks like Alonzo may have done basically the same thing that Curtis did. He was born in 1861 or 1862, hired out as a laborer and lived on his own or with others after his father’s death between 1862 and 1867.  In 1870, he isn’t living with Rachel and I can’t find him in the census.  He married and divorced in Crawford and Warren County, PA, respectively, as did his brother Curtis.  We don’t know where he lived or anything about him beyond that, except that he was alive between roughly 1895 and 1905 and he didn’t much care for his brother’s misbehaved daughters!  If Curtis Lore’s obituary is correct, and may well not be, Alonzo may have been dead by 1909 when Curtis died.

Solomon Jehiel Lore

Solomon Jehile Lore was born in 1854 in Blue Eye, Warren County, Pennsylvania. This is Uncle Stanley and Denny Lore’s ancestor.  Solomon married Candace “Virginia” Cummings between 1880 and 1882.  The Cummings family was a neighbor to the Lore family.  Solomon died in 1914 in Erie, Pa.  Denny found remnants and fragments of this family in the attic of his aunt.  Among other things, he found a coin that had been drilled and worn on a chain, possibly as a good luck token in the Civil War, although we have not found records that Solomon served.  Denny also found Canadian money, in particular, a bank note from Montreal.  This helped us focus upon an area between Montreal and Vermont where Anthony’s wife, Rachel, was born.  Anthony and Rachel married in Starksboro, Vermont in 1831.

Solomon had two children:

  • Blanche Lore born in 1881, married Ray Killian and died after 1947 (1 child)
  • Albert Lore born in 1883, married Merle Irvin(e) and died in 1959 (2 children)

Solomon died on January 31, 1914 in the hospital in Erie, PA.

Maggie/Minerva Lore married Henry Ward

At the historical society, Denny and I found an index entry for Minerva Ward, an adult, baptized at Spring Creek, Sept. 23, 1883, from the Garland Methodist Church Records. She would have been 35 years old.

If this is the same Minerva, she did in fact survive childhood. Where was she in the 1860 census?  By 1870 she was apparently married and by 1880 we find the following in Spring Creek District 274 in Warren Co. PA.

  • Henry Ward 35 works in tannery (born 1845)
  • Minerva 31 born Pa father born France mother born New York
  • Ernest 10 born in Michigan at school
  • Seillie M (female) 6 at school born Pa
  • Franklin J 5 born Pa
  • Stephen A 2 born Pa

The 1900 we find in Fayette County, Pa., Henry married to Viola for 9 years with sons Joseph and Howard 19 and 14. Perhaps these are Minerva’s children before she died.  We find Henry in 1920 in Warren Co, age 75 married to Viola J. age 61.  If this is the correct Henry Ward, Minerva died between 1886 and 1891.

In the death records, we find Maggie Ward, age 32-10-8, died October 18, 1893 of a bowel inflammatory in Sugar Grove on Hazeltine Rd., buried on Stilson Hill. So Maggie was born about 1860, while Mary and Minerva were born in 1848, so this is not likely to be the same person. Maggie’s parents were not listed on her death certificate but her gravestone on FindAGrave says Maggie Waters, wife of G. U. Ward, so this eliminates this Maggie.

Records from Minerva’s descendants on Ancestry.com show that Mary or Minerva, wife of Henry Ward, was indeed a Lore, daughter of Anthony and Rachel, and that Mary died in 1921. One tree shows that Henry was first married to Minerva and then to Mary.  Of course, there is no source information and I take Ancestry trees with a very big grain of salt.  Unfortunately, there is no gravestone for either Mary or Minerva Ward.  Fortunately, this isn’t my direct line.  If anyone ever really needs to know, an autosomal DNA test to see if they match the Lore cousins would solve the mystery.

It seems apparent that there were twins, Mary and Minerva, born in 1848, since they both appears in the 1850 census. Both are missing in 1860, but one may have survived to marry Henry Ward.

Franklin (Francis) “Frank” Lore

Franklin survives as well, and lived an extremely interesting life.

Both Franklin’s descendant, Don Lore, now deceased, and Stanley Lore’s records contain a very old photo of a man. Don Lore’s family says that it is the father of Franklin Lore and shows his name as Joseph.  Denny has him as “the progenitor,” but with no name.  Denny could have received the photo from the Wisconsin line.

After speaking with Don over the phone, he told me that he had taken the photo out of its original frame and the photo had the name of a studio in Coudersport. Given that piece of information, I am beginning to suspect that this photo is actually of Francis (Frank) and not his father.  I suspect this because this man looks to me to be between 40 and 50 and that is the age that Francis would have been in about 1880 when he married Loretta Butler in Coudersport, Pa.  For this photo to have been taken of Anthony, given his birth about 1806, the photo would have been taken between 1846/1856 which may be somewhat early for this quality of a photo and we have no record of Anthony being in Coudersport, Pa., although that isn’t to say he couldn’t have been there.  That is very early for a portrait which had become very popular by the 1880s, with studios popping up.

We know that Anthony died between 1862-1867 when the camera was not yet widely in use, in fact not in use much at all before the Civil War. Of course, we also know that Franklin Lore, aka Francis Lore left Pennsylvania between 1881 and 1883, so if this is his photo, taken in Coudersport, he would have been about 40 years old, or perhaps he came back to visit.

Franklin Lore

Regardless, this is allegedly either Franklin Lore or his father Anthony Lore. If this is Franklin, he probably looks similar to his father, Anthony, and this is as close as we will ever get to seeing Anthony.

Franklin served in the Civil War as a logger and surveyor. He enlisted in the US Cavalry on Aug. 16, 1862 and was honorably discharged September 6, 1865 in Erie Co., Pa.

According to the census, Francis was born in 1845. Stan’s records show nothing except his name, probably because he left the area.

The following photo of Francis “Frank” Lore below was contributed by Jane Funcheon,

Frank Lore

The records of Don Lore show that Francis was called Frank, born Dec. 5, 1843 in Jamestown, Chautauqua, NY. He died January 17, 1913 in Iron River, Bayfield, Wisconsin and is buried in the Iron River City Cemetery.

The Northern Great Lakes Visitor Center very kindly provided me with information from their index that says “Francis Lore was found dead in the woods on January 19, 1913” along with a note that there was a long article about him.

The ”long article” below, printed in the Iron River, Wisconsin Newspaper on January 23, 1913:

Francis Lore

Francis Lore, whose sudden death occurred Friday night in his hunting camp in this town, was my old time friend and associate for more than 22 years. For the last 15 years we have traveled with our crew over hill and dale, through swamps and mire, and hewed our way through windfalls and jungles: we have endured the scorching sun of summer and faced the biting winds of 30 degrees below in the winter.  We have met in the wilderness, the fiercest storms of summer and winter.  We have located and established logging railroads, town and country highways and government lines in every direction from the Brule River to the Chequamegon Bay, and from the bold shores of Lake Superior to the Sawyer County line; there are few miles in this territory that we have not traveled over together.  Francis Lore was an honest man.  A minister in Superior East end directed me to him, and told me he would use me right.  I came to Francis when I was looking for a homestead, and he did not show me the wrong land, or tell me that there were three million feet of timber when there was only two.  He has collected my money and always turned it over to me to the cent.  No timber baron could bribe him to run a crooked line, to take in timber that did not belong to the baron.  He was reliable and faithful and a tried and true friend to me.  Francis possessed a wonderful mind, the retina of which took in every detail of the object and every minute occurrence connected with it, and that picture never faded.  Fifteen years later, he would recall every detail as though it happened on the day previous.  He was one of the best witnesses that ever took the witness stand.  Every detail would be told just as it occurred, convincing everyone that he was telling the whole truth.  He had his faults – but who has not.

Last Wednesday, he took his last walk into the wilderness he always loved so well. His legs that had carried him so many thousand miles, refused to carry him further, so he went to that Beautiful Isle of Somewhere.  I shall miss him so much. – Winfield E. Tripp

Francis was married April 19, 1879 in Jamestown (Coudersport according to Jane Funcheon) to Loretta Hanna Butler, known as “Etta”. She was born in July 9, 1859 in Coudersport, Pa. and died Feb. 17, 1923 in Baudette, Lake of the Woods, Minnesota. She was brought back and buried beside Francis in Iron Mountain.

Jane indicates that Loretta was the first white woman to take up an abode in or near the present village of Iron River, Wisconsin. She and her husband began the first year of their marriage in her home state of PA before they moved west and settled in Merril, Wisconsin for a year before moving again to Superior, Wisconsin.  They came to Iron River in 1883 where they built a shanty and filed a claim on it.  A portion of today’s present Iron River Village is built on that claim.

Don Lore (now deceased) indicated that there is a museum that has a family Bible on the site, but the Bible belonged to one of Francis’ children and it contains nothing that is genealogically of note.

Both Frances Lore and his wife are buried in the Iron River City Cemetery.

Their children are:

  • Frederick Ancil (Ansel) Lore born Oct. 11, 1881 in Butler, Butler Co Pa, (Jane Funcheon indicated born in Coudersport) died July 31, 1972 in Kelly Lake, St. Louis, MN and was buried in Nashwauk, Itasca, MN He married Anna Olson Dec. 15, 1905.
  • Ella Lavina Lore born June 11, 1885 in Superior, Douglas, Wisconsin, died Apr. 17, 1935 and was married to James Luther Deeth Jan 31, 1905 in Iron River, Bayfield, Wisc.

February 1905 Marriages from the Iron Mountain Newspaper James Deeth, stepson of ________Fargo, to Ellen Lore, daughter of Mr. & Mrs. Frank Lore, in Duluth, before Feb. 16

Ellen Lore Deeth 2

James Luther Deeth and Ella Lavina Lore (daughter of Franklin Lore, granddaughter of Anthony Lore,) photos contributed by Jane Funcheon and Don Lore.

Deeth stones

  • Charles George Lore born July 30, 1888 in Iron River, died Jan 26, 1952 in Red Oak, Iowa and is buried in Pine Lawn Cemetery on Long Island, NY and was married to Josephine Marie Delaney, “Jo”, June 23, 1919. His delayed birth certificate issues in 1940 lists his father’s place of birth as York, PA and his mother’s as Germantown, PA.
  • Frances Jeanette Lore born Feb. 5, 1894 in Iron River, died Jan. 13, 1962 in Lansing Michigan and was married to John William Huntoon, “Jack”, Dec. 14, 1911 in Ashland Wisconsin and subsequently divorced and remarried. Her delayed birth certificate issues in 1940 lists her father’s birth location as NY State and her mother’s as Pennsylvania.
  • Estelle Loretta Lore born May 21, 1896 in Iron River, died June 20, 1973 in Lansing, Michigan and was married to Clifton Smith “Deke” April 28, 1936 in Lansing Michigan.

I searched for this family in 1880 and could not find them.

The 1895 Wisconsin state census lists “Soldiers of other states in Wisconsin” and includes an entry for Francis Lore, Private, Company C, Regiment 16, from Pennsylvania now in Iron River.

A very odd twist to this family is that for some reason Franklin Lore inherits land in Warren County, PA from a William M. Jackson in 1893, nearly 15 years after Franklin left Warren County and ten years after he left for Wisconsin. It is 50 acres of land listed on a plat map found in Warren County as Jackson’s estate.  This further pinpoints where the Lore’s lived, as this property borders the Farnham and Cummings properties which helps us triangulate where the Lore family lived.  Two of Anthony Lore’s children married into these families.  William Jackson had no heirs, and despite repeated efforts, I have been unable to discover the reason for the inheritance.

Of note, A.D.’s daughter said that after Anthony and Rachel died, “relatives” raised the children. I never saw any signs of “relatives” but perhaps this is a hint as to who some of those relatives might have been.  Clearly, someone took those kids in and they were not kept as a group.

Two of the Lore children bought and sold land in Spring Creek Township and the section numbers, 314 and 318 are given. Today, this into the old farmhouse at the end of Jackson Hill Road, and the property just beyond that as well, on Punkey Hollow Road.

Jackson Hill road map

At the point that the road ends today, it abruptly turns to the right and becomes Punkey Hollow Road and there is an old abandoned farm on the left side of the road, right at the bend.  This is lot 314.

End of Jackson Hill road

You can see where at one time there was a fork in the road and another branch went to the left at the junction where the road turns to the right. That road to the left went to the Cummings land.  Solomon Lore married a Cummings.  The Farnham’s lived just past the Cummings where there are no roads today.  One of the Lore daughters, Maria, married a Farnham, and Rachel was living with the Farnhams after Anthony’s death.  Given that the daughters married men from this geography, and two of the boys owned land here, this is where the family lived, possibly on the 50 acres that Franklin inherited.

Jackson plat map

On the map above, the house shown on section 314 that says “HR Jackson” may well be the house shown below. Today, the dotted line road above the “314” and below the “W. Jackson 50 A Est.” that I’ve highlighted is the turnout shown in the photos below.

The next photo shows the turnoff that led back to the Farnham and Cummings properties in the plat map and probably as well to where the Lore family lived.

Jackson turnout

The photograph above is the cut away from the “road” today which is just north of the abandoned farmhouse which looks to have at one time led to the Cummings and Farnham properties which included the Lore area and the associated families, according to the plat maps of the late 1800s. This would have been the “road” to their land.  Perhaps the Lore family actually lived on the 50 acres that Franklin inherited.  I wonder if he (or he and his father) cleared it for Mr. Jackson in return for allowing the family to live there.  Note that on the map there is no house on the Jackson property.

The area cleared for the abandoned farm is shown below.

Jackson farm satellite

Today this road is clearly abandoned, and the area is rife with bears and very isolated, not affording cell phone coverage. Even with a Jeep, it was very muddy and I was not of the mind to challenge my mortality.

Jackson Farm satellite 2

There is no driveway back there today so this house is very likely gone. Notice on the plat map above there is no road to the Farnham house, even then.  This area is extremely remote and rugged and today as is seen on the following current atlas, the area is now State Game Land.  The satellite views show just how rugged this area remains.

The “Big Farm” noted with an X is a very old, very large production farm that was known for many years to employ many young men. This farm is no longer in production, but it is a very good candidate for where C.B. Lore was working in the 1870 census.

The cemetery where the Farnham’s are buried and were Rachel Levina Lore is most likely buried in an unmarked grave is located on Cemetery Road across from where the “ce” in cemetery is placed on the map. If is a relatively large cemetery and impossible to miss.

Spring Creek map

This photo was taken in the cemetery closest to where our Lore ancestors lived – on Cemetery road. I was unable to find the stones that were supposed to be there – those of the Farnham family that Rachel Lore lived with after Anthony’s death, but I had to wonder if this group of 3 were the unmarked graves of Anthony’s wife and maybe two children.  Anthony from all stories drowned someplace so he would not have been buried if the body was not recovered.

Spring Creek cemetery

The map below shows the cemetery at the red balloon at top, and the location of the abandoned farm near where they lived at the bottom.

Spring Creek Cem to Jackson Hill

Satellite view of the same area.

Spring creek cem satellite

By the way, those little cleared postage stamp squares between Jackson Hill Road and Brokenstraw Creek are not farms, they are oil pumping and storage facilities.

The Cemetery was on the paved road before one turned left onto Jackson Hill road, which was and is still dirt, or mud, shown in the next photo.

The following photo is “the long road,” Jackson Hill Road. Was this named for Mr. Jackson whose land Franklin Lore inherited?  This area is so remote that as the road petered to a 2 track then worse, I actually turned my Jeep around for fear of getting stuck, having no cell reception and fear of being a snack for the local bears if I had to walk the miles to a paved road.  When I say this area is remote, it’s the head of the Allegheny National Forest and several other wilderness areas as well.  I was not yet ready to follow Anthony to the great beyond, a victim of the relentless Allegheny natural forces.

Jackson Hill road view

This is the house at the end of Jackson Hill road where the road turns to trail. I believe our ancestors lived just north-east (left) of this point.

Jackson Hill farm

Was this near where they lived, or actually where they lived?

Jackson Hill clearing

Directly across the road from the abandoned farm house is another piece of cleared property which was clearly used at one point for farming.

Jackson Hill field

Above, a picture of an area on the South side of Jackson Hill road that could have been owned by the Lore family, according to the plat maps. Even if this isn’t it exactly, it’s very similar.

Jackson Hill oil

Given the Lore family’s long history of oil speculation, I don’t know if it’s relevant or not that today we find this oil storage tank on land that could have been owned by the Lore family. That would somehow be fitting as several of Anthony’s sons and grandchildren were workers in the oil field business.

Sweet Taste of Success

Given that we began with several strikes against us, it’s amazing that we ever found Benjamin Lore, aka Anthony Lore aka Antoine Lord. His name wasn’t Benjamin or Lore.  The only other thing we knew about him was that his son Curtis aka C. B. was from Pennsylvania and born in 1860 or 1861, except that birth year was wrong too by 5 years.  Not only is it amazing that we found either Curtis or Anthony, but that we’ve now proven that this is the right family, our family, and that Anthony Lore of Warren County, PA in 1850 is the same Anthony Lore as found in Addison County, Vermont in 1831 is the same Antoine Lord born and baptized in L’Acadie in Quebec in 1805.

Fortunately, we had multiple records that indicated Anthony was born in Canada, although records, even multiple records, can sometimes still be wrong. Still, Canada is a big place.

Denny’s Canadian money, found in his aunt’s attic, provided clues as to a potential location in Canada, pointing us towards the Montreal area. A drilled coin, found in the same box, looking to have been worn around someone’s neck on a chain begs so very many questions. We know at least one of Anthony’s sons, Franklin, fought in the Civil War.  Did he wear the coin around his neck as a good luck charm, as has been suggested by family members?  Or did that coin belong to Solomon, in whose descendants possession it was found?

Ultimately, finding and proving Benjamin/Anthony/Antoine Lore/Lord of Warren County, PA was the same man found in Addison County Vermont marrying Rachel Hill who was the same man born in Blairfindie was the most difficult part of the challenge. I don’t think we could have done this without DNA testing.  We waited for years to find the right people to prove the family tie via DNA testing.  If there is a lesson to be learned here it’s that your DNA is fishing for you 24X7X265, so never give up.

This was a case where we needed both Y DNA to confirm that actual paternal line and autosomal DNA to prove our branch of that paternal family line. Fortunately, Family Tree DNA offers both tests and we took full advantage of them, including DNA archived by my mother before her death. I can’t thank Family Tree DNA enough for their free archival services.  Having her results has made a world of difference.

I am forever grateful to Sylvain Lord as well as my cousin Denny Lore, both for their individual research and assistance, and for agreeing to DNA test. DNA is the gift that keeps on giving, and it was through their combined participation that we have been able to prove the connection to Julien Lor/Lord.  In fact, just this week, we’ve had another amazing breakthrough on the Lore/Lord line, but that story will have to wait for a future article!

Anthony, or Antoine

Of course, I’d love to know what Anthony looked like. We have only two photos of his children.  The photo below, at right is definitely Anthony’s son Curtis Benjamin Lore, and at left probably Francis aka Franklin or Frank Lore.  I say probably, because both Denny and the family in Wisconsin have this labeled as “the Progenitor” and Franklin’s father, respectively, so there is a possibility this photo is Anthony himself, not his son Franklin.  The Wisconsin family has the name as “Joseph.”  Well, Anthony was Benjamin in Indiana so maybe he is Joseph in Wisconsin.  Stranger things have happened in this family!

Franklin and CB Lore

As I look at these two photos, the family resemblance escapes me. We know positively the photo of Curtis is Curtis, and we know that he is Anthony’s son, but we don’t know if the photo at left is misidentified, although it is from Coudersport where Franklin aka Francis Lore married in 1879.  Given how far we’ve come identifying Antoine, it’s somehow fitting that the only possible photo remains a mystery – and all for lack of someone writing on the back.

Reflections

As I reflect upon Anthony or Antoine, I wonder whether he was truly a river pirate. I can’t imagine why a family would concoct a story that brought them shame, so I tend to believe the story, or at least I believe that Eloise believed it to be true.  I might feel differently if Eloise was bragging or boasting when she told the story, or thought it was “cool,” but she clearly wished she didn’t have to convey that information.

On the other hand, the information from Curtis’s other child, Mildred suggests that he might not have been a pirate, but might have instead been a trader.

So now we have a quandary.  Was he a good guy or a bad guy?

Information from all sources suggests that he died on the river. Perhaps he tussled with river pirates, and lost.  In other words, as a rafter, he could have been a victim of pirates. Perhaps his raft hit something and capsized.  Perhaps he was a river pirate.  I wish there was a way to know.

Was Antoine a “voyageur” before moving to Warren County? Did he love the river? Was it in his blood?  Was he tied to the water and the woods? Was he a woodsman like his son Francis?  Was his Native heritage speaking to him?

Did Antoine make his own moonshine? Did he feed his family off of the land, in true pioneer spirit?  How else would one make a living in an uncleared area?

Was Anthony an opportunist, making an honest living off the river as a highway, a moonshiner making a relatively honest living off of thirsty rafters who welcomed his wares, or was he an evil man, a pirate, taking unfair advantage of others?

Was he simply doing what he needed to do to feed his family, or did he enjoy the pirating lifestyle?

Why did none of his 7 children who had children name one of his 47 grandchildren after him, with the exception of Maria Farnham who gave one of her children Anthony for a middle name?  Four of them named a child after their mother.

We really know so very little about Anthony, the man, and we understand even less.

Anthony’s sons were certainly attracted and tied to an adventurous lifestyle. Were they following in his footsteps or did they perhaps suffer from a lack of parenting and direction after their parents died?  Three of his sons were divorced, a very uncommon occurrance for that timeframe.

Franklin, Anthony’s second oldest child was himself a woodsman, living on the frontier, one of the first whites to settle in northern Wisconsin. Did he learn these skills from Anthony?  If not, how could he have learned them to the degree that they were a second sense, second nature?  Who would have or could have taught him?

Acadians were staunch Catholics, but Anthony clearly was not, although he was raised in the church. Did he actively leave the faith, or did he simply drift away, down the river, so to speak?  His wife’s family was protestant, but there is no evidence at all of any religious affiliation until a couple of generations later with Minerva’s adult baptism.  Was religious estrangement a function of Anthony’s belief system or simply reflective of the extremely rugged and remote lands where he lived?  Or maybe a result of his “career” choice?  Anthony’s son, William Henry, felt very negatively towards Catholics and warned his children to stay away from the Catholic church.  He felt Catholic churches were involved in some type of conspiracy.  Was that a reflection of Anthony’s feelings, or were they simply William’s own opinions?

I do know one thing, I can never look at the Allegheny River again without thinking about Anthony and wondering about his life…and death. The Allegheny River, below, near where Brokenstraw Creek empties into the river is likely where Anthony would have connected up with the Allegheny as he drifted downriver from his home back in the rugged mountain country off of Jackson Hill Road.   Brokenstraw Creek was literally in Anthony’s back yard, the riverman’s highway.  The Allegheny itself serves as Anthony’s grave marker.

Allegheny near brokenstraw

Rest in peace, Anthony. We found you.  You’re not lost anymore and you’ll never be lost again.

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research

Curtis Benjamin Lore (1856-1909), Devilishly Handsome Rogue, 52 Ancestors #113

Will the real Curtis Benjamin Lore please stand up?????

How I wish it were that simple. What his story lacks in simplicity, it more than makes up for in mystery – some of which we’ve never unraveled, and never will.

Curtis Benjamin, known as C.B. Lore, was the dark and dreamy mystery man, the elusive, unavailable, field hardened, working man….the kind of man that attracts women like moths to the flame. C.B. was a survivor, an entrepreneur, successful, adaptable, an expert in his field and respected – so one side of the story goes.

The other side suggests he was a fast talker, the slippery sort, not reliable and not truthful about his past, or present – in essence, a rogue.

One thing is for sure. He survived one way or another on his own, from the time he was a child, for 20 years by the time he met Nora Kirsch, the young woman who would become his wife…well, one of them anyway.

C.B. was very probably a ladies man. And Nora was young, very beautiful and living right there at the Kirsch House.  The attraction between them was probably magnetic.

Nora’s heart likely skipped a beat at the end of each day as the men from the oilfields would knock off work and come in to the bar for a beer, some food and in his case, probably a room as well. C.B. probably lived at the Kirsch House while he worked in the area.  After discovering Nora, I’m positive that he did. He probably spent evenings in the parlor, or helping out to be with Nora.  And when the chill of autumn set in in 1887, he put his arms around Nora to keep her warm.

Kirsch house 1990s

In 1990, 103 years later, his granddaughter, and great-great-granddaughter stand by that very bar that C.B. Lore frequented in the Kirsch House.  Can you see him, there beside them, leaning on the bar, smoking a fine cigar?

C.B. Lore was a manly man, a hearty outdoorsman who worked in the rough oil and gas fields. The census in Indiana says he was born in 1860 or 1861, but the 1860 census in Warren County, Pennsylvania shows us that he was born in 1856.

In 1887 when he came to Indiana from Pennsylvania, he was 31 years old, a roughneck, strong, worldly and extremely handsome.  Did I mention that he was handsome???

Nora Kirsch was 21 and had little experience with men.  It’s no wonder that he subtracted a few years from his age, reducing the 10 year divide between their ages to a less questionable 5 years.  I don’t know whether Nora ever knew the truth or not, but C.B.’s redesigned birth year stayed with him for the duration of his life, in the census and on his tombstone.

What was C.B. Lore, born in Pennsylvania, doing at the Kirsch House in Aurora, Indiana? Well, it’s a long story.  Get a cup of coffee or tea and some chocolate, a I’ll tell you the story of our mystery man.  Yea, you’re going to need chocolate for this one!  In fact, just bring the whole box!  That’s what my mother did when she found out…ate chocolate.  To quote her, “What else is there to do?”  Yep, you’re gonna need lots of chocolate!

Born in Pennsylvania

Curtis Benjamin Lore was born on April 17, 1856 in Blue Eye, Warren County, Pennsylvania to Antoine “Anthony” Lore and Rachel Levina Hill. Anthony and Rachel had moved to this area from New York a decade or so before.

Blue Eye is a remote area, fairly heavily forested and mountainous. There really isn’t a town of Blue Eye, it’s an “area” on or off of Blue Eye Road which intersects with the small town of Spring Creek, PA.  Only the locals call it “Blue Eye,” and no one knows how it got its name.

Blue Eye PA

This photo contributed by Betty Rhodes shows Spring Creek in 1903.

Spring Creek PA 1903

The area probably didn’t look a lot different when C. B. Lore lived there.

1870 census Warren co

Looking at the 1870 census, we discover a couple of very interesting items. Two things, actually.

First, much to my surprise, Curtis is hired out as a farm hand.  At age 14.  Where was his family?

The second surprise is that Curtis is not age 9, born in 1861, as was reflected in his documentation in Indiana, but age 14, born in 1856. So he wasn’t born in 1861 as the family said?  Well, maybe.  Let’s take a look at the 1860 census and see what we find there.

1860 census Warren Co

Sure enough, the 1860 census for Spring Creek Township in Warren County, PA shows Curtis with his parents, age 4. That pretty well cinches the 1856 birth year.

But where is the rest of his family in 1870?

Curtis’s mother is living with the Farnham family. His sister Margaret, age 12, who would have been listed as Marilla in 1860, is living with that family as well, but otherwise, none of the family is to be found in Warren County.  Based on Curtis’s father’s application for citizenship, we know that he applied in 1862 and never returned to claim his citizenship in 1868, so he died sometime between those dates.

Maria Lore, Curtis’s oldest sister married Elisha Stephen Farnham in 1862, but she is missing in 1860. Most of the older children had either married, moved away, or died.  The 1860s was an utterly brutal decade for this family, aside from the Civil War.

Have a piece of chocolate.

Aunt Eloise’s Stories

Nora Kirsch and C.B. Lore would marry in 1888 and have 4 girls, Edith (1888), Curtis (1891), Mildred (1899) and Eloise (1903). Edith Barbara Lore was my grandmother and she died in 1960 when I was a child.

However, I remember Aunt Eloise well. She was 15 years younger than my grandmother.  After my grandmother died, Eloise, who had no children of her own, “took over” the role of grandmother, as best she could.  Mother was close to Eloise and even though Eloise lived in Lockport, New York and we lived in Indiana, we visited with her as often as we could.  I remember how thrilled Mother would be when letters from Eloise arrived!

Eloise worked for a company that produced plastics and every Christmas we would receive a wonderful “Santa” box filled with gifts and plastic items that were slightly flawed, just enough that they weren’t saleable. That was before the days of outlet stores.  For us, it was like winning the lottery.  How we looked forward to those boxes and carefully rationed the contents, trying not to use them up too fast.  Eloise always included a box of chocolate too.

It would be Eloise who would provide the clues to begin the process of unlocking the secrets of C.B. Lore. According to the other daughters, Eloise was his favorite.  She was also the baby of the family.  Eloise and her sister Mildred would accompany C.B. in his buggy as he made his rounds, checking on his projects and horses, and the girls would listen to his stories.

Buggy ride

Eloise was only 6 years old when C.B. Lore died of tuberculosis, which must have been devastating for both of them. Perhaps because of his illness which incapacitated him, then killed him, he may have talked more and shared more with her and the other girls when he was bedfast than he would otherwise have done.

Eloise provided quite a bit of verbal history.

She told us that C.B. had a brother they called “Uncle Lawn” (my spelling, not hers, she told me verbally) but that she didn’t know his real name. Eloise tells the story about when “Uncle Lawn” visited in Rushville when Edith and Curtis were young.  Those two sisters were quite the mischief makers and were best friends.

Eloise said, “Edith and Curtis, always devils, put a pin in the horsehair sofa so he would sit on it.”  He did. The mischievous girls of course though this was hilariously funny.  “Uncle Lawn” was enraged and told C.B. Lore that his girls were awful and stormed out, never to return.  That event had to have happened between about 1895 and 1903, given that Curtis was born in 1891 and Eloise said that event occurred before she was born in 1903.  C.B. Lore doted on his daughters and I doubt he cared what “Uncle Lawn” thought.

Eloise said C.B.’s parents’ names were Benjamin (later proved to be Anthony) and Alvira or Alvina (later proved to be Rachel Levina), and that they both had immigrated when they were 5 or 6 and that “the first Kaiser Wilhelm had signed their immigration papers.”

The first Kaiser Wilhelm reigned from 1861-1888 in Germany and Curtis Benjamin Lore was born in Pennsylvania in 1856, so this made no sense, but then, Eloise didn’t feel the need to question what she had been told.  Later research proved this to be incorrect, but one has to wonder at the genesis of the story.  Was Eloise confused, was this a different family line, or did C.B. make it up to cover some uncomfortable or sinister truth?  It seems a very odd and detailed fact to be simply “created.”

Eloise wasn’t as quick to talk about the darker story of C.B.’s father’s death, but eventually she relented. Remember, she didn’t even know C.B.’s father by his correct name.

C.B.’s father, Anthony aka Benjamin, it seems, was an “Indian Trader” on the Allegheny river and drown. After discussing this for a while, Eloise confessed that C.B.’s father was really a “river pirate.”  I was quite shocked to have a pirate in the family and questioned the existence of pirates on rivers within the US.  Unfortunately, Eloise had or gave no details, but I would find information later to flesh out this story and would discover that yes, there were in fact river pirates on the Allegheny River in that timeframe.  Who knew?

Those river pirates weren’t pirates in the traditional sense, but were bootleggers and traders – not really a “profession” one could be proud of, at least not in this context.  They flew under the radar, as tavern keepers had to be licensed to sell liquor.  So the “traders” provided their illicit wares to rafts and the bored men on those rafts traveling the Allegheny by rowing from the sides of the river, hidden in the alcoves, out to meet the rafts as they drifted downriver.  However, it’s possible that Anthony began by being a “voyageur” in Canada, one who traded with the Indians. He may simply have transported his known occupation to a new location and slightly different circumstances.

Have another piece of chocolate.

Voyageur

However, Anthony’s story becomes more sinister, because he drowned and as Eloise talked more, and began speaking in hushed tones, I discovered that Anthony was perhaps murdered. Now, this wasn’t a murder where the family was righteously indignant, but one that seemed to carry some unspoken shame.

I guess engendering sympathy for a pirate’s demise, especially if he was “pirating” at the time of his death, was probably somewhat more difficult than for the local minister’s death.

For me, this new pirate edition was an absolutely enthralling story and I longed desperately to know more.  I’ve discovered over the years that how “good” and juicy a story turns out to be is approximately equivalent to the effort someone expends to hide the truth!  Even C.B. Lore, with his own rather checkered past didn’t want to tell the truth about his father and even went so far as to mis-state his parents’ names.  So, this story must have been a doosey!

Eventually we would find three additional lines of Anthony Lore’s family. All 3 lines would share a “death by drowning” story, but the circumstances were different in each version.  One would have him die at sea, one murdered while returning to or from France for his inheritance, another one on the river, but with no mention of being a pirate, and finally, our family line’s pirate version where he was either murdered or drown.

One thing seems certain, he probably did drown. That part is consistent.  All stories involved water and travel.  Two included murder.  Eloise said his body was never found.  Perhaps that is where the murder theory arose.  Or, perhaps it is true.

Allegheny

When I visited Warren County, Pennsylvania, I fully expected to find this family having lived on or near the Allegheny River, above, the county’s only major water thoroughfare.  This was not the case.  The Lore family lived in a very remote area of the county near a small stream, Spring Creek. All streams in that area do eventually empty into the Allegheny, so that does not preclude this story, but it certainly casts doubt upon it relative to earning a living on the river.  Or, maybe Anthony kept his family safely away from the river and pirates.

Trying to find Benjamin Lore in Warren County was indeed a red herring in this search, because the man did not exist. I surely spent a lot of time looking for Benjamin, based on C.B. Lore’s death certificate and family oral history.

C.B.’s father’s name is Anthony, or actually Antoine in French, but in the US, his name was always Americanized to Anthony.

Did C.B. intentionally disguise his father’s name, changing it to Benjamin? Did Nora believe C.B.’s father’s name was Benjamin, or was she just upset when providing his death certificate information?  Death certificate information, provided not by the deceased, but by a distraught family member, is often notoriously incorrect.  However, given that C.B.’s daughters said that their grandfather’s name was Benjamin, I suspect that Nora wasn’t confused and the family had been told that his name was Benjamin, not Anthony or Antoine.  But why?

Perhaps the river pirate stories were true and C.B. did not wish to divulge the true name of his father. Whatever the reason, his father’s name was incorrectly recorded on his death certificate, and his mother’s name was not recorded at all.  That information sent me on a very long and very wild goose chase.

As it would turn out, very little of what the Indiana family thought they knew about C.B. Lore in Pennsylvania was true.

Eloise went on to say that after C.B.’s father’s death, when C.B. was young, that he and the other children “pretty much raised themselves.” There was one sister apparently, and the story says that both the mother and sister died.  The impression I had from this story was that they died under very dire circumstances, were desperately poor, living on the doorstep of starvation.  This may indeed have been true.  Records found later do indicate that Rachel, C.B.’s mother, and youngest sister indeed did have to live with another family after Anthony’s death.  There are also no gravestones for any family member, another sign of abject poverty.

When I visited Warren County, PA, I had hoped to find at least a newspaper article telling about Anthony’s death and maybe C.B.’s mother’s death too, but there are no such articles in the papers that remain and have been indexed.

When the search for C.B. Lore’s heritage first began, more than 30 years ago, there was no internet and few compiled resources. What genealogy was to be done had to be done in person, or at the Allen County Public Library which had a superb collection of records.

However, the Lore brick wall would not fall until 3 decades after it reared its ugly head….sadly, after Mother’s passing…..and then with only the happenstance lynchpin of one word…….Blairfindie…..but I’m getting far ahead of myself. Let’s visit Warren County Pennsylvania and see what we find there.

It’s time for another piece of chocolate.  A really good one!

Curtis Lore in Blue Eye, Warren County, Pennsylvania

As any good genealogist does, I left a series of bread crumbs years ago hoping that someone someday would find them and the information they have and the information I have would click like puzzle pieces for both of us.

In September of 2003, a very unusual series of events occurred that began with someone reading my internet Rootsweb posting, then attending a class reunion in Warren County, PA, with Denny Lore and thinking to mention it. That comment at the reunion would lead to Denny and I meeting online. I was thrilled to receive Denny’s e-mail, as it was the first solid lead I had had in many years on this family.

We clicked immediately, like long lost family.  This seemed too good to be true, and Denny and I felt like we had decades of catching up to do.  It was the beginning of a wonderful friendship that endures to this day and some very productive research.  At first, in spite of how well we got along, Denny and I weren’t at all sure we were related.

Denny and I had very different information. He had rescued his Uncle Stanley’s genealogy from sure and certain destruction, literally from the curb after his death. I knew immediately when Denny told me that story that I liked him immensely and we were cut from the same cloth.

We didn’t know it at the time, but Uncle Stanley and Denny are both descended from Solomon, the son of Anthony and Rachel Lore. C.B. was Solomon’s brother.

Uncle Stanley documented this family by using existing family records. Stanley was born in 1911 and died in 1998, so his research was completed post 1930, entirely before the days of internet access and when one had to visit a major library to access microfilm census records.  Fortunately for me, he knew most of these people and didn’t need to find them in old dusty records, so the information he provided was invaluable and not available elsewhere.

My research had been done almost entirely by remote access methodology, except for trips to the Allen County Public Library and my trip with Mother to Rushville in the 1990s which wasn’t terribly productive aside from finding the graves of C.B. and Nora Kirsch Lore and that red herring death certificate.  I was working backwards in time. Stanley was documenting what he knew.  The challenge for Denny and I was to connect the dots between the two methodologies and see if these were indeed the same family.

Before we look at Uncle Stanley’s records, let’s see how we determined that Warren County, Pa. was indeed the place to begin.

C.B. Lore’s death certificate lists his birth place as Pennsylvania.

We know he was married in 1888, and the 1890 census was destroyed, so we first find him and his family in the 1900 census in Rushville, Indiana.

In 1900 they were renting a home and C.B. lists himself as a machinist, 4 months unemployed. They were fairly well to do, as they had two live-in servants.

Rushville 1900 census

Nora had borne three children and all were living. Curtis’s father’s place of birth is given as France, his mother’s as New York, his as Pennsylvania.  As it turns out, this is one third accurate.  C.B.’s father was born in Canada and he was Acadian.  C.B.’s mother was born in Vermont and C.B. was born in Pennsylvania.  Often, wives provided information to the census taker, so this could well have been second hand information and not deemed terribly important.  However, this record in combination with his death certificate sent me looking in Pennsylvania for Curtis.  Thankfully, that much was right.

By 1910, C.B. was dead, so we have no further census records for him.

Based on the 1870 Warren County, PA census, where Curtis is recorded as being age 14, he should be found in the 1880 census being age 24.

In 1880, C.B. Lore (indexed as Lare at Ancestry) is found in Pennsylvania, but not exactly as we might expect to find him.

1880 Warren Co census

The 1880 census shows in Warren Co PA:

  • Curtis age 24, a laborer, born PA and father born PA and mother born in England, with his wife, Mary E, 20 and their children:
  • Maud, 2, and
  • Hebert 2/12th.

This family is living in Enterprise, PA in the far southwest corner of Warren County.

Because my Curtis had never been married, I discounted this record for quite some time as being the “wrong” Curtis, but it turns out to be the “right” Curtis after all. It seems Curtis had been married, with children, something the Indiana family never knew.

More chocolate.

The Courthouse

I decided it was time to visit Warren County and meet my cousin, Denny.

Research at the local court house in Warren, Pennsylvania would give us a different perspective of Curtis’s life.  But first, we had a challenge of a different kind.

Denny and I visited the courthouse in 2004 amidst a massive renovation.  Books weren’t where they were normally stored, and staff was not terribly interested in accommodating those pesky genealogists who want access to old records, which in this case, were stored in the furthest and most inconvenient rooms and in the heights of the attic that could only be accessed by several sets of stairs that wound upwards inside a turret.  If you were one bit claustrophobic or afraid of heights or leary of a winding circular staircase with no railing snaking up the inside of a turret with increasingly small triangle wedge shaped steps, you were sunk.  Never let a little issue like that come between me and genealogy…

Warren Co PA courthouse

Of course, it was August with no air conditioning. I bet those old records are still there deteriorating because no one wanted to carry them back down those dangerous stairs.  And there was no organization of course, just crates and boxes of records all stacked together on shelves and on the floor amid layers of dust. It was amazing we found anything at all, and it wasn’t without a battle with the staff.

Ok, just eat the rest of the box of chocolate.

Lunatics, Alcoholics and Divorcees

In one dusty old book that I peered into out of utter frustration and mild curiosity, as I had never seen one before entitled “Lunatics, Alcoholics and Divorcees,” I received the shock of my life. There were Mary Lore and Curtis Lore.  Seriously, in the lunatics book?  What were they doing in here?  Were they crazy?  Alcoholics?  Divorcees?  Were divorcees considered crazy or depraved?  Talk about social stigma!  OMG!!!!

This is not exactly the book where you want to find your ancestors.  But you know, if it’s them, there’s going to be a good story, one way or another.  If it’s them.  Maybe it’s not them???  Maybe it’s not the right Curtis.  Maybe.

Extremely excited, I copied down the numbers, as this was only an index book, and took my results to the staff. The staff was equally as unhappy as I was excited, because the papers I sought were upstairs in the attic, in that turret, and they tried every excuse possible to avoid taking me there.  Also in this book was a second Lore divorce, a man who might have been C.B.’s brother, Alonzo, but those records were not able to be found, and the staff later refused to try again to locate them.  I’m telling you, those old records were all abandoned in that attic.

I begged. I whined.  I made noise about working with local government and FOIA.  They finally relented – I’m sure only to shut me up and because to comply with a freedom of information act (FOIA) request, they would have had to haul those books downstairs to copy.  It was easier to just take me upstairs to look – which was the exact outcome I was hoping for.

We climbed the stairs, one flight at a time, each flight getting increasingly smaller, and hotter.  Each step creaked and complained under our weight.  Rivulets of sweat ran down my back under my clothes.  I didn’t care.  The woman with me did.  I told her we would get out of there more quickly if she helped me look. I HAD to see those papers.  HAD to.

We found the book, then the box with the docket papers, even though she tried to tell me they no longer existed.  I saw the packet, tied with a string.  Lore vs Lore.  I opened the packet and a century’s worth of dust fell to the floor.  The old paper was very fragile.  My hands were sweaty and shaking.  There were no archival gloves to be had.  I opened the packet very carefully and began to read.

Heavy with oppressive heat, the room was entirely silent, except for the sound of us sweating and an occasional rustle of paper as I turned a page, simply not believing what I was seeing.  I had to read it again.  I wanted to take it downstairs to copy, but according to the woman, I wasn’t taking it anyplace because she wasn’t bringing it back upstairs.

Curtis was married in the 1880 census with 2 children. In 1887, we find that his wife, Mary, has retained an attorney and filed for divorce on Nov. 16th.  It was granted April 5th, 1888, 4 months after he had married the pregnant Nora Kirsch in Aurora, Indiana.  Damn those pesky details anyway!

Chocolate.  More chocolate!

Where Was Curtis Benjamin Lore?

The papers say that Curtis Lore was verbally read the filing the next day, on November 17, 1887, so we know that Curtis was at least in Pennsylvania for some time at that point, specifically on November 17th.

Nov. 17, 1887 – served the within subpoena in divorce on within named Curtis Lore by reading to him the contents of the within writ and also by giving to him a true and attested copy thereof and informing him of its contents.

This was almost exactly the time that Nora was becoming pregnant, judging from Edith’s birth date.  In my mind, this cast some significant doubt about whether or not this really was the same Curtis Lore.  Was this another red herring?  The worse of all bad genealogy jokes?

The truth being, I didn’t want MY Curtis Lore to be a bigamist – to be married to two different women at the same time. I also didn’t want MY Curtis to be the kind of man that abandoned a wife and four children.  Or a liar.  I wanted my Curtis Lore to be an upstanding gentleman, roughneck knight in shining armor, sweeping Nora off her feet – not a cheating husband.  I wanted him to be the renaissance man his daughters believed him to be.  He wasn’t.

The copy of the decree states that Mary Lore and Curtis Lore were married in Centerville, Crawford Co, PA on June 17, 1876 and until June 1886 Mary had “cohabited with him as his wife and it was owned and acknowledged as such by him and so deemed and reputed by all their neighbors and acquaintances: and although by the laws of God as well as by their mutual vows and faith plighted to each other they were reciprocally bound to that constancy and uniform regard which ought to be inseparate from the marriage state; yet so it is that Curtis Lore in violation of said laws and his vows aforesaid has willfully and maliciously deserted the libellant and absented himself from her habitation without reasonable cause for more than one year last past.” The “one year last past” comment would support his time spent in Indiana in the oil and gas fields.

Mary signed this compliant. They had been married 10 years when he left.  “Happy Anniversary Honey – I’m leaving.”  It was either the best anniversary gift Mary ever had, or the worst.  Keep this month and year in mind, June 1886, because there is even yet MORE to this story!

Divorces were different in 1870 than they are today. There was no such thing as a “no fault” divorce where people just agree to disagree and go their separate ways.  Someone had to be wrong, and worse yet, bad, very bad.  If they weren’t bad, they had to be made to look bad.  Adultery, physical abuse or abandonment had to be involved.  Clearly, Curtis did leave Mary, although we don’t know if it was meant to be just an oil drilling trip that became indefinite, then permanent – or if he meant to leave her permanently.  We don’t know if he sent money back home for his family, or not.  We just don’t know.

I hoped to find their marriage license, but checking the Crawford Co. genealogy web site they state that marriage licenses were not required until 1885 except for 2 years in the mid-1850s. Darn.  What luck.  They also said that sometimes there would be a newspaper announcement.  The web site states that these newspapers are indexed at the Crawford Co. Historical society.  Mary had married Curtis when she was 16 and her parents would have had to consent.  I wonder if Mary and Curtis lost their first child.

In June 1876, Curtis would have been age 20 years and 2 months, assuming his birth year was actually 1856.

This is what the courthouse would have looked like in 1877. It was probably in this building where the divorce accusations were “read to” Curtis.  He was probably relieved, knowing that he was going back to Aurora – although he clearly did not know that Nora was pregnant.  That information probably greeted him on his return.

Warren Co courthouse 1877

Further records combined with Uncle Stanley’s information reveals that before their divorce in 1887/1888, Curtis Lore and Mary Bills Lore had 4 children:

  • Maud Lore born in 1878, married in 1911 to Victor Hendrickson and had one son, Roger.
  • Herbert Judson Lore born Nov 23, 1879 in Enterprise, Warren Co., PA, married in 1900/1901 to Ina Mae Bills, died Aug 5, 1968 in Titusville, Crawford Co. PA. Herbert had 4 children, Ronald, May, Guinevere and Harold.
  • John Curtis Lore born January 20, 1881 in Pennsylvania.
  • Sid Lore – probably the child listed in the 1900 census with mother Mary Gilliland as Seldon B. Lore, born in June of 1886.  I’m guessing that B. might have stood for Benjamin.

Given Seldon’s birth month and year, C.B. Lore left Mary that same month, leaving her either 9 months pregnant or with a newborn child, plus 3 children under 8. So either he was the king of all cads, or he didn’t believe the child was his.  However, that’s not mentioned in the divorce proceedings and it would have been very significant.  This situation is not looking good for C.B. Lore’s sense of integrity.  Mary remarried in 1888 as well, but in the 1900 census Seldon is listed as her husband’s step-son with the Lore last name, so clearly represented as C.B.’s child.

The 1880 census shows Maud and Hebert (Herbert?). Uncle Stanley shows both of them, Maud listed as Maud Lore Henderson Marshall Rainer (or Rasner), the last two names being handwritten later.  Uncle Stanley gives no location for where Maud lives, but shows Hebert in Pleasantville, PA. Stanley also shows a J. E. Lore in Jefferson, Ohio and then a Sid with no further info.  Sid could possibly be by a second wife, although his name appears above the words “second wife”, but the wife’s name is not indicated nor is any further info about Sid.  Maybe Sid died.  Or maybe, God forbid, there really is yet another wife and another child named Sid.

MORE FRIGGING CHOCOLATE!!!!!!

In the 1900 census we find that Curtis’s first wife, Mary, remarried in 1888 to Allen Gilliland, and is living in a household in Warren County that includes her Lore children.

In 1904, both a Seldon and a John Lore are living in Oil City, PA as a laborer and an electrician, respectively, according to the city directory.

Mary’s son, John Curtis Lore, was later found residing in Radical, Lee County, Kentucky, a very spartan, remote, mountainous area. John’s WWI draft registration card in 1918 shows he was born in 1881, has blue eyes, brown hair, is tall and of medium build.  He lists his occupation as a driller, so he has apparently followed his father into the oil fields.  His mother, Mrs. A. W. Gilliland, living in Crewe, VA is given as his nearest relative.

The name Curtis seems to repeat and must surely be a family name of some sort, likely through the Hill family of Vermont.  Curtis Benjamin Lore names his daughter Curtis as well.

Apparently, sometime between about 1910, the year after C.B. Lore died, and 1916, the year Nora remarried and left Rushville, John Lore went to find his father, Curtis.

The Illegitimate Son Story

Aunt Eloise told me “the illegitimate son” story, as did Mother. When my grandfather, John Ferverda was courting my grandmother, Edith Lore, or shortly after they were married, and they were in the home of her mother, Nora Kirsch Lore, in Rushville, Indiana, they received an unexpected visitor.  I initially had the impression that this was before C.B. died, but it may have been after, based on later conversations.  John and Edith were married in November 1908 and Edith’s father, C.B. Lore died a year later on Thanksgiving Day, 1909.

In any event sometime within a couple years of this time, one day, a young man “from Kentucky” came and knocked on the door.  Nora answered the door and he told her that he was the son of C.B. Lore and he was looking for him.  The family did not know C.B. had been married previously, so it was presumed that this son must have been illegitimate.  Unfortunately, the question of “what happened next?” must remain unanswered, because the story ends with just this tantalizing tidbit and the fact that Nora invited the young man inside and told him that he was too late.

We’re assuming here that this son was John, but truthfully, it could have been Herbert, Seldon or Sid, whether those are one or two people, or possibly, yet another son. For some reason, Eloise though this son was from Kentucky, fathered when C. B. Lore was tending to race horses in Kentucky.  John was from Kentucky, but clearly fathered in Pennsylvania before C.B. came to Indiana.

Perhaps Nora knew the truth, if not initially, then eventually, that C.B. had been married before and had 4 children from that marriage.  Perhaps the visit from C.B.’s son was as enlightening for Nora as for the son.  Maybe C.B. never told Nora exactly when he got divorced, but did confess the marriage and the children. Maybe he never told her anything at all.  Given the circumstances, perhaps C.B. would have preferred to allow Nora to think he had an illegitimate child rather than for her to know he was already married at the time he married her.  That would have been a betrayal of the first degree on many levels – giving a second wife legitimate grounds for divorce.

But I don’t think Nora wanted to divorce C.B. I think he was indeed probably the only man she ever loved.  She was buried beside him, so one way or another, they continue to be together, regardless of his indiscretions.

The Marriage

Given that Nora’s father, Jacob Kirsch, had been involved with lynching a man in August 1886, just 17 month before Curtis married Nora in January 1888 – I’m thinking that maybe Curtis decided that a marriage, regardless of the circumstances was preferable to the business end of the shotgun owned by a man with an obvious temper and a willingness to execute on that temper, pardon the pun.  Curtis also had to know that Jacob was a crack shot.  A decade later, at more than 50 years of age, with a glass eye, Jacob would win a tri-state shooting competition.  Jacob Kirsch was a non-trivial force to be reckoned with.  C.B. Lore, being a veteran of the rough and tumble oil fields would have recognized that immediately.

There is very little that will get a man riled up quicker than someone getting his daughter pregnant.  Well, unless it’s a married man with a family getting his daughter pregnant.  Where I grew up, that would have been viewed as an experienced worldly man “taking advantage” of Nora’s innocence and naivety.  Clearly, Jacob could not have known about the marriage to Mary and the four children or Curtis would already have been dead – and it would have been considered justifiable homicide.

Lore Kirsch Marriage

On January 18th, Jacob Kirsch signed for the marriage of Nora Kirsch and Curtis B. Lore.  I’m betting this was not a joyful trip to the courthouse.  They were married later that same day!  I’d almost wager a bet that Jacob found out earlier that day, or maybe the evening before and was waiting on the courthouse steps when they opened on the 18th.  I wonder if he had the shotgun with him.  I would have liked to have been a fly on the wall that day.

Someone knew at least a little in advance, because Eloise had a copy of their wedding invitation.

Nora Kirsch wedding invitation

Based on what little we know, Curtis left Pennsylvania in June 1886, the same month his wife Mary gave birth to a son, Seldon. We know for sure he was in Aurora, Indiana in November of 1887 when Nora got pregnant, and we also know he was in Pennsylvania on November 17th, 1887 because his divorce warrant was filed and “read to him” at that time.  Maybe he went back to Pennsylvania to “take care of business” so he and Nora could marry, not realizing of course that Nora had just gotten pregnant.

Using a reverse conception calculator, if the resulting daughter, Edith, was born at exactly full term, Nora became pregnant between November 3rd and November 8th.  So we know where Curtis was then too.

Curtis Lore Wedding

One thing is for sure, based on this wedding picture, Curtis is one handsome rogue.

Is Edith Curtis’s Child?

So, now the delicate question of paternity raises its head.  Not the paternity of Mary’s child, but the paternity of Nora’s child.

Given how close these dates are in terms of where Curtis was in November of 1887, is Edith really Curtis’s daughter?  I’m sure when that thought ran through my head, Nora probably rolled over in her grave a couple of times and then wanted to sit up and slap me.

But I couldn’t help wondering. Call it the cynic in me…plus…I really don’t want to do a lot of genealogy work on a line that isn’t mine, especially thinking it is mine.

Thankfully, cousin Denny agreed to test his DNA, initially for the Y chromosome, but then later when autosomal testing was available, for the Family Finder autosomal test as well. Denny, if you remember, descends from the brother of Curtis Benjamin Lore, so if my mother matches Denny appropriately, then the question of paternity for Edith is resolved.

Denny and my mother match on several segments, as shown below.

Denny Mom chromosome browser

The chromosome browser information at Family Tree DNA, above, is also available as a match table, below.

Denny Mom match

Based on this amount of DNA, Denny was estimated to be mother’s 2nd cousin.

Denny Mom pedigree

Mother and Denny are actually 2nd cousins once removed.

Furthermore, both of them match additional cousins on the Lore side, one additional through Solomon, one through Curtis’s son (by Mary), Herbert, and one through Curtis’s sister Marie.

I was curious how much of Curtis’s DNA I had inherited, and how much of Curtis’s DNA my child had inherited, so I compared Cousin Denny with all three of us.

Denny Mom Me child chromosome browser

In the above chromosome painting, I am orange, mother is blue and my child is green. You can clearly see some segments where Mom had DNA that matches Denny, but I don’t.  Chromosome 12 has a fairly large segment that I did not inherit.  On the other hand, look at chromosomes 1 and 2 where most of the large segments are passed between generations.

Chromosome 16 is another great example where I received almost all of Mother’s, but my child only received about half of that segment.

And yes, some small segments hold up quite well with this type of parental matching, which is called parental phasing because you can clearly see which parental side of your family this DNA came from.

I color coded this spreadsheet with the same colors as the chromosome browser, above.  Match groups are in the bracketed red boxes.

Looking at this matching group on chromosome 2, we have a classic example.

Denny mom me child chr 2

On chromosome 2, Denny matches mother on the largest segment, 22.46 cM and 3766 SNPs.  I inherited part, but not all of, of that segment from Mom, 19.58 cM and 3482 SNPs, and my child inherited the entire amount of that segment from me.  The table below shows all of the matching segments between Denny, mother, me and my child.

Denny mom me child matches

You can easily see which of these matches are valid, meaning which survive parental phasing. Identical by chance matches won’t match your parents as well as you.

There are also several segments where Denny matches only Mom, meaning that segment was not passed to me.  That too is normal.

I’ve sorted this next spreadsheet by match type so it’s easier to see which of these matches falls into what category.

Denny mom me match sort

The IBC or identical by chance are not valid matches because they don’t match through the generations, meaning up through my mother to Denny. The only way I can receive Curtis Lore’s DNA is through my mother, so for Denny’s match to me to be valid, he must also match my mother on that same segment.  You can read more about matching and what it means here.

The matches to my mother only may be valid or identical by chance. There is no way to tell for sure without tests from additional people who descend from the Lore line.  The larger match at 10cM is the most likely to be valid, but certainly some of the others may be too.

The match groups are comprised of at least me and mother, which means that Denny matches both of us, so the DNA is not matching by chance bouncing between two parents. Match groups that include only me and mother to Denny have the *.

Some match groups include my child as well, so that child has also inherited at least some of Curtis Benjamin Lore’s DNA.

Some of you are going to wonder why I didn’t label these as triangulation groups. They are, technically.  The definition of a triangulation group is three (or more) individuals whose DNA matches and who descend from a common ancestor. However, when three are individuals who are very closely related, I tend to count them as “one” group and not 3 people in the triangulation group.  Therefore, I’d be most comfortable calling these triangulation groups if we had Denny, plus my family group, plus a third person descended from the Lore line, preferably through yet another child.

But back to the question at hand, yes, Edith was unquestionably Curtis’s child, as proven by DNA matching, and so was Herbert.

Sorry, Nora, for doubting there for a minute! Your virtue is redeemed even if mine isn’t for doubting.

The Blue Lick Well

What brought C.B. Lore to Aurora, Indiana? He was a well driller and came to Indiana to drill for gas wells, but that wasn’t what he discovered.

BLue Lick Well

The Blue Lick Well was discovered in 1888 by Curtis Benjamin Lore, who, along with others in his crew, accidentally discovered the mineral well while drilling for gas.

Here’s Mom leaning on that very well when we visited around 1990. She was thrilled that we could find that location and the well still existed.

Mom Blue Lick Well crop

At that time it was covered under a shelter behind a building, allowing access to the water.

Blue Lick Well Mom

The above photo shows Mom at the well as it appeared in the 1990s. In 2008, it was being used as a car-port.

Today, the shelter appears to be taped off.

Blue Lick well today

The Blue Lick well is located on 350 north of Exporting on the south bank of Hogan Creek, on the left side of 350/Importing.

Blue Lick well map

In the pictures above and below, the gray balloon marks the location.

Blue Lick well satellite

The Kirsch House was just over the bridge beside the depot at 2nd and Exporting Streets.  At the bottom of the photo, right beside the white box, the Kirsch House is the light grey roof beside the red roof which is the train depot.

Indianapolis and Rushville

We know that shortly after their marriage in January of 1888, Nora and C.B. Lore moved to Rushville, Indiana, but we don’t know what attracted them to that location.

We also didn’t know that they lived in the Indianapolis area for at least a little while, between Aurora and Rushville, until my grandmother accidentaly found her birth certificate in Marion County. Until then, she thought she had been born in Rushville – the year after she was actually born.  The discrepancy was explained away by something about an insurance policy.  Even the family Bible had been “amended.”  Goodness, the webs we weave…

Adding two and two, it appears that Nora and C.B. left Aurora before their first child was born, possibly to disguise the fact that Nora was already pregnant when they were married, moving to Indianapolis where Nora was born. C.B. Lore seemed to be something of a drifter of sorts, following one thing and then another.  Maybe an opportunist or entrepreneur would be a more embracing and positive word.

C.B. and Nora lived in Rushville for all of their married life, except for that short stint in Indianapolis. Unfortunately, their married life wouldn’t last all that long, just 21 years.

Lore collage

C.B. Lore and Nora Kirsch Lore had 4 daughters (above):

  • Edith Barbara Lore, born August 2, 1888 in Indianapolis, married John Ferverda in 1908 and died in Rochester, Indiana on January 4, 1960. Edith had two children, Barbara Jean and Harold Lore Ferverda. Edith’s best friend was her sister, Curtis.
  • Curtis Lore, born in March of 1891, presumably in Rushville, died on February 9, 1912 after contracting tuberculosis taking care of C.B. Lore who died of that disease in 1909. Curtis never married.
  • Mildred Elvira Lore, born April 8, 1899 in Rushville, married Claude Martin in 1920 and died in Houston, Texas on May 30, 1987. She had two children, James and Jerry Martin. Mildred’s best friend was her sister, Eloise.  I suspect Mildred’s middle name was “in honor of” C.B.’s mother, except her name was Rachel Levina, not Elvira, although the Indiana family clearly thought it was Elvira.
  • Eloise Lore, born October 8, 1903, married Warren Cook in 1929 and after his death, married “a younger man,” Al Rutland in the 1970s. Eloise died June 5, 1996 in Leesburg, Florida. She stayed active, playing golf into her 90s until she became blind, which curtailed her activities significantly.  Macular degeneration is hereditary and my mother had that disease as well, so I suspect it was inherited from either C.B. or Nora.  Eloise never had children.

Nora and C.B. went back and forth visiting Aurora from time to time. The girls, one of whom was my grandmother, Edith, and another being my Aunt Eloise who I knew well, had many wonderful memories of the Kirsch House – a glorious place bigger than life to those children.  Mildred said that she and Edith spent the two years that C.B. was so desperately ill living with their grandmother Barbara Drechsel Kirsch at the Kirsch House in Aurora.  This may well have saves their lives, because their sister, Curtis, who remained at home contracted TB and died.

This photo of C.B. Lore was taken in Aurora.

CB Lore Martin Kirsch

C.B. Lore is to the right and Martin Kirsch, Nora’s brother, is on the left. The photo is undated, but it has to be between 1886 and 1909 when C.B. died.  He looks to be a younger man, about 30 or so, so my guess would be this was taken in the late 1880s or maybe early 1890s.  The modern “safety bicycle” was invented in 1887 and by 1890, everyone was riding the more modern bicycles in what was known as the bicycle craze.  So this photo above were probably taken before 1890 and possibly before 1887.

The only other photo we have of C.B. Lore is this family photo taken about 1907 or 1908 based on the fact that the young child is Eloise who was born in 1903 and looks to be about 4 in the photo. The photo was taken before C.B. became desperately ill and died in November 1909.

Jacob Kirsch family photo crop

Left to right, I can identify people as follows:

  • Seated left – one of Nora’s Kirsch sisters – possibly Carrie.
  • Standing male left behind chair – C. B. Lore – which places this photo before November 1909 when he died
  • Seated in chair in front of CB Lore in white dress, his wife – Nora Kirsch Lore
  • Male with bow tie standing beside CB Lore – probably Nora’s brother Edward Kirsch
  • Male standing beside him with no tie – probably Nora’s brother Martin Kirsch
  • Woman standing in rear row – Nora’s Kirsch sister, possibly Lula.
  • Standing right rear – Jacob Kirsch, Nora’s father – the man with the shotgun.
  • Front adult beside Nora – Nora’s Kirsch sister, possibly Ida.
  • Child beside Nora –Eloise born 1903
  • Adult woman, seated, with black skirt – Barbara Drechsel Kirsch, Nora’s mother
  • Young woman beside Barbara to her left with large white bow – probably Curtis Lore, C. B. and Nora’s daughter

What Did C.B. Lore Do, Exactly?

Let’s just say that I wish I had asked Aunt Eloise a lot more questions, and earlier, when her memory had not yet begun to fade.

We know that C.B. Lore worked the oil fields, which is how and why he came to Indiana.

He was listed in the 1900 census as a machinist.

The family said he had race horses in Kentucky too, and he went to check on them regularly.  According to Mildred’s granddaughter, C.B., called Curt by Nora, kept a sulky and horse at the Jones farm.  Mr. Jones had a livery stable and race horses.

C.B. also obtained contracts with the city of Rushville to do some sort of contracting or construction work. When he became ill, he apparently was bidding on something, with the hopes of being able to obtain the contract and do the work. Nora, being concerned about being left with a contract and obligations she could not fulfill, went to the “powers that be” quietly and explained that he was much more gravely ill than he wanted to admit, and asked them not to award the contract to C.B.

Another hint we have comes in the way of a death notice published in the Shelbyville Democrat November 27th, 1909 where he was referenced as a contractor..

Curtis Lore funeral

Thank goodness for small town obituaries.

CB Lore Obit 3

This obituary gives is the date they moved to Rushville, 1893, so it appears that Curtis who was born in 1891 was likely born elsewhere, perhaps Marion County where Edith was born.  Eloise had mentioned that they thought he contracted TB in Kentucky looking after his race horses, and this obituary confirms what she said.  Note that Curtis’ children from his first marriage are not mentioned, although we have no idea if Nora knew anything about that first marriage or his children.

Based on these obituaries, Curtis’s last year must have been pretty miserable.  I wonder how the family lived.

CB Lore obit 4

These obituaries confirm that indeed, Nora did think that Curtis’s father’s name was Benjamin, and that she did believe his birth year was 1861.  The past piece of evidence in that vein is this note found by Eloise in Nora’s Bible where Nora was doing some kind of calculations in 1890 and clearly thinks that Curt is 30 years old.

Nora Bible note

I must admit, this obituary is the first I had ever heard of a “sprinkling wagon,” so I had to research “sprinkling wagon.”  A sprinkling wagon sprinkled the streets of a city, likely to keep the dust down, I’m guessing.  In the picture below, you can see the water at the rear of the wagon.

sprinkling wagon

Rushville, Indiana

In the 1910 census, a year after C. B. Lore died, Nora and the girls were living at 324 W. First Street in Rushville which is, today, the state highway through town.

Nora sold fabric and such, after C. B.’s death, so this would have been a perfect location for her business, being the main drag through town.

Nora Wabash house

I don’t know if Nora lived in this location when C.B. Lore was alive, but I suspect that Nora would not have moved unless she was forced to.  Deed records don’t indicate that they ever owned property.

Trying to unravel the lives of Nora Kirsch and C.B. Lore, Mom and I visited Rushville in the late 1980s or 1990.

Mom and I found find the Graham School that the Lore girls would have attended, which was located a couple of blocks from their house, which was on Main Street according to the census.  The school was abandoned in the 1990s, but when the girls would have gone to school, it would have been a bustling place full of youthful voices.

Rushville school

I can see the Lore daughters walking up this sidewalk, perhaps holding hands and swinging them back and forth on a lovely, warm spring day.

Rushville school crop

This is the First Presbyterian Church in Rushville where Nora and C.B. were members.  This would also have been the church wee C.B.’s funeral took place on the Sunday afternoon after Thanksgiving in 1909, as well as daughter Curtis’s funeral in 1912.

First Presbuterian Rushville

This is embarrassing, but I can’t recall exactly what Mother and I discovered about the church. I obviously didn’t take adequate notes and deceived myself with “of course, I’ll remember this.”  Mom’s gone and I can’t ask her.  I can’t recall if they simply attended this church, if C.B. Lore helped to construct this church, or both.  Whatever the connection, Mom was very excited to find their church.  In Aurora they were Lutheran.  Here they were Presbyterian.  By the time their daughter Edith would move to Silver Lake, the family would become Methodist.  Mom would become Baptist.  Our German ancestors would be appalled.  I heard a minister once refer to the “church of opportunity” and this seems to be the case.  My family was flexible and bloomed in whatever accepting church was planted nearby!

Rushville church

I’m so glad I took some photos that included Mom. I cherish these trips we took together more than ever today.

Mom church Rushville

A final hint relative to C.B.’s social status is this excerpt from the Centennial History of Rush Co. (1921), and it gives us only one tidbit:

The Rushville Social Club, the leading organization of its sort in the city and recognized as one of the most substantial clubs in this section of Indiana, came into being at a meeting called for the evening of March 13, 1896 when a number of the leading men of Rushville got together to talk over the plan of organizing a club which would provide a home where friends could meet in a social manner and where the wives and families of members also might find entertainment. The project was favored and an organization at once effected.  Claude Cambern was elected first president of the Social Club and the other initial members were……Curt B. Lore.  (List of other individuals omitted.)

The Cemetery

Judging from the photos in Mother’s box, her visit with me was not the first time she visited Rushville. She apparently visited with her mother at least twice, once about 1940 and then again after Nora’s death in 1949.  She knew the location of the cemetery, but we had a difficult time finding the tombstones.

The photos below were taken by C.B. Lore’s headstone when Mom was probably 28 or 29.

Mom Rushville 1940s

The grave looks fairly new in this photo, and this is Nora’s burial, so I suspect that Mom’s visit was shortly after Nora’s September 1949 death, perhaps in the late fall of 1949 or the spring of 1950.

The Payne family crypt is located in front of the stones, so getting a good photo is difficult. However, it makes a great landmark when trying to find the stones.

Lore graves Rushville

Lore graves Rushville2

The 3 Lore family members in a row. Note no grass on Nora’s grave.

Rushville Payne memorial

The Lore headstones are to the left in the photo above taken in 1990.

Nora Kirsch Lore stone

When we visited in the 1990s, we found the three family stones together.  Given the short distance between the stones and the Payne building, I wondered how a coffin could fit there.  It wasn’t until I saw the photos from the 1940s that I realized they are buried behind the stones.

Nora stone with CB and Curtis

Curtis Lore stone

Daughter Curtis Lore, above and father Curtis Benjamin Lore, below.

CB Lore stone

C.B. Lore’s Spirit

It’s difficult to discern or understand from a distance why our ancestors might have done what they did, or their intentions. Giving him the benefit of the doubt, Curtis’s marriage with Mary may have unraveled and neither wanted to continue.  Maybe he stayed as long as he could or as long as either of them wanted.  Maybe Mary wanted out as much or more than he did.

The flip side of the coin would be that Curtis was a scoundrel, cheating on his wife, abandoning his family both physically and financially at the worst time possible – the month Mary had their 4th child which also marked their 10th anniversary.

I don’t know if either end of this spectrum is truth, or if the truth lies someplace in the middle.  Or perhaps C.B. made a mistake, or two, in judgment.  Who hasn’t.  Perhaps he learned from his mistakes.

My mother’s reaction to this was somehow very appropriate.  “There’s nothing to be done now.  It is what it is.  It was a long time ago.  We weren’t there and don’t know.  He wasn’t all bad.  Here, have some chocolate.”  What she didn’t say is that without him having made the choices he did, bad or good, neither she nor I would be here today.

One thing is for certain, C.B. Lore took the road less traveled and it brought him to Indiana where he married Nora Kirsch and had my grandmother.  None of his daughters through Nora had an unkind word to say about him.  He pretty much walked on water, as far as they were concerned.  A very different perception than the man I found in the records.  It took a lot to convince me that those two men were one and the same person, but they are.  I knew it and eventually, DNA proved it.

I do know that C.B.’s family life as a child was ripped apart with his father’s death, leaving the children to literally fend for themselves. Some died.  The family came to depend on the charity of others and by the age of 14, C.B. Lore was living on his own and working as a farm laborer.  From what Eloise said, he had been on his own since he was someplace between 10 and 12, which would place C.B.’s father’s death at between 1866-1868, within the bracket of 1862 when we know he was alive and 1868 when we know he was dead.  I could not help but notice that C.B. Lore did not name one of his 8 known children after his father.  Perhaps there is yet more to that story that shaped C.B. in ways we’ll never understand.  I ache for that poor boy child, all alone.

C.B. Lore made something of himself. Yes, he may have been a farm laborer when other boys his age were in school learning, a hard-scrabble oil field roughneck type of guy and perhaps a cad as far as his first family was concerned – but he worked his way up and took the opportunities that presented themselves.  He started with nothing and wound up a leader in his community.  He was an entrepreneur in his day, unafraid of what the future held.  The future couldn’t have been any more frightening than facing the world completely alone as a child.

C.B. was a bit of a gambler too, judging from his behavior and his love of race horses. Had he not contracted tuberculosis, that family could well have wound up being quite wealthy.  Judging from the fact that they had two servants in 1900, they seemed to be well on their way.  But fate is a mean mistress.  Curtis died when he was only 52 years old, or 48 years of age if you asked his wife.  He had a lot of life left to live – and he was deprived of seeing the daughters he loved so desperately grow up.  Karma perhaps?

It would have killed C.B. to know that the disease he had also took the life of his namesake daughter, Curtis, two years and three months after his death.  She contracted tuberculosis caring for her father.

I like to think that a bit of the good side of C.B. Lore’s irrepressible spirit came to me via my mother and grandmother. They too were status-quo-challenging rebels in their own way and time.

Edith Lore, C.B.’s daughter, my grandmother, left home, went to live at the Kirsch house and attended business school in Cincinnati. Finally, someone talked some sense into that girl and she settled down and got married, like women were supposed to do, a decision she was never at peace with and always regretted in many ways – not that she didn’t love my grandfather.  However, her business school training was the only thing that saved the family during the depression when my grandfather lost his business.  She had a job.  He didn’t and there were no jobs to be found.

Mother also did many things that women just didn’t do. For example, she moved to Chicago and was a professional ballet and tap dancer – coming out of an extremely conservative and religious region in Indiana with one Brethren parent.  She also committed the “sin of divorce” when she caught her husband cheating. Those were both outrageous scandals of magnanimous proportions.  Several years later, Mom bought a house as a single woman too – completely confounding the bank in 1960 with the audacity of her mortgage application and her refusal to obtain a co-signer.  She got the mortgage too, after a battle, and eventually paid it in full!

Much to my mother’s chagrin, I too followed suit in many ways. I mean, really, what else did she expect?  Being well-behaved for the sake of conformance does NOT run in our family.  It might be easier and more socially acceptable to be blindly compliant, but that just doesn’t happen.

In high school, when denied a seat in an advanced placement class, for those students on their way to college, because they “weren’t going to waste a seat on a girl who is just going to get married and have babies anyway,” I petitioned the school board, with absolutely no adult support – and yes, I did obtain that seat. I also graduated from college, with multiple degrees, in fields women didn’t enter at that time.  And that’s just the tip of the iceberg, believe me.  I don’t think you can ever stop being a rebel, when necessary.  It’s in the blood.  Dare I suggest the genes perhaps?  Maybe a combination of old Jacob Kirsch and C.B. Lore?

I like to think that all of this wasn’t just being “arnry,” difficult and unduly rebellious, but that C. B. Lore’s adventurous and resilient spirit was shining through, guiding our way, silently spurring us on to confront and change that what needed changing.  Perhaps we are his legacy.

Based on this photo of “well behaved women,” which are C.B. Lore’s wife and three surviving daughters, including my grandmother Edith, on the rear – Mother and I came by this honestly!

lore sisters motorcycle

______________________________________________________________

Disclosure

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers

Genealogy Services

Genealogy Research