In previous articles, I’ve considered Ancestry’s new ThruLinestm feature. In Part 1, I looked atThruLinestm in a general manner. In Part 2, I developed a process and decided on some caveats I would use with it. Here in Part 3, I proof my process/procedure by using it and verify the process holds true in use. Briefly, the process is:
Confirm the shared DNA amount matches expectations for the relationship.
Confirm the cousin’s descendants from the common ancestor and a known child of the common ancestor.
Analyze the remaining path to the cousin, assuring things make sense.
I used the process focusing on my 2nd great-grandfather’s (Asa Ellis Robert) descendants.
All of the descendants of Asa are 3rd cousins. Asa was married twice, so descendants of Asa and Patience Anna Marshall should be 3rd cousins. Descendants of Asa and Cynthia Minerva Toney would be half third cousins to me. DNA Painter’s Shared cM Project 3.0 tool v4 indicates that a 3rd cousin should share between 0 and 217 cM of DNA and half 3rd cousins should share between 0 and 178 cM of DNA.
ThruLinestm indicates I have 18 Cousins that have tested with AncestryDNA.
In all cases, the DNA amount matched matches expectations as suggested in DNAPainter.
In all cases, the individuals are descended from individuals that I had independently identified as children of Asa.
In all cases, the individuals have a pedigree chart that makes sense.
Thanks to ThruLinestm I added 37 new cousins to my chart all descended from Asa Ellis Roberts.
17 new cousins descended from Rosa Della Roberts.
2 New cousins descended from Charles W. Roberts.
10 New half-cousins descended from Sarah A. Roberts.
8 New half-cousins descended from William T. Roberts.
The process is much faster than any methods I ever used before to verify a person’s relationship to my tree. I’m happy with the process and feel confident that I’m adding valuable information to my tree to better the likelihood of connecting ancestors. ThruLinestm is great for widening your tree to include individuals that are descendants of a known family unit.
If you are a descendant of Asa Ellis Roberts, consider testing with Ancestry DNA; it is a great genealogical resource and can help you broaden your tree too.
When I took a look at William Hunt Scott (1834-1903) last February, I knew that I wanted to take a closer look at his household. Not only did I want to understand his family, but I also wanted to broaden my tree so that cousins discovered through DNA matches could be understood and incorporated into my research more efficiently.
Roberts Research 2019 – Ancestor #36 – Update!
William Hunt Scott (c.1834-1903) – Update!
Marriage to Emily Hendricks.
Further research indicated that William Hunt Scott married Emily Hendricks on 24 May 1879 in Goode township in Washington County, Illinois, on 12 September 1856.
William had five children; four with Emily and one with Matilda Cooper.
For this week’s Treasure Chest Tuesday, I’m looking at a page from the Donna Darling Collection. The page includes two photos, one ad for the Bijou, one non-descript ad, and two articles about Donna and Sammy playing at Lowe’s.
Lowe’s Theatre – “Seven Sinners”
The only item identified with a date is the clipping for Loew’s Theatre – “Seven Sinners”. It indicates June 24, 25, 26 and “Ont.) IMDB indicates that the movie was released on 7 November 1925 in the USA. That would suggest the film played at Loew’s in June 1926.
Donna and Sammy played at the Capitol Theater in Kitchener on June 21, 22, & 23, so it fits that after Kitchener they went the 110km (68 miles) to London to play at the Loew’s Theatre there.
The first article reads:
Dona Darling, former Zeifield Follies girl, heads an all-star vaudeville cast at Loew’s Theatre the last half of this week, and together with the famous crook story, “Seven Sinners,” as the feature picture, London theatregoers are treated to a perfectly balanced theatre bill. Mary Prevost makes a crook really too pleasant to be natural, and Clive Brook, the hero, is an excellent parallel.
The story is interesting in its novelty; everybody in it is a crook, but everybody manages to enlist the sympathies of the audience before the picture ends. The settinsg [sic] show careful choosing and the plot development is well worked out. The story consists of the efforts of seven crooks to steal jewels from a deserted mansion, and then, when the house is quarantined with them inside it, the owner returns. Situations develop which are in turn funny and tense, until, at the end, crooks are probed to be sometimes nearly human, after all.
The vaudeville bill is exceptionally fine. It is seldom that London audiences have the pleasure of seeing such smooth aerial performancers as the Aerial Smiths on the same bill as the act given by Dave Fox and Jane Allyn. This is a comedy skit of unusual merit entitled, “To Let.” The last act on the bill, the Darling and Clark Revue, has five very capable performers. The dancing in the first part is especially good.
The second clipping appears to have been clipped without the information about the motion picture. The clipping says:
AT THE THEATERS
The trapeze work of the vaudeville program is carried out by the Aerial Smiths. It is said of them that they have been a long time at it, and it can be said for them that they haven’t wasted their time. They make other acts of their kind look like the last rose of summer, especially when the climax is reached and the woman shoots out on a trapeze that suddenly lengthens as she swings in mid-air.
Fox and Allen entertain with songs and patter based upon an unsatisfactory search for an apartment in a big town. They seem to please and draw to themselves a generous amount of the applause.
The Darling and Clark Revue is not the kind that deals exclusively in dancing. It has that, too, but it also has other features equally as entertaining, including songs, whistling, a clever recitation and a darkened-stage novelty. The whole is permeated with the personality of Miss Darling, there are five persons.
The third item is a simple ad for Donna and Sammy and “Their New Revue.” There is no theatre mentioned but it reminds us that Donna was “The Scintillating Beauty” and Sammy was the “Juvenile Komik.”
Next, are two photos that appear to shoe the entire cast of the Darling and Clark Revue. It looks like one photo was taken by Donna and includes Sammy as the third person from the left. The second one looks like it was taken by Sammy and has Donna as the third person from the left. I am quite certain the other three people in these photos are the other members of the show. I will need to do a little more research to determine what their names were.
Finally, there is an ad for “Decatur’s Favorite – The Bijou” It mentions three vaudeville acts: Donna Darling and Sammy Clare [sic] Revue “A Modern Vaudeville Frolic” Donna & Sammy’s show is playing with Paul & Darling “Two Broadway Rounders” and Billy De Armo doing a comedy novelty show. It wouldn’t be clear why this clipping would be on the same page with the Loew’s Theatre clippings unless you knew that Donna and Sammy played at the Bijou Theatre in Decatur, IL only eight days later.
I was able to add a new venue to Donna’s Career. She and Sammy played June 24 to 26, 1924, in their “Darling and Clark Revue” at Loew’s Theatre in London, Ontario, Canada.
I was also able to add images I suspect are the three other performers in the show.
Finally, I was able to add another advertising clipping to Donna and Sammy’s show at the Bijou Theatre in Decatur, IL.
Research the other three individuals who play in the Darling and Clark Revue.
When I first discovered the name of my wife’s 3rd great-grandfather on her Vincent line, I thought I had found the most unusual first name ever, the document I found indicated “Barkhead.” Now, I know it was Burkett, but for a while, I was intrigued thinking of what the origins of the name “Barkhead” were.
4th Great-grandfather: (Possibly Philip Vinson[i])
Burkett Vincent (c. 1778 – 1847)
It is not clear when Burkett Vincent was born. The 1810 Census indicates he was between 26 and 45 years old suggesting a birth between 1765 and 1784. The 1820 Census shows he was still between 26 and 45 years old suggesting a birth between 1775 and 1795, thus narrowing his likely birth year to between 1775 and 1784. His ages during the 1830 and 1840 Censuses indicate he was born between 1770 and 1780, narrowing his likely birth year further to having been born between 1775 and 1780. I choose to use c. 1778 as a date in the middle of the range.
Halifax was a hotbed of revolution during 1775. Moore’s Creek Bridge, in Halifax, was the site of the first battle for independence in North Carolina. The county also gives its name to a resolution that was a precursor to the Declaration of Independence on April 12, 1776, now called “The Halifax Resolves.” It was the first formal call for American sovereignty.[ii]
I believe that Philip Vincent was Burkett’s father. If true, it is likely that he had at least three brothers and three sisters. One of his brothers was named Jarrett and was close to the same age as Burkett. A lot more research is needed to understand The Burkett’s family of Halifax, North Carolina.
During the 1790 Census the Philip Vincent family of Halifax, North Carolina consisted of eight individuals. Philip, the only male over 16 in the household, three males under 16, and four females appear to have made up the family. Burkett should have been between 10 and 15 in 1790 and fits nicely as one of the three males under 16 years of age in the household.
During the 1800 Census the Philip Vinson[iii] Family of Halifax, North Carolina, consisted of 10 individuals. Along with Philip, who was over 45, there were four males. Two were 16 to 26 years of age. Burkett should have been between 20 and 25 in 1800 and fits nicely as one of the three males in that age group.
It appears that Burkett married sometime between 1800 and 1810, most likely after 1806. The name of his wife is still unknown.
The 1810 Census shows the Burket[iv] Vincent family of Halifax, North Carolina consisting of Burkett, an apparent wife, who was the same age as Burkett, and one daughter under ten years of age.
The 1820 Census shows the “Perkit” Vincent family of Halifax, North Carolina consisting of Burkett, and an unknown woman over 45. If Burkett and his wife were the same age group in 1810, I would expect them to be in the same age in 1820. Because his apparent wife of 1810 appears to have been replaced by a different woman over 45 years of age in the 1820 Census, I suspect that this individual is either a second wife, older sister, or a mother. Living with Burkett are five children – two boys under 10, who I presume to be John and James, and three girls. One is possibly Elisha, and two are still unknown.
The 1830 Census is just a mess. The census indicates that Burkett’s four boys are missing and four older children are in the household. Likewise, the three daughters of Burkett and Elizabeth appear to be missing, but three older children are enumerated in the household. For a while I thought I had the wrong family, the surname change between Vinson and Vincent occurred several times for this family line, and maybe this wasn’t one of those times. However, a look at the neighbors during the 1830 Census found several of the same people are still neighbors in the 1840 Census, so I’m reasonably sure it is the right family unit. It is just that the enumerator got his marks off. The number of children and the respective ages of the children are correct.
The 1840 Census finds the Burket Vinson of Halifax County, North Carolina consisting of:
Free White Persons – Males – 60 thru 69: 1 – Presumed to be Burket Vinson (Senior).
Free White Persons – Males – 20 thru 29: 1 – Presumed to be John Vincent, Age 23. (b. 1817).
Free White Persons – Males – 15 thru 19: 1 – Probably Burkett (Junior?), age 16.
Free White Persons – Females – 50 thru 59: 1 Presumed to be Elizabeth (wife of Burkett)
Free White Persons – Females – 15 thru 19: 1 Presumed to be Nancy, age 15 (b. 1825).
Death & Burial
I am yet to find any definitive death information regarding Burkett. Other researchers indicate he died about 1847. His death in 1847 is consistent with the 1850 Census that suggests that his wife Elizabeth and daughter Nancy are living in the same location (next door to John Vincent – Elizabeth’s son) without Burkett.
Events by Location
Halifax County, NC – All events in Burkett Vincent’s/Vinson’s life take place in Halifax County, North Carolina.
Further Actions / Follow-up
Determine or verify the BMD information on all of Burkett’s children who are believed to be John, James, Elisha, Susan, Nancy, Burkett, and William Hiram.
1790 Census (NARA), Family Search, 1790 – Philip Vincent – Edgecombe, Halifax, North Carolina. “United States Census, 1790,” database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XHK1-WJ4 : accessed 27 April 2019), Philip Vincent, Edgecombe, Halifax, North Carolina, United States; citing p. 461, NARA microfilm publication M637, (Washington D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, n.d.), roll 7; FHL microfilm 568,147.
1800 Census, 1800 – Philip Vinson – Halifax, Halifax County, North Carolina. “United States Census, 1800,” database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XHR7-XNF : accessed 27 April 2019), Philip Vinson, Halifax, Halifax, North Carolina, United States; citing p. 348, NARA microfilm publication M32, (Washington D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, n.d.), roll 30; FHL microfilm 337,906.
1810 Census, NARA, 1810 Census – Burket Vincent – Halifax, North Carolina. “United States Census, 1810,” database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XHLM-2NW : accessed 22 September 2018), Burpet Vincent, Halifax, North Carolina, United States; citing p. 121, NARA microfilm publication M252 (Washington D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, n.d.), roll 38; FHL microfilm 337,911.
1820 Census, 1820 Census – Burkit Vincent – Halifax, North Carolina. “United States Census, 1820,” database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XHGS-FNW : accessed 18 September 2018), Perkit Vincent, Halifax, Halifax, North Carolina, United States; citing p. 168, NARA microfilm publication M33, (Washington D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, n.d.), roll 85; FHL microfilm 162,801.
1830 Census, 1830 Census – Burkett Vincent – North Carolina, Halifax – Page 321. “United States Census, 1830,” database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XH59-67P : 22 August 2017), Berkett Vincent, Halifax, North Carolina, United States; citing 321, NARA microfilm publication M19, (Washington D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, n.d.), roll 121; FHL microfilm 18,087.
1840 Census, 1840 – Burket Vinson – Halifax, North Carolina. “United States Census, 1840,” database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XHTJ-T71 : 24 August 2015), Burket Vinson, Halifax, North Carolina, United States; citing p. 2, NARA microfilm publication M704, (Washington D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, n.d.), roll 362; FHL microfilm 18,094.
RootsWeb’s WorldConnect Project, Copeland, Harris, Lawrence, Neville, Pittman, Turner, Wheeler. Entries: 176239 — Updated: 2017-08-05 04:27:43 UTC (Sat) — Owner: Jesse Jr. Lawrence — Home Page: Ancestors and Descendants of Jesse Macon Lawrence Jr. — 1 Burkett Vincent b: Abt 1795 d: Abt 1847.
The 1790 Census drives home the notion that Vinson and Vincent seem to be interchangeable in this family line. The Philip Vinson of the 1800 Census is clearly Philip Vincent in the 1790 Census. His family unit consists is identified as 1 3 4 0 2 10. That is 1 male over 16, 3 males under 16, and 4 females. All three males between 10 and 26 during the 1800 Census are represented in the males under 16 in the 1790 Census. Likewise, all the females listed in the 1800 census are represented in the 1790 Census.
Philip Vincent 1 3 4 – 2 10 (Left Column – 11th entry down)
So, from the two censuses I believe:
Philip Vinson/Vincent was born before 1755. (He was over 45 during the 1800 Census)
The suspected wife of Philip was also born before 1755. (She was also over 45 during the 1800 Census.)
They appear to have had six children, three boys and three girls.
1 boy born 1790 to 1800
1 boy born 1784 to 1790
2 boys born 1774 to 1787 – One appears to be Burkett (born between 1775 and 1780)
3 girls born 1784 to 1790 – No names.
The 1790 Census also includes five households with the surname Vinson. Willis is clearly the same as Willys in the 1800 Census.
John Vinson – 1 1 1 – – 3 (left column – 3rd from bottom)
Benjamin Vinson – 1 2 2 – – 5 (right column – 2nd from top)
Charles Vinson – 1 3 2 – – 6 (right column – 10th from bottom)
Hanna Vinson – 0 0 4 – – 4 (right column 14th from bottom)
Note: The numbers above represent Free White Males 16 and up, Free White Males under 16, Free White Females, all other persons, slaves, and a total number of people.
If Burkett was born between 1775 and 1780, I would expect him to be reflected in this census as a Free White Male under 16 years of age. All of the households have male members that fit that criteria except for Hanna Vinson.
Based upon the 1800 Census[i], I had tentatively considered Philip to be Burkett’s father. There is nothing in the 1790 Census that would dissuade me from that hypothesis.
If you have evidence that Burkett’s father is not Philip, I would love to hear from you and learn what you have.