Dear Carol, I have never seen any proof that George Campbell b. 1720, who married Caty, was the son of George Campbell b. 1700, who married Margaret. Both men are named George Campbell, both men certainly did live in the very same area, that of Amherst Co., VA., both men died there as well. And the older man did name a son George Campbell (Jr.) as per his Will with is on file in Amherst Co records. But what is there which will link the 2 men together? I am from the George Campbell who married Caty. Did any descendant of George and Margaret ever marry any descendant of George and Caty? This might prove they were "cousins", as we know that cousins marrying was very common and acceptable then. But I can not see any data which shows any intermarriage among the descendants of George and Margaret, with the George and Caty "clan". Does anyone have any data to show on that? In fact, it would appear that most if not all the children of George and Margaret moved away, and did not stay in the Amherst or Nelson Co VA areas. Does this mean that they had no sibling in Amherst Co, such as an older brother named George, to keep them there? Or was the presence of George Campbell b. 1720 the reason they moved away? Was he their much older, half-brother, and perhaps they felt ill at ease with him? George Campbell b. 1720(aprox) could not have been the s/o Margaret, since she was born about 1725, so that relaitionship will not work out on paper. But Margaret could have been his very young step-mother, his father's second wife, and mother of a 'second' family of kids for George Campbell b. 1700 (aprox). Perhaps this is a possible scenerio: George Campbell b. 1700 gets married to an unknown lady, and they have a son George Campbell (jr.) about 1720. She dies and George Sr. raises George Jr. George Sr. gets married for the 2nd time to a young lady named Margaret, she is 5 yrs younger than his son, and they start having a family together, with the first child born in 1745, when George Jr is already 25 yrs old. Her last child is born in 1768, she is approximately 43 yrs old then, and George Jr, her children's older half brother would be then 48 years old. George Jr's children are therefor about the same basic age range as his half-siblings by his step mother Margaret. This is how it could be, based on if the 2 men are really Father and Son. But the other scenerio which might work just as well, is that the George b. 1700, had a son named George (jr.) and that son moved away from the area, along with all his siblings, and that is why we do not know anymore about him. If this scenerio is true, then the George Campbell b. 1720 is not related to George Campbell and Margaret, but simply another man with the same name, in the same area in VA at about the same basic time frame. If there is any document or reason to believe that the 2 men are related, other than their name, I would LOVE to see that and would appreciate to hear any reason to even suppose or propose the theory that they are related. Here are some IDEAS to look for, which might tend to prove a relaitionship between George b. 1700 and George b. 1720: 1. A land record which names them both? Father and Son many times recorded land passing between them. 2. A Bible record? 3. A church record? 4. A newspaper record? 5. An intermarriage between some descendant of George and Margaret and George and Caty? 6. A court document refering to a relationship? 7. The land that George and Caty had: was it next to, or extremely near to the land of George and Margaret? Did they SHARE a boundary? That might point a finger toward a relationship. 8. Concerning the descendants of George and Margaret: do we have any researchers of them, which have old letters, or family trees, or even old family Legends which show a relationship? 9. Concerning George Campbell b. 1720: did he ever refer to his Father's land, or his Father's kids, or such in any land or court documents? How did he buy the 480 acres of land he had? Did that purchase, or aquistion have any connections to George and Margaret? That study would intail looking at the FIRST purchase records of the land that George had, and determining WHO he bought it from, and reading thru it all to see if his FATHER might have sold him some land, or given some land?? Would love to hear from anyone else as to their thoughts, opinions, feelings, etc. Best regards, Lilly Martin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Carol Harlow" <charlow1@ntelos.net> To: <CAMPBELL-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 5:48 AM Subject: Re: [CAMPBELL] Connections between the various Campbell families of VA. > Lilly, > I thought it had been determined that George Campbell d 1792 h/o Catherine > (Caty) was a son of George & Margaret #1 on your list > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Lilly Martin" <malik@scs-net.org> > To: <CAMPBELL-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 10:33 AM > Subject: [CAMPBELL] Connections between the various Campbell families of VA. > > > > Dear Gloria, > > > > I found there are 7 distinct and unrelated Campbell families in Amherst > and > > Nelson Co., VA. > > > > When I first started studying my Campbell ancestry, I thought that all the > > people named Campbell in Nelson and Amherst Co VA were all related > somehow, > > but they are not. > > > > Some of the people named Campbell, who were neighbors and friends were not > > related to each other at all, but from very different ancestry, but only > > happened to have the same surname. > > > > The 7 men named Campbell, who are unrelated as far as documentation now > > exists are: > > > > 1. George Campbell, m. Margaret > > 2. George Campbell, m. Catherine (aka Caty) > > 3. James Campbell, Sr, m. Mary Smith > > 4. Henry Campbell , m. Charity > > 5. Lawrence Campbell, m. Henrietta > > 6. Francis Campbell, m. Isabelle > > 7. John Campbell, m. Amelia Coffey > > > > There is no known proof that these 7 men relate to each other, however > there > > may indeed come forth proof later, which says that #2 above is the son of > an > > early first marriage of #1 above. And perhaps #7 above is the son of an > > early first marriage of #6 above, and perhaps #3 is actually the son of #2 > > above. At this point in time I do not have proof to those supositions, so > > they remain doubtfull until proven. > > Also, there might be a relationship between #4 and #5, because they had > some > > land deals between them, which might tend to say they were related, > perhaps > > back in Scotland. > > > > As far as naming practices, the families all used some of the same names, > > even though they were from very different and unrelated ancestry. I wish > > names could be a better clue as to which group they came from, but it can > > not be counted on, since several groups, unrelated used the same name. > > > > One thing we know for sure, is that the name George is a real favorite! > > > > Best regards, > > Lilly Martin > > > >

My apologizies, I stand corrected. How do we know the birth year of Margaret and her children? I am not doubting the information just curious as to how it was obtained. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lilly Martin" <malik@scs-net.org> To: <CAMPBELL-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 9:14 AM Subject: [CAMPBELL] Reply to Carol H., re: George Campbell, is he s/o George? > Dear Carol, > I have never seen any proof that George Campbell b. 1720, who married Caty, > was the son of George Campbell b. 1700, who married Margaret. > > Both men are named George Campbell, both men certainly did live in the very > same area, that of Amherst Co., VA., both men died there as well. And the > older man did name a son George Campbell (Jr.) as per his Will with is on > file in Amherst Co records. > > But what is there which will link the 2 men together? I am from the George > Campbell who married Caty. Did any descendant of George and Margaret ever > marry any descendant of George and Caty? This might prove they were > "cousins", as we know that cousins marrying was very common and acceptable > then. But I can not see any data which shows any intermarriage among the > descendants of George and Margaret, with the George and Caty "clan". Does > anyone have any data to show on that? > > In fact, it would appear that most if not all the children of George and > Margaret moved away, and did not stay in the Amherst or Nelson Co VA areas. > Does this mean that they had no sibling in Amherst Co, such as an older > brother named George, to keep them there? Or was the presence of George > Campbell b. 1720 the reason they moved away? Was he their much older, > half-brother, and perhaps they felt ill at ease with him? > > George Campbell b. 1720(aprox) could not have been the s/o Margaret, since > she was born about 1725, so that relaitionship will not work out on paper. > But Margaret could have been his very young step-mother, his father's second > wife, and mother of a 'second' family of kids for George Campbell b. 1700 > (aprox). > > Perhaps this is a possible scenerio: George Campbell b. 1700 gets married to > an unknown lady, and they have a son George Campbell (jr.) about 1720. She > dies and George Sr. raises George Jr. > George Sr. gets married for the 2nd time to a young lady named Margaret, she > is 5 yrs younger than his son, and they start having a family together, with > the first child born in 1745, when George Jr is already 25 yrs old. Her > last child is born in 1768, she is approximately 43 yrs old then, and George > Jr, her children's older half brother would be then 48 years old. > > George Jr's children are therefor about the same basic age range as his > half-siblings by his step mother Margaret. > > This is how it could be, based on if the 2 men are really Father and Son. > But the other scenerio which might work just as well, is that the George b. > 1700, had a son named George (jr.) and that son moved away from the area, > along with all his siblings, and that is why we do not know anymore about > him. If this scenerio is true, then the George Campbell b. 1720 is not > related to George Campbell and Margaret, but simply another man with the > same name, in the same area in VA at about the same basic time frame. > > If there is any document or reason to believe that the 2 men are related, > other than their name, I would LOVE to see that and would appreciate to hear > any reason to even suppose or propose the theory that they are related. > > Here are some IDEAS to look for, which might tend to prove a relaitionship > between George b. 1700 and George b. 1720: > > 1. A land record which names them both? Father and Son many times recorded > land passing between them. > 2. A Bible record? > 3. A church record? > 4. A newspaper record? > 5. An intermarriage between some descendant of George and Margaret and > George and Caty? > 6. A court document refering to a relationship? > 7. The land that George and Caty had: was it next to, or extremely near to > the land of George and Margaret? Did they SHARE a boundary? That might > point a finger toward a relationship. > 8. Concerning the descendants of George and Margaret: do we have any > researchers of them, which have old letters, or family trees, or even old > family Legends which show a relationship? > 9. Concerning George Campbell b. 1720: did he ever refer to his Father's > land, or his Father's kids, or such in any land or court documents? > How did he buy the 480 acres of land he had? Did that purchase, or > aquistion have any connections to George and Margaret? That study would > intail looking at the FIRST purchase records of the land that George had, > and determining WHO he bought it from, and reading thru it all to see if his > FATHER might have sold him some land, or given some land?? > > Would love to hear from anyone else as to their thoughts, opinions, > feelings, etc. > Best regards, > Lilly Martin > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Carol Harlow" <charlow1@ntelos.net> > To: <CAMPBELL-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 5:48 AM > Subject: Re: [CAMPBELL] Connections between the various Campbell families of > VA. > > > > Lilly, > > I thought it had been determined that George Campbell d 1792 h/o Catherine > > (Caty) was a son of George & Margaret #1 on your list > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Lilly Martin" <malik@scs-net.org> > > To: <CAMPBELL-L@rootsweb.com> > > Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 10:33 AM > > Subject: [CAMPBELL] Connections between the various Campbell families of > VA. > > > > > > > Dear Gloria, > > > > > > I found there are 7 distinct and unrelated Campbell families in Amherst > > and > > > Nelson Co., VA. > > > > > > When I first started studying my Campbell ancestry, I thought that all > the > > > people named Campbell in Nelson and Amherst Co VA were all related > > somehow, > > > but they are not. > > > > > > Some of the people named Campbell, who were neighbors and friends were > not > > > related to each other at all, but from very different ancestry, but only > > > happened to have the same surname. > > > > > > The 7 men named Campbell, who are unrelated as far as documentation now > > > exists are: > > > > > > 1. George Campbell, m. Margaret > > > 2. George Campbell, m. Catherine (aka Caty) > > > 3. James Campbell, Sr, m. Mary Smith > > > 4. Henry Campbell , m. Charity > > > 5. Lawrence Campbell, m. Henrietta > > > 6. Francis Campbell, m. Isabelle > > > 7. John Campbell, m. Amelia Coffey > > > > > > There is no known proof that these 7 men relate to each other, however > > there > > > may indeed come forth proof later, which says that #2 above is the son > of > > an > > > early first marriage of #1 above. And perhaps #7 above is the son of an > > > early first marriage of #6 above, and perhaps #3 is actually the son of > #2 > > > above. At this point in time I do not have proof to those supositions, > so > > > they remain doubtfull until proven. > > > Also, there might be a relationship between #4 and #5, because they had > > some > > > land deals between them, which might tend to say they were related, > > perhaps > > > back in Scotland. > > > > > > As far as naming practices, the families all used some of the same > names, > > > even though they were from very different and unrelated ancestry. I > wish > > > names could be a better clue as to which group they came from, but it > can > > > not be counted on, since several groups, unrelated used the same name. > > > > > > One thing we know for sure, is that the name George is a real favorite! > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Lilly Martin > > > > > > > > > > > ============================== > Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the > last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx > >

Dear Carol, You have asked an excellent question, and I hope others will chime in here and give some information and move the discussion along. WHO is a serious researcher of George and Margaret? Who can we turn to for help and insight? Don't be afraid to reply here, because we won't bite. We all need to learn together. Since I can only trace my own line back as far as George and Caty, I have never spent time looking at George and Margert other than to "COPY" the names and dates which "everyone" else has listed. Family trees such as www.rootsweb.com have many listings for George and Margaret. In 1776 when George wrote his will, he says he is sick and weak in body. We don't know if that means he is 50 yrs old or 80 years old. But most researchers have listed his birth year as about 1700. Margaret, his wife, could not have been born about 1700, because of the ages of her kids, she is having kids from 1745 thru 1768. After she is widowed in 1777 she remarries to a Mr. Henderson, and when her daughter Ruth married John De Priest 9-19-1791 she signed the record at Amherst Co VA as Margaret Henderson, and the surety was given by George Campbell. Her legal name is Margaret Henderson, meaning that she has remarried to a man named Henderson, not that her maiden name was Henderson. That as of 9-19-1791 she can legally sign docements, such as her daughter's marriage, by the name of Margaret Henderson, and not her fomer married name of Campbell. This George Campbell , who signed the surety for the marriage of Ruth, might be the brother of Ruth Campbell De Priest, but he can not be George Campbell who married Caty, because he was already DEAD before that date, as evidenced by Will Book #3. I don't know the death date for Margaret, but she was living as of 9-19-1791, that was 14 years after her husband George Campbell had died. A woman's child bearing years can be said to be about from the age of 15 thru 45, those boundaries might be stretched a little bit, a few years on one side and the other. More often than not the age range is closer to 20 yrs to 40 yrs of age, basically. I think the most data recovered from any of the kids of George and Margaret, is from the 4th child born, his name is Archibald Campbell. His birth is listed as 4-18-1754 Albemarle Co VA, but in his War Pension Application, it is listed as 4-1-1763 Amherst Co VA. Pat Carter is a researcher who has worked on this man and his records. I hope Pat is reading this! and will reply. In the Application it states that the Soldier is 71 yrs old, and was in the VA Line, the date of the App. is 6-23-1834 at Greenbrier Co., VA. He died 7-20-1857. The Revolutionary War Pension Application is # W10572, BLW#61301-160-55, VA Line. As far as the birth dates of the OTHER kids, I am not sure what documents, or records are used to determine the dates given. If Archibald was born about 1763, by his own statement, and he was the 4th of 8 births (last birth was twins) for Margaret, then we could say that Archibald was probably born about at the mid-point of the birthing years for Margaret. Let's say that Margaret was about 30 yrs old when Archibald was born in 1763, because the mid point of the 20-40 yrs of age birthing span would be about 30 years of age. If Margaret Campbell was about 30 yrs old in 1763, that would make her birth year about 1733. If her first born was born in 1745 and her last birth was 1768, then her birth year could be approximated to be 1725, making her 20 at the first birth and 43 at her last delivery, of twins. This age analysis of Margaret Campbell, wife of George, is based upon the Rev War record of her son Archibald. If we had MORE records and documents to look at for other kids of hers, the picture would widen up, and we could understand her age better. Best regards, Lilly Martin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Carol Harlow" <charlow1@ntelos.net> To: <CAMPBELL-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 9:46 PM Subject: Re: [CAMPBELL] Reply to Carol H., re: George Campbell, is he s/o George? > My apologizies, I stand corrected. > How do we know the birth year of Margaret and her children? I am not > doubting the information just curious as to how it was obtained. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Lilly Martin" <malik@scs-net.org> > To: <CAMPBELL-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 9:14 AM > Subject: [CAMPBELL] Reply to Carol H., re: George Campbell, is he s/o > George? > > > > Dear Carol, > > I have never seen any proof that George Campbell b. 1720, who married > Caty, > > was the son of George Campbell b. 1700, who married Margaret. > >