Need help merging Colonial Americans?

Started by Erica Howton on Saturday, August 11, 2018
Problem with this page?

Participants:

Profiles Mentioned:

Related Projects:

Showing 5041-5070 of 5589 posts

Patricia Ann Scoggin - merge done.

Private User - I still don’t like the William Flemings as a match.

I’ll open a separate discussion for more sourcing efforts.

,Erica Howton
Thank you for doing the merge, but I do have a question about where he (Thomas Roote, of Hartford & Northampton) war buried as he died in Massachusetts. Everything I have about him is in Mass. so I wonder if hi is confused with another Thomas Root(e)??? So, did he die in Northampton, Province of Mass or somewhere else???

From: https://www.foundersofhartford.org/the-founders/thomas-root/
* Thomas Root, (1605-1694) came to Salem, MA 1637, settled at Hartford, in Pequot War. On 4-5-1654 he moved with his family to Northampton, MA which was known as Nonotook. He was both a farmer and a weaver of cloth. He came from Hartford to Northampton, MA and was one of the "Seven Pillars" when the church was organized in Northampton, June 18, 1661. His wife's name is unknown.

This site has numerou references that have him in Northhapton, Mass: http://www.griffinfamilytree.com/bios/bio_roote_thos_2.html

Patricia Ann Scoggin -The memorial is a cenotaph in Hartford. I know where his body was buried, do you?

Something is wrong with Edward Sturgis, Jr. Do not merge.

OK, the duplicate Sturgis tree was only wrong at the top, which I fixed. The rest is merged.

Merge issue. Working on a Grandparents line and the tree is isolated for being fictional people. Should this generation be listed as unknown. I'll have to verify up to what point is real. It appears up to the 9th generation is okay just looking it over. Seems the issue starts here at first link.

*Antoine Desarure de Saussure Peronette de Crocketagne

The isolationed tree issue here:

https://www.geni.com/merge/compare/6000000133369863846?to=600000011...

Should we just isolate it up to the 9th generation and put unknown parents and tag the remaining profiles that are isolated for feature research? Mark them from that point as probably fictional Genealogy? Please advise.

Annber Lynn Collins - good question.

The “earliest known Crockett” could be Antoine Desarure de Saussure Peronette de Crocketagne or a generation down at Colonel James Crockett

Let’s look for more references.

See the discussion on the de Crocketagne Hoax:

https://www.geni.com/discussions/276462?msg=1686433

Amber: At whatever point the lineage is known to become "unverifiable" or "fictional", what I would recommend is:

1. add an "{Unknown}" profile for the parents

2. if of interest or relevance, put a link in the "About" of the {Unknown} to the corresponding "questionable" or "unverifiable" profile (along with any other desired explanation).

3. ask a Curator to lock the parent profiles' relationship so they can't be "swapped out" or replaced via a merge.

@Dan

I usually leave notes on the profile and tag the detached profile for future reference and do the same on the other as well. That way it's easier to reattach should evidence be found or rule out similar lines within the area with Forename and Surname. I never knew people made up or faked their family lineage before Genealogy... though I understand the sentiment of not wanting to be related to certain Ancestors.

I agree, the fictional, unverified or questionable ones should be locked,as not to add to the bad merges. I'll request the areas once I find them. Many thanks Dan.

THE TWO CORNELII

Dear Erica,

I think you’ve worked on the Roger and Shadrach Williams families of Virginia in the past. I have some merges and unmerges for that family and especially their allied family, the Cornelius Kincheloe clan.

First, regarding Cornelius Kincheloe - this Cornelius is listed as having a brother also named Cornelius Kincheloe, or Cornelius Kincheloe, the Immigrant. Of course, it would be extremely unusual to have brothers with the exact same name. In fact, there was only one Cornelius Kincheloe of this era. These two profiles represent the same man.

Cornelius ‘the immigrant’ Kincheloe Cornelius ‘the immigrant’ Kincheloe

Once merged, Cornelius Kincheloe would be shown with four wives. However there does not seem to be proof, let alone real evidence, for any of these spouses. And at least three of the four can be easily disproven.

The separate Cornelii profiles, and indeed, the multiple wives, largely spring from attempts to somehow show that this Cornelius Kincheloe married into the immediate family of Shadrach Williams (1673/4 – 1710)

@wife of Cornelius Kincheloe
@Anne Thornton Deboard (Williams)
@Jane Kincheloe (Bayliss)
@shadrach "Joane" Williams

I. CORNELIUS KINCHELOE DID NOT MARRY SHADRACH WILLIAMS

There are precious few records known of Cornelius Kincheloe. However…

On the 6th of February 1694/5, Cornelius Kincheloe served as security for a bond for an illegitimate child of Shadrach Williams.

“ … Sarah Stephens upon the Holy Gospel of God made Oath that Shedrack Williams was the true Father of a bastard Child late born of her body. Shedrick Williams and Cornelius Kinshloe do acknowledge themselves indebted to the Church Wardens of Farham Parish on behalf of the said Parish in the sum of Ten thousand pounds of tobacco …. “ (source: Richmond County Virginia Order Book 2, p. 27).

And then on 6 June 1695, Cornelius Kincheloe (Chencello) planter of North Farnham Parish, Richmond County, took deed from Shadrach Williams

“for 100 acres on the west side of Totuskey Creek along the line of said Chenchello, adjoining land of William Smith along Kincheloe Spring Branch … “ (source: Richmond County Virginia Deed Book 2, pp. 121- 123).

Based upon these records mentioning both Shadrach and Cornelius, but seemingly nothing more, many people claimed and still claim that Cornelius Kincheloe’s wife was Shadrach Williams.

However, Shadrach is a male name - like William and John - and not a female name. And Shadrach Williams of the records above, and every other related record, is a male. Therefore, Cornelius Kincheloe’s wife Shadrach “Joane” Williams is an error. There was NO Shadrach "Joane" Williams. . This is an attempt to keep the Shadrach, but somehow claim that he was a she, and he had the nickname Joane. (The fictitious nickname name Joane was possibly a guess from Shadrach‘s mother Joane).

II. CORNELIUS KINCHELOE DID NOT MARRY A DAUGHTER OF SHADRACH WILLIAMS

When apprised of the fact that Shadrach was a man, some researchers then claimed that Cornelius Kincheloe married a daughter of Shadrach Williams, instead of Shadrach himself.

Beyond the lack of any record showing Shadrach had a daughter who married Cornelius, the surviving North Farnham Parish records prove that this Shadrach Williams, son of Roger and Joane, was christened on 7 February 1673/4 in what was then Old Rappahannock County, Virginia. (source: The Registers of North Farnham Parish, 1663 – 1814, digital images on FamilySearch.org Film # 007897249, p. 94, (http://www.familysearch.org : accessed 22 February 2024) .

It was therefore impossible for Shadrach b. 1673/4 to have had a daughter who grew up and married by the 1690s. This “unnamed daughter of Shadrach Williams” who supposedly married Cornelius Kincheloe could not and did not exist. Hundreds and hundreds of trees on ancestry and elsewhere, published by people copying other trees without question, perpetuate this error.

On Geni, a second wife of Cornelius Kincheloe is listed as a daughter of Shadrach Williams and Joan Frith / Firthe. This unnamed daughter’s birth year is listed as 1667, which was suspiciously the estimated birth date of Shadrach Williams by people who did not know of the existence of the North Farnham parish record. Her birthplace is listed as Richmond County Virginia, which did not exist at this time. Her death date is listed as 1722. This is “coincidentally” the year that Cornelius Kincheloe’s son John Kincheloe first deeds part of the 100 acres listed in the reference above. And these are the exact same dates given the non-existent Shadrach “Joane” Williams.

Since this daughter/wife doesn't even have a name, it seems these birth and death dates are likely fictitious. And clearly, were she born anywhere near 1667, she could not have a father born in 1673/4, six years later. Her supposed father Shadrach Williams is recorded on Geni as being born in 1616 and dying in 1670. Obviously, these are not the same dates as the Shadrach Williams b. 1673/4 discussed above.

It’s not clear whether these birth and death years are supposed to refer to the Shadrach Willliams in the records cited above, or to a different man of the same name. There do not appear to be any records of an earlier Shadrach Williams in Virginia. I also looked to find any record in the Williams family tree or even in English vital records, without locating a suitable Shadrach. To make this even further suspect, the wife of the questionable Shadrach Williams b. 1616 is listed as Joane Frith / Firth / Thrift . But that is supposedly the mother of the “real” Shadrach Williams b. 1673/4, and the wife of Roger Williams, not the wife of a likely imagined Shadrach Williams b. 1616.

In short, Cornelius Kinchenloe's wife could not be the daughter of the Shadrach Williams who is mentioned with him in a several surviving records. And simply creating another man who's unsourced birth and death dates might work appears to be an unsuccessful attempt to have one’s Shadrach cake and eat it, too.

III. CORNELIUS KINCHELOE DID NOT MARRY A SISTER OF SHADRACH WILLIAMS

In still another attempt to connect Shadrach Williams to Cornelius Kincheloe, some researchers claim that Cornelius was married to a sister of Shadrach. This probably stems from realizing that Shadrach Williams was a man, so he couldn’t be married to Cornelius Kincheloe, and that Shadrach was too young to have a daughter who married Cornelius. So why not say Cornelius married a sister of Shadrach?

One of Shadrach William’s sisters, Anne Williams Thornton Deboard. is currently listed on Geni as another wife of Cornelius. Anne Williams is proven to have married Henry Thornton and later James Deboard. (source: Richmond County Virginia Deed Book 8; Part 3, p. 375). However, there is no evidence whatsoever that Anne Williams also married Cornelius Kincheloe. In fact, she could not have married Cornelius.

In 1722 and 1724 Richmond County deeds, Cornelius’s son John Kincheloe sells the 100 acres originally purchased from Shadrach Williams by his father. The 1724 deed contains the following language:

“which land was by Shadrack Williams by Deed bareing date the 26th day of June 1695 sold and conveyed unto Cornelius Kenchilo, Father unto aforesd. John, by who's decease the same became the proper inheritance in fee simple of sd. John to whom it descended as Heir at Law of Cornelius Kenchilo, (source: Richmond County Virginia Deed Book 8, pp. 247-248).

The legal wording of this document stating “proper inheritance in fee simple” and “Heir at Law” is important. It proves that Cornelius Kincheloe died intestate. It also indicates that his wife probably predeceased him, and that she was almost certainly dead by 1724. Had she been alive, she would have been entitled to her widow’s life estate or dower interest in 1/3 of the property, and / or would have also been required to sign the deed of conveyance to clear title. Cornelius’s son John Kincheloe would also not have held the 100 acres as proper inheritance in fee simple had his mother (or even a stepmother ) still been alive in 1724.

Anne Williams Thornton Deboard was still alive in 1724. In fact, in 1726, two years later, her son Roger Thornton sold land inherited from Anne’s husband and Roger’s father Henry Thornton. This deed is an example of reservation of dower rights, and describes property as:

“land granted to Henry Thornton, Father of sd. Roger Thornton, dated the fifth day of July 1695 … excepting and reserving unto Anne Deboard, Mother of Roger Thornton her life in the land “ (source: Richmond County Virginia Deed Book 8, p. 375).

Anne Williams Thornton Deboard also gave a deposition on 5 October 1727, stating her age was about 60, and that she was the wife of James Deboard. (source: Richmond County, Virginia Account Book Part I, p. 15-16).

So unless these primary source documents are incorrect, Anne Williams could not have been the wife of Cornelius Kincheloe. Similarly, as shown by a number of additional surviving records, Shadrach’s other sisters Elizabeth, Susannah, Rebecca and Ruth were all also alive as of 1724, and thus none of these women could have been a wife of Cornelius Kincheloe.

IV. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT CORNELIUS KINCHELOE MARRIED A JANE BAYLISS

The final wife of Cornelius Kincheloe as currently listed on Geni is a certain Jane Bayless / Bayliss. There was a contemporaneous Bayliss family in the Old Rappahannock/Richmond counties area of Virginia. They are tangentially connected to the Williams and Kincheloe clans, but I cannot find an appropriate Jane Bayless in this family, nor any direct Kincheloe - Bayless link. The only Bayliss head of household in the area, and of the right age was a certain Robert Bayliss. His 1691 will does not list a daughter Jane. While his widow did carry this common name, her will and the will of subsequent husbands do not show any Kincheloe connection. (source: Richmond County, Virginia Order Book , p. 87).

V. CHILD(REN) OF CORNELIUS KINCHELOE

The children of a combined Cornelius Kincheloe would be listed on Geni as John Kincheloe, Cornelius Kincheloe, Jr., Arthur Kincheloe., and Peter Kincheloe.

As noted in the 1722 and 1724 deeds above, John Kincheloe is a proven son of Cornelius Kincheloe:

“unto Cornelius Kenchilo, Father unto aforesd. John, by who's decease the same became the proper inheritance in fee simple” (source: Richmond County Virginia Deed Book 8, pp. 247-248).

There does not appear to be any evidence for an Arthur Kincheloe. Similarly, there is no evidence for a Cornelius Kincheloe Jr., son of Cornelius. John Kincheloe’s eldest son was named Cornelius Kincheloe. The North Farnham Parish records note his christening on 8 October 1721 (source: The Registers of North Farnham Parish, 1663 – 1814, digital images on FamilySearch.org Film # 007897249, p. 94, (http://www.familysearch.org : accessed 22 February 2024). With some original confusion about dates, some people incorrectly attributed early records of this Cornelius son of John, as a Cornelius Jr. But this Cornelius was the grandson of the original Cornelius, not the son.

Peter Kinslow was born roughly 1734 according to Geni as well as several census records. Given that Cornelius Kincheloe was proven to have died before 1722, it would have been extremely difficult for him to have risen from the dead and had a child decades later. While this is not the case on Geni, other online family trees incorrectly place Peter Kinchelow as a son of a mythical Cornelius Jr. This appears to be an attempt to link Peter’s descendants back to the “older” line. However, comparison of the y-DNA shows that this is a different family entirely and that the Peter / Conrad Kinchlow families probably descend from a German family originally called Kunzle

John Kincheloe, Sr. @Peter Kincheloe @Arthur Kincheloe

CONCLUSION:

As much as many descendants would love to know the name of Cornelius Kincheloe‘s wife, there’ does not seem to be any proof, nor even really any strong evidence of her identity. The commonly repeated articles, books, and online trees showing Cornelius’s wife as Shadrach Williams / Shadrach “Joane” Williams, or a daughter of Shadrach Williams, or a sister of Shadrach Williams, are apparently all in error. In addition, John Kincheloe seems to be the only known and proven son and probably only child of the original Cornelius Kincheloe.

- Michael W. Walker

p.s. so sorry about the long post, I was just trying to cover everything ;)

Private User - not too long, and very clear. I’ll post back when disconnects are done.

Thanks Erica! Most of these people are clearly fictitious. The nonexistent but oft repeated Shardrach "Joane" Williams , for example, seem particularly difficult to "kill." I don't know if there is a way to make it a challenge to recreate this type of unsourced fauxfile. Michael

Sure. We lock relationships.

Private User - this is done.

What’s the evidence supporting Marion Kinselo & Hugh Kincheloe as parents?

Actually he’s looking fictive. Notes in profile:

~Kincheloe Origins~

Research on Hugh Kinselo

by John William Kincheloe, III

Appendix I:

New research on "Hugh Kinselo" has yielded some surprising results, however. What this author has recently discovered questions almost everything family historians have been claiming about this individual. Based on a review of the documentation as cited by earlier genealogists, it is the author's opinion not only that "Hugh Kinselo" is unrelated to the Kincheloe family, but that it is unlikely that a "Hugh Kinselo" ever existed in 17th century Virginia. …

Continue reading: http://web.archive.org/web/20010808142537/www.kincheloe.com/origins...

Another one for the spurious pedigrees project.

I will also copy overt those notes to the dedicated discussion on Cornelius ‘the immigrant’ Kincheloe at https://www.geni.com/discussions/270498?msg=1656293

Private User - merging done.

https://www.geni.com/merge/compare/5288902712800039689?idx=0&to... adds a daughter Ruth Ruth Tunstall who is unsourced and not on DAR nor FaG list but I see Erica Howton is a co manager

Thank you in advance

Private User - see Cynthia Curtis, A183502, US7875087 question above:

Elizabeth Vickery & Marmaduke Vickery, Sr. were added as parents of Ruth Tunstall by you today, and we have matching profiles for them that does not include Ruth as their daughter.

I only see tree sources. So you have a record source for Ruth’s parentage?

Curated profile John Peartree Burks--
https://www.geni.com/merge/compare/6000000008219166147?to=600000020...
John Peartree Burks
John Peartree Burks
would ADD a new wife Anna Birks and child Margaret Elizabeth Dooley

Thinking he should be relationship locked.
Curator Private User

How do we know he didn’t have a second wife, Cynthia Curtis, A183502, US7875087

We shouldn’t complete the merge of dup looking John Peartree Burks if unsure, but it’s not a lock opportunity.

Erica Howton I will revisit them. I have a brick wall Burks (spelled that way on her son’s death certificate) that I hope to break so this name is of interest and importance to me. The profile was only recently added so maybe the manager will be able to add some sources?
Thank you for looking

New Hugh Review:

Dear Erica,

Regarding the Hugh Kincheloe - Marian Haley hail Mary:

I agree that there is no proof that this couple were the parents of Cornelius Kincheloe. However, there was a Hugh Kincheloe / Kunneloe and he is recorded as marrying Marion Hary (probably Haley) -

The marriage occurred in 1660, which would’ve been around the time that Cornelius ‘s parents most likely married.

The marriage took place in today’s Accomack County, Virginia, which was quite close to Old Rappahannock / Richmond County, Virginia by boat, the predominant form of transport at the time.

And there are a number of connections between members of a Haley / Halley family and Cornelius Kincheloe’s immediate family, signing as witnesses to deeds and wills and living on adjoining plantations through generations, etc.

All of that is still not enough to prove a Hugh and Marion Haley Kincheloe descent, or even that H & M were related to the later Northern Neck nabobs. But poor Hugh Kincheloe / Kunneloe was more than "so called.." Refreshingly, he did in fact exist.

While almost all 17th century Virginia Parish records have. well … perished , contemporaneous copies of some birth's deaths and marriages in 1660 and 1661 still exist for Hungars Parish. They are the only two years that survive from the 1600's for this congregation and have only done so because the Minister had the foresight to copy them into the Northampton Court Order Books shortly after they occurred. Transcripts of these records were published in the William and Mary Quarterly over a century ago, and have also appeared in booklets, etc.

To wit:

"A true account of such persons as have been baptised, married and burried in Hungars Parish from ye 25th. of March anno. 1660 unto ye 25th. of March 1661. .......

....Hugh Kunneloe & Marian Hary 8br 14th.... (MWW note : 14 October 1660)

....True Copy, John Lawrence, Clerk of Hungars Parish."

(source: Robertson, Thomas B. "Hungars Parish Records for 1660-1661," The William and Mary Quarterly, Vol. 18, No. 3 (Jan. 1910): 178-181)

I have to strongly disagree with my distant cousin and his Hugh view -

I think Hugh Kincheloe and Hugh Kunneloe sound very similar phonetically, and they look almost identical in print and script. In fact Kunneloe is closer to Kincheloe than that name is to Chencello , a form of the family name recorded for Cornelius.

Spelling was notoriously fluid in the 1600s, even within the same document. And this is especially true with an uncommon surname that is still often misspelled today.

So, on the non-scientific scale of 1) no evidence and disproven, to 2) no evidence , to 3) some evidence, but still uncertain and without conclusive “proof” to 4) proven with a genealogical standard of evidence / primary source documentation, I would say this is about a three.

I agree that Cornelius's reputed parents should be detached. But not yet discarded. I don't know if there a way to navigate the grey area and communicate that it is still uncertain, but at least some evidence suggests that Hugh and Marian MAY be Cornelius's parents, i.e. extremely uncommon surname, the appropriate general time period, a general geographic proximity, a potential Haley, connection, etc.

Besr, Michael

Hugh Kincheloe Marion Kinselo

Private User - so I’ve left Marion Kinselo & Hugh Kincheloe to stay as detached profiles in the database, linked through the about.

Erica Howton

Could we review if this John is indeed the son of or if we're dealing with another John? I added the notes from Familysearch. I added the Google document that is first hand account from his son that he was kidnapped from Ireland at 7 with other boys and sent to Maryland for servitude.

As for the Kincheloe my family married into them. Quite a few lines that Enslaved people. I'm seeing some mixed race people. I know the Johnson and MacPherson lines enslaved individuals out of Maryland. They may or may not relate to the Johnson line in the South. That's an adjacent thing to them. Bigger picture type thing. I'm working on the African lines from New Amsterdam as they run into the same family lines of mine. Missing lines of 30 people in Bedford County that's related to the project but takes time to document and honestly a separate project in itself I wanted to start.

The enslaved mentioned for Richard Simpson line is of interest. So these dead in lines that come from non African areas cannot be ruled out. Also look into anything to do with the Washington lines,especially George Washington. He's very much around in quite a few lines. Some African and non-African DNA matches.

From what I can see,he is not related per family data sheet but he still could be depending if he acquired the Surnames of these families and was of African origin. I'll see what I can source.

https://www.ancestry.com/sharing/10539582?mark=7b22746f6b656e223a22...

https://www.geni.com/projects/New-Amsterdam-Origins-African-Immigra...

Dr. John Kennedy, Sr

https://www.ancestry.com/sharing/10537481?mark=7b22746f6b656e223a22...

https://www.ancestry.com/sharing/10537481?mark=7b22746f6b656e223a22...

Hi Annber Lynn Collins

Private User

This is a John Kincheloe, wife Millie, selling land to Lund Washington in 1797, Hampshire County.

https://www.ancestry.com/sharing/10537481?mark=7b22746f6b656e223a22...

I don’t know the Kincheloe tree well enough to place it.

Annber Lynn Collins - for Dr. John Kennedy, Sr you have a “kidnapped as a child” story, and I have to say, why are so many Irish boys being kidnapped and sent to America? What possible reason? It wasn’t to get rid of London urchins like a hundred years earlier.

I have Roark collateral line who was supposedly kidnapped by his uncle, the priest. Problem with the story? The family was Presbyterian.

So, yeah, I’m not much buying it.

Showing 5041-5070 of 5589 posts

Create a free account or login to participate in this discussion