I talked to Hollis, the person who took the picture of Mary Nall's gravestone, and he told me that he scanned the picture again, blew it up 300% and the only thing he could make out was part of the last lines, "dead but not forgotten". ----- Original Message ----- From: <Mbmackie1231@aol.com> To: <younger@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 12:52 PM Subject: Re: [YOUNGER] Thomas Younger ... > ......time? waits for no man... > > > I made that much out. And then "something,something, something".....was > dead. What's the verse "was dead but now is alive"? > **************One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, > Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. > (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000025) > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > YOUNGER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Just so you folks know, since this is going in the direction of DNA, I'm going in for surgery on the 24th and I'm trying to get a great many things done between now and then, so in a nutshell, I'm not following these posts. So if you're thinking I'm paying attention right now, I'm not and I'm not going to be for awhile:) If you have a specific question for me after your discussions, ask me directly and I'll answer as soon as I can after the surgery. Sorry. Bobbi -----Original Message----- From: younger-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:younger-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of L S Y Sent: Monday, December 22, 2008 11:34 PM To: younger@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [YOUNGER] Source Records I was worried I might have to clarify that post a little. The descendancy I listed is for the current DNA participants, not for me. Mine looks like this: 1.Alexander Younger (b.1681) -2.Thomas Younger (b.1707) --3.William Younger (b.1744) ---4.Williamson Younger (b.1782) ----5.Armistead Younger (b.1811) -----6.Robert Albert Younger (b.1853) ------7.Charles Edward Younger (b.1881) -------8.Richard Younger (b.1813) --------9.My Father ---------10.Me I am descended from James Samuel (through his son, Wilson Leonard), but the link is my great-grandmother, Rutha Viola, so the DNA chain is broken for me in that direction. - Stephen On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 1:49 PM, Mark Younger <Mark.Younger@hilton.com>wrote: > Your James Samuel was my John W brother so we should match - both sons > of William and Pricilla ... So you have not had your DNA tested? You and Bob? > > Mark Younger CFM > Director Facilities Administration > Hilton Hotels Corporation > Memphis Operations/Data Center > 755 Crossover Lane > Memphis ,TN 38117 > Tel: 901 374-5458 > Fax :901 374-5458 > > "Necessity is the Mother of Invention" > > -----Original Message----- > From: younger-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:younger-bounces@rootsweb.com] > On Behalf Of L S Y > Sent: Monday, December 22, 2008 2:37 PM > To: younger@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [YOUNGER] Source Records > > "The DNA from the Armistead line is flawed." > My wife's family would probably agree with you there (I write this > while sitting on my Father-In-Law's couch). That aside though, I > didn't know there were any participants from Armistead's line yet. > Bob and I are the only list members that I am aware of that are direct > male descendants of > Armistead: both of us through sons of his son, Robert Albert. I keep > toying with the idea, but I just can't justify the expense (especially > now that the question of Thomas' relationship to Alexander has been > adequately proven). > > Below is the descendancy from Alexander as I extrapolated it from the > FTDNA > site: > 1.Alexander Younger (b.1681) > -2.Thomas Younger (b.1707) > --3.William Younger (b.1744) > ---4.Williamson Younger (b.1782) > ----5.William Younger (b.1803) > -----6.James Samuel Younger (b.1831) > ------7.James Henry Younger (b.1866) > -------8.William Stanley Younger (b.1895) --------9.Participant #92740 > DNA:14,24,14,08,11,13,12,12,12,14,13,30 > ---4.Thomas Younger (b.1784) > ----5.Josephus Younger (b.1821) > -----6.Josephus W. Younger (b.1856) > ------7.Stanley E. Younger (b.1896) > -------8.Participant's Father > --------9.Participant #81432 DNA:14,24,14,08,11,13,12,12,12,14,13,30 > -2.James Younger (b.1720) > --3.Thomas *James* Younger (b.1761) > ---4.Thomas Younger (b.1790) > ----5.William Alexander Younger (b.1828) -----6.John Willis Younger > (b.1869) ------7.Claude Elmer Elzy Younger (b.1900) > -------8.Participant #86386 DNA:14,24,14,08,11,13,12,12,12,14,13,30 > ---4.Joseph Younger (b.1803) > ----5.William Green Younger (b.1839) > -----6.Earle Younger (b.1876) > ------7.Merwin Younger (b.1900) > -------8.Participant #N32738 DNA:14,24,14,08,11,13,12,12,12,14,13,30 > > - Stephen > ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to YOUNGER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
I was worried I might have to clarify that post a little. The descendancy I listed is for the current DNA participants, not for me. Mine looks like this: 1.Alexander Younger (b.1681) -2.Thomas Younger (b.1707) --3.William Younger (b.1744) ---4.Williamson Younger (b.1782) ----5.Armistead Younger (b.1811) -----6.Robert Albert Younger (b.1853) ------7.Charles Edward Younger (b.1881) -------8.Richard Younger (b.1813) --------9.My Father ---------10.Me I am descended from James Samuel (through his son, Wilson Leonard), but the link is my great-grandmother, Rutha Viola, so the DNA chain is broken for me in that direction. - Stephen On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 1:49 PM, Mark Younger <Mark.Younger@hilton.com>wrote: > Your James Samuel was my John W brother so we should match - both sons of > William and Pricilla ... So you have not had your DNA tested? You and Bob? > > Mark Younger CFM > Director Facilities Administration > Hilton Hotels Corporation > Memphis Operations/Data Center > 755 Crossover Lane > Memphis ,TN 38117 > Tel: 901 374-5458 > Fax :901 374-5458 > > "Necessity is the Mother of Invention" > > -----Original Message----- > From: younger-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:younger-bounces@rootsweb.com] > On Behalf Of L S Y > Sent: Monday, December 22, 2008 2:37 PM > To: younger@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [YOUNGER] Source Records > > "The DNA from the Armistead line is flawed." > My wife's family would probably agree with you there (I write this while > sitting on my Father-In-Law's couch). That aside though, I didn't know > there were any participants from Armistead's line yet. Bob and I are the > only list members that I am aware of that are direct male descendants of > Armistead: both of us through sons of his son, Robert Albert. I keep > toying > with the idea, but I just can't justify the expense (especially now that > the > question of Thomas' relationship to Alexander has been adequately proven). > > Below is the descendancy from Alexander as I extrapolated it from the FTDNA > site: > 1.Alexander Younger (b.1681) > -2.Thomas Younger (b.1707) > --3.William Younger (b.1744) > ---4.Williamson Younger (b.1782) > ----5.William Younger (b.1803) > -----6.James Samuel Younger (b.1831) > ------7.James Henry Younger (b.1866) > -------8.William Stanley Younger (b.1895) > --------9.Participant #92740 DNA:14,24,14,08,11,13,12,12,12,14,13,30 > ---4.Thomas Younger (b.1784) > ----5.Josephus Younger (b.1821) > -----6.Josephus W. Younger (b.1856) > ------7.Stanley E. Younger (b.1896) > -------8.Participant's Father > --------9.Participant #81432 DNA:14,24,14,08,11,13,12,12,12,14,13,30 > -2.James Younger (b.1720) > --3.Thomas *James* Younger (b.1761) > ---4.Thomas Younger (b.1790) > ----5.William Alexander Younger (b.1828) > -----6.John Willis Younger (b.1869) > ------7.Claude Elmer Elzy Younger (b.1900) > -------8.Participant #86386 DNA:14,24,14,08,11,13,12,12,12,14,13,30 > ---4.Joseph Younger (b.1803) > ----5.William Green Younger (b.1839) > -----6.Earle Younger (b.1876) > ------7.Merwin Younger (b.1900) > -------8.Participant #N32738 DNA:14,24,14,08,11,13,12,12,12,14,13,30 > > - Stephen >
Your James Samuel was my John W brother so we should match - both sons of William and Pricilla ... So you have not had your DNA tested? You and Bob? Mark Younger CFM Director Facilities Administration Hilton Hotels Corporation Memphis Operations/Data Center 755 Crossover Lane Memphis ,TN 38117 Tel: 901 374-5458 Fax :901 374-5458 "Necessity is the Mother of Invention" -----Original Message----- From: younger-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:younger-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of L S Y Sent: Monday, December 22, 2008 2:37 PM To: younger@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [YOUNGER] Source Records "The DNA from the Armistead line is flawed." My wife's family would probably agree with you there (I write this while sitting on my Father-In-Law's couch). That aside though, I didn't know there were any participants from Armistead's line yet. Bob and I are the only list members that I am aware of that are direct male descendants of Armistead: both of us through sons of his son, Robert Albert. I keep toying with the idea, but I just can't justify the expense (especially now that the question of Thomas' relationship to Alexander has been adequately proven). Below is the descendancy from Alexander as I extrapolated it from the FTDNA site: 1.Alexander Younger (b.1681) -2.Thomas Younger (b.1707) --3.William Younger (b.1744) ---4.Williamson Younger (b.1782) ----5.William Younger (b.1803) -----6.James Samuel Younger (b.1831) ------7.James Henry Younger (b.1866) -------8.William Stanley Younger (b.1895) --------9.Participant #92740 DNA:14,24,14,08,11,13,12,12,12,14,13,30 ---4.Thomas Younger (b.1784) ----5.Josephus Younger (b.1821) -----6.Josephus W. Younger (b.1856) ------7.Stanley E. Younger (b.1896) -------8.Participant's Father --------9.Participant #81432 DNA:14,24,14,08,11,13,12,12,12,14,13,30 -2.James Younger (b.1720) --3.Thomas *James* Younger (b.1761) ---4.Thomas Younger (b.1790) ----5.William Alexander Younger (b.1828) -----6.John Willis Younger (b.1869) ------7.Claude Elmer Elzy Younger (b.1900) -------8.Participant #86386 DNA:14,24,14,08,11,13,12,12,12,14,13,30 ---4.Joseph Younger (b.1803) ----5.William Green Younger (b.1839) -----6.Earle Younger (b.1876) ------7.Merwin Younger (b.1900) -------8.Participant #N32738 DNA:14,24,14,08,11,13,12,12,12,14,13,30 - Stephen On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 6:53 AM, Mark Younger <Mark.Younger@hilton.com>wrote: > My theory's: In order of probability > > William's wife, Pricilla Jones had my John William(eldest son before > William) - which is my line > The DNA from the Armistead line is flawed. How many males have been tested > form the William, Williamson, Armistead line? > Something happen along the way after William and John William... affair , > adoption etc > > > Mark Younger CFM > Director Facilities Administration > Hilton Hotels Corporation > Memphis Operations/Data Center > 755 Crossover Lane > Memphis ,TN 38117 > Tel: 901 374-5458 > Fax :901 374-5458 > > "Necessity is the Mother of Invention" > > ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to YOUNGER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
"The DNA from the Armistead line is flawed." My wife's family would probably agree with you there (I write this while sitting on my Father-In-Law's couch). That aside though, I didn't know there were any participants from Armistead's line yet. Bob and I are the only list members that I am aware of that are direct male descendants of Armistead: both of us through sons of his son, Robert Albert. I keep toying with the idea, but I just can't justify the expense (especially now that the question of Thomas' relationship to Alexander has been adequately proven). Below is the descendancy from Alexander as I extrapolated it from the FTDNA site: 1.Alexander Younger (b.1681) -2.Thomas Younger (b.1707) --3.William Younger (b.1744) ---4.Williamson Younger (b.1782) ----5.William Younger (b.1803) -----6.James Samuel Younger (b.1831) ------7.James Henry Younger (b.1866) -------8.William Stanley Younger (b.1895) --------9.Participant #92740 DNA:14,24,14,08,11,13,12,12,12,14,13,30 ---4.Thomas Younger (b.1784) ----5.Josephus Younger (b.1821) -----6.Josephus W. Younger (b.1856) ------7.Stanley E. Younger (b.1896) -------8.Participant's Father --------9.Participant #81432 DNA:14,24,14,08,11,13,12,12,12,14,13,30 -2.James Younger (b.1720) --3.Thomas *James* Younger (b.1761) ---4.Thomas Younger (b.1790) ----5.William Alexander Younger (b.1828) -----6.John Willis Younger (b.1869) ------7.Claude Elmer Elzy Younger (b.1900) -------8.Participant #86386 DNA:14,24,14,08,11,13,12,12,12,14,13,30 ---4.Joseph Younger (b.1803) ----5.William Green Younger (b.1839) -----6.Earle Younger (b.1876) ------7.Merwin Younger (b.1900) -------8.Participant #N32738 DNA:14,24,14,08,11,13,12,12,12,14,13,30 - Stephen On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 6:53 AM, Mark Younger <Mark.Younger@hilton.com>wrote: > My theory's: In order of probability > > William's wife, Pricilla Jones had my John William(eldest son before > William) - which is my line > The DNA from the Armistead line is flawed. How many males have been tested > form the William, Williamson, Armistead line? > Something happen along the way after William and John William... affair , > adoption etc > > > Mark Younger CFM > Director Facilities Administration > Hilton Hotels Corporation > Memphis Operations/Data Center > 755 Crossover Lane > Memphis ,TN 38117 > Tel: 901 374-5458 > Fax :901 374-5458 > > "Necessity is the Mother of Invention" > >
I have the following families on the 1850 Carroll County TN District 5 Census: My first census record of my William(b 1803) and John W( b 1829- my line) Armistead/William/James Samuel shows up on the Ark census in 1860 the others still in Tennessee. Attached is a spread sheet showing data Family / Name / Birth/Death Head Williamson 1817 1876 Wife Louisa 1818 1894 Louisa A 1846 Lydia A 1848 Margaret P 1844 1868 Mary Jane 1838 William A 1840 1864 James W 1842 Head Armistead 1811 1883 Wife Rebbecca 1814 1892 James W 1843 John B 1847 Mary W 1837 Rutha F 1839 William A 1841 Head William 1803 ? Wife Priscilla 1804 ? James S 1831 John W 1829 Joesph M 1840 Martha J 1837 Paul B 1844 Thomas A 1842 William M 1834 Frances M 1846 Harriet 1848 Head James Samuel 1818 1880 Wife Harriet 1827 1922 Dolly 1843 William 1846 Mark Younger CFM Director Facilities Administration Hilton Hotels Corporation Memphis Operations/Data Center 755 Crossover Lane Memphis ,TN 38117 Tel: 901 374-5458 Fax :901 374-5458 "Necessity is the Mother of Invention" -----Original Message----- From: younger-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:younger-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Mbmackie1231@aol.com Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 5:31 PM To: younger@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [YOUNGER] Source Records . I have no definite proof that William and Williamson where brothers other than folklore( right?). No...not folklore. Deeds call them brothers, I believe. They are lumped together quite a bit in debates of the Will of their father and grandfathers. And a professional genealogist, Marguerete Hutchins, long before the computer, said that they were brothers. Until now there's not been much debate on that score. Your DNA mismatch could have happened at just about any time in your lineage. Are there other descendants of William that you know of? Brownie **************One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000025) ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to YOUNGER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
My theory's: In order of probability William's wife, Pricilla Jones had my John William(eldest son before William) - which is my line The DNA from the Armistead line is flawed. How many males have been tested form the William, Williamson, Armistead line? Something happen along the way after William and John William... affair , adoption etc Mark Younger CFM Director Facilities Administration Hilton Hotels Corporation Memphis Operations/Data Center 755 Crossover Lane Memphis ,TN 38117 Tel: 901 374-5458 Fax :901 374-5458 "Necessity is the Mother of Invention" -----Original Message----- From: younger-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:younger-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Mbmackie1231@aol.com Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 5:34 PM To: younger@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [YOUNGER] Source Records In a message dated 12/19/2008 5:09:19 P.M. Central Standard Time, Mark.Younger@hilton.com writes: Again my DNA matches a James line from the Carolina's Yeah...I know. But as I said...that could have happened "somewhere down the road" after William. :-) Brownie **************One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000025) ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to YOUNGER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
In a message dated 12/19/2008 5:09:19 P.M. Central Standard Time, Mark.Younger@hilton.com writes: Again my DNA matches a James line from the Carolina's Yeah...I know. But as I said...that could have happened "somewhere down the road" after William. :-) Brownie **************One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000025)
England. He's not ours. **************One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000025)
. I have no definite proof that William and Williamson where brothers other than folklore( right?). No...not folklore. Deeds call them brothers, I believe. They are lumped together quite a bit in debates of the Will of their father and grandfathers. And a professional genealogist, Marguerete Hutchins, long before the computer, said that they were brothers. Until now there's not been much debate on that score. Your DNA mismatch could have happened at just about any time in your lineage. Are there other descendants of William that you know of? Brownie **************One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000025)
Who is this Alexander and where the devil did he come from? -----Original Message----- From: younger-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:younger-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Mbmackie1231@aol.com Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 5:12 PM To: younger@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [YOUNGER] Source Records Sarah Younger (now wife of Alexander Younger) confesses to his lordship Philip Calvert (out of the hearing of her said Husband) that she gives up all claims. She was Sarah Claw before Alexander & before Claw she was Sarah Cole. Thus the closed door session. More about Sarah & Alexander of Daleys Desire later. Mark...you do realize that the above Youngers are not ours, don't you? Not the same Alexander. **************One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000 025) ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to YOUNGER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
In a message dated 12/19/2008 4:28:25 P.M. Central Standard Time, Mark.Younger@hilton.com writes: is my William Younger came to West Tennessee in the 1840's Well, if indeed your William was a brother to my Williamson, Jr. , then that's a fairly straight line from William/Mary Watkins Younger. What makes you say the 1840s? Brownie **************One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000025)
Sarah Younger (now wife of Alexander Younger) confesses to his lordship Philip Calvert (out of the hearing of her said Husband) that she gives up all claims. She was Sarah Claw before Alexander & before Claw she was Sarah Cole. Thus the closed door session. More about Sarah & Alexander of Daleys Desire later. Mark...you do realize that the above Youngers are not ours, don't you? Not the same Alexander. **************One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000025)
Sorry the 1820's - I think the last census record is 1840. I have no definite proof that William and Williamson where brothers other than folklore( right?). Also my DNA does not match Armistead's line ,supposed submitted DNA line, who was Williamson brother per his will. If you look at the census record in Carroll county thru the 1800' there were several families of Younger's that where in the area. There were also several families of Younger's that went thru the Carolina's - also thru Kentucky.... Again my DNA matches a James line from the Carolina's Mark Younger CFM Director Facilities Administration Hilton Hotels Corporation Memphis Operations/Data Center 755 Crossover Lane Memphis ,TN 38117 Tel: 901 374-5458 Fax :901 374-5458 "Necessity is the Mother of Invention" -----Original Message----- From: younger-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:younger-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Mbmackie1231@aol.com Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 4:34 PM To: younger@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [YOUNGER] Source Records In a message dated 12/19/2008 4:28:25 P.M. Central Standard Time, Mark.Younger@hilton.com writes: is my William Younger came to West Tennessee in the 1840's Well, if indeed your William was a brother to my Williamson, Jr. , then that's a fairly straight line from William/Mary Watkins Younger. What makes you say the 1840s? Brownie **************One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000025) ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to YOUNGER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Well that's the one thing we can say without any question! -----Original Message----- From: younger-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:younger-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Mbmackie1231@aol.com Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 4:53 PM To: younger@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [YOUNGER] Source Records In a message dated 12/19/2008 3:45:56 P.M. Central Standard Time, restes@comcast.net writes: Our ancestors are so confusing. And it's no wonder we are all such a bunch of mutts. :-) **************One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000 025) ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to YOUNGER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Dear Mark, This information comes as no shock to me. I have given a number of years tracking my Irish ancestors. Among the Celts, women were encouraged to enjoy conjugal behavior with other men. If a man fathered a child out of wedlock, that child was brought home for his wife to raise. Divorce was frequent and did not require legal action. I'm not sure the Brehon laws even existed for divorce. This is one reason the English considered the Irish to be barbarians and treated them with such disdain.. However the members of the English Court and, indeed, many of their kings were openly siring progeny with extra-marital affairs. Monogamy has not been especially practiced throughout the ages. I'm sure you have seen court cases in which the father is revealed to assure that the child will not become a burden on society. They weren't especially concerned with morality. None of us can be assured of out "purity" unless we pass the DNA test. In my own family it was a well known but hidden fact that one of my cousins was sired by his grandfather. No one betrayed the truth and he died without ever knowing. I can be pretty sure about my Irish folks back to a point because they were Catholic and the Priests kept pretty accurate records to the point of making a note of bastardy when a christening took place. Even with all that I wouldn't stake my life on it. Remember Kentucky was the Dark and Bloody ground. The early Kentuckians were pretty barbarian until the Great Awakening of religion took place. They had nothing to do but drink, fight and whatever might happen behind the corn stalks. Genealogists can just do the best they can. Wilma ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Younger" <Mark.Younger@hilton.com> To: <younger@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 2:43 PM Subject: Re: [YOUNGER] Source Records My researcher as told me that the Universities of Maryland and Virginia gave him the following info concerning records: Up until about the 1740s (couple of generations) "family" relationships were many times described as generational and not biological. You are using a newer "Puritan" type view of "family" (which was a strict interpretation of the Church of England & only existed in a small region of "New England") and not the actual meaning as it was used at the time (prior to about the 1740s) in the Maryland, Virginia & Carolina colonies by banished low-land Scots Presbyterians and French/Dutch Huguenots. Many of the Younger's where the banished low -land Scots... It was not uncommon for the Scottish (plus the Welsh, Irish & French) to have a second set of children by a much younger wife (one generation removed) and refer to this set of children as "grandchildren". Note that the 1st wife does not have to be necessarily dead ("divorce" after all was an evil Catholic & Church of England edict). When the old man died; the second wife could re-marry (all women had to be married) & a new set of children would be produced. This means that one "will" or "deed" (which could only be executed by a man) could refer to three different sets of children (the word "cousin" did not exist; invented at Harvard for history of emigrants of "Persons of Quality" & etc) by the wife's current last name. But actually refer to a prior "family" under a different name. Note that if the younger wife did not re-marry; she could be referred to as a "daughter" of the old man by the children of the 1st wife. The word "daughter" (and "son") meant different things to different groups of people. Most contemporary docs did not use either word because of the above (or was cleaned-up by various translators and the original no longer exist; see Harvard above & below). This can only be unscrambled (inferred) from the few original (un translated) "wills" by beds who were given to seemingly unrelated women. Beds (wife's), guns (sons) & cows (daughters & grandchildren) were given in that general order; which was the order of the "higher class" of people in England & Scotland at that time. "Whore, "Hore", or "Hure" implies a woman who did not re-marry and does not live with the old man's family. It may not of meant anything other than that someone was insulted by her living alone. But our friends at Harvard took offence & did not "translate" these parts of the original wills (and family Bibles) so we can never know how these extended families where constructed & that "cousins" may have been in fact "half" brothers & sisters inter-related by common mothers or fathers. (This is why there are so many of them in one very small region.) And these "translators" also supplied (or removed) the "son" and "daughter" parts to make it fit the Harvard Puritan view of "Persons of Quality". Also - Most colonial records( many where destroyed) requires some understanding of pre & post Latinized English spelling in three locations; Scotland, England & the early colonies. Example: Youngare = Younger Saruant = Servant Haue = Have Sarue = Serve Seaven = Seven Aleauen = Eleven Henry Frith brought his Saruant Richard Dods to haue Judgmt of this Courtt for his time he is Judged to Sarue Seaven yeares Thomas Cox brought his Saruant Francis Oxley to haue Judgmt of this Courtt for his time he is Judged to Sarue Seaven yeares Tho: Martin brought his Saruant Jno Youngare to haue judgment of this Courtt for his time he is Judged to Serue Seauen yeares Natha: Euitt brought his Saruant John Burcher to haue Judgment of this Courtt for his time he is Judged to sarue Seauen yeares Mr William Hamblton brought his Saruant Elizabeth Grundell to haue Judgmt of this Courtt for her time She is Judged to Sarue Seauen yeares Tho: Heythcott brought his Saruant Michell Foster to haue Judgment of this Courtt for his time he is Judged to Sarue Aleauen yeares Tho: Scellington brough his Saruant George Mackeelling to haue Judgment of this Courtt for his time his Judged to Sarue Six yeares Ralph Dawson brought his Saruant John Stonestreet to haue Judgment of this Courtt for his time he is Judged to Sarue Seauen yeares [ Ref: Proceedings of the County Courts of Kent (1658-1676), Talbot (1662-1674), and Somerset (1665-1668) Counties Pg 454 Talbot County Court Proceedings, 1662-1674 (abt 1669?)] Mark Younger CFM Director Facilities Administration Hilton Hotels Corporation Memphis Operations/Data Center 755 Crossover Lane Memphis ,TN 38117 Tel: 901 374-5458 Fax :901 374-5458 "Necessity is the Mother of Invention" -----Original Message----- From: younger-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:younger-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Wilma (Younger) Norton Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 2:51 PM To: younger@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [YOUNGER] Thomas Younger ... I have eight Thomas Youngers -- these below and a whole bunch more born after 1790. Most, if not all the dates are estimates, most of the information came from the FOTY book or from this List. 1. Alexander and Rebecca Mills had a Thomas who had two unknown wives and about 15 children. 2. One of the children from the first unknown wife was named Thomas born ca 1734. 3. Humphrey and Mary Pell of MD had a Thomas born ca 1712 4. John and Sarah Kennard had a Thomas born ca. 1753 5. James and Anna Nash had a Thomas born March 10, 1761 NC married Mary Nall 6. William and Mary Watkins had a Thomas born ca 1784 married Sarah Brown 7. Unknown parents had a Thomas born ca. 1790 married Martha Crowder 8. Thomas and Mary Nall had a Thomas born bet. 1790-1791 NC married Ellen London. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Roberta J. Estes" <restes@comcast.net> To: <younger@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 2:11 PM Subject: Re: [YOUNGER] Thomas Younger ... >I don't see any evidence of a second Thomas being part of the time between > 1700 and 1791. The reason is that by 1740 Thomas buys the land from > Driscoll saying it was Alexander's. By 1749 Fretwell is involved and we > know > Thomas's early children were "of the half blood" (based on the > estate/lawsuit records) and one of them married a Fretwell. I'd be glad > to > contribute my research notes to Larry and I'm all for cleaning up > genealogy > messes everyplace. I'm very glad someone is working on them. > > Bobbi > > -----Original Message----- > From: younger-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:younger-bounces@rootsweb.com] > On > Behalf Of Mbmackie1231@aol.com > Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 2:45 PM > To: younger@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [YOUNGER] Thomas Younger ... > > I have a Thomas Younger b. ABT. 1700...son of Alexander. > > Then a Thomas Younger b. 1798...son of William the above Thomas's > brother. > > (can't be...too much time between) > > I don't think the Thomas b. 1700 lived until 1791. I think there was > another in between him and the one who died in 1791. > > Brownie > **************Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and > favorite sites in one place. Try it now. > (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000 > 010) > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > YOUNGER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes > in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > YOUNGER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to YOUNGER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to YOUNGER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
In a message dated 12/19/2008 3:45:56 P.M. Central Standard Time, restes@comcast.net writes: Our ancestors are so confusing. And it's no wonder we are all such a bunch of mutts. :-) **************One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000025)
In a message dated 12/19/2008 3:45:56 P.M. Central Standard Time, restes@comcast.net writes: Our ancestors are so confusing I have a Bonham back in NJ in the 1700s who had four children by first wife (Mayflower Soc. accepts them)..then he had fifteen children by second wife and the Mayflower Soc. doesn't accept those descendants because even tho' it's the husband who is the Mayflower descendant, the second wife cannot be proven. Yet. **************One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000025)
Our ancestors are so confusing. -----Original Message----- From: younger-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:younger-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Mbmackie1231@aol.com Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 4:29 PM To: younger@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [YOUNGER] Source Records Thanks, Mark. That would explain much. Looks like it may help us to get somewhere. This finding could explain some other ancestors as well. I'm very happy to know this information and history. Makes sense. Love, Brownie **************One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000 025) ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to YOUNGER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Thanks, Mark. That would explain much. Looks like it may help us to get somewhere. This finding could explain some other ancestors as well. I'm very happy to know this information and history. Makes sense. Love, Brownie **************One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000025)