I do not have the answer on Catherine Huffman, the daughter of Little Fork Henry Huffman.  In 1960, B. C. Holtzclaw said that she married John Ashby.  John Alcock in �Fauquier Families� shows a marriage bond was issued 27 Oct 1783 to Ashby and Catherine Huffman.  Humphrey Brooke was the bondsman.  Then in 1964, Holtzclaw, in �Ancestry and Descendants . . . � says that she appeared as not being married in 1791.  He did not cite any evidence.

***** John Frederick Miller came in 1738.  He married Anna Maria Arnd 4 Jul 1737, and they had one child, Matthias, who was born on 2 Jan 1738.  Four years earlier, in 1734 in Germany, John Frederick had been accepted as an apprentice in the Guild of Steelsmiths and Toolmakers.  Normally, the training program would probably have run many years during the apprentice and journeyman stages and a man was not allowed to marry during this time.  Perhaps he considered marriage more important and left the program.  Thus, the trip to America could have been an economic alternative.

There is no record of the son Matthias in America.  Since the family traveled on the ship Oliver, which departed in July 1738 and on which about two of every three people died, and since ocean voyages were especially hard on the young ones, it is very unlikely that Matthias arrived in America.  Note that he was only about six months old when the ship left.  In America, John Frederick had a wife Mary, but whether this is the woman, Maria (German form of Mary), that he married in Germany is uncertain.  Considering that Mary was a popular name and considering the death rate on the ship's voyage, it is only a probability, perhaps about one chance in three, that she is the same person.

What John Frederick did for the first ten years that he was in America is uncertain.  The first record for him occurs in 1748.  He acquired 400 acres on the North Fork of Mayo River in the Patrick-Henry County area, which was then Lunenburg County.  The very next entry in the record book was made by Harman Crites, who is undoubtedly the Hymen�us Creutz on the Freudenberg emigration list of 1738.  Sometimes, this last name is given as Critz.  This is a family who has never been recognized as a Germanna family.

When Halifax County was formed in 1752, John Frederick Miller and Harman Critz were added as tithables.  Both of these men were naturalized in 1753.  It appears that these two were the first naturalized citizens of Halifax Co.  John Frederick often used both of his given names but not always.

By 1755, the effects of the French and Indian War were felt.  A series of forts were erected in the area.  Fort Mayo was built on the plantation of Miller.  In 1759, Miller filed for damages due to the fort.  The garrison had cut down a large orchard, burned one house and 1600 fence rails, and used 518 feet of planking in building the fort.  In addition he lost the use of his property.  It was decided that he was entitled to something more than twenty pounds money as damages.  During the war, Miller purchased property to the east.  Apparently he issued mortgages and bonds, since he was in court several times seeking money due him.  By 1780, he appears to have been the owner of two thousand acres in the Patrick and Henry County areas.
(21 Dec 02)

John Frederick Miller acquired his first land in Virginia, almost down to the North Carolina border, in 1748.  He was joined by his brother Harman, in 1763 or 1764, who came down from the Little Fork area in Culpeper County.  Harman had married Elizabeth Holtzclaw, the daughter of the 1714 immigrant Jacob Holtzclaw.  Elizabeth's mother is uncertain as Jacob was married twice, and the mother of children number four, five, and six (counting Elizabeth as six) is indeterminate.  Jacob Holtzclaw gave land to Elizabeth in the Little Fork, which is probably where she had been living with Harman.  They sold the land and moved to the south of Virginia.  A Hitt moved at the same time (was this Henry Hitt who had married Alice Katherine Holtzclaw?).

Because John Frederick Miller was so active with land transactions after he moved south, the question arises as to why was he was so quiet for the first ten years, from, 1738 to 1748.  It would appear that he was in Virginia, probably in the Little Fork area, where his brother Harman seems to have been.  Did he rent land there?

I have wondered if the 1738 immigrants were indentured to someone, such as Jacob Holtzclaw, who was probably responsible for bringing them over.  In the case of John Frederick, there is a strong contrast between his behavior for the first ten years in America and in the period after that.

John Frederick Miller made his will in 1787.  To his wife Mary he left his plantations, two slaves and other items.  To his sons, Haman and Harman, and his daughters, Elizabeth and Mary, he left one shilling each.  Jacob was bequeathed forty pounds.  John, Jr., was left a slave girl, Jane, after Mary's decease.  Frederick was to receive a slave boy, Simon, and fifty pounds.  Martin, the remaining child, was to inherit the plantation and two slave boys, after Mary's decease.  The will was probated in 1787.  John Frederick's wife came into Court and relinquished all claim to the will and demanded instead her third interest.  The estate was appraised at 369 pounds, 11 shillings and 6 pence.

There is speculation that Mary may have been a second wife.  And whether she was on the best of terms with the sons has been questioned.  In 1790, there is a marriage of Mary Miller to Hugh Bragg, but it is not clear if this is the same Mary Miller.

Starting with Matthias in Germany, there seems to be nine children of John Frederick Miller.  They dispersed widely, and places of death of the children include North Carolina, Tennessee, South Carolina, and Virginia, with three unknowns.  (The county records often confused Haman and Harman but the will shows clearly these were two separate individuals.)
(23 Dec 02)

The family last discussed, John Frederick Miller's, had a son Haman.  All of the surviving children of John Frederick were born in Virginia.  Haman was born ca 1739, to judge by his age at death.  John Frederick's family appeared in Lunenberg County in 1748, when Haman was approaching the age for some serious chores on the farm.

Haman served in the French and Indian War, which started in 1754, so he would have been quite young at the time.  In 1759, a receipt signed by John Frederick acknowledges receipt of three pounds earned by Haman for his services in the war.  When the family moved to Halifax Co. (as it exists now), Haman went with the rest of the family and purchased 220 acres on the north side of the Dan River.  This was not far from the present community of Pace, which is close to the North Carolina border.

Haman married Frances Roberts.  Six children are known:

1. Peter,
2. Haman, Jr.,
3. James,
4. Jacob,
5. Martha, and
6. Sarah.

On 19 Feb 1778, Haman sold his land for one thousand pounds, which reflects the severe inflation caused by the Revolutionary War.  Haman then moved southwest about one hundred miles into North Carolina in the Piedmont region.  He appears in the 1779 tax list for Randolph, the first list for the newly created county where he purchased land.  Later, there were grants from North Carolina for 1,342 acres, but some of these acres might have been to Haman, Jr.  Wherever Haman's name appears in the land records, the name of this father-in-law, William Roberts, is apt to be found also.

A little later, he had permission to build a mill on his own land.  He might have had a mill already by the time that he had permission.  He died in 1814 at his residence in Randolph County in his 77th year.  A newspaper account of the time, describes him as a Patriot of the American Revolution.  His wife and sons (Haman and James) were executors of his will.  The will mentioned six children and two grandchildren.  Before he died, he had deeded 1,376 acres to five of his children.  There were sixteen slaves in the estate.

Descendants are spread across the U.S., with a few still living in Randolph County, NC.
(24 Dec 02)

The Post Office brought my Winter 2002 issue of the Germanna Foundation Newsletter called "Germanna".  I can remember the days when the Foundation put out what seemed like one page once a year.  So the current issue was all the sweeter.  One could gather an impression of what the Foundation was doing.  It has been very active.

The newsletter had a good feature article by Heinz Prinz on what the Siegerland was like at the time of the departure of the First Colony.  His story was very enlightening and filled with information where you may see the reasons the First Colony had for leaving the Seigerland in 1713.  It corrects a number of misconceptions that have been floating around.

Two cemeteries have been located in the Germantown area.  It would be nice to have aerial infrared photographs to define them better.  If any of you want to finance the endeavor, which will cost many nickels, talk to Thom Faircloth and tell him how you can help.  Infrared photographs detect soil disturbances even though the disturbance was three centuries ago.

Thom writes some about the ways in which Salubria might be put on a financially sustaining basis.  The property can be rented for weddings, reunions, and group meetings.  Those of you at last summer's Reunion, will remember how the group was able to meet there.  If you are having a group meeting in Northern Virginia, remember Salubria as a possibility.

Orange County and the Foundation have reached an agreement by which Orange County will provide help in manning the Foundation's Visitors Center, which will be help to the Foundation.  And the Visitors Center provides an extension of the service points that the county can use to acquaint visitors with both Orange County and with the site of the first settlement in what became Orange County.

If you are not a part of the Germanna Foundation, perhaps it is time to consider joining.  You can help or you can just meet cousins.  But either way, your financial support is desired and needed.
(28 Dec 02)

Recently, I purchased a book which I think will prove to be worth more than its cost.  Here is the pertinent information:

• Title:  "A Social History of Hesse: Roman Times to 1900".
• Author:  Dan C. Heinemeier.  (He researches, writes, publishes, and sells on his own.)
• The book sells for $29.95 plus $5.00 S/H (plus 5% for Virginia residents for the sales tax).
• The address is:
  • Dan C. Heinemeier
  • 4401 N. 33rd Road,
  • Arlington, VA 22207-4423.

I will use some of the material here.

Place:  “Germany”
Time:   18th Century
By:       Dan C. Heinemeier
(Continued)

The nobility took as their ideal the courts of France and they tried to ape the customs of the French courts.  Few of the German nobility could really afford to do this as their principalities were too small to give them the necessary financial means.  The result is that many of the nobles became impoverished after a few generations or else they raised the taxes to increase their income.  However, in some of the principalities, the tax rate and fee structure had been negotiated between the nobles and their subjects.  The nobles were not entirely free to change these.

Some of the rulers recognized that their interests coincided with those of the people.  If the people prospered, the rulers did also.  If the people did not prosper, the rulers would not prosper.  Thus, rose the term "enlightened despotism".

Some of the rulers saw that the people should be freed from the requirements to perform certain services for the nobles.  In the place of service, they substituted cash payments.  Thus, the workers were left on their own farms to produce crops and goods for sale, from which they would pay their taxes.  This was a major agricultural reform in the last half of the 18th Century, which was copied by the areas adjacent to those who had tried it out first.  A man would work three times as hard on his own land as he would on the Lord's land.

The more cash-like economy showed a shortage of capital on the farms.  Starting in Prussia, a Rural Credit Bank was created to help the farmers finance their production.  This idea was slow to catch on in other parts of Germany, though.

The measure of a state's strength was the ability to impose its will.  Many smaller German rulers developed standing armies and an increasing elaborate and centralized state administration.  These were expensive, and it took increased taxes to pay for them.  One way of paying for these armies was to rent the armies out to others.  During the American Revolution, this became a favorite tactic to earn a profit.  Recruiting often concentrated on the poorer agricultural regions, especially where there was surplus of labor.  It was thought to be better to get the unemployed off the roads and alleys in the homeland and have them earning money, which would come back to the rulers.  Many states used troops in peacetime to crush minor local rebellions and to keep order like policemen.

On the whole, there was a rigid society and change came slowly.  Some of the most conservative individuals were the peasants themselves.  Their attitude was, "This is the way my father did it and this is the way that I am going to do it."

Place:  “Germany”
Time:   18th Century
By:       Dan C. Heinemeier
(Still in 18th Century Germany with Dan C. Heinemeier)

Class distinctions were emphasized in most of the German states, in part as a technique of social control.  Nobles, clergy, army officers, professional men, merchants, and peasants constituted separate classes, and the last were more numerous than all of the others together.  Within each category there were grades, each of which stiffened itself with scorn on the next grade beneath.  Marriage outside one's class was almost unthinkable, but some merchants and financiers bought nobility.  The nobles had a monopoly on the higher posts in the army and the government, but many of these earned their privileges by bravery or competence.  Perhaps more common were the uniformed parasites who competed for social precedence at the court.

The nobles, especially, tended to mimic the French court which was their model, even if they could not afford it.  As one moved to the end of the scale represented by the peasants, life was more German in its outlook.  After the turn of the century, the middle classes found an improvement in the social, economic, and political conditions.

There were universities, generally good by European standards.  The education system in general was not good.  Initially, most education was the responsibility of the churches, but it eventually passed to the control of the state.  With this shift, there was less Latin and more German taught.  School teachers were not well paid, and were not well regarded.  With the inflation of the late century, teachers were extremely hard pressed to make a living.  The teachers often had to go from house to house asking for meals and back wages.

Some of the inflation came about because the swelling population overtook agricultural production, and foods were scarce and expensive.  For example, rye prices rose 80%, from 1740 to 1800, while wages generally increased only 10%.  There was a glut of manual labor, so wages were held in check by the willingness of some of the labor force to work for their bare sustenance.

Cattle plagues were a problem in the century.  This also put pressures on the food prices.  These plagues could be severe, as in 1711 to 1714, and in 1744 to 1745, when 50% to 90% of the stock died.  Most cattle were small and poor draft animals.  Selective breeding had not produced superior breeds.  Milk yields might be measured in cups per day.

Reforms in agriculture were slow to come, in part because of the conservatism of the peasants.  Production failed to keep pace with population growth.  In the third quarter of the century, potato culture was introduced as a desperation measure and it proved to be a successful advance.

Place:  “Germany”
Time:   18th Century
By:       Dan C. Heinemeier
(We are still in the Eighteenth Century in Germany)

I mentioned the potato as a food item.  Europeans were slow to adopt this staple, and there was much opposition to it.  (At the Hans Herr House, which really belonged to Christian Herr who died in 1750, I ask visitors to name the foods that we would find in the cellar in Christian's time.  Nearly always someone will answer the potato.  This was not a food that Christian would have used.)  In 1781 in the Elbe region of Germany, it is recorded that servants would rather change masters than be forced to eat potatoes.  Dr. Kuby said in a speech once that in 1700 it was bread for breakfast, bread for dinner, and bread for the evening meal (assuming there were three meals per day).  In 1800, he went on to say that it was potatoes for breakfast, for dinner, and for the evening meal.  The introduction of the potato was one of the positive food revolutions of the Eighteenth Century.

After The Thirty Years' War, the economy of Germany was less of a world economy than its neighbors had, and even less than it had been before the war in Germany.  Germany had no colonies or maritime activity.  Spain, France, England, Portugal, and Holland developed a world trade base.  German markets were local or confined within Germany.  Much of the economic strength of Germany was based on agriculture whose practices were not keeping pace with the demands.  There were few markets that earned foreign currencies.  The most prominent was the practice of hiring out armies to other nations.

Production of goods was generally based on the guilds, which at the best utilized a very small shop.  An exception was military goods.  As the century wore on, the guilds lost power and social standing.  The inflation required the master and his helpers to work long days.  Much of the textile manufacturing, such as spinning and weaving, was placed out in the hands of the peasants, especially women and children, who were trying to earn some extra money for the family.

After The Thirty Years' War ended, the landlords tried to gain more control and to increase their income.  This led to severe conflicts with the peasants who had agreements with the landlords about their rights and taxes.  The Lords periodically asserted their rights to the common areas (pastures and wood lots) and the peasants insisted they owned these.  These led to court cases and to appeals to higher Lords.  These higher Lords would take up the case of the peasants because it would weaken the lower Lords and strengthen the claims of the higher Lords.  The Gemmingens and the von Neippergs in the Kraichgau were not anxious to have the Duke of Wuerttemberg enter their squabbles with the peasants.

In volume 5, the number 4 issue (July 1993), of Beyond Germanna, I published a short note on the Bunger family which was based on information from B. C. Holtzclaw and Ina Ritchie Sipes.  I would, of course, be interested in any refinements to this information.

Felta Bunger bought 100 acres on a branch of Deep Run from Michael Wilhite and Mary, his wife, on 1 Aug 1775 (Culpeper Co. DB H, p.111).  Valentine Bungard, or Bangert, signed the Church Covenant of the German Lutheran Church 27 May 1776, and also the petition by the male members of the church 22 Oct 1776, asking that they be freed from levies to support the Anglican Church.  Veldun Bonger/Banger and his wife Elizabeth sold this 100 acres to their son John on 22 Jan 1795 (Madison Co. DB 1, p. 172f).  His signature is a classic German script.  The personal taxes of Madison Co. show that Felty Bunger was levy free for the first time in 1800, indicating that he was around 60 years of age and born about 1740.  On 26 Aug 1802, Felty and Elizabeth Bunger deeded to John Henshaw 100 acres (DB 3, p.211) on Hutchesons Mountain, which they had purchased of Alex Tull on 8 Dec 1788 (Culpeper DB P, p.52).  He appears in 1803 for the last time in the personal taxes, and his family seems to have moved away from Madison Co. about then.  The will of Felta Bunger was probated in Greenbrier Co., VA (now WV) on 11 Mar 1806.

Felta's wife was named Elizabeth and there seems to have been some relationship to Matthew House and his wife Mary Margaret.  Valentine Bungert and Elizabeth, his wife, were godparents of Salome, daughter of Matthew and Mary Margaret House in 1776, and of another of their daughters, Catherine Elizabeth, in 1778.  Matthew Houses sons, Michael and Jacob, and their wives, appear as sponsors of the children of Valentine Bungards son Jacob at Hebron (the German Lutheran) Church from 1790 to 1798.  The lists of confirmations at Hebron indicate that Valentine and Elizabeth Bungard had these seven children:

1. John, b. 1762, confirmed 1782 at age 20.
2. Magdalena, b. 1763-4, confirmed in 1782 at age 18.
3. (Anna) Margaret, b. 1766-7, confirmed in 1782 at the age of 15.
4. Jacob, b. 1768-9, as he was confirmed in 1785, age 16.
5. Philip, who was confirmed in 1789 without any statement of age, but perhaps he was born 1770-71.
6. Henry, who was confirmed in 1794 at the same time as his sister Catherine.  Perhaps he was born about 1772.
7. Catherine, who was probably born about 1774.  Girls were often younger when confirmed than the boys/men.

Probably, there were no children older than John since there were no confirmations of Bunger children from 1776 to 1782.
(06 Jan 03)

The oldest child of Valentin Bunger and his wife Elizabeth was John, b. ca 1762, confirmed 1782 at the age of 20.  He married Eva House about 1786/7.  John was deeded 100 acres by his father in 1795.  On 22 Sept 1803, John Bunger and Eve his wife deeded this land to John Batton of Culpeper County (Madison Co. DB 3, p.451).  This same year is the last year that John appears in the tithables.  The records at the Madison Lutheran Church show the births of four children of John and Eve Bunger:

1. Margaret, b. 8 Oct 1788,
2. Barbara, b. 1 Feb 1790,
3. George, b. 16 Dec 1791, and
4. Anna, b. 20 Jul 1794.

That the Eve who married John Bunger was a House is indicated by the baptismal records for their children.  Sponsors for Margaret were Michael House and Margaret Bunger.  Sponsors for Barbara were Jacob Bunger and his wife Margaret.  Sponsors for George were Mathais House and his wife Margaret.  For Anna, the sponsors were Valentin Bunger and Elizabeth Bunger.

Magdalena Bunger, b. ca 1763, to judge by her age at confirmation, married, about 1783, the Rev. Daniel Huffman, son of John Huffman and grandson of John Huffman, the 1714 colonist.  The Hebron church records show that the sponsors for Dinah, the daughter of Daniel Huffman and wife Magdalena, was Joseph Huffman, the brother of Daniel, and Anna Margaret Bunger, who would be the mother's sister.

(Ann) Margaret Bunger, b. ca 1766, married, on 19 Jan 1790, Daniel Huffman, son of George Huffman and grandson of John Huffman, the 1714 colonist.  This Daniel Huffman was a cousin of the Rev. Daniel Huffman.  A note by Mrs. L. R. McDonnell, said to be in the Germanna Foundation library, traces the descendants of this family.  In the first generation there were (children of Daniel Huffman and [Ann] Margaret Bunger):

1. Adam,
2. Ambrose,
3. Isaac,
4. Margaret,
5. Anna,
6. Susannah, and
7. Eva.

In addition to the work of Holtzclaw and Sipes, use was made of the Hebron Church Register and the Hebron Communion Lists.  The second edition of this latter work is now available.
(07 Jan 03)

The Bunger and House families were close, perhaps related.  Let's look at four baptisms of House children.

Matheus Haus & wife Maria Margaretha (parents)
Saloma, born 28 Feb 1776 (child baptized)
Valentin Bunger and wife Elisabetha (sponsors)

Matheus Hauss & wife Maria Margaretha (parents)
Cath. Eliz., born 14 Feb 1778 (child baptized)
Valentin Bunger and wife Elisabetha (sponsors)

Matheis Haus & Margretha (parents)
Moses, born 20 Apr 1787 (child baptized)
Joseph Holskla, Elisabetha Holskla (sponsors)

Matheis Hauss & Margaretha (parents)
Sara, born 4 Jul 1789 (child baptized)
Christopher Zimmerman & wife An. Maria

These are the only baptisms recorded at the German Lutheran (Hebron) Church for Matheus House.  Immediately, some questions are raised.  Are all the four fathers the same person?  Matheus Haus, Sr., did have a son, Matheus Haus, Jr.  The younger Matheas was confirmed in 1785 at the age of 19.  While he might have been a parent in 1787 and in 1789, the sponsors do not seem appropriate.  They were at least middle aged.  Also there is a civil record of a marriage in Culpeper County of Matthias to Susannah Floyd in 1792, which would also suggest that the father of Moses and Sara above was Matheis, Sr.  I conclude the father of all four children above was the same.

The mother's name above is slightly different but not enough different to raise concerns.  The difference merely suggests, "Look out."

The problem that raises my concerns to the serious level is the choice of sponsors for the last two children.  We know that the Bunger and House families seem to be related.  Just the consecutive sequence of five names being confirmed in 1782 of John Bunger, Adam House, Michael House, Margaret Bunger, and Margaret Bunger would alert us to the possibility.  (See "Hebron Communion Lists," second edition, by Mielke and Blankenbaker.) Many other records tell us a similar story.

What do Joseph Holtzclaw, Elisabeth Holtzclaw, Christopher Zimmerman, and Ann Mary Zimmerman have in common?  And what does that suggest about Margaret House, the mother?

This is your homework assignment.  Send in your answers.
(08 Jan 03)

Elizabeth Holtzclaw was born Elizabeth Zimmerman.  She was the sister of Christopher Zimmerman.  The two of them were the children of John Zimmerman and Ursula Blankenbaker.  John Zimmerman was born in 1711 and Ursula was born after the arrival of her father, John Nicholas Blankenbaker, in 1717.  It is thought that Christopher was born about 1746, and Elisabeth was born about 1742.  Joseph Holtzclaw was the son of Jacob Holtzclaw, the 1714 immigrant, and his second wife Catherine.  Joseph married first Mary Thomas, the daughter of John Thomas.  There is no known issue of this marriage.  He married secondly, Elizabeth Zimmerman before 1770.

By 1787, when Joseph Holtzclaw and Elisabeth, his wife, were sponsors for Mathias House and his wife, Margaret, we would see that Joseph and Elisabeth were middle aged.  The interesting thing about Christopher Zimmerman and Elizabeth Zimmerman is that they had a sister Margaret.  The name of Mathias House's wife in the last two baptisms in the last note is Margaret.  Thus, we have the very typical pattern that the sponsors at a baptism are chosen from the siblings or cousins of the parents.  Spouses would also be included in the set from which sponsors were chosen.

The wife, Maria Margaretha, of Mathias House had died after the birth of Catherine Elizabeth.  Mathias House married a middle-aged woman, Margaret Zimmerman.  They had two children, and, at the first baptism, a sister of Margaret, and Margaret's husband, were chosen as sponsors.  At the second baptism, the mother's brother was chosen with his wife.

We must, though, discuss another point.  Germanna Record Six, in discussing the Zimmerman family, says that Margaret Zimmerman married Jacob Lipp, 26 Jan 1787.  There is a Culpeper Co. license for a marriage of two people of this name.  I believe this is another Margaret Zimmerman.  According to the Communion Lists for the German Lutheran Church (Hebron), Jacob Lipps was confirmed at age 17 in 1782.  So he was born ca 1765.  He would be of an appropriate age to marry in 1787 when he was 22.  But Margaret Zimmerman, the daughter of John Zimmerman and Ursula Blankenbaker, would probably have been older than 30.  A Margaret Zimmerman took communion, as a single person in 1775, so she was confirmed earlier.  This is probably the Margaret Zimmerman who later married Mathias House.

To sort these people correctly, it is useful to have the records from the church.  The baptismal lists have been published (with some of the early communion lists).  In addition, the communion lists are now available in a published format.
(to be continued)
(09 Jan 03)

Still referring to the wives of Matthias House, let me emphasize that it was not the change of names of his wives which was important, but it was the change of sponsors.  A given name might even be written down in error but it would be very hard to change the sponsors.

Several of the names that we have discussed in the last couple of notes are interrelated.  They are interesting in themselves.  You might ask, "What was Joseph Holtzclaw doing in the Robinson River Valley?"  This is a good question.  His brother Jacob was there with him.  They had land among the First Colony people; why did they come down to the area of the Second Colony?  I would like to know the answer to this better as it might help me understand the Thomas family better.

Jacob Holtzclaw married Susannah Thomas, while Joseph Holtzclaw married Mary Thomas.  Mary and Susannah were daughters of John Thomas (Jr.), who was the son of John Thomas (Sr.) and Anna Maria Blankenbuehler.  There is no written record for John Thomas (Sr.) in Virginia.  The evidence that he came to Virginia consists of the two children that were born here.  He died before the 1726 land patents were issued.  The widow, Anna Maria, married Michael Kaefer.  Whom John Thomas, Jr., married is uncertain.  There were four, possibly five, children.  Two of the girls married the Holtzclaw men.

There was no known issue of Joseph Holtzclaw and Mary Thomas.  She died and he married Elizabeth Zimmerman.  Elizabeth Zimmerman was the daughter of John Zimmerman and Ursula Blankenbaker.  Ursula was a first cousin once removed of Mary Thomas since Ursula's father, John Nicholas Blankenbaker, was the brother of Anna Maria Blankenbaker, who was the grandmother of Mary Thomas.

Jacob Holtzclaw and Elizabeth Zimmerman had, according to my records, eight children.  One of these, Jacob Holtzclaw, married Salome House in 1796.  Salome was one of the children that were given in the recent notes.  Three of the Holtzclaw girls seem not to have married, namely, Susannah, Elizabeth, and Eve.  Possibly the son, Joseph, never married either.  Susannah Holtzclaw was confirmed in 1785 at the age of 19.  Thereafter she appears for 38 communions, a near record.  The son, Joseph Holtzclaw, was confirmed in 1800.  Probably all of the Joseph Holtzclaws (three) in the communion lists are this Joseph.  The father, of the same name, was of the Reformed faith and was not permitted to take communion in the Lutheran church then.  (This rule has changed in the Hebron Church where communion is open to all professed believers.)  Another daughter, Jemima, married Reuben Tanner in 1799.  She appeared at communion fairly regularly.  Two sons, Henry and John, make the seventh and eighth children.

The Jacob Holtzclaw who married Susannah Thomas moved to Kentucky at an early date.  He appears only once in the church records.
(10 Jan 03)

The question was asked whether I had discussed my House findings with Susie House Cooper.  Yes, about fifteen years ago, I wrote a note on the subject and sent it to her.  She objected, mostly because the note upset some of her work.  In particular she objected to the three-wife concept; however, from the tone of her letters I could see that a further discussion on this subject would be fruitless and so we only communicated socially in the years since then.

My thoughts were based on the sponsorship pattern at the baptisms.  If you had relatives in the neighborhood, preferably of the same age, they were to be used, as opposed to people who were merely friends.  It is interesting that I discussed this concept with the Lutheran minister in Dietenhofen in Bavaria.  He said the rules that I had deduced from the study of the German Lutheran Church in Culpeper Co., Virginia, were exactly the rules they to use today in his church.  There were exceptions, because some people did not have any relatives in the area.  For example, when Rev. Franck and his wife had a child baptized, Adam Wayland, Nicholas Crigler, Andrew Carpenter, and wife Barbara were sponsors.  But this was solely because the Francks had no relatives in the area.

Three of the children in the Matthias House family did not have their baptisms recorded.  George, John, and Susanna were confirmed, but they did not have any baptisms recorded in the Hebron records.  The older children, born before the House family came to the Robinson River Valley, were baptized elsewhere.  The mother of the three named ones above is uncertain as of this moment.

There is a comment or two that could be made about the appearance of the children in the church record.  Adam House and Michael House were both confirmed on the 25th Sunday after Trinity in 1782.  Both were listed as 18 years old.  I thought this might be evidence that they were twins but Susie said they were not.  These were the first House children to be confirmed.  On the first Sunday after Trinity in 1785, Adam House took communion and an added note says that his wife was confirmed.  In the list of communicants, he is the only Hauss.  In the list of people being confirmed, there are Matthias Haus, Eva Hauss, Catharina Hauss nee Farnbach, and Margretha Hauss.  The only one of these that would seem to be married to a Hauss is Catharina.  Reading her last name is very difficult in the records.  Eisenberg, who read the lists once, thought that he could read Farnbach.  (Mielke and Blankenbaker were not so sure, but accepted Eisenberg's reading.)  This is an awkward name in the sense that no Farnbachs lived in the neighborhood.

Dinah Holtzclaw married a Mr. House and had one daughter, Inga.  She married a second time in 1783/4, John Van Meter (from Holtzclaw, "Nassau-Siegen").  If we attempt to place Mr. House in the Robinson River Valley Houses, it would be Adam, as all of the other older sons of Matthias House have definite marriage partners and lived.  Perhaps this is not pertinent here but I would note that the timing is about correct and that Adam is not to be found in the church records after 1785.  In fact he is not in the personal property tax lists for Culpeper Co. in 1787, though his father and Michael are.  He either had died or moved away.  (Comments are very much invited.)  In short, I am not very satisfied with the story for Adam House.
(11 Jan 03)

I am continuing the discussion of Matthias House who had three wives, the second of which was Margaret Zimmerman, the daughter of John Zimmerman and Ursula Blankenbaker.  This Margaret had two nieces named Margaret, both of which were younger.  Using the "Hebron Communion Lists", we see that a Margaret Zimmerman attended communion services in 1775.  She was sitting next to Mary Zimmerman, her sister.  In order to participate in a communion service, one had to be confirmed.  We have no record of this but it would not be unreasonable to put her age at about twenty considering a number of factors.

She attended the communion on the 17th Sunday after Trinity in 1776, sitting next to Rosina Blankenbaker.  For the Easter 1777 communion she attended and sat next to Anna Barbara Fisher (nee Blankenbaker).  Then she attended the 25th Sunday after Trinity in 1782.  Don't think that she was lax or not attentive to her church going, since in those years 1778-1781 there was no minister.

The next appearance of a Margaret Zimmerman is the 19th Sunday after Trinity in 1800, when a Margaret Zimmerman was confirmed.  This, of course, is a different Margaret.  Or to put it differently, for eighteen years there was no Margaret Zimmerman at church.  She either died or changed her name, and I suggest that she changed her name to House.

There are three patents with head rights of First Colony members.  William Moore (Patent Book 14, p. 362) has John Camper, Alice Catherine Camper, John Huffman, Katherine Huffman, Jacob Richart, Elizabeth Richart, John Richart, and Catherine Cunk.  These are imaginative spellings of Kemper, Huffman, Rector, and Cuntz.

William Hallaway (P.B. 14, p. 521) has Johannes Martin, Margaret Halscrow, Henry Halscrow, John Halscrow, and Maria Katherina Martin.  These are Martins and Holtzclaws.

Laus Crest has Katherine Cuntz, John Cuntz, Likewin Peter Hill, and Elisa. Peter Hill (P.B. 14, p. 528).  These are two Cuntzes and two Hitts.  (Nugent who transcribed these had a difficult time in distinguishing the letter "l" and the letter "t" in several cases.) Lawrence Crest was a member of the Second Colony.

These are all that I found, even though there surely was a head right for Jacob Holtzclaw.

It was the law of Virginia that anyone who came to the colony could claim 50 acres of the crown's land.  Because the rights were transferrable, they could be sold.  In fact, it soon became the practice that anyone who paid the transportation of a person would get the use of the head right.

In the case of the First Colony, the members paid part of their transportation and Lt. Gov. Spotswood paid part of the transportation.  This was an unusual situation since no one individual had paid the entire cost for anyone.  Spotswood could not claim them.  By default, the members claimed the head rights.

They could not use the head right in the Northern Neck because the Northern Neck was no longer the land of the Crown.  The proprietors of the Northern Neck were not going to give away their land.  The head rights were useful outside the Northern Neck, so residents of the Northern Neck often obtained their head rights and sold them for use outside the Northern Neck.  This is what we have in the three cases above.
(16 Jan 03)

(Continuing with Inheritance Practices.)

The practices followed in any one area for the preferred method of inheritance varied.  Germany was a collection of hundreds of principalities, and each of these probably had its rules.  These changed in the course of time also.  When I said that in northern Germany the land went to the youngest daughter, I was quoting Roger Minert, a researcher (I think that is the name).  He was telling his own personal story.  In Eighteenth Century Germany, the most common rule was that there was a freedom to divide one's estate in any way that one saw fit.  It was never as rigid as it was in England.  There were localities and periods of time where the rules were more rigid.

Craig is right about the home place going to the youngest son.  He was often still at home and he was charged with taking care of his mother.  He was given the home place.  Many times the oldest children receive nothing because they have already been given something, probably when they left home.

As I have been discussing social conditions in Hesse, perhaps you have felt that it did not apply to �your people�.  We do have the comments of one Johannes Wilhelm Hoffman, which might be taken as �closer to home�.  Wilhelm Hoffman was the younger brother of John Huffman (1714 Colony) and of Henry Huffman (1743 immigrant who lived close to John in the Robinson River Valley).  Wilhelm also emigrated to America, but he chose to live in Pennsylvania, not in Virginia.  Our interest in him centers on his diary and account book, which has been preserved (now in The Library of Congress).  I am using a translation by Charles T. Zahn.

The book is better described as an account book, not as a diary.  William was very selective about what he entered into the book.  He especially entered the services he performed for others plus the taxes and fines he paid.  The book begins in 1733, when he was 21, with a prayer, which makes it clear that he was a dedicated member of the Reformed Church and that he regarded the Catholics very unfavorably, as even worse than the �Turks�.  The source of much of his grief was that he lived in Eisern in an area which was controlled by the Catholics.  The head of the government had been the Catholic prince of Nassau, who lived in the Upper Castle in Siegen.  (After the prince had beheaded one of the citizens early in the century, the administration of the area was given to the Archbishop of Cologne by the Emperor.)

William tried to rationalize life by saying that God had ordained overlords to rule over the peasants, and to require services from the peasants at the overlord's command.  He continued that, whereas God had made him a peasant in this fatherland which had Catholic rulers, he hoped to live in peace with good health and fortune.  "Therefore, I, Johannes Wilhelm Hoffman, from Eysern, intend to record the services I give to the overlords."  Among the services he had or expected to perform were mowing, making hay, hauling wood from the forest, hunting, and military service.  Since he did own a horse, many of the services involved the horse.

Two of the services seemed to have a very adverse effect on Wilhelm.  He had to perform military service and he had to quarter soldiers in his house.  Quartering of soldiers was a burden that fell almost exclusively upon the Reformed Church members.  He did not spell out the wars clearly, but foreign troops and citizens from other regions were involved.

Fines were levied for different causes.  Wilhelm and his fellow church members spent a lot of time in appealing these fines.  Great turmoil ensued whenever an overlord died and before the successor was determined.  The Reformed Church members were fined whenever they held school on Catholic saint days.  Though much of the burden which befell Wilhelm was because he was a Reformed member, he never wavered in his faith, or considered changing it.

(From number 3 issue of volume 9 of Beyond Germanna.)

Wilhelm Hoffman mentions a few names which are intriguing.  We wish that he had said more than he did.  Remember that he started writing his account book in 1733.

In 1739 and 1740 he mentions Pastor Heltsklaw from Wilmetogff.  This man must surely be a Holtzclaw.  In 1738, Wilhelm writes of his brother-in-law, Heide of Siegen.  Just how this came about is unknown, as his wife was Catharina Pithan.  According to B. C. Holtzclaw, none of Wilhelm�s sisters married a Heide.  He also refers to a brother-in-law, Henrich Schute, at F�cknhette (?), whose actual relationship is not explained.

He records that on 16 May 1741, he, Johannes Wilhelm Hoffman and his wife Anna Cadrina, with their sons Johannes and Johan Heinrich, left the village of Eysern in the Catholic part of the principality of Nassau-Siegen in his fatherland in Europe.  He arrived in Philadelphia on 1 Oct 1741, and within the year had moved to York County and across the �Sequahanna� to a place beyond Yorktown.

He left an incomplete statement, �After I left Europe and the servitude in Siegen, in the form of handwork and money, as the book shows again and again -----.�  In another place, he gives as motivation for coming to America, �the hope of being able to live without the burden of war.�

In America, he continued to record some of the same kinds of observations as had in Germany, namely, taxes, road building, road maintenance, and war.  He was caught up in the French and Indian War which was so hard on the frontier counties.  With his fatalistic spirit, he believed that God was punishing America by using war as the means.  He records the end of the war on a very happy note with a wish for a peaceful life under our King George the Second of Great Britain.

(I said previously that the diary was in The Library of Congress.  More correctly, I believe a copy is there on microfilm.  The translation by Charles T. Zahn is in the LDS library on film 193014(?).

Was it so unusual that a man in the position of Wilhelm could read and write?  No.  A high percentage of the German immigrants in the eighteenth century could read and write.  A quick look at the 70 male passengers on the ship Molley in 1727 arriving at Philadelphia shows only about 15% had someone else write their names.  In this group were several Mennonites (Anabaptists).  Another ship in 1729 shows about a 75% literacy rate among the passengers.
(20 Jan 03)

(In response to a query on the list, I deviate from the ongoing series.)

Zacharias Blankenbaker, the son of the 1717 immigrant, married a widow with two daughters.  There are two threads of evidence, but the best one is the church record of baptisms.  About 1775, the baptismal list was rewritten and in the process three rules were used:

1. If a family had children before 1750, their records were not included.
2. If the record was incomplete for the family, prior to 1775, no records were included.
3. If the family had moved away, no records were included.

As the record was being rewritten, a case arose which had not been anticipated.  The scribes hesitated and put the case aside.  Toward the end of the process, they had to make a decision.  The essence of the problem was that a man married a widow who had two children (daughters) born before 1750.  All the children of the man were born after 1750.  Is anyone to be included?  The decision was to include the man (Zacharias) and his wife and their mutual children but not her daughters.  The wife�s given name may have been Elizabeth but she seems to be called Els most of the time.  Her maiden name is totally unknown from the church records.

The other thing that tells us that Els had been married before is that Zacharias, in his will, refers to a daughter of my wife.  This was Elizabeth, and Zacharias was not her father.  The other daughter was Mary Magdalena, and she married Henry Wayman as his first wife.  She died and he married Magdalena Blankenbaker, the daughter of John Blankenbaker.  Zacharias did not mention Mary Magdalena in his will.

I had arrived at these conclusions when a statement from the book �Some Martin, Jefferies, and Wayman Families and Connections of Virginia, Maryland, Kentucky and Indiana� came to my attention.  It said, �Henry Wayman, b. �, d. �; m.1, � , m.2 before 1776 Mary Magdalena Finks [according to a descendant].�  I had already arrived at the two marriages for Henry Wayman, but I believe that the author and his source got the sequence of the two wives backwards.  The first marriage was to Mary Magdalena Finks and the second marriage was (Mary) Magdalena Blankenbaker (d/o John Blankenbaker).

This says that Els married a Finks, probably a younger brother of the senior Mark Finks.  He died and she married Zacharias Blankenbaker.  Els� maiden name is unknown.  I am of the opinion that she was not from one of the families who attended the German Lutheran Church regularly.  I came to this conclusion from an examination of whom she sat with in church after Zacharias died.  She was probably several years younger than Zacharias, who was born in Germany and lived in Essex, Spotsylvania, Orange, Culpeper, and Madison Counties.
(21 Jan 03)