Chat
|
Daily Search
|
My GenForum
|
Community Standards
|
Terms of Service
|
|
|
Cheryl, we could get into a long running discussion on this information, but it's not going to get us anywhere. This is one of the reasons, I'm asking people to look anew at former Chandler information. I really truly believe that some of the male Chandlers have been combined into one person.
When I first started doing genealogy, I was in contact with the CFA. They are the ones who gave me this information on this branch of Chandlers. Once, I got a little more experience, I started questioning dates, etc. If you would like you can go back and read my posts over the years.
I was given the date of "1761", and I questioned how a boy of 11 yrs could be an overseer. I was then told, oh that date is incorrect, he was born earlier; he was born about 1755. He still would only have been about 16-17. I don't think a 17 yr. old boy would have the difficult job of overseer on a large plantation. That was a man's job, with much experience, not an inexperienced lad of 16-17.
I've always felt there were two Daniels and they have been combined into one person, just as some of the other Chandlers have been.
Here is part of what I received from the CFA officer:
"CFA documents - He first appears in the 1772 tithe list in Lunenburg Co., VA as an overseer on a Plantation of his Uncle John Cox. Daniel went with his parents to Surry Co., NC where he is found as a juror in 1779. In the 1786 NC state census he is shown in Surry Co., with 2 sons under 21 and three daughters. In 1790 he is still in Surry with 4 sons and 5 daughters"
If this Daniel Chandler had that many children who were they? And why isn't anyone claiming him?
I know the CFA had at least one child credited to William and Delitha who was not their child, Richard Chandler, b. ca. 1748, married Elizabeth Carter. Linda Lewis has proven this beyond doubt. Even now some of the researchers are claiming they had a son Richard Chandler
So why couldn't they be wrong on Daniel being their son?
DNA tests have proven the CFA gave a lot of people as descendants of John Chandler/Elizabeth (Lupo) and they were totally wrong on these Chandlers including at least one of the officers who for years claim descent from John Chandler and the DNA tests proves he was wrong, as was the CFA and their information on this branch of Chandlers. So far, as I know only one person who's taken the DNA tests is claiming descent from William and Delitha, but I have not seen any paper proof, showing he descends from that line. How good is this person's research? If he's made a mistake on who his ancestor was, and this person wasn't his ancestor, this can mess up an entire clan of Chandlers.
If I went just by circumstancial evidence, then I could definitely attach my clan to William and Delitha, but at this time do I have actual paper proof, no. Names, dates, places, all match up for Richard Chandler b. 1751 to belong to this clan of Chandlers, but that elusive piece of paper just hasn't shown up yet.
If William and Delitha had all these sons, why did her father only mentioned Delita Chandler & her two dtrs Rebecca and Keziah Chandler in his will,when all the children are credited with being born by 1864.
John seems to have named all his children and his grandchildren in the will. Some say he only included his grand daughters in the will so they would have some inheritance. I don't accept that, back in that time frame, the sons were the "sun and moon" rolled into one. Dtrs normally meant very little to a family.
I say at the time of his death, there is a big possibility that he only had grand daughters, there may not have been any grandsons born by this date. All of John Cox's children were still young adults, most just starting their families, with one or two children. If the birthdate of Delitha is correct of about 1730, she was still of child bearing age in 1764. It isn't that unusual for a family to only have dtrs, or many dtrs. with only 1 son. Or vice a versa, many sons and no dtrs. or only 1 dtr. One set of my great grandparents only had dtrs, 4 of them. My mother had 1 brother and 5 sisters.
Perhaps Cox researchers may have more answers. I may have more answers soon as I've recently found out this Cox line is part of two more of my lines. One may be my direct line, dating back to the late 1600's. As of now, I know "my" John Cox family came to VA along with a John Davis. It seems that all three Cox families will be related, with a possibility the common ancestor will be a "John Cox."
Notify Administrator about this message?
Followups:
|
| http://genforum.genealogy.com/chandler/messages/7523.html | ||
 |
Link to GenForum Add Forum |
|