Notes on the "Battle on the Monongahela"

 

Notes on the “Battle on the Monongahela” With excerpts from BritishBattles.com

https://www.britishbattles.com/french-indian-war/general-braddocks-defeat-on-the-monongahela-in-1755-

I am rather proud of the article I wrote in November and December 2011 in this blog and of my Stewart ancestors who served in the  French and Indian war and the Revolutionary war. But recently I came across this page and was immediately drawn to it to see if our ancestor – Captain Robert Stewart (at that time the Virginia Troop of Light Horse) was mentioned.

The article is a rather lengthy and exhaustive accounting of the political situation before, during, and after the battle. As well as an accounting of the lives and political careers of the British officers and politicians who were the key players in the expedition to the American colonies. I strongly recommend this reading for those historians and researchers who will find it enlightening.

Since the story is told from the British perspective, the colonists, pioneers, and other persons of interest are barely mentioned. There are letters and communications from George Washington and Benjamin Franklin that I found interesting. Daniel Boone is mentioned but only briefly.

Of course, my primary interest was in my ancestor, and I found he and his command are mentioned a few times.

All in all, I found that this article only strengthened and supported my initial research.

In this 10-part article there is an accounting of every day of the march from the forming of the army to the crossing of the Monongahela into the battle to the aftermath of that disastrous venture as follows:

Starting in part 8 -

On 9th April 1755, the 5 companies of Virginia Rangers and Captain Stewart’s Virginia Light Horse marched out of Alexandria for Winchester. Sir Peter Halkett’s orders stated: “As soon as they arrive at Winchester the commanding officer of companies to provide their men with arms as soon as possible, and to make application to Sir Peter Halkett for their direction. Capt Stewart is to apply immediately to Sir Peter Halkett for 34 hangers [short infantry swords] for his men which they are to take with them.

 

In a listing of Braddock’s Units at Will Creek on 8^th June 1755;

Provincial Units:

Captain Robert Stewart’s* Troop of Light Horse: 3 officers, 2 sergeants, 33 rank and file.
Captain George Mercer’s* Company of Carpenters: 3 officers, 3 sergeants, 1 drummer and 42 rank and file.
Captain William Polson’s* Company of Carpenters: 3 officers, 3 sergeants, 1 drummer and 50 rank and file.
Captain Adam Stevens’* Company of Virginia Rangers: 3 officers, 3 staff (adjutant, quartermaster and surgeon), 3 sergeants, 1 drummer and 53 rank and file.
Captain Peter Hogg’s* Company of Virginia Rangers: 3 officers, 3 sergeants, 1 drummer and 42 rank and file.
Captain Thomas Waggoner’s* Company of Virginia Rangers: 3 officers, 3 sergeants, 1 drummer and 53 rank and file.
Captain Thomas Cocke’s Company of Virginia Rangers: 3 officers, 3 sergeants, 1 drummer and 47 rank and file.
Captain William Perronée’s* Company of Virginia Rangers: 3 officers, 3 sergeants, 1 drummer and 52 rank and file.
Captain John Dagworthy’s Company of Maryland Rangers: 3 officers, 1 surgeon, 3 sergeants, 1 drummer and 53 rank and file.
Captain Edward Brice Dobbs’ Company of North Carolina Rangers: 3 officers, 1 surgeon, 3 sergeants, 1 drummer and 72 rank and file.
(* These company commanders were all officers in the Virginia Regiment at Fort Necessity in June 1754 as were Lieutenants Carolus Spiltdorf and Walter Stuart of the Virginia Companes.)

Braddock’s Defeat: Part 8

 

The Army’s formation for the final march on 9^th July 1755:

Advanced party (commanded by Lieutenant Colonel Gage):

Party of ‘Guides’ comprising a group of around 10 Native Americans led by Chief Monocatotha and 6 mounted soldiers of Captain Robert Stewart’s Troop of Virginia Light Horse…

The Main Army (General Braddock)

Captain Robert Stewart’s Troop of Virginia Light Horse

Contingent of seamen and pioneers

Three 12 pounder field guns with ammunition carts

A company of Grenadiers

A van guard of battalion soldiers from the 44^th and 48^th Regiments commanded by Lieutenant Colonel Burton

The column of some 35 wagons in single file, 3 or 4 of them provision wagons, with the remaining body of troops from the 44^th and 48^th in files on each side and the cattle and carrying horses between the files and the flank guards in the woods.

A 12 pounder field gun with the ammunition carts of the artillery train.

Engineer Gordon records in his letter of 22^nd July 1755 (Pargellis) that Braddock’s section of the army carried with it 4 howitzers and 3 coehorns in addition to the 6 and12 pounders.

Braddock’s Defeat: Part 10

 

Most of the French-led Native Americans remained on the main battlefield, tomahawking and scalping the wounded.  Some 50 followed the British to the river and fired into the mass of soldiers as they re-crossed the Monongahela, but none followed across the river.  Nevertheless the panic-stricken soldiers kept going.

At a point about half a mile back along the southern bank of the Monongahela Lieutenant Colonel Burton attempted to rally some of the troops and take up a position.  None of the soldiers would stay and the retreat continued.

Braddock was brought off the field by a group of officers, Orme, Stewart, Morris and Washington in particular, and conveyed back to Gist’s in a cart.

Braddock’s Defeat: Part 10

 

This part confirms Washington and Stewart assisting the general - lending credence to the story about loading the general and other fallen officers in a wagon to take them out of the fray.

It is a long read but worth your time. I am happy to confirm the research from my previous writing.

 

Apology

One of my favorite musicians from early age is guitar player,  Chet "Mr. Guitar" Adkins, a wonderfully talented musician and showman.
Someone asked him many years ago, "What do you think when you listen to your earlier recordings?"
"Oh," he said, "I never do that because I can't help but see how I could have done it better."

I have neglected this blog for a while now and that neglect has come back to bite me. I was going through and re-reading earlier posts and found several places I could have done better. But, I needed to do that because ...
I received an email last night from a distant cousin who had just discovered the blog. She had a glowing review - loved and appreciated it ... and oh, by the way, someone is posting comments with pornographic links there! What?

Yes, dear readers, friends and family, it is true.

I wanted this to be open to the public so that my family, primarily, but also the genealogy community at large, could access and comment on it.  I just saw a wonderful exchange of information and links to more info for further research in comments on one of my posts. Great! That is what this is all about.

Unfortunately, some unscrupulous lowlife had posted in comments some vile and disgusting links here. I have gone through and removed them and I will find a way to screen future links posted here.

My deepest and most sincere apologies to all of you and I promise to fix this situation as soon as possible.

Your humble and very embarrassed friend,
David Green

Sizemore Family Photo Mystery Solved

The mystery is solved.

Some time ago I came across a photo marked “Harmon and George ‘of all’ Sizemore” it came from what appeared to be a reliable source. It can be found in many places on the internet and is always (as far as I have seen) attached to George “All” Sizemore. However after I posted the photo, comments and questions came in that cast a cloud of doubt about the accuracy of the label.

The most damning of which was the fact someone pointed out that George ‘of all’ had lived and died before photography was invented. George “All” Sizemore lived 1750-1822 (and is buried in Leslie County, Kentucky) and the first commercially available photography - the daguerreotype was introduced in 1839.

Then the question asked by many, “Well, then, who IS this?” 

I received a letter from a descendant of Harmon and Susan Sizemore, Walter L. Sizemore, who was understandably upset that his ancestors were not given their proper recognition. 

First and foremost I want to extend my apologies to the family and take this opportunity to set the record straight:

The letter says the picture is of Harmon Sizemore (1806-1909) and his wife (behind him), Susan (Sizemore), daughter of John “Rockhouse” Sizemore , with his brother, John Sisemore (1822-1900), and John’s daughter, Mary Ann (Sisemore) Seamans.  John apparently changed the spelling of his name when he moved to Arkansas in 1837. 

The picture is taken in front of John’s store in Aurora, Arkansas in the 1870’s, probably, he says, to celebrate the moving of Harmon and Susan from Leslie County, Kentucky to Madison County, Arkansas.  Harmon and John were sons of James Sizemore (before 1774-1824) and Elizabeth Fields.

So for all of us who have been wondering, the mystery had been solved at last. Now we know the true identities of the people in the picture. 

Thanks again to the descendants of these pioneers who helped in the writing of this post and

brought to light the facts that were for so many years lost in history.

 

The Red, White...and Blue Decendants of Pocahontas

It is not unusual to find Red and White descendants of Native American ancestors - particularly if it is a famous character - like Pocahontas, but this is my first encounter of a group called "Blue" descendants.
As I had promised, I have been working on the line that led from the famous Indian princess to my family of coalminers. I have collected census records, birth, death, and marriage certificates. Along the way I have come to appreciate military pension requests and requests for membership in the Sons and Daughters of the American Revolution and have found them to be a wealth of information.
So, I am carefully documenting each generation of ancestors in this line to be able to prove that we are, indeed, descendants of the "Guardian Angle of Virginia". That is, until today, when I came across this "new" term - Blue descendants.
Note to all new and inexperienced genealogists: This is why, as much fun as it is to gallop through the  pages of Ancestry.com and other family history pages, when it comes down to it, you really must do your own research and find official documents to prove the lines we follow are actual.
As you might imagine, a red line descendant is the blood line of an Indian (in this case) and a white line descendant is from a marriage of another time (before or after) to a European or non-Indian spouse. However, in this case there is a third option - who knew?
It seems that, first of all, I should have started at the top and worked my way down rather than the other way around. But, secondly, that Pocahontas and John Rolfe had a son (their only child), Thomas Rolfe, who married Jane Poythress and they had only one child. Their daughter, Jane Rolfe, married Col. Robert Bolling. The children from this union became known as the "Red Bollings" - the direct line from our famous princess.
Col. Bolling married, secondly, Anne Stith and the children from this marriage became known as the "White Bollings" - not directly related to the princess.
Col. Robert and Jane Rolfe had a son named Col. John Bolling who married Nancy Kennon and had at least 6 kids and one of those was Maj. John Bolling - the (military) force was strong with this family...
Anyway, Yoda, this is where things get ... interesting or frustrating depending on how you look at it.
Maj. John Bolling and his wife, Elizabeth Blair continued the "red" line and had as many as 18 children (according to one source) but most of them - maybe 11- died young.
Then there is this third group who also claim to be descended from this marriage which, if true, would make the couple the proud parents of 30 children!
It seems that there was a book published about the descendants of Pocahontas and John Rolfe and after the publication of said book there suddenly appeared this group of people complaining that their ancestors should have been included in the list of the children of John Bolling and Elizabeth Blair. Since they appeared "out of the blue", they became known as the "Blue Bollings".
The problem with this group is that they do not appear in the will of John Bolling or in letters or papers written by one of the sons of John Bolling. Some of them may not exist at all. But at the present time or in the most recent writings I have seen, there is still little, if any, evidence to substantiate their claims.  
They may have lived near or even with the family in question. Some may be illegitimate children of one of the parents.They may have been close relatives that were being taken care of by the family. One writer has said that they may even have been orphans that were cared for by the family. At this point no one really knows or can prove it either way.
My 6th GGrandfather, Maj. Benjamin Bolling, when I found him, was listed as a son. But, alas, he is in the list of the Blue Bollings and not in the blood line of the famous Indian Princess after all. We know he was a real person. He is a historical figure who was a famous pioneer who settled in Flat Gap which became Wise Co. Va. He was quite a colorful character whose story will probably be my next post on this wonderful site.

So take heart family members and stay tuned. We may or may not be in the direct line of Pocahontas, but there are plenty of colorful and interesting stories to tell about brave, intrepid pioneers, warriors, soldiers, and Indian Chiefs who have all helped make the words "red, white and blue" famous and a proud statement in our heritage.

A Famous Indian Princess Found

A Famous Indian Princess Found

What do one of the most important couples in Jamestown Colony in the 1660's have to do with a humble family in the coal fields of West Virginia in the 1950's?

It's funny the way things happen sometimes and it's always exciting to stumble onto a line of ancestors that leads to a famous character in American History.

When I started this journey, I was mainly concerned with my surname - Green. So I concentrated on my fathers family and his fathers fathers. 


I had neglected my mothers side of the chart because for some stupid reason I didn't think it would be all that interesting. Man, oh, man, was I wrong. 

So, here I am just  plugging away on Ancestry.com filling in the blanks moving from one ancestor to another...O.K. and his father was... and his parents were...chasing these lines to see how long it would take to find family in Europe when all of a sudden a name pops up with this note attached:

"GGrandson of Pocahontas"

What? Are you kidding me? 

You mean the Pocahontas, John Smith, Jamestown story? That Pocahontas?

 Well, not quite that story. But, yes, the Indian princess, "the guardian angel of Virginia" is an ancestor of mine. Wow! What a revelation, and what a cool thing to be connected to such a pivotal story in this nations history.

Well, how did that happen?

 I traced the line to Powhatan, the principal chief over a large group of tribes in what was to become the state of Virginia.

His daughter, Pocahontas, famously saved the life of John Smith who was one of the leaders of the fledgling Virginia colony. No one knows exactly why, but it is an established fact that the young princess was her fathers favorite daughter and he could deny her nothing.

As the English explorer's head was placed on a rock, his body held in place by several warriors, and several stone axes held ready to "smash the braines out of his head", the young maiden did plead with her father to spare this live. After all else had failed, the girl put her arms around Smith's head and placed her head upon his.
 Seeing this, the Chief could no longer fight and there followed a great feast and there was peace in the land ... for a few years ... until the war ... and the kidnapping of the favored daughter...
But that is a story for another day. (I promise I will flesh out the whole story and post it separately soon.)

In the mean time, Pocahontas does not marry John Smith, but a younger John Rolfe who was the man who brought tobacco to the colony.  Tobacco, of course, became the principal cash crop for the struggling colony.

So, between the Indian maiden's help and assistance to the people of the colony and the tobacco, this couple was responsible for saving the colony and the beginning of the State of Virginia. 

John Rolfe and Princess Pocahontas had one child, Thomas Rolfe, b. Jan. 30, 1615. (She was given the title of Princess by the Queen of England - she was the daughter of a "King" after all.)

Thomas married Jane Poythress and they had only one child - Jane Powhatan Rolfe b. Oct. 10, 1665 (as the mother died later that same year - possibly due to complications of childbirth).

Jane Powhatan married into the Bolling family - Col. Robert Bolling b. Dec. 26, 1646 who passed the line down through the next 4 generations when Elizabeth Bolling b. Mar. 8, 1767 married William Grancer Short b. May 15, 1768.

The line passes down that family for another 4 generations until Mary Elizabeth Short b. Apr. 16, 1877 marries William R. Bishop b. Feb.15, 1875.

Now, it just turns out that Mary Elizabeth and William Bishop have a daughter named Ethel Mae Bishop b. Jan. 1, 1905 who lives to be my mother's mother. 

And so, there you have it. From the tidewaters of Virginia to the coal fields of West Virginia. From the daughter of a great Indian chief to the daughter of a coal miner in 300 short years... ain't genealogy fun!

The Greenberry mystery solved

Is it Greenberry "Green" Atkins or is it Greenberry Adkins Green? Is our Ggrandfather actually an Adkins and not a Green? What do 2 Mary's, 2 Nancy's, and 3 Greenberry's add up to and what is up with all these "Polly's"? Was it some kind of law that every family should have at least 1 girl named Polly?

Greenberry “Green” Adkins b. 1840 Yancy Co. NC

Greenberry’s niece, Nancy, had a son that she named (obviously after her uncle or possibly her brother) – Greenberry Green b. 1866.

Let's start here: 

 

Joshua Green, born 1792 in Yancy Co. NC married Elizabeth Sparks b.1802 Yancy Co. NC 

Joshua & Elizabeth Green had several children including; Mary “Polly” Green b.1819 and her sister, Nancy Green b.1823.

Mary “Polly” married Alexander Adkins abt 1843.

 One article says that Adkins was the father to Mary’s first 5 children. They must have separated for some good reason because she relocated to Wyoming Co. West Virginia with 5 kids and no husband.  She carried the Adkins name on the 1850 census after which she started using her maiden name, Green. Mary’s daughter, Nancy,(not to be confused with her sister Nancy) is 3 years old and listed as born in NC as well as a son listed as Green (berry?) Adkins (not to be confused with her brother Greenberry).

So between 1843 and 1850, she had 5 kids, left her husband and is living with 3 kids in WVa (some of the kids were living with other family members). On the 1860 Census she appears as Mary Green and 13 year old Nancy Green is listed in her mother’s household.

Alexander Adkins removed from Yancy Co. NC to Wise Co., Va. along with the families of ‘Lias Green and Billy Green. This is only 3 counties away from his estranged wife. Alexander had married Lavina "Viney" Green – sister to ‘Lias and Billy. I often wonder if it was not the news of this marriage that made Mary change back to her maiden name. 

It is said that some of the children that came into Wyoming County with Mary listed their father as Alexander Adkins and their mother as Polly Green. One daughter, Millie, listed her father’s name as John McKinney when she married John Sizemore. It occurs to me that this may have had something to do with the couple's dramatic split.

I have not found a record or article that mentions Nancy Green ever marrying before she had a son named Greenberry Green so at this point I have to assume that she had the child out of wedlock and was using her maiden name. In the 1870 Census she is living in the household of her brother Greenberry Atkins (not to be confused with her uncle Greenberry  Green) with her 5 year old son, Greenberry Green. Are you confused yet?

Articles about Greenberry refer to him as “Greenberry Green, son of Nancy Green who later married Nathaniel Rose.” Frustratingly void of the juicy details, grrr.

Nancy did, indeed, marry Nathaniel Rose and had several children with him who bear the surname Rose.

On the wedding certificate when Greenberry marries Juda Morgan, he lists his parents as _____(blank) & Nancy _____,

I am still trying to locate the marriage certificate of Greenberry to my Ggrandmother – Mary Ann (another “Polly”) Perdue. They are listed on the 1900 Census of Center District, Wyoming Co. WV as Greenberry Green and Polly Ann with 6 children all with the surname Green.

Polly must have been a very common name in that era – their son – my grandfather – Daniel married 1^st  a woman named Ann "Polly" Taylor and 2^nd my grandmother, Lula Jewell.

So there you have it: 2 Mary's, at least 2 Nancy's, 3 Greenberry's and a passel of Polly's. Isn't genealogy fun?

And what does it all add up to?  Well, I could very well have grown up as an Adkins but I didn't because my family name was handed down from father to daughter to daughter to son to be handed down to me by my great grandfather - Greenberry Green.

P.S.

Mary Polly Green never remarried but she had such an impact on her community that the town now known as Itmann, W. Va. was for several years know as "Poll Green". She is last seen on the 1880 Census living in the household of her son. She died shortly afterward and is said to be buried on a hill overlooking the confluence of Barkers Creek and the Guyandotte River.

The Latest DNA Results are In

The Latest DNA Results are In

Good morning, Readers,

Last night I found that my 'Family Finder' DNA test had been completed and the results had been posted on my page.

A little nervous and apprehensive, I went to my page and started to look through the results. And the good news is ... there is no bad news. The other news is there are no surprises.

A-hem, drum roll please ... "In the category of 'percentage of heritage' we have only 2 contestants (OK, maybe this was a little bit of a surprise - I really expected more variation) ... and the count is ... 97% Western European and 3% Native American."
And the crowd goes … "What the...?"

These 2 populations are the two I most expected to see, although, I was a little concerned about the Native American percentage but it was expected. The ancestors that are not accounted for are the Germans and the French.  Now, this test only goes back to the 5th and 6th generations and these other European lines may not come into the family until after that, but I thought they were a little closer. I'll have to go back and check my Gedcom file (family tree) and look at that.

Anyway, my brothers and cousins, there you have it - 97% Western European and only 3% Native American. So much for applying for those Federal grants for NA status. Oh, well, I know some of you are disappointed.

This does, however, confirm most of my research that shows our family coming from England, Ireland and Scotland and, of course, the Indian blood that we were told we had. 

Concerning that - I came across a very interesting website while researching for another project: An entire Green family of Chickamauga Cherokee - very interesting - you can check that out here - http://chickamaugacherokee.org/green/ .


"Now for something completely different..." (thank you, Monty Python).
We know that there was a lot of controversy around several 'facts' about the Sizemore family and none more than the Black (Caribbean Indian) and the possible Jewish people in some of the lines in that family.
In my last project 'My Native American Connection', I mentioned a character which I had read in at least two other researcher's papers. This was an "indentured servant". This (Portuguese-Jewish) slave is said to have been listed in the colony of Jamestown with the name Sizemore.
For whatever reason, at the time I did not give the source of that information as it was ( I thought at the time ) just a passing bit of information that had very little to do with my main subject. 
However, I was reminded that even though this blog is for the edification and education of my family, that there are people who are reading this as part of the research they are doing for their families. One of these people was very upset and wants the proof of that statement.
I have found evidence of the flight of the Jews from parts of Europe during and after the Spanish Inquisition and at least two people named Sizemore in the early history of Barbados and Portuguese (Jewish) slaves being brought to Barbados. The possibility that a rich landowner could have taken (bought) one or more of these slaves and brought them to the young British colonies is certainly not out of the question.
However I have yet to lay my hands (or eyes) on ‘the list’ from Jamestown on which this person was listed or the one that one Sizemore was listed as, or should I say, indicated that he was a ...  dark-skinned man. These are said to exist as some researchers have quoted them – I just haven’t found them yet. And as we have said ‘Always do your own research’ because you can’t trust everything you read.
Coming next – “Proof of the ‘Portuguese-Jewish Sizemore of Jamestown”