Big changes have come to Genealogy.com — all content is now read-only, and member subscriptions and the Shop have been discontinued.
 
Learn more


Chat | Daily Search | My GenForum | Community Standards | Terms of Service
Jump to Forum
Home: Surnames: Churchill Family Genealogy Forum

Post FollowupReturn to Message ListingsPrint Message

Re: Pleasant Valley and Dutchess Co. family
Posted by: Malcolm Churchill (ID *****4717) Date: September 25, 2009 at 08:02:01
In Reply to: Re: Pleasant Valley and Dutchess Co. family by lisa defilippo of 3037

Lisa, on your question as to whether William was Edward's father, I at one point had questions as to whether all of William's claimed sons were really his. Among other things, this was in part because Dennis Churchill found a still-unidentified Churchill in Wethersfield or Newington, Connecticut. Eventually, however, we were able to locate descendants of William's sons who tested in our Y-DNA testing program. This genetic testing showed that they matched with each other and not with the Connecticut Churchills, or in other words, that the three sons of William's whose male lines continued were indeed sons of William.

However, the identity of William's father in England is not known. Many claims are floating around as to the parentage of each of the immigrant Churchills of the three northern lines. If you have any concrete evidence of William's parentage, many would be interested in it.

"Churchill Family in America" (CFA) has no birth date for either Robert, Sr. or Robert, Jr. It does have a very specific birth date for Stephen, June 8, 1791. Your birth date of 1724 for Robert Jr. would make him roughly 67 years old when Stephen was born. Robert Jr. had four children born after Stephen, which would put Robert, Jr. into his 70's. As discussed in the next paragraph, Robert, Jr.'s birth date could not have been 1724.

CFA has Robert Sr.'s two older brothers born in 1716 and 1718 respectively. Therefore, Robert Sr could not have been born in 1706. After his two brothers, two sisters were born. Thus, Robert. Sr. would have been born in the 1720's.

Robert, S. being born in the 1720's, Robert, Jr. could not have been born in 1724.

A Dutch feminine ending is tje, as in Jannetje. Edward's wife undoubtedly was also Dutch, with Wentje being her first name. Although I speak some Dutch, I'm not a scholar of Dutch, so don't know if there were alternative spellings in the 17th century, but Wentje is what I would go with.

Regards,
Malcolm Churchill


Notify Administrator about this message?
Followups:

Post FollowupReturn to Message ListingsPrint Message

http://genforum.genealogy.com/churchill/messages/2694.html
Search this forum:

Search all of GenForum:

Proximity matching
Add this forum to My GenForum Link to GenForum
Add Forum
Home |  Help |  About Us |  Site Index |  Jobs |  PRIVACY |  Affiliate
© 2007 The Generations Network