1860 Botetourt Grief Crawford 70 Nancy 70 Saml 22 Jno 18 Mary 40 Jane 10 May 8 Note the above. Clearly not all of the last 5 names are children of Grief and Nancy. In order for her to have had May, she would have gotten pregnant at age 63 - a rare feat, indeed! No. What is the case? It is hard to be certain. Yet, I think this may be admissable: Comparing the above with the 1850, 172/172 Grief Crawford 52 M Virginia Nancy Crawford 48 F Virginia Hiram Crawford 21 M Virginia Polly Crawford 20 F Virginia Jackson Crawford 18 M Virginia Lucy Crawford 16 F Virginia Samuel Crawford 11 M Virginia John Crawford 9 M Virginia Francis Crawford 2[?] M Virginia Hiram appears to be a son who moved away from home after 1849 sometime, but before 1861. Polly, Jackson, Lucy, Samuel and John appear to be children. Francis appears to be a grandchild. In 1870, Polly is listed with a Jane and a Minerva. I suggest Paulina Jane and Frances Minerva or Frances May - hence I suggest Paulina Jane and Fannie M CRAWFORD, buried at Oriskany, are Grief's grandchildren, through his daughter Mary or Polly. Of course, there is a possible flaw. With CRAWFORD, I've come to expect that! 1870 lists a Griff Crawford, but only aged 66, with a Nancie, aged 55, a John and a Samuel. Also a Martha, however. I am thinking this may have been a son to Grief and Nancy who left the next *before* 1850. A first-born is often named for good ole Dad. It is common to name children after brothers and sisters. The wife's name *is* a curious coincidence - but I suggest it *is* a coincidence, and that Grief and Griff are not the identical person. Vince P.S. Comments, evidence, etc., not only welcomed, but requested.