Have you run into any famous names as you push your way into
the unknown of your family’s past history?
I thought it rather notable when I bumped into a name of
significance as I rolled through the genealogy of my extended Taliaferro line:
Frank Lebby Stanton, writer and creator of the poem from which the Association of Graveyard Rabbits has drawn its name.
Finding mention of that name reminded me of the Unit Studies
approach of my homeschooling years: a technique for studying a central figure
or topic in history, then exploring all the related trails branching from that
one point of examination. Sort of like mind-mapping for curriculum design,
developing Unit Studies could escort you through varied educational terrain—math,
science, composition, geography, language, sometimes even performing arts or
athletics—all while studying history. Unit Studies took learning out of the education
box and turned it into an observatory of how life really is, where everything is (or can be) related.
That experience—finding Frank—got me to thinking: could
there be others who were once recognized as significant by their peers, during
their lifetime?
Of course, that thought led to another: would there be
enough of those interesting people in my extended family universe to warrant
creation of my own family’s Who’s Who
of relatives?
While I thought this an interesting possibility, my inner
critic decided finding Frank was definitely a fluke—besides, he was an in-law—and dismissed
the idea.
Then I ran into yesterday’s story.
There I was, mindlessly grinding my way through the
Taliaferro genealogy I’ve been studying for the past month—Willie Catherine
Ivey’s Ancestry and Posterity of Dr. John Taliaferro and Mary (Hardin) Taliaferro—and I saw the possibility for entry
number two in my own family's Who’s Who.
By this point in my progress, I was up to page fifty six in the Ivey text, and working on the descendants of Dr. John’s son Charles. I had moved
on to Charles’ son—named John, after his grandfather—who married Martha Wright
and moved from the family’s hometown in Surry County,
North Carolina, to Tennessee.
This younger John Taliaferro had a son whom he named
William, who had been married twice, owing to the death of his first wife
sometime before 1869. William and his second wife—a cousin named Martha
Franklin whom everyone called (for some inexplicable reason) Pattie—had one
child, born in 1870. They named this son Charles Franklin Taliaferro.
While this younger Charles Taliaferro was listed as “a
prominent physician,” that is not why I bring up his story today. Since Charles
and his wife had no children, I’m certainly not mentioning his story for that
reason—he, too, joined the ranks of those who became the last leaf on their
family tree’s branch.
It is solely for one sentence in the Ivey book that I bring
up Charles’ record today. He married a woman whose own genealogy was notable
enough to be included in the Ivey narrative.
He married Ida Virginia Bolejack, daughter of Nathaniel Bolejack and Victoria (Bunker) Bolejack of Mount Airy, N.C…
Up to this point, nothing in the narrative would be unusual
for a genealogy book. It is the continuation of that last sentence that made
all the difference.
…and granddaughter of Chang Bunker, one of the Siamese twins.
Siamese twins? I thought the name, Chang, to be quite
unusual for the spouse of anyone associated with a family whose roots reached
back to colonial days in America.
More than that, though, while I understood the concept of Siamese twins, I had
never given any thought to the reason why such twins might be dubbed “Siamese.”
Straight to Wikipedia I flew, looking for any possible entry on
Chang Bunker.
I found one.
Yes, the original Siamese twins were indeed named Chang and
Eng, and they were, literally, Siamese. Born in 1811 near Bangkok, they were observed as teenagers by a
Scottish merchant living in the area. The merchant realized the financial
possibilities in exploiting the curiosity of the twins’ predicament, and
entered into a contract with the twins’ family to take the boys on a world
tour.
At the end of their agreed contractual terms, the
now-world-traveler twins decided that the place where they would most like to
settle was an area near Wilkesboro,
North Carolina. They adopted
Western styles and ways, choosing even to assume an anglicized surname: Bunker.
Becoming naturalized American citizens, they went into business for themselves
and became an established part of their new community.
Incredibly—and awkwardly, I am assuming—the brothers
married. Two sisters became their wives, Chang marrying Adelaide Yates, his
brother marrying her sister Sarah Anne.
Chang and Adelaide
became parents of eleven children. One of those children was Victoria Bunker,
who eventually married Nathaniel Bolejack. They, in turn, became parents of Ida
Virginia Bolejack. And she, as we read above, became the wife of Dr. Charles
Franklin Taliaferro.
While Chang and his constant-companion brother Eng became
worldwide curiosities, Chang’s granddaughter became someone in my own
extended family whom I can consider intriguing. If it hadn’t been for stumbling
upon her name—and the inclusion of her family’s story in my family’s
genealogy—I wouldn’t have revisited the history of the concept of “Siamese
twins” and would have missed the personal connection totally. Though yet
another in-law to my Taliaferro line, Ida Virginia Bolejack Taliaferro makes a
great candidate for my own private Who’s
Who of interesting relatives.
Above: "Chang and Eng, the Siamese twins, One Holding a Book," undated lithograph by unidentified publisher; public domain image in the Iconographic Collections at Wellcome Library, from Wellcome Images, a website operated by Wellcome Trust, a global charitable foundation based in the United Kingdom; this image shared under Creative Commons Attribution only license CC BY 4.0; via Wikipedia.
Above: "Chang and Eng, the Siamese twins, One Holding a Book," undated lithograph by unidentified publisher; public domain image in the Iconographic Collections at Wellcome Library, from Wellcome Images, a website operated by Wellcome Trust, a global charitable foundation based in the United Kingdom; this image shared under Creative Commons Attribution only license CC BY 4.0; via Wikipedia.
You have quite a few ancestors to include in a Who's Who. I can come up with just a couple candidates -- most for being notorious rather than meritorious. But the name Bolejack is all too familiar. Last year during the 52 Ancestors challenge, I worked on the line of one Mary Jollett from Culpeper County, VA who married John Dodgins Forrester and promptly disappeared. I found them in NORTH CAROLINA before they moved on to Tennessee and then Illinois. While in NC, one of their daughters married a Bolejack. Betcha they're related somehow.
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't be surprised, Wendy. Actually, sometimes--but not that often, of course--I wish I were a statistician, someone who's a whiz at numbers, who could estimate the likelihood that any given one of us colonial descendants would be related to another one. I bet the odds are better than we think.
DeleteNow there is an eye-opener! :)
ReplyDeleteI think most of my family were non-famous - lots of peanut farmers.
Well, they may not have been famous in the traditional sense of the word, but from what I've read on your blog, Iggy, some of your ancestors were well known in their own community, at least. Weren't some of your "greats" well-respected businessmen on account of their foundry? I seem to remember reading something like that...
DeleteMy dad's family of foundry men were lost in the sea of what was the second largest city in America...
DeleteInteresting! I recalled reading about them at great length one time long ago, perhaps I picked them for a school project. You are practically famous!
ReplyDeleteNot really. But it was fun learning about them--and realizing the connection made it doubly interesting.
DeleteI like the Who's Who idea.
ReplyDeleteWhether generally acknowledged as famous, or just common everyday people with some great stories to tell, we all have our favorites among our ancestors. When we tell their stories, we are in essence creating our own Who's Who of our family. I'm glad that idea is resonating with you, Margie!
Delete