When (Half) Siblings Squabble

 

"Long ago and far away" may sound more like lyrics for a 1970s love song, but right now in real life, that's my problem as I research the children of my fifth great-grandfather John Carter. Apparently, the passage of centuries—not to mention wars and courthouse fires—can make vital documents disappear.

While John Carter and his family may irk us with nagging questions—such as the true identity of his wives—absence of explanations or even documents in such sources as marriage records or wills is not always the roadblock at the end of the research tunnel. If we are fortunate, those half-siblings of different mothers may grow up to see their squabbles grow to full force and erupt in a subsequent generation.

Much as I had discovered last summer when researching my mother-in-law's Rinehart ancestors in Ohio, the disposition of property, or even how a will was drawn up, may spark a smoldering anger that takes years to burst into a flaming legal battle. Though unfortunate for family peace, the resulting court records may clearly draw the lines between the children of one mother and those of the other.

In reading the research report of John Carter's family by one genealogist, fellow of the American Society of Genealogists George Harrison Sanford King, I spotted word of such a possible legal battle. After listing the names of each of John Carter's children, this researcher mentioned,

Several long and tedious suits arose in the chancery courts over the estate of Robert Carter...and several of these reached the Fredericksburg District Court where the voluminous papers are now filed.

A list of the several case names were then provided:

File #139: Hamilton versus Samuel

File #144: Hamilton versus Sutton

File #194: Marshall versus Samuel

File #195: Marshall versus Garnett 

The best detail about this King report is his observation that "these papers clearly separate the two sets of children." Granted, since the suits involved Robert Carter, son of John Carter and his final wife Hannah Chew, the separation was between the specific children of Hannah Chew and all other children as half-siblings, so there is still the question of whether there was one other wife or two. But at least one subset of the Carter children was now clearly identified by their mother.

Discovering this new set of court papers requires us to look further into that realm of blurry copies of handwritten reports, in the hopes that it will lead to more clarifying information. In this trek through those legal records, I am thankfully not alone. Just as I had mulled over what could be found on John Carter's family two years ago, fellow genea-blogger Patrick Jones had also done so, two years ago. In his case, access to what he calls "extensive files" in the Virginia chancery records sheds light on his branch of the Carter line.

Just as Patrick had stumbled upon documents regarding the woman who was likely the true first wife of John Carter, reaching even farther down the related lines of John Carter's extended family may provide us the answers to the questions those original documents had prompted. Just as family members had squabbled in court over property distributions in one generation, there are surely more such disputes to lead us to a clearer picture of the Carter family's true composition.

 

  

 

 

 

 

Exhibit A versus Exhibit B

 

It seems an easy way out to depend on published genealogies of our ancestors, especially those whose life span stretched over that century mark crossing from United States records to colonial British North American records. Exhibit A in that case might be said to be the Joseph Lyon Miller volume, The Descendants of Capt. Thomas Carter of "Barford," Lancaster County, Virginia, published in 1912, which includes a chapter on the "Descendants of John Carter of Caroline and Spotsylvania."

That volume, as has long been noted, contains information on two wives of John Carter. All well and good, you might think—until we reach the part about wife number one being named Elizabeth Armistead. 

The last time I had focused on John Carter's family as part of my annual Twelve Most Wanted, I stumbled upon wills of extended family members which had indicated that John Carter's first wife was not named Elizabeth Armistead, but Sarah Kenyon. Yet the Miller genealogy seemed to make no reference to that possibility.

Enter Exhibit B. Thanks to some exploration at FamilySearch.org using their Full Text Search option, I stumbled upon a typewritten manuscript drawn up by genealogist George Harrison Sanford King. Among other details, this report was concerned with the identity of John Carter's first wife.

As I read through this particular manuscript, I could see George Harrison Sanford King's painstakingly careful outlay of details in support of Sarah Kenyon as John Carter's wife. Let's just say that, in the case of Exhibit A versus Exhibit B, in the first ten pages, he had me convinced—although I admit, I was already partial to that point of view, having found some of those court records, myself.

However, pages one through ten of this manuscript are only skimming the surface of the legal paperwork drawn up concerning this extended family. We've only just begun learning the full story. By page ten it's too soon to draw up a judgment regarding the wives of John Carter just yet. Besides, as the manuscript reveals—and the court records bid me to observe—things are about to become rather messy in the Carter family's story.

Cheering for the Girls' Team

 

With a goal this month to research the matrilineal descendants of my fifth great-grandfather John Carter, I'm beginning to feel like the cheerleading mom of a family large enough to field two teams for a softball tournament. Do I cheer for the boys' team? Or the girls' team?

This month, the answer—genealogically speaking—is: I'm cheering for the girls' team. 

I started out, finding what documentation I could for each of John Carter's daughters. This is not easy, considering the time frame we are working with, spanning much of the eighteenth century. I jump-started my search by selecting as my first attempt the granddaughter mentioned in John Carter's own will: Sarah Kenyon Thomas, whose mother was John's daughter Elizabeth.

Keeping in mind the risks inherent in relying on published genealogies, I nevertheless defaulted to using some of these to guide in discovering names of potential husbands for each of these female Carter descendants. Sure enough, there was a mention of Sarah Kenyon Thomas as second wife of a Virginia widower named James Frazer—this, according to genealogist John Goodwin Herndon's privately published 1951 book, The Herndons of the American Revolution.

From this union, fortunately, I found three daughters to trace, and began my long slide down to the present era, document by document, daughter by daughter. I began this next iteration by focusing first on the Frazer daughter with a sure-bet given name: Sarah Kenyon Frazer, whose own marriage and family yielded four daughters.

Onward I searched, until I reached the present time, and a daughter born in 1939. I had made it to the brink of the generations of our own memory, and was poised to uncover the identity of someone eligible to  participate in a Carter matrilineal project, should it ever become a reality.

As often happens in these attempts, that was where I ran into a matrilineal roadblock. Unfortunately, that daughter tragically died in an automobile accident as a teenager. Her only sibling: a brother.

There are some families we research which, over generations, clearly present as families of sons of sons. Thankfully, what I'm seeing of the Carter family history shows me that there were several daughters in the branches extending over several generations who may still permit us a chance at this mtDNA experiment.

At this point, to be able to launch such an experiment will still involve much preparatory work simply building and documenting each line of descent, from each of John Carter's wives forward in time to living matrilineal descendants.  

When Family Stories are Nice — but . . .

 

Family stories are nice but they usually have little to do with fact. 

~ George Harrison Sanford King 

In searching for the actual documents supporting the assertions published about my fifth great-grandfather John Carter of Spotsylvania County, Virginia, I ran across a concerning mention about resources in one oft-trusted genealogy resource, Joseph Lyon Miller's 1912 book, The Descendants of Capt. Thomas Carter of "Barford," Lancaster County, Virginia. Within the book's sketch about John Carter, sources credited included two manuscripts drawn up by one of John Carter's grandsons, one in 1845, the other in 1858. The grandson, in turn, owed the authority of his statements to his "mother, a daughter of Capt. Carter, and of an old uncle of his...who said that he had served in the Revolution with Capt. Carter."

Obviously, those of us who are serious about pursuing our family's history know to rely on the documents that support assertions. Family stories can lead us to the records, but they can never become the sole substitute for such support.

In researching the Carter roots which connect me with dozens of DNA matches, I've noticed that some of those stories in the Miller publication don't line up with documents I've subsequently found—the question of John Carter's wives being a prime example. However, it is apparent that I am not the first to have found the book's assertions questionable. As I mentioned yesterday, one respected genealogist of a previous generation had written extensively about the Carter family: George Harrison Sanford King.

Thanks to use of the Full Text Search capabilities at FamilySearch.org, I stumbled upon the digitized King manuscripts—a voluminous collection specializing in the histories of early Virginia residents. Not knowing who Mr. King was and upon what basis he had gained such widespread recognition, I decided to take time to learn about this researcher.

While it was one article mentioning the quote above which instantly endeared him to me, there were other notable accomplishments attributed to this genealogist, who died in 1985. As a Fellow of the American Society of Genealogists, Mr. King was posthumously inducted into the National Genealogy Hall of Fame in 2019. A card index of his more than one hundred thousand papers is kept at the Virginia Historical Society, and both the card index and the actual papers themselves have been digitized and are available at FamilySearch.org. 

Just taking a look at one index of the subjects and surnames covered in Mr. King's scholarship, drawn up as a finding aid at University of Mary Washington in his lifelong home in Fredericksburg, gives an inkling of the prolific magnitude of his life's work.

For one thing, I felt vindicated when I discovered the Carter article among the King papers at FamilySearch.org. It was clear that at least this researcher was quite aware that one of John Carter's wives was named Sarah Kenyon.

The beauty of discovering this researcher's work, though, comes in the fact that his writing becomes the road map to lead Carter researchers to the many legal records involving this extended family over decades—some records which apparently have been hard to find. But that, as it turns out, was one of George Harrison Sanford King's strong suits: he was known to specialize in complex family relationships among historic Virginia families, especially reconstructing histories in "burned counties" through other sources of documentation.

In looking at the King report about the Carter family—a typewritten document I've just begun scouring—it's apparent that he has noted several legal proceedings among family members which may help spell out the construction of that extended family for us. Keeping in mind my goal to find the names and dates for John Carter's wives—and each wife's specific children—this exploration may help speed the process. 

Stuck in the Murky Middle Again

 

There is a familiar pattern that appears every time I launch into new research waters. I dive in to the work, sinking deep into the middle. Surrounded by piles of documentation, the sheer number of files I still need to read seems to drown out the daylight. Right at the start, before I even know it yet, I'm stuck in the murky middle. Again.

When it seems there's no light to guide me—not even that ominous light at the end of the tunnel—by now I know to just keep plugging. So it wasn't dismaying this weekend when I pulled up my DNA matches and discovered that my seventeen suggested John Carter matches among my DNA cousins at Ancestry's ThruLines tool seem to connect through lines of descent that, well, wobble more than I'd like. Things are still murky; I can wait until that shaft of explanatory daylight makes its way through the thickness.

Not to be undone in numbers, those fifty nine DNA matches attributed to John Carter's last wife, my fifth great-grandmother Hannah Chew, have also kept me stymied. Most of them descend, as I do, from Hannah's daughter, Margaret Chew Carter. But do you think the Carters were aiming to keep things simple when they named that daughter? Of course not; papa John Carter had already named another daughter by that same first name, Margaret. Granted, she was daughter of a different wife—whoever that woman turns out to be—but that fact has seemed to evade detection by several family historians, including those who are my DNA matches.

When I face such research conundrums, I've learned that to conquer the murkiness, I first have to research my way through that messy middle. It will take wading through pages and pages of court records to organize them into categories, and by relatives, before I can comprehend how the pieces of the family story fit together. 

I admit: actually finding the records necessary for this sifting process can be headache job number one. For that heavy lifting—at least, as soon as I have reliable names, dates, and locations—I head first to FamilySearch's Full Text Search. After wandering through some wills and deeds for a few Carter family members—mostly men, not helping my goal to search for the daughters—the Full Text Search led me to a paper written by a fellow of the American Society of Genealogists. 

This typewritten report from the 1960s, though admittedly long past the 1700s of John Carter's lifetime, referred to several court records which I am keen to inspect. Yes, here comes more of the murky middle, as I pull up digitized copies of those records which haven't been lost to courthouse fires and other catastrophes, but as each document gets placed in its logical order in the timeline of the Carter pedigree, I'll hopefully begin to see a glint of that far-off light.

The Family Genealogists Meet

 

There is likely no one else in the world other than those of us who care about our family history who can say that news about a distant cousin would have an impact on us. How many people even know who their third cousins are—let alone meet them? And yet, earlier this week, my mother's cousin called to tell me that her third cousin had just died, and I not only knew exactly who she meant, but felt a sadness over the loss. After all, I had met this third cousin before.

Perhaps this sense of connection is for those of us who also know where our families once lived. Those of us who know the story of our ancestors, the key features of their lives, may relate to this feeling more closely. After all, this distant cousin of mine still lived in the same small town where his second great-grandfather—my third great-grandfather—had settled shortly after his marriage. The family has lived there for a long, long time.

I had met this cousin, thanks to an introduction by my mother's cousin, who made it a point to keep in touch with the descendants of those original settlers. I had asked for that introduction, and afterwards, I was so glad I did. Walking the land where those ancestors lived and farmed is an experience I can't match in words. I guess that's why people value what's meant by the term "heritage."

Mulling over that phone call this week sparked many other thoughts. I realized we live in an age in which we have the ability to reach out to those who were previously mere strangers but whom we now realize are family. Granted, there is an element of relationship required before we can bestow that term "family" upon those we've never met before, but that relationship can grow more quickly than we'd assume. Meeting this cousin for the first time, spending hours talking about the people important in his branch of the family, sharing what we knew about those who have gone on before—that becomes fertile soil for growing that family relationship with yet another cousin whom we'd never known before.

While I'll miss being able to visit this distant cousin in his hometown again—and certainly his treasury of family anecdotes and insights—the thoughts his passing sparked make me realize how blessed we are to be able to reach out and connect with those strangers who are willing to explore the "familyness" of our relationship.  

Not All Daughters Lead to Matrilines

 

It seemed like such a straightforward, streamlined solution: to determine which of John Carter's children belonged to which of his wives, start with the daughters. Then, since my fifth great-grandfather John Carter lived and died in Virginia in the 1700s, trace the descendancy of his many daughters, seeking to focus specifically on the daughters' daughters' daughters, on down to the present time, at which point we could find willing Carter descendants of those matrilines to take a mitochondrial DNA test and help us compare results.

There's a problem with such an approach. Yes, of course, there is that one issue of finding eligible descendants who would be willing to participate in such a DNA project. But that is not the problem which concerns me. Where I'm stuck is this: not all ancestral daughters would eventually lead to matrilines. Somewhere in that long line of generations, John Carter's descendants could experience the exact opposite of what genetic genealogists call "daughtering out."

While I'm still stymied with actually documenting the genealogies of all of John's children, I did find one way to do a quick and dirty assessment of such a situation. I turned to the ThruLines tool at Ancestry to see whether, even at the level of fifth great-granddaughter, my autosomal DNA test could reveal genetic connections to this distant Carter ancestor.

At the level of fifth great-grandparent, that is the most distant level the ThruLines readout will extend. Sure enough, there in my results was an entry for my own DNA matches who join me in linking back to John Carter. 

There were seventeen of those Carter DNA matches. The closest of them shared a puny nineteen centiMorgans with me—an understandable amount, considering the distance of the relationship—and the smallest shared amount registered at only six cMs, hardly a measure generating confidence.

Still, my purpose was to do a quick assessment of my theory that finding matrilines direct from the current generation back to the Carter wives might be a challenge. Looking at the proposed lines according to ThruLines, here is what I found: 

• One match to Mary Beverley Carter, through her son Richard C. Stevens
• Five matches to Margaret Carter (half sister), all through her son Carter Marshall
• Six matches to Sarah Carter (half sister), four through son John Sutton, two through son Norborne Sutton

As you can see, none of those matches came strictly through a matrilineal line of descent, foiling our project's purpose. 

Looking even further, checking the ThruLines entries specifically for the wife of John Carter from whom I'm descended, Hannah Chew, there are a total of fifty nine DNA matches currently entered in this category. For one of them, Carter daughter Judith showed six matches to me, but three come through Judith's son Joseph Sutton, two from son Stephen Sutton, and one more from son John Sutton. Not even among these can I find lines of descent from any of John Carter's granddaughters. I, myself, am such an example, as the matriline leading from Hannah Chew to me stops with my second great-grandfather, Thomas Taliaferro Broyles.

In a general exploration of all of John Carter's grandchildren, I spotted further problems from documentation. Some daughters did have daughters of their own—but of those I've found so far, some died young, or, having survived and married, had only sons. I did find one daughter who had a daughter—but I find no record that she even married, let alone had daughters of her own.

Granted, ThruLines relies on the trees of those who tested their DNA at Ancestry. There can be mistakes. But even the old published genealogies some people rely on contain errors, too. Seeking actual documentation, as we've already discovered, can reveal details not included in some genealogies.

To complicate matters, researching ancestors from the 1700s is far easier when we are looking for ancestral grandfathers than when we are looking for their wives. Women from earlier centuries seemed almost invisible, adding this one challenge to our quest to trace the matrilineal descent of John Carter's wives. Still, if someone doesn't build the tree, we'll never arrive at the answer we're seeking.