Beginning March 2nd, 2020 the Mailing Lists functionality on RootsWeb will be discontinued. Users will no longer be able to send outgoing emails or accept incoming emails. Additionally, administration tools will no longer be available to list administrators and mailing lists will be put into an archival state.
Administrators may save the emails in their list prior to March 2nd. After that, mailing list archives will remain available and searchable on RootsWeb
We have had over 1000 visits since we first started back in August!
Hopefully all those visits accomplished something! Thanks all for your
support and help!
http://mysite.verizon.net/vze2p5sj/childres/welcome.htm
Regards,
Steve
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.17/505 - Release Date: 10/27/2006
Reminder: Jamestown tonight on PBS 8 PM!
Regards,
Steve
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.4/480 - Release Date: 10/17/2006
It has been awhile since our last, but I have finally found time to complete
this update. New information is in the Timeline, new research links and
updated Childres and related Wills. Enjoy your search and just look around,
you may find something new you weren't looking for.
Special thanks to Marie Jennings for sharing a great plat of the area where
our Child?? first settle in Virginia. It is contributions by people like
her that keep OUR site fresh and new. Thanks Marie!!
http://mysite.verizon.net/vze2p5sj/childres/welcome.htm OR
http://mysite.verizon.net/vze2p5sj/childres/childresframes.html
Thanks all and happy hunting!
Regards,
Steve
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.4/480 - Release Date: 10/17/2006
PLEASANTS, John [Howard Allied Surname]
Emigrated to Va ca 1665 ; settled Henrico County, a a wealthy and
influential Quaker Planter. From Peggy Hooperís Web pages
ìSocial Life in Old Virginia, by Phillip Alexander Bruce c, 1910
The most prominent Quaker in Henrico County at this time was John Pleasants,
a planter of considerable wealth, and of a high reputation for sense and
character. He had been convicted previous to 1679 for violating the
provisions of the statute passed for the repression of his sect, but the
sentence was not put in force. On his persisting in allowing Quaker services
to be held in his house, he was warned that, if he continued to do this,
execution would be ordered pursuant to the old judgment.' As Pleasants
refused to desist, he fell a victim to what must have proved to him to be a
peculiarly annoying form of persecution:-he and his wife were indicted for
living together without the sanction of legal marriage simply because they
had been united after the ordinary Quaker manner; and for their alleged
illicit cohabitation, each was fined two hundred and forty pounds sterling
on the ground that they constituted, not one couple, but two separate
persons. In
addition, a fine of twenty pounds sterling was imposed on each of them for
every month they had respectively refrained from attending services in the
parish church; a fine of two thousand pounds of tobacco for refusing to
baptize their children; and also one for five hundred pounds for permitting
conventicles to be held in or near their residence. (Henrico County Records,
vol. r677--gg, orig. p. xx6. The English Conventicle Act, passed in 1664,
imposed penalties on those taking part in religious meetings in private
houses.) Had the total amount of these double penalties been collected by
execution on Pleasants estate, it would have precipitated ruin upon his
affairs; but fortunately for him, Culpeper intervened under the authority of
the order recently promulgated in England granting liberty of conscience to
all the subjects of the King. That Pleasants enjoyed the esteem and good
will of the community in which he lived is shown by his election in 1692 to
the House of Burgesses; but as he declined to take the required oaths, he
was not allowed to occupy his seat. (Va. Maga. of Genealogy. and Biog., vol.
vii.P. 171.)
Notwithstanding the fact that Pleasants was a Quaker he bequeathed his
slaves to his children as if they were merely part of his livestock; (see
Henrico County Records, vol. 1677-92, orig. P- 328; also Orders,)
[My Roots - Peggy Hooper Webpages of Peggy Hooper
hooperhous(a)earthlink.net]
MILNER, Anne [Howard Allied Surname]
Wife to Thomas Cary above discussed. Unknown ascendancy. Present Virginia
1680s substantiated by birth of daughter Dorothy CARY there.
WOODSON , John [Jamestown 1619] [HowardAllied Surname]
John Woodson and his wife Sarah followed closely on Abraham Piersey, and
shared with him not only Jamestown proper but the region of Jamestown colony
known first and later as Fleur de Hundred and second and between as
Piersey's Hundred where the Woodsons were living in 1624, the year of
Piersey's acquisition of it from Gov Yeardley. John Woodson was Listed as
a Surgeon, and they both emmigrated 1619, to Jamestown, VA on the "George"
and in company of Governor Sir Yeardley. Both Sarah and John survived the
first devastating massacre of 1622 in which Jamestown was nearly
extinguished, but he was killed in the Indian massacre of 1644 at Fleur de
Hundred, Henrico County, VA [part of the Jamestown colony] while she is
credited, without proof to support the story, with overcoming attacking
braves in her home , killing two, and preserving the lives of her two boys.
John Woodson and his wife are some of the first citizens to have in their
household persons of color in all American history, but they do not long
remain in their enumeration. In any scholarly discussion of the history of
black Americans or the history of black slavery, there is the inevitable and
rightful inclusion of the "20 and some odd" first Black Americans of known
origin [6 of which are found in the Woodson household in 1623 ]. Begininning
unwittingly and before the concept of slavery was developed in America but
during the time when indenture sometimes closely mimicked it , this marks
the first generation involving black Americans within our white household's
censuses, and shortly thereafter slave ownership among our plantar [and
Quaker] families of Virginia was strongly in place. These "20 and some odd"
black Americans are often found called slaves and not indentures but the
use of the word slave to define them is not historically accurate when
study is made of the nomenclature of the census involved, the evolving
law regarding black American slavery and white and black early indenture ,or
the conditions of early indenture itself . Extant letters and documents
relating to white indentures suggests that their condition was no better
than slavery, though its time frame was limited. After the massacre of 1622,
it was found that some women had been taken captive. One was bought back by
paid ransom ransom by the man to whom her murdered husband still owed time
and for the purpose of her payment of that time. Within a year she lamented
that her slavery to him was no better than her slavery while an Indian
captive and sought relief through governmental intervention.
Because of the obvious interface of the first two generation Woodsons with
the native Powhatan Confederacy and particularly their fascinating leader
Openchancanough, [himself with perhaps THE most interesting bio in all these
pages] several pages studying these peoples are provided
WINSTON , Sarah [Howard Allied Surname] [Surname under research]
Sarah accompanied her husband to Virginia in 1619. See husband Dr John
Woodson above. Sarah is said to have been born Sarah Winston, but this is
not proved. She was married and present with her husband on 1624 census for
Jamestown. She and her husband survived the massacre of 1622. She and her
sons survived the massacre of 1644, but her husband did not. Will proved in
Henrico County, VA January 17,1659/60.
Regards,
Steve
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.4/475 - Release Date: 10/13/2006
where is the tombstone??
-----Original Message-----
From: childress-request(a)rootsweb.com
To: childress(a)rootsweb.com
Sent: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 3:05 AM
Subject: CHILDRESS Digest, Vol 1, Issue 16
Today's Topics:
1. Albemarle County Survey Plat Books (Steve Stevens)
2. Re: Research and Sources (Conduff Childress)
3. Re: Research and Sources (Mark and Gary)
4. Re: Research and Sources (Mark and Gary)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 09:06:48 -0400
From: "Steve Stevens" <steve.stevens(a)verizon.net>
Subject: [CHILDRESS] Albemarle County Survey Plat Books
To: "CHILDRESS-LIST" <CHILDRESS(a)rootsweb.com>,
"CHILDRESS-RESEARCH@rootsweb. com" <CHILDRESS-RESEARCH(a)rootsweb.com>
Message-ID: <LKEIJPOILDGCLDIEAICAKEFOCLAA.steve.stevens(a)verizon.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>From a fellow researcher of another family of mine comes these tidbits on
Abraham and his neighbors one pretty famous:
Steve,
Here are all the entries I found for Abraham Childres and Childers - I am
very sorry about my mistake
Plat book one, part one, page 39
Jno Hughes; 298 ac; march 27, 1747; lying under East side Willis?s Mountain;
by Thomas Turpin; adjoining Abrm Childres. (listed in index as Childers)
Plat book one, part one, page 87
Abraham Childers; 200 ac; Ap 17, 1749; on both side Hunts Creek; by Thomas
Turpin, joining D. LeSueur, Thos Phelps.
Plat book one, part one, page 257
Abraham Childers; 100 ac; Feb 17 1754; on North side Fluvanna River on
Mullanax Creek; by William Cabell Jun.
Plat book one, part one, page 92
Thos Hardwick; 200 ac; Ap 11, 1749; branches Hunts Creek; by Thomas Turpin;
joining Abrm Childres, Lesueur?s corner.
Plat book one, part one, page 152
Thos Napier; 400 ac; Apr 10, 1752, branches Rockfish Creek; by Thomas
Turpin; joining Wm Matlock, thos Lawhorn, Abrm Childres, Patrick Napier, a
new line; a road and a creek shown.
John Hardiman; 160 ac; Oct 31, 1750; near Willis Mountain; by Thomas Turpin;
joining Jno Hughes?s corner, new lines on a ridge, Colo Bolling, Abrm
Childres; shows Willis?s Ridge.
plat book one, part one, page 158
John Douglas; 400 ac; Nov 15, 1750; on both side Rockfish Creek, 175 acres
part of sd tract was before Survd for sd Douglas and the residue survyd for
ye sd Douglas Nov 15, 1750; by Thomas Turpin; joining Abrm Childres
plat book one, part one, page 197
John Melton; 400 ac; 14 Decr 1751; in Fork of James River lying on branches
of Bremore Creek; by Thomas Jefferson; joining Joseph Walton, new lines,
Abraham Childres, new lines, John Payne.
Thos Webb; 345 ac; 14 Decr 1751; Fork of James River lying on brances
Bremore Creek; by Thomas Jefferson; joining Abra?m childres, new lines, John
Payne, Geo Brock, John Melton.
the last one is the one I made the mistake in Plat book one, part two page
74
Regards,
Steve
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.2/471 - Release Date: 10/10/2006
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 10:33:55 -0500
From: "Conduff Childress" <cchldrss(a)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: [CHILDRESS] Research and Sources
To: childress(a)rootsweb.com
Message-ID: <380-2200610311153355968(a)mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Gary,
I find this portion of your post most interesting
>
> Abraham (b. 1655 d.1720) married to Hester (nee Pledge) Cannon is the
> son of Philemon the Emigrant, a Viking Childress lineage.... per Mark
> Childress' research.
>
I have a couple of questions regarding it.
1) Since you have the firm 1655 date here did Mark attribute the race
starting data to this Abraham?
2) Why, if Abraham was born this early, do you think he wasn't on the 1679
Head of Households list? If he wasn't married and thus not a head of a
household, wouldn't you expect that he would be listed as a titheable on
the list under Philemon, who had only one? It is usually assumed that
Abraham had to be less than 16 in 1679 because he wasn't listed as a
titheable. Is this assumption not valid for some reason?
3) Are you sitting on some other data relevant to this question that the
rest of us don't know about?
There is also another unrelated question that I have been wanting to ask
for some time but never got around to it. It regards Joel. I've seen what
remains of the tombstone. The piece that remains (using the writing as the
horizontal) is much longer than tall. The writing is at the top. Since
tombstones of this period were typically much taller than wide and the
placement of the writing was not centered, it seems to clearly indicate
that this is a fragment of a much larger tombstone, which strongly supports
what has been written about it by those who saw it. To me, it appeared
that the plan for the tombstone would have been as follows:
1) The fragment that remains is missing the bottom writing that would have
been placed symmetrically with that of the top;.
2) The piece with the writing likely was part of a super structure of much
heavier stone which would have included a base, sides, and a top framing
this piece; and
3) The overall tombstone would have matched. traditional practices of the
time in being taller than wide.
The open central area is curious. The plan may have been for this to have
been a family stone, with the middle reserved for the placement of writing
for those immediate family members who died later.
My question relates to what is said to have been inscribed that is missing.
Since there seemed to have been some problem in reading the date of the
crossing, I've been wondering which number would have been the one that was
hard to read. Having looked at the other numbers present on the stone, I
would expect that the problem may have been in determing whether the date
was 1715 or 1745. Did you and Mark look at the question of what if the
date was 1715 instead of 1745? Do you have data that would have been
better explained with a 1715 crossing?
Again, I'm sorry to hear of Mark's passing and realize these questions
would have been best addressed to him. Having also lost a borther
prematurely, I sometimes ponder on the question as to what would he have
wanted me to do in certain situations. For what it is worth, I think that
in situations like this that the best way to remember them is to try to do
what you can to carry on what they started. Maybe the fact that you are
starting to post things on the list again is an indication that this is
also what you think. If so, I would encourage you to actively participate
in discussions on the list.
Sincerely,
Con
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 14:40:46 -0700
From: "Mark and Gary" <london2005(a)charter.net>
Subject: Re: [CHILDRESS] Research and Sources
To: <cchldrss(a)mindspring.com>, <childress(a)rootsweb.com>
Message-ID: <000201c6ed7e$094f4510$0a00a8c0@gary>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
You write:
> Abraham (b. 1655 d.1720) married to Hester (nee Pledge) Cannon is the
> son of Philemon the Emigrant, a Viking Childress lineage.... per Mark
> Childress' research.
1) Since you have the firm 1655 date here did Mark attribute the race
starting data to this Abraham?
[My Response: I don't know. I am looking at his notes to himself, not
his footnoted manuscript. He would have been abbreviating data since he
knew what it meant. Don't read too much into the fact that his dating
looks firm.]
2) Why, if Abraham was born this early, do you think he wasn't on the
1679 Head of Households list? If he wasn't married and thus not a head
of a household, wouldn't you expect that he would be listed as a
titheable on the list under Philemon, who had only one? It is usually
assumed that Abraham had to be less than 16 in 1679 because he wasn't
listed as a titheable. Is this assumption not valid for some reason?
[My response: I don't know. Mark concluded Dennsted didn't have the
Philemon line correct because there were multiple Philemon and she
conflated them ie. combined the records of two or more people to make
one person. ............Titheable documents are church tax records and
the Church taxed even non-church members. Maybe Abraham figured out how
to fiddle his taxes to a church he didn't identify with...much like
corruption creating "head right" documents for people that didn't exist.
You write:
3) Are you sitting on some other data relevant to this question that the
rest of us don't know about?
[My Response: I'm sitting on it all. I haven't read any of Mark's
writings or research other than what relates to Celtic Childress'. Mark
could talk endlessly on the Viking lineages. My eyes glazed over. When
Mark died he took 90% of his research with him. He was writing as much
down as he could devote the time to it. He has organized his data in
ring binders that stack floor to ceiling, which I will give to the
library system in TN. But he said that the vast majority of his
observations were unfinished texts, because footnoting was the labor
intensive part and he was always short of time. Because of so much
acrimony on Rootsweb he deliberately didn't post until his footnoting
was complete. But he speculated all the time and described various
lineages that he was working on. He estimated that he might never finish
footnoting and he was unfortunately right. One of the by-products of
Xeroxing 100% of all Childress/Childers documents at various courthouses
is that it inevitably makes you opinionated and knowledgeable on various
lineages, no matter which DNA pool they belong to.]
You write: There is also another unrelated question that I have been
wanting to ask for some time but never got around to it. It regards
Joel. I've seen what remains of the tombstone. The piece that remains
(using the writing as the horizontal) is much longer than tall. The
writing is at the top. Since tombstones of this period were typically
much taller than wide and the placement of the writing was not centered,
it seems to clearly indicate that this is a fragment of a much larger
tombstone, which strongly supports what has been written about it by
those who saw it. To me, it appeared that the plan for the tombstone
would have been as follows:
1) The fragment that remains is missing the bottom writing that would
have been placed symmetrically with that of the top;.
2) The piece with the writing likely was part of a super structure of
much heavier stone which would have included a base, sides, and a top
framing this piece; and
3) The overall tombstone would have matched. traditional practices of
the time in being taller than wide.
The open central area is curious. The plan may have been for this to
have been a family stone, with the middle reserved for the placement of
writing for those immediate family members who died later.
My question relates to what is said to have been inscribed that is
missing. Since there seemed to have been some problem in reading the
date of the crossing, I've been wondering which number would have been
the one that was hard to read. Having looked at the other numbers
present on the stone, I would expect that the problem may have been in
determing whether the date was 1715 or 1745. Did you and Mark look at
the question of what if the date was 1715 instead of 1745? Do you have
data that would have been better explained with a 1715 crossing?
[My Response; The best description of the tombstone is in the writings
of John Williams Childress who describes it in my mind, like a bench
sitting on legs or short pillars. A big slab of stone, lying flat facing
the sky, but elevated on short legs, much like a low table. That wasn't
how Mark visualized it, however. In my mind I visualized the
non-Childress property owner flipping the stone upside down, off of its
short legs, to use it as a fireplace hearth. When the stone was found
it was part of some other stone rubble, perhaps from other family
graves.
We paid a researcher to take pictures of it, which were hard to fathom.
My recollection of those pictures is that the tombstone is taller than
it is wide. It is not apparent to my eye that both fragments belong to
the same stone. Maybe some molecular study of the stone can tell if they
belong together. But our paid researcher didn't offer any contradictory
opinion on the date. There is a cryptic prayer on the stone, partially
destroyed, which looks out of place, since John Williams Childress never
mentioned the prayer. Mark and I never discussed 1715. If 1715 makes
better sense for some reason, it should be explored. The stone is just
part of a panoply of fragmentary incomplete artifacts. Make of it what
you will, as will those that follow. Make your evidentiary case to
future researchers yet to be born. The best explanation is the one that
stands the test of time.
You write: I would encourage you to actively participate
in discussions on the list.
My Response: I'm done going to courthouse. That part of my life is over
Rootsweb runs in repeating cycles and is atrophying. That part of my
life is slowing down. I'll follow the DNA trail especially finding DNA
in Britain.
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 14:43:13 -0700
From: "Mark and Gary" <london2005(a)charter.net>
Subject: Re: [CHILDRESS] Research and Sources
To: <cchldrss(a)mindspring.com>, <childress(a)rootsweb.com>
Message-ID: <000301c6ed7e$43acfb30$0a00a8c0@gary>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
You write:
> Abraham (b. 1655 d.1720) married to Hester (nee Pledge) Cannon is the
> son of Philemon the Emigrant, a Viking Childress lineage.... per Mark
> Childress' research.
1) Since you have the firm 1655 date here did Mark attribute the race
starting data to this Abraham?
[My Response: I don't know. I am looking at his notes to himself, not
his footnoted manuscript. He would have been abbreviating data since he
knew what it meant. Don't read too much into the fact that his dating
looks firm.]
2) Why, if Abraham was born this early, do you think he wasn't on the
1679 Head of Households list? If he wasn't married and thus not a head
of a household, wouldn't you expect that he would be listed as a
titheable on the list under Philemon, who had only one? It is usually
assumed that Abraham had to be less than 16 in 1679 because he wasn't
listed as a titheable. Is this assumption not valid for some reason?
[My response: I don't know. Mark concluded Dennsted didn't have the
Philemon line correct because there were multiple Philemon and she
conflated them ie. combined the records of two or more people to make
one person. ............Titheable documents are church tax records and
the Church taxed even non-church members. Maybe Abraham figured out how
to fiddle his taxes to a church he didn't identify with...much like
corruption creating "head right" documents for people that didn't exist.
You write:
3) Are you sitting on some other data relevant to this question that the
rest of us don't know about?
[My Response: I'm sitting on it all. I haven't read any of Mark's
writings or research other than what relates to Celtic Childress'. Mark
could talk endlessly on the Viking lineages. My eyes glazed over. When
Mark died he took 90% of his research with him. He was writing as much
down as he could devote the time to it. He has organized his data in
ring binders that stack floor to ceiling, which I will give to the
library system in TN. But he said that the vast majority of his
observations were unfinished texts, because footnoting was the labor
intensive part and he was always short of time. Because of so much
acrimony on Rootsweb he deliberately didn't post until his footnoting
was complete. But he speculated all the time and described various
lineages that he was working on. He estimated that he might never finish
footnoting and he was unfortunately right. One of the by-products of
Xeroxing 100% of all Childress/Childers documents at various courthouses
is that it inevitably makes you opinionated and knowledgeable on various
lineages, no matter which DNA pool they belong to.]
You write: There is also another unrelated question that I have been
wanting to ask for some time but never got around to it. It regards
Joel. I've seen what remains of the tombstone. The piece that remains
(using the writing as the horizontal) is much longer than tall. The
writing is at the top. Since tombstones of this period were typically
much taller than wide and the placement of the writing was not centered,
it seems to clearly indicate that this is a fragment of a much larger
tombstone, which strongly supports what has been written about it by
those who saw it. To me, it appeared that the plan for the tombstone
would have been as follows:
1) The fragment that remains is missing the bottom writing that would
have been placed symmetrically with that of the top;.
2) The piece with the writing likely was part of a super structure of
much heavier stone which would have included a base, sides, and a top
framing this piece; and
3) The overall tombstone would have matched. traditional practices of
the time in being taller than wide.
The open central area is curious. The plan may have been for this to
have been a family stone, with the middle reserved for the placement of
writing for those immediate family members who died later.
My question relates to what is said to have been inscribed that is
missing. Since there seemed to have been some problem in reading the
date of the crossing, I've been wondering which number would have been
the one that was hard to read. Having looked at the other numbers
present on the stone, I would expect that the problem may have been in
determing whether the date was 1715 or 1745. Did you and Mark look at
the question of what if the date was 1715 instead of 1745? Do you have
data that would have been better explained with a 1715 crossing?
[My Response; The best description of the tombstone is in the writings
of John Williams Childress who describes it in my mind, like a bench
sitting on legs or short pillars. A big slab of stone, lying flat facing
the sky, but elevated on short legs, much like a low table. That wasn't
how Mark visualized it, however. In my mind I visualized the
non-Childress property owner flipping the stone upside down, off of its
short legs, to use it as a fireplace hearth. When the stone was found
it was part of some other stone rubble, perhaps from other family
graves.
We paid a researcher to take pictures of it, which were hard to fathom.
My recollection of those pictures is that the tombstone is taller than
it is wide. It is not apparent to my eye that both fragments belong to
the same stone. Maybe some molecular study of the stone can tell if they
belong together. But our paid researcher didn't offer any contradictory
opinion on the date. There is a cryptic prayer on the stone, partially
destroyed, which looks out of place, since John Williams Childress never
mentioned the prayer. Mark and I never discussed 1715. If 1715 makes
better sense for some reason, it should be explored. The stone is just
part of a panoply of fragmentary incomplete artifacts. Make of it what
you will, as will those that follow. Make your evidentiary case to
future researchers yet to be born. The best explanation is the one that
stands the test of time.
You write: I would encourage you to actively participate
in discussions on the list.
My Response: I'm done going to courthouse. That part of my life is over
Rootsweb runs in repeating cycles and is atrophying. That part of my
life is slowing down. I'll follow the DNA trail especially finding DNA
in Britain.
------------------------------
To contact the CHILDRESS list administrator, send an email to
CHILDRESS-admin(a)rootsweb.com.
To post a message to the CHILDRESS mailing list, send an email to
CHILDRESS(a)rootsweb.com.
__________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to CHILDRESS-request(a)rootsweb.com
with the word "unsubscribe" without the quotes in the subject and the body of
the
email with no additional text.
End of CHILDRESS Digest, Vol 1, Issue 16
****************************************
________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
Gary,
I find this portion of your post most interesting
>
> Abraham (b. 1655 d.1720) married to Hester (nee Pledge) Cannon is the
> son of Philemon the Emigrant, a Viking Childress lineage.... per Mark
> Childress' research.
>
I have a couple of questions regarding it.
1) Since you have the firm 1655 date here did Mark attribute the race
starting data to this Abraham?
2) Why, if Abraham was born this early, do you think he wasn't on the 1679
Head of Households list? If he wasn't married and thus not a head of a
household, wouldn't you expect that he would be listed as a titheable on
the list under Philemon, who had only one? It is usually assumed that
Abraham had to be less than 16 in 1679 because he wasn't listed as a
titheable. Is this assumption not valid for some reason?
3) Are you sitting on some other data relevant to this question that the
rest of us don't know about?
There is also another unrelated question that I have been wanting to ask
for some time but never got around to it. It regards Joel. I've seen what
remains of the tombstone. The piece that remains (using the writing as the
horizontal) is much longer than tall. The writing is at the top. Since
tombstones of this period were typically much taller than wide and the
placement of the writing was not centered, it seems to clearly indicate
that this is a fragment of a much larger tombstone, which strongly supports
what has been written about it by those who saw it. To me, it appeared
that the plan for the tombstone would have been as follows:
1) The fragment that remains is missing the bottom writing that would have
been placed symmetrically with that of the top;.
2) The piece with the writing likely was part of a super structure of much
heavier stone which would have included a base, sides, and a top framing
this piece; and
3) The overall tombstone would have matched. traditional practices of the
time in being taller than wide.
The open central area is curious. The plan may have been for this to have
been a family stone, with the middle reserved for the placement of writing
for those immediate family members who died later.
My question relates to what is said to have been inscribed that is missing.
Since there seemed to have been some problem in reading the date of the
crossing, I've been wondering which number would have been the one that was
hard to read. Having looked at the other numbers present on the stone, I
would expect that the problem may have been in determing whether the date
was 1715 or 1745. Did you and Mark look at the question of what if the
date was 1715 instead of 1745? Do you have data that would have been
better explained with a 1715 crossing?
Again, I'm sorry to hear of Mark's passing and realize these questions
would have been best addressed to him. Having also lost a borther
prematurely, I sometimes ponder on the question as to what would he have
wanted me to do in certain situations. For what it is worth, I think that
in situations like this that the best way to remember them is to try to do
what you can to carry on what they started. Maybe the fact that you are
starting to post things on the list again is an indication that this is
also what you think. If so, I would encourage you to actively participate
in discussions on the list.
Sincerely,
Con
>From a fellow researcher of another family of mine comes these tidbits on
Abraham and his neighbors one pretty famous:
Steve,
Here are all the entries I found for Abraham Childres and Childers - I am
very sorry about my mistake
Plat book one, part one, page 39
Jno Hughes; 298 ac; march 27, 1747; lying under East side Williss Mountain;
by Thomas Turpin; adjoining Abrm Childres. (listed in index as Childers)
Plat book one, part one, page 87
Abraham Childers; 200 ac; Ap 17, 1749; on both side Hunts Creek; by Thomas
Turpin, joining D. LeSueur, Thos Phelps.
Plat book one, part one, page 257
Abraham Childers; 100 ac; Feb 17 1754; on North side Fluvanna River on
Mullanax Creek; by William Cabell Jun.
Plat book one, part one, page 92
Thos Hardwick; 200 ac; Ap 11, 1749; branches Hunts Creek; by Thomas Turpin;
joining Abrm Childres, Lesueurs corner.
Plat book one, part one, page 152
Thos Napier; 400 ac; Apr 10, 1752, branches Rockfish Creek; by Thomas
Turpin; joining Wm Matlock, thos Lawhorn, Abrm Childres, Patrick Napier, a
new line; a road and a creek shown.
John Hardiman; 160 ac; Oct 31, 1750; near Willis Mountain; by Thomas Turpin;
joining Jno Hughess corner, new lines on a ridge, Colo Bolling, Abrm
Childres; shows Williss Ridge.
plat book one, part one, page 158
John Douglas; 400 ac; Nov 15, 1750; on both side Rockfish Creek, 175 acres
part of sd tract was before Survd for sd Douglas and the residue survyd for
ye sd Douglas Nov 15, 1750; by Thomas Turpin; joining Abrm Childres
plat book one, part one, page 197
John Melton; 400 ac; 14 Decr 1751; in Fork of James River lying on branches
of Bremore Creek; by Thomas Jefferson; joining Joseph Walton, new lines,
Abraham Childres, new lines, John Payne.
Thos Webb; 345 ac; 14 Decr 1751; Fork of James River lying on brances
Bremore Creek; by Thomas Jefferson; joining Abram childres, new lines, John
Payne, Geo Brock, John Melton.
the last one is the one I made the mistake in Plat book one, part two page
74
Regards,
Steve
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.2/471 - Release Date: 10/10/2006
We are very fortunate to have posted on our Childres Timeline website, by
permission of Alberta Marjorie Dennstedt, her article entitled "Progenitors
and Kinfolk of Abraham Childers III." I believe this is the first time
that these articles have been available for all to read since being
published in the Virginia Genealogist Magazine and "Childress Chatter."
http://mysite.verizon.net/vze2p5sj/childres/Dennstedt%20Paper.htm
Regards,
Steve
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.13.1/466 - Release Date: 10/7/2006
Philemon I "Lemon" Childers
b. Probably mid 1630s Derived by working backwards from family ages given
by deposition (James Horton)
d. Possibly May 1717 Varina Parish, Henrico County, VA See Will of Philemon
Childers dtd 10 Jan 1716,m Recorded 3 Jun 1717.
Married 1st ?????
Married Possibly 2nd Mary Evans abt 1669 Henrico County, VA See Will of
Griffin Evans dtd 16 May 1681 Probated 1 Aug 1681
Children:
Mary Childers b abt 1655 d. ???? married ??? Humphrey Smith
Deeds name children as:
1713 deed 50 acres to Philemon and 50 acres to John Smith; 1732 40 acres
to Humphrey Jr.
Thomas Childers b. abt 1658 [Guess] d. abt 1735 dates Will of Thomas
Childers dtd 15 Nov 1734 and recorded 3 Nov 1735
married first Mary Holmes Nov 1694 ?? [source unknown] & second Mary
Milner
Children: Thomas Jr, John, Philemon, James and Benjamin See Will of
Thomas Childers
[FNU] Childers b. abt 1660 [Guess] d. ????? married James Horton, Sr,
Children: James Horton Jr., Lemon Childers made in "open Court" on 2 Oct.
1682. He gave to his grandson James Horton, Jr., two sows, one cow named
Flower, and a calf. These animals were then in the possession of the
grandson's father, James Horton, Sr. When the child became 12 years old his
father was to deliver to him one cow and Calf or one cow with calf of
six years and two sows with pig or pigs by their sides. If the grandson
died before 12 years of age the animal were to return to Philemon.
Philemon Childers, Jr., b. abt 1664 [Guess] d. bef 1720 Named in Will of
Griffin Evans, married Margaret [MNU],Children: William, Joseph and
Benjamin
Abraham Childers, b. after 1673, d. bef 4 Jul 1720 See Will of Abraham
Childers dtd 4 Jan 1718/19 Recorded 4 Jul 1720.
Anyone want to take a stab at this? Add, correct, anything?
Regards,
Steve
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.13.0/465 - Release Date: 10/6/2006
You guys...I'll be 70 on Monday after having retired first in 1974 and then again in 2002 and I still do not have time to do any research otherwise I would have been in Richmond months ago. Still think we need to get a group of us together at the Library of Virginia in Richmond to do some collective research.
Ron
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Steve Stevens" <steve.stevens(a)verizon.net>
> Gosh I feel real lucky! I'm 57 and retired a year ago. Just good planning
> I guess! LOL!
>
> Happy Birthday youngster!
>
> Regards,
> Steve
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: childress-bounces(a)rootsweb.com
> [mailto:childress-bounces@rootsweb.com]On Behalf Of David & Cecelia Talley
> Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2006 9:25 AM
> To: childress(a)rootsweb.com
> Subject: Re: [CHILDRESS] Serious Researchers Wanted
>
>
> David, Thank you! And Happy Birthday!
> I face the same problem and 57 so I am having to wait on retirement to
> really get to places. The list helps because it gives directions and
> possibles - but my Childresses are at the hideout in the canyon! I would
> love to be able to share in the "community" but feel very isolated right
> now.
>
> Thanks for the encouragement!
>
> Again, Happy Birthday!
>
> Cecelia
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Wm Childress"
> To:
> Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 10:52 PM
> Subject: Re: [CHILDRESS] Serious Researchers Wanted
>
>
> > Cecelia,
> >
> > I am a Childress and my older brother did the DNA testing that put us
> > in the 'Viking Group'. But, like you, my mother always told us that
> > we were "Scotch-Irish". When I first got on this List, someone
> > posted some stuff about this little tid-bit of information. I wish I
> > was able to do a lot of research on my own, but I just don't have the
> > time or resources. Saturday (Oct 7) is my 58th birthday. Maybe when
> > the day finally comes that I actually retire, I may find the time to
> > do something then. Until that time may come, I depend on this List
> > for a lot of my information. So take heart. You will learn a lot here.
> >
> > David Childress
> > Richmond VA
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: David & Cecelia Talley [dtalley(a)internetpro.net]
> > []
> > Date: Oct 6, 2006 22:34
> > To:
> > Subject: Re: [CHILDRESS] Serious Researchers Wanted
> > Sorry to be from a family that has to add its two cents but I thought
> > serious documentation was what it is about.
> > I have a copy of the family "William Penn Letter" and the "Sara Childress
> > Polk" info - and nothing to which to relate it. And the "somebody married
> > a
> > Cherokee Indian woman" rumor runs through our lore. My research would be
> > no good to our family without documentation even if we're not related to
> > someone famous. What would be the use? I was always told our
> > Childresses
> > were from Scotland (does that actually make us Celtic?) but nobody has
> > left
> > any proof. Was stunned to find out about "Viking Childress" - no male
> > DNA
> > to give up here. Have a lot to prove here to even say I'm a Childress
> > since
> > I don't have the surname. Would just like to prove I'm related somewhere
> > to some of you as some kind of personal validation.
> >
> > Gary, I'm glad to see messages from you and hope you and your family are
> > doing well. I think of you, your family and Mark often.
> >
> > Cecelia Talley (fact)
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> > CHILDRESS-request(a)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
> CHILDRESS-request(a)rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
> quotes in the subject and the body of the message
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.13.0/465 - Release Date: 10/6/2006
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.13.0/465 - Release Date: 10/6/2006
>
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> CHILDRESS-request(a)rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in
> the subject and the body of the message
Than you Barbara. We appreciate each and everyone who supports our efforts
and we are going to give it our best, SUCCESS or BUST!!!!
Regards,
Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: Barbara Evans [mailto:bevans@coutsfamily.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2006 3:42 PM
To: steve.stevens(a)verizon.net; childress(a)rootsweb.com; jpc(a)beecreek.net
Cc: J. B. Childers
Subject: Re: [CHILDRESS] Serious Researchers Wanted
Hi Steve and Childers/ress researchers, There are many Childers researchers
who you can contact with a great deal of information:
1. Jack Childers of Delaware, jbchilders(a)dca.net has been an inspiration to
many of us. We have sent him copies of all of our Childers data-(all
childers) much of it is on your page). He was also the recipent of research
data from those Childers researchers who have passed. He has been a charter
member of the Childers/Childress Family Association and the engineer of the
family web page. They have collected reams of information- it needs to be
indexed on line and on hard copy.
2 Also, Virginia Dennstedt (an excellent all Childers researcher) has
spent years of summers in the Library of VA, studying and collecting
information (dawn to dusk) of All Childers lines. She lived in San Diego and
once could be found in the phone directory. It was a kick talking to her on
the phone. She stated that she had touched and recorded Childers' data in
all files, except for the Misc. File at the Library. Transcribing or
transferring her information to the online location would be a remarkable
assest for all of us.
Congratulation on your web page and the new committee. Good luck in your
plans, it is long overdue. I hope that there will continue to be free
access to the information. I can't wait until I retire to devote more time
to reseaching our family. Respectfully,
Barbara Couts Evans
Coutsfamily.com
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.13.0/465 - Release Date: 10/6/2006
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.13.0/465 - Release Date: 10/6/2006
Leave a trail of bread crumbs! Eventually I will get to VA (according to
the lore).
C
----- Original Message -----
From: <ron.childress(a)comcast.net>
To: <steve.stevens(a)verizon.net>; <childress(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2006 12:58 PM
Subject: Re: [CHILDRESS] Serious Researchers Wanted
> You guys...I'll be 70 on Monday after having retired first in 1974 and
> then again in 2002 and I still do not have time to do any research
> otherwise I would have been in Richmond months ago. Still think we need
> to get a group of us together at the Library of Virginia in Richmond to do
> some collective research.
> Ron
>
> -------------- Original message --------------
> From: "Steve Stevens" <steve.stevens(a)verizon.net>
>
>> Gosh I feel real lucky! I'm 57 and retired a year ago. Just good planning
>> I guess! LOL!
>>
>> Happy Birthday youngster!
>>
>> Regards,
>> Steve
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: childress-bounces(a)rootsweb.com
>> [mailto:childress-bounces@rootsweb.com]On Behalf Of David & Cecelia
>> Talley
>> Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2006 9:25 AM
>> To: childress(a)rootsweb.com
>> Subject: Re: [CHILDRESS] Serious Researchers Wanted
>>
>>
>> David, Thank you! And Happy Birthday!
>> I face the same problem and 57 so I am having to wait on retirement to
>> really get to places. The list helps because it gives directions and
>> possibles - but my Childresses are at the hideout in the canyon! I would
>> love to be able to share in the "community" but feel very isolated right
>> now.
>>
>> Thanks for the encouragement!
>>
>> Again, Happy Birthday!
>>
>> Cecelia
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "David Wm Childress"
>> To:
>> Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 10:52 PM
>> Subject: Re: [CHILDRESS] Serious Researchers Wanted
>>
>>
>> > Cecelia,
>> >
>> > I am a Childress and my older brother did the DNA testing that put us
>> > in the 'Viking Group'. But, like you, my mother always told us that
>> > we were "Scotch-Irish". When I first got on this List, someone
>> > posted some stuff about this little tid-bit of information. I wish I
>> > was able to do a lot of research on my own, but I just don't have the
>> > time or resources. Saturday (Oct 7) is my 58th birthday. Maybe when
>> > the day finally comes that I actually retire, I may find the time to
>> > do something then. Until that time may come, I depend on this List
>> > for a lot of my information. So take heart. You will learn a lot here.
>> >
>> > David Childress
>> > Richmond VA
>> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: David & Cecelia Talley [dtalley(a)internetpro.net]
>> > []
>> > Date: Oct 6, 2006 22:34
>> > To:
>> > Subject: Re: [CHILDRESS] Serious Researchers Wanted
>> > Sorry to be from a family that has to add its two cents but I thought
>> > serious documentation was what it is about.
>> > I have a copy of the family "William Penn Letter" and the "Sara
>> > Childress
>> > Polk" info - and nothing to which to relate it. And the "somebody
>> > married
>> > a
>> > Cherokee Indian woman" rumor runs through our lore. My research would
>> > be
>> > no good to our family without documentation even if we're not related
>> > to
>> > someone famous. What would be the use? I was always told our
>> > Childresses
>> > were from Scotland (does that actually make us Celtic?) but nobody has
>> > left
>> > any proof. Was stunned to find out about "Viking Childress" - no male
>> > DNA
>> > to give up here. Have a lot to prove here to even say I'm a Childress
>> > since
>> > I don't have the surname. Would just like to prove I'm related
>> > somewhere
>> > to some of you as some kind of personal validation.
>> >
>> > Gary, I'm glad to see messages from you and hope you and your family
>> > are
>> > doing well. I think of you, your family and Mark often.
>> >
>> > Cecelia Talley (fact)
>> >
>> >
>> > -------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
>> > CHILDRESS-request(a)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
>> CHILDRESS-request(a)rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>> --
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>> Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.13.0/465 - Release Date: 10/6/2006
>>
>> --
>> No virus found in this outgoing message.
>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>> Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.13.0/465 - Release Date: 10/6/2006
>>
>>
>> -------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
>> CHILDRESS-request(a)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
> CHILDRESS-request(a)rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
> quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>
>
David, Thank you! And Happy Birthday!
I face the same problem and 57 so I am having to wait on retirement to
really get to places. The list helps because it gives directions and
possibles - but my Childresses are at the hideout in the canyon! I would
love to be able to share in the "community" but feel very isolated right
now.
Thanks for the encouragement!
Again, Happy Birthday!
Cecelia
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Wm Childress" <David.W(a)childress.net>
To: <childress(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 10:52 PM
Subject: Re: [CHILDRESS] Serious Researchers Wanted
> Cecelia,
>
> I am a Childress and my older brother did the DNA testing that put us
> in the 'Viking Group'. But, like you, my mother always told us that
> we were "Scotch-Irish". When I first got on this List, someone
> posted some stuff about this little tid-bit of information. I wish I
> was able to do a lot of research on my own, but I just don't have the
> time or resources. Saturday (Oct 7) is my 58th birthday. Maybe when
> the day finally comes that I actually retire, I may find the time to
> do something then. Until that time may come, I depend on this List
> for a lot of my information. So take heart. You will learn a lot here.
>
> David Childress
> Richmond VA
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: David & Cecelia Talley [dtalley(a)internetpro.net]
> []
> Date: Oct 6, 2006 22:34
> To: <childress(a)rootsweb.com>
> Subject: Re: [CHILDRESS] Serious Researchers Wanted
> Sorry to be from a family that has to add its two cents but I thought
> serious documentation was what it is about.
> I have a copy of the family "William Penn Letter" and the "Sara Childress
> Polk" info - and nothing to which to relate it. And the "somebody married
> a
> Cherokee Indian woman" rumor runs through our lore. My research would be
> no good to our family without documentation even if we're not related to
> someone famous. What would be the use? I was always told our
> Childresses
> were from Scotland (does that actually make us Celtic?) but nobody has
> left
> any proof. Was stunned to find out about "Viking Childress" - no male
> DNA
> to give up here. Have a lot to prove here to even say I'm a Childress
> since
> I don't have the surname. Would just like to prove I'm related somewhere
> to some of you as some kind of personal validation.
>
> Gary, I'm glad to see messages from you and hope you and your family are
> doing well. I think of you, your family and Mark often.
>
> Cecelia Talley (fact)
>
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> CHILDRESS-request(a)rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
> quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>
>
Cecelia,
I am a Childress and my older brother did the DNA testing that put us
in the 'Viking Group'. But, like you, my mother always told us that
we were "Scotch-Irish". When I first got on this List, someone
posted some stuff about this little tid-bit of information. I wish I
was able to do a lot of research on my own, but I just don't have the
time or resources. Saturday (Oct 7) is my 58th birthday. Maybe when
the day finally comes that I actually retire, I may find the time to
do something then. Until that time may come, I depend on this List
for a lot of my information. So take heart. You will learn a lot here.
David Childress
Richmond VA
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
----- Original Message -----
From: David & Cecelia Talley [dtalley(a)internetpro.net]
[]
Date: Oct 6, 2006 22:34
To: <childress(a)rootsweb.com>
Subject: Re: [CHILDRESS] Serious Researchers Wanted
Sorry to be from a family that has to add its two cents but I thought
serious documentation was what it is about.
I have a copy of the family "William Penn Letter" and the "Sara Childress
Polk" info - and nothing to which to relate it. And the "somebody married a
Cherokee Indian woman" rumor runs through our lore. My research would be
no good to our family without documentation even if we're not related to
someone famous. What would be the use? I was always told our Childresses
were from Scotland (does that actually make us Celtic?) but nobody has left
any proof. Was stunned to find out about "Viking Childress" - no male DNA
to give up here. Have a lot to prove here to even say I'm a Childress since
I don't have the surname. Would just like to prove I'm related somewhere
to some of you as some kind of personal validation.
Gary, I'm glad to see messages from you and hope you and your family are
doing well. I think of you, your family and Mark often.
Cecelia Talley (fact)
Some members of the Childress Research list are presently putting together a
serious and concise effort to assemble by committee a "Early Childres"
baseline for posterity. This baseline will be based only on early records
and where required and boldly noted assumed by best estimate dates. We
would like any and all who wish to open their eyes to NEW ideas and
discussion to participate. This effort will be assembled by Patrick
Childress and placed somewhere on his DNA website at a later date.
I am aware that at the present time the CHILDRESS Reunion is going on in
Huntsville, AL so I personally wish all of you the best of luck in your
efforts and look forward to your participating in this refreshing new
effort.
Please contact Patrick Childress at jpc(a)beecreek.net if you would like to
participate.
Regards,
Steve
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.13.0/464 - Release Date: 10/5/2006
In doing some reading of information we have posted, I came across
interesting, yet puzzling pieces of information. This hog incident
involving John Pledge, John Cannon, Abraham Childers, Jr. and Ester/Hester
Pledge Cannon Childers.
On 23 Mar 1685 Abraham Childers, Jr. testified to being 30 years of age and
seeing these hog pieces hung up on the fireplace of John Pledge, among other
testimony, per Henrico County Court Records Book 1677-92, p. 361. Then
Ester Pledge, on 23 Mar 1685/6, at age 22, said that 3 weeks before she went
to her father Pledge's and did eat some fresh hogs feet and beef which her
father gave her. On April 1, 1685/6, John Cannon deposed, at age 43, that
about 3 years ago John Pledge had 20 heads of hogs and Pledge wronged no one
of anything.
Question is who is this Abraham Childers, Jr.? If it is son of Philemon,
then he just happens to be the same age as Abraham the horse starter, son of
Abraham I . Or have I confused people yet again? Or better yet, do we have
too many Abrahams in the pie?
Regards,
Steve
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.12.13/463 - Release Date: 10/4/2006
Abraham (b.c. 1656 plus or minus 5 years, died circa 1698, married to
Ann Pew [m2 Joseph Atkins]) is the son of Abraham the Emigrant, a Viking
Childress lineage.
Abraham (b. 1655 d.1720) married to Hester (nee Pledge) Cannon is the
son of Philemon the Emigrant, a Viking Childress lineage.... per Mark
Childress' research.
Change of subject to Celtic Childress research.... if you trace your
lineage to Benjamin Childress (m. Jopling), the best available evidence
(Celtic Childress in-laws witnessing documents) suggests that this is a
Celtic Childress lineage. I need DNA from your "Benjamin" lineage.
Should you discover any modern day, living sources of male Childress
Y-chromosomes verifiably from the Benjamin lineage I would welcome being
alerted. I will pay for the DNA testing, if the party will donate DNA.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: childress-bounces(a)rootsweb.com
[mailto:childress-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Steve Stevens
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 6:25 AM
To: CHILDRESS-RESEARCH@rootsweb. com; CHILDRESS-LIST
Subject: [CHILDRESS] Research and Sources
In doing some reading of information we have posted, I came across
interesting, yet puzzling pieces of information. This hog incident
involving John Pledge, John Cannon, Abraham Childers, Jr. and
Ester/Hester
Pledge Cannon Childers.
On 23 Mar 1685 Abraham Childers, Jr. testified to being 30 years of age
and
seeing these hog pieces hung up on the fireplace of John Pledge, among
other
testimony, per Henrico County Court Records Book 1677-92, p. 361. Then
Ester Pledge, on 23 Mar 1685/6, at age 22, said that 3 weeks before she
went
to her father Pledge's and did eat some fresh hogs feet and beef which
her
father gave her. On April 1, 1685/6, John Cannon deposed, at age 43,
that
about 3 years ago John Pledge had 20 heads of hogs and Pledge wronged no
one
of anything.
Question is who is this Abraham Childers, Jr.? If it is son of
Philemon,
then he just happens to be the same age as Abraham the horse starter,
son of
Abraham I . Or have I confused people yet again? Or better yet, do we
have
too many Abrahams in the pie?
Regards,
Steve
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.12.13/463 - Release Date:
10/4/2006
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
CHILDRESS-request(a)rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message