Robert McCorkle and Robert W. McCorkle, My Maternal 4th Great Grandfathers
52 Ancestors in 52 Weeks
Week 33
Prompt: Multiples
When I saw this week's prompt, “Multiples,” I thought I had found an easy way to interpret it.
Ancestry's ThruLines showed that I have 134 DNA matches to people whose family trees descend from my fifth-great-grandfather, Henry Holstine.
One hundred thirty-four DNA matches. That certainly qualified as “multiples.”
There was just one little problem.
I decided to make sure I could prove that Henry Holstine really was my fifth-great-grandfather.
That innocent decision cost me the better part of a weekend.
What I Know
Henry Holstine died in Botetourt County, Virginia, in 1805. His will names his wife, Mersey, and eight children. One of those children was his daughter Mercy, or Mersey, Holstine.
Mercy married Robert McCorkle in Botetourt County in 1789. Henry's estate records provide additional evidence of the relationship. An 1807 deed involving Henry's heirs identifies Robert McCorkle and his wife Mercy and places them in Roane County, Tennessee.
So far, so good.
Henry Holstine → Mercy Holstine → Robert McCorkle is well supported by documentary evidence.
The trouble begins with the next generation.
My tree shows Robert and Mercy as the parents of Stephen McCorkle, whom I have as the father of my second-great-grandfather Daniel McCorkle.
I also have Rachel McCorkle, who married James Bowman in Roane County in 1811, as a daughter of Robert and Mercy.
But when I started looking closely at my sources, I discovered something uncomfortable.
I don't have proof that either Stephen or Rachel was their child.
Apparently, sometime during my earlier DNA research, I worked my way down through Henry Holstine's descendants, found Mercy's marriage to a McCorkle, saw all the McCorkle and Holstine DNA connections, and reconstructed what seemed to be the most likely path to my known McCorkle family.
Unfortunately, I didn't leave myself enough notes explaining how I reached those conclusions.
That becomes a problem when Future Me comes along and asks Past Me, “How do you know that?”
Past Me has been remarkably unhelpful.
Enter Robert McCorkle Number Two
As if one uncertain Robert McCorkle weren't enough, there is another one.
To make matters even more confusing, these weren't two unrelated men who happened to share a name. The older Robert McCorkle was Robert W. McCorkle's uncle. They belonged to the same extended McCorkle family, lived in the same general part of Tennessee, and their lives overlapped. No wonder records attributed to one Robert could so easily end up attached to the other.
My tree shows Robert W. McCorkle, husband of Priscilla Cluck, as the father of Martha McCorkle, whom I believe was Daniel McCorkle's mother.
If my tree is correct, Daniel's parents were both McCorkles.
And if that is correct, both Robert McCorkles are my fourth-great-grandfathers.
One Robert may have been Daniel's paternal grandfather and the other his maternal grandfather.
Notice how many times I have used the word if.
It was time to sort out the Roberts.
| Click on image for a larger view. |
A Clue from Rachel
While researching Rachel McCorkle Bowman, another small detail caught my attention.
Her Find a Grave memorial says she was born in Overton County, Tennessee.
Find a Grave is not proof of a birthplace, especially when no underlying source is given. But the words Overton County rang a bell.
I remembered that I had an 1830 Overton County census attached to Robert W. McCorkle.
What if I had attached it to the wrong Robert?
When I looked at the census again, the Robert McCorkle heading the household was age 60 to 69. That was a poor fit for the generally reported age of Robert W., but an excellent fit for the older Robert McCorkle, husband of Mercy Holstine, who was supposedly born about 1764.
That still wasn't enough to move the census from one Robert to the other.
Then FamilySearch's Full-Text Search gave me something much better.
A Tennessee land grant issued in 1835 was based on a survey made ten years earlier. The 1825 survey described the land as including the place “where Robert McCorkle lived at the date of the survey.”
So a Robert McCorkle was living in Overton County in 1825.
Then I found a deed dated September 1, 1834. In it, Robert McCorkle and Joshua Wright, “of Overton County,” sold fifty acres to Riley Miller. Robert personally appeared before the clerk that same day to acknowledge the deed.
Now I had a Robert McCorkle living in Overton County in 1825, an age-appropriate Robert household there in 1830, and a Robert explicitly described as a resident of Overton County in 1834.
Suddenly Rachel Bowman's reported Overton County birthplace didn't seem like such an insignificant clue.
Is this Robert the husband of Mercy?
I think he may be.
Can I prove it?
Not yet.
Following Robert Across Tennessee
The documentary trail for Robert, husband of Mercy, begins much earlier in eastern Tennessee.
In 1807, Robert and Mercy were identified as residents of Roane County.
Robert McCorkle appears repeatedly in Roane County records during the following years. One record was particularly interesting because it connected him with another person already in my tree.
In 1811, James Bowman married Rachel McCorkle in Roane County.
Five years later, in 1816, James Bowman and Robert McCorkle appear together on the same land survey.
Does that prove Rachel was Robert's daughter?
No.
But it establishes a direct association between Robert McCorkle and the man who had married Rachel McCorkle five years earlier. That is exactly the sort of evidence genealogists look for when building a case from friends, associates and neighbors.
Robert later appears in records in the area that became Morgan County. By 1835, one land description referred to the place “where Robert McCorkle lived,” suggesting that he no longer lived at that particular location.
By then, however, we now know that a Robert McCorkle had been living in Overton County for several years.
And then things get even more interesting.
In 1836, a Robert McCorkle entered twenty-five acres in Warren County, Tennessee. His land began on “Stephen McCorkle's old line.”
Robert and Stephen. Side by side.
If this is the older Robert from Roane, Morgan and Overton Counties, and if this Stephen is the man I believe was his son, that is a tantalizing piece of evidence.
There are those ifs again.
Meanwhile, the Other Robert
Sorting the records for Robert W. McCorkle produced its own surprises.
An 1840 Warren County census appears to fit the family of Robert W. and Priscilla reasonably well when compared with the known ages of their children.
By 1850, Priscilla was enumerated in Warren County with their two youngest daughters, Mary and Louisa. Robert was not in the household.
An agricultural census that year listed a fifty-acre farm under the name Robert McCorkle: twenty improved acres and thirty unimproved.
Then I looked more carefully at two Mexican War service cards I had attached to Robert W.
Private Robert McCorkle served in the 1st Tennessee Mounted Volunteers. One of the cards contains a notation I had apparently never noticed:
“Died at Camp Placido near Lavaca Texas the 6 Oct 1846.”
Could that be Robert W., Priscilla's husband?
Possibly.
His absence from Priscilla's 1850 household certainly doesn't rule it out. But so far I have found no pension, bounty-land record, probate record, or other document connecting the soldier who died in Texas with Priscilla McCorkle in Warren County.
So the military records remain in the possible pile.
Genealogy has a lot of piles.
A Very Precise Date With No Source
My tree says that the older Robert McCorkle, husband of Mercy Holstine, died December 2, 1840, in Warren County, Tennessee.
That's wonderfully specific.
Unfortunately, I have no idea where it came from.
The same exact date appears in numerous online family trees. FamilySearch has it too. FamilySearch even showed four sources attached to Robert.
Great!
Except all four sources were for his marriage.
Not one supported his death.
I searched for the origin of the December 2, 1840, date and came up empty. Finally, I sent a message to the FamilySearch contributor who entered it and asked if they knew the source.
Maybe I'll get an answer.
Until then, December 2, 1840, belongs in the category of “often repeated but not proved.”
And What About Those 134 DNA Matches?
After all this, I went back to where I started.
Those 134 DNA matches haven't disappeared.
ThruLines shows DNA connections through descendants of multiple children of Henry Holstine. That is compelling evidence that I belong somewhere in this extended Holstine family.
But 134 DNA matches are not the same thing as 134 independent pieces of documentary proof. ThruLines combines DNA results with family trees, and family trees can copy mistakes just as easily as they copy correct information.
The DNA may be pointing me toward exactly the right family while the precise route from that family to me is still wrong—or simply unproved.
At the moment, I can document Henry Holstine as the father of Mercy Holstine and Mercy as the wife of Robert McCorkle.
I have good evidence that Daniel McCorkle, Samuel McCorkle and Rachel McCorkle were siblings.
What I still need to prove are the generations in between.
Was Stephen McCorkle really the son of Robert and Mercy?
Was Stephen really the father of Daniel and his siblings?
Was Martha McCorkle really Daniel's mother and the daughter of Robert W. and Priscilla?
If those relationships are correct, both of my Robert McCorkles really are my fourth-great-grandfathers.
That's a lot of ifs for two men with the same name.
Sometimes Tree Cleanup Is Progress
I started this week's “Multiples” prompt thinking I would write about 134 DNA matches.
Instead, I spent several days sorting multiple Robert McCorkles, questioning old record attachments, discovering a death in Texas that I had somehow overlooked, finding new evidence for an Overton County residence, and realizing that some relationships I had treated as facts were actually hypotheses.
I didn't solve the mystery.
In fact, in some ways I know less than I thought I knew when I started.
But my tree is cleaner. My evidence is better organized. I know which relationships are proved, which are probable, and which still have big question marks beside them.
And I have a much better idea of what I need to find next.
Sometimes successful genealogy doesn't add another generation to the family tree.
Sometimes it just removes a few exclamation points and replaces them with question marks.
And 134 DNA matches still don't equal proof.