Tom: Aaron got it wrong in his diary regarding Martin. Martin is a known son of John, Jr, not John, Sr. I have my doubts about Daniel being a son of John, Sr. I think it is more likely that he is also a son of John, Jr, as well but have no real basis for this other than a hunch. Clearly, we now know for sure that Jonathan was one of the sons of John, Sr (see article I posted yesterday). I believe Aaron when he says David was one of the sons of John, Sr. The question is which David (the one who died in Clermont County in 1818 with wife, Elizabeth (Sailor?) or the one who married Sarah Moore). Regarding the Enoch/Enos controversy, I don't know. Aaron says that Enos lived for only a short time in Clermont County, moving west, with some of his relatives working in St Louis for the Globe Democrat. This does not seem to be a made-up story, but the problem is we have no substantion of any of this. We know there was an Enoch who died in Clermont County in 1816 with wife Sally. Did Aaron get Enos confused with Enoch? Two of the sons of John, Jr are listed as recipients of the distribution of Enoch's estate, which leaves me wondering, if Enoch may have also been a son of John, Jr. Other than these few loose ends, I think the other siblings are well documented (including the two sisters, Anne and Elizabeth) who married and remained in Virginia. John Charles Tippet JohnDoeTippet@csi.com ---------- > From: Tom Robison <tcrobi@adamswells.com> > To: BEHYMER-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Jonathan Behymer's kids > Date: Friday, September 25, 1998 10:27 PM > > Hi, all, > > I ashamedly admit that I have not yet looked at John Tippet's web page, but > judging from the messages to the list of the past few days, I take it there > is some consternation as to John/Jonathan Behymer's lineage. > > Following is a chart I first prepared in April of 1997 when we were hot on > the trail of "Jonathan's kids". I publish it here again to illustrate the > variety of records that are still out there, and that "official" records > can often be contradictory to the point of madness. > > Comments? > > Jonathan's children: > >====================================================================== > > A B C D E F > >1 Samuel Samuel John Samuel John John > >2 Jacob Jacob Samuel Joseph Samuel Jonathan > >3 Nathaniel Nathaniel Nathaniel Anne Jacob Daniel > >4 Joseph David Joseph Elizabeth Nathaniel Solomon > >5 Enos Anna Jacob Nathaniel Enos Joel > >6 David Martin Solomon Jacob Joseph > >7 Anna Joel Daniel Solomon Samuel > >8 Martin Solomon Jonathan Daniel Nathaniel > >9 Joel Joel Joel Enoch > >10 Solomon Ann John B. > >11 Elizabeth Jonathan > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >A) Per Aaron Behymer diary entry "Our Family Tree", sent by Lori; > >B) Per Aaron Behymer diary entry "Aaron Sargent Behymer" from Lori; > >C) Per Clermont Co. Courier, Feb 1893, sent by Wilfred > >D) Per Rob Dupuy's data file > >E) Per Ralph Behymer in 1980 History of Clermont Co. > >F) Per 1880 History of Clermont Co. by Everts > >====================================================================== > > > >In case the column formatting gets screwed up in your e-mail software, > >here's the same info long-hand: > > > >Column A: Samuel, Jacob, Nathaniel, Joseph, Enos, David, Anna, Martin, > >Joel, Solomon; > > > >Column B: Samuel, Jacob, Nathaniel, David, Anna, Martin, Joel, Solomon; > > > >Column C: John, Samuel, Nathaniel, Joseph, Jacob, Solomon, Daniel, > >Jonathan, Joel, Ann, Elizabeth; > > > >Column D: Samuel, Joseph, Anne, Elizabeth, Nathaniel, Jacob, Solomon, > >Daniel, Joel, John B., Jonathan; > > > >Column E: John, Samuel, Jacob, Nathaniel, Enos; > > > >Column F: John, Jonathan, Daniel, Solomon, Joel, Joseph, Samuel, > >Nathaniel, Enoch. > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > I find it interesting that Aaron lists David and Martin among the children, > and no one else does. Note also that Aaron lists no John, Jonathan, or > Daniel... > > The other lists show a Daniel in most cases, but Aaron does not. I wonder > if David and Martin are middle names for Daniel, John, or Jonathan... > [recall that the Dutch/Germans had a habit of using the middle name as the > "call" name of a person, whereas the first name was generally used only for > official purposes.] > > I find it curious, also, that Rob's data matches the 1893 Newspaper > article for every name, but not their order... > > Equally curious, only Rob and the newspaper mention the daughter Elizabeth. > > curioser and curioser... Any comments, thoughts, or God-willing, an > EXPLANATION, will be appreciated. > > Tom > > Tom Robison > Ossian, Indiana > tcrobi@adamswells.com > > Never forget the importance of history. To know nothing of > what happened before you took your place on earth, > is to remain a child forever. [unknown] > > >