Sorry time at the library cut off, but I'm back.
Here is a repost of my former post
Proof#2-James,ScottCo.INnot sonof Thomas
Posted by: Michael Schwing Date: February 28, 2000 at 16:26:41
Since I'm being ignored by the descendants of James who have web pages, I will publish this proof here too.
Subj:Proof # 2 that James Harrod of Scott Co.,IN not son of Thomas
This will of course upset some people, but here is the indisputable proof that James Harrod who married Elizabeth Stewart and later moved to Scott Co., IN, is NOT the son of the Thomas Harrod who is the older half-brother of the James Harrod who founded Harrodsburg, KY, and the older full brother of my 6th great-grandfather John Harrod who married Rachel Shepherd.
As if my statements in my last e-mail (posted on Christine Smith's Harrod page, excerpted on Sharon Puckett's Harrod Page) that the two men had dates of birth about 40 years apart, lived 3 states away from each other at the same time, and James of Scott County died during the lawsuit that James, son of Thomas, of Knox Co., TN, was a part of, were not enough (and apparently they weren't) here is indisputable proof taken solely from public records--the census is available on-line--that James son of Thomas was much younger than James of Scott County AND was living at home with his father Thomas at the same time that Scott County James was in KY living and performing military service and married with children (before squatting years later in what was to become Scott County,IN).
This proof is necessarily of two parts:
Part One: In the famous lawsuit called "Harrod Heirs vs. Harrod Heirs", filed in Mercer County, Kentucky, 25 December 1815, (what records still remain are located Mercer Co., KY, Courthouse, Box H 45) when the heirs of Thomas Harrod sued their uncle James Harrod's (of Harrodsburg) heirs over land sold by Thomas to his half-brother James, etc., the lawsuit was delayed until the youngest child became of legal age. This age was then 21. The child referred to was the 5th son and youngest child of Thomas and Hannah Harrod--Josiah. This means Josiah was born in 1794 (1815 minus 21). Remember this--it's the important thing. Fifth son and youngest child born in 1794.
Part Two: On the 1790 census for Rutherford County, TN, Morgan District, we find the record for Thomas Harrod. The numbers conventionally recorded as:
01-04-09-00-00 (some say 1 or 11). Now for some reason Berenice Swainson and all people quoting her (Helynn Carrier, Sharon Puckett--though as I said, not their fault they were quoting) got the tags wrong for these numbers. They state the tags are :
In reality as any careful reference on the early censuses will tell you (such as the wall chart put out by Broderbund's Family Tree Maker CDs), the CORRECT tags are:
Number of free white males, age 16 and over including head of family
Number of free white males under age 16
Number of free white females including head of family
Number of all other free persons
Number of slaves
Therefore, in Thomas's family are one male over 16 (= Thomas himself)
4 males under age 16 (therefore not born before 1774--1790 minus 16)
(as Thomas has 5 sons, the oldest is not in KY with his uncle James as stated by Atkins in her book, or by William Anthony in his work, but is HOME with his father Thomas, because Thomas's FIFTH SON JOSIAH IS NOT BORN YET IN 1790 as he was born 1794--see Part One above. Therefore the males under 16 are: John -born 1774 acording to a letter he wrote, Samuel -born c.1776, Levi -born c. 1778 and JAMES born c. 1785 according to a deed he signed with his father--if this was reported correctly by Atkins, who of all the Harrod researchers was surprisingly the only one who got this census information and tags correct!!!)
9 free white women--these are his wife Hannah, and daughters: Mary, Jane, Elizabeth, Leah, Lucinda, Rachel, Susannah, and Hannah.
Thomas had slaves too but this has nothing to do with the topic under discussion.
CONCLUSION: James son of Thomas was living with his father Thomas in the 1790 census and was under age 16 at the same time James (later) of Scott County was living in KY and already married nearly 14 years with several children.
AND James son of Thomas was living in Knox County,TN, in 1815 at the same time James of Scott County,IN, was living in Scott County.
CONCLUSIONS MOST UPSETTING TO THOSE FORGING GENEALOGY OR AT LEAST NOT ADMITTING THEIR OR THEIR ANCESTORS MISTAKES:
As Thomas the half-brother of the James Harrod who founded Harrodsburg, KY, had no sons born before 1774, regardless of whether the exact birthdates are known, the following Harrod lines CANNOT be a descendant of THIS Thomas:
THE SCOTT COUNTY FAMILY OF JAMES AND ELIZABETH STEWART HARROD:
already proven not to be descendants of Thomas the half-brother of James who founded Harrodsburg--argument above. It's time to start giving credence to that little "Chronlogical (sic) Account" now, isn't it? This was written by Samuel the son of James and Elizabeth Stewart Harrod (matches handwriting and spelling as found in letters signed by Samuel). It names as the parents of James Harrod: Samuel and Jemima Sherewood. It also names the parents of Elizabeth Stewart as "Danniel Stuart a native of america (but his father from Scotland) State of merryland married to Rebeckah ward the daughter Marget Ward and her husband".
DESCENDANTS OF THE JAMES HARROD WHO MARRIED ELIZABETH, who, after James's death and before the estate settled had re-married c.1783 to Daniel Hogan. This family IS descended from a THOMAS, just not the same man as is the half-brother of the Harrodsburg founder. Nor is his son James the same one as the son of the other Thomas or the one of Scott County, IN. This James was born c. 1738 and died before 1783 in Washington Co., NC/TN. The estate papers were filed in Davidson Co., TN.
Now I know that the descendants of this line BELIEVE that the two James's and two Thomas's are the same, but it is NOT SO. This is the Thomas for whom the birth dates are so early for the Thomas brother of James. This is the Thomas who is said to have died in Wilson County,TN, earlier than Thomas James's half-brother died.
From the dates, one can easily see that if the father Thomas died before the other Thomas and if his son James died before the other James son of Thomas may have been born, that the two pairs of Thomas-James CANNOT be the same. However,
in MY OPINION this does not preclude that the Thomas who died in Wilson Co., TN, was/could be the UNCLE of the other Thomas. Ages, names, and places suggest this is possible (as he is so listed in Carrier's manuscript).
THE ORANGE COUNTY,VA, AND FRANKLIN AND MERCER COUNTIES, KY, FAMILY
This interesting (to me anyway) family that was for so long ignored by other researchers because they did not/ could not prove they belonged to "THE HARRODS" (as judged by the researchers of that family:Atkins, Swainson,etc), finally has gotten the researchers and interest it deserves. And I have the privilege of knowing some of them (Sharon Puckett, Goebeline Harrod Singleton for instance) if only on-line and by phone. But this line or major parts of it cannot be descended from the Thomas half-brother of the Harrodsburg founder despite the information in an interview of 1930 by John W. Harrod, a descendant of John and Nancy Brewer Harrod. John Harrod who married Nancy Brewer was born c.1764 in Virginia.
John son of Thomas was born 1774 in North Carolina and married Mary Moore in Kentucky. This should be enough to discount the descendancy of the family from the Thomas half-brother of James.
However, that is NOT enough to discount all or even most of John W. Harrod's interview. It is MY BELIEF that he made statements, OTHER PEOPLE, most particularly Bernice Swainson read into those statements what they wanted to.
I must admit I have not seen the article so some points here may have to be corrected when I see the article or someone who has a copy notifies me I stated something wrongly ( I do make mistakes but unlike some researchers I can admit it, correct it, and move on). As some of the statements as stated in the interview as recorded by Swainson in "The Filson Club Quarterly", Vol. 32, No. 2, April 1958,
(I will not here quote the words of John Harrod or Swainson, just paraphrase--the words can be found on Sharon Puckett's Harrod webpage) state, John's great-grandfather's brother "Jim" was the first of the Harrods to come to "Kaintuck" (as it actually was called then). That means the GREAT-GRANDFATHER is THOMAS not the great-great grandfather (if this WAS the family of Thomas and James of Harrodsburg). The great-great-grandfather was the first Harrod to America, had 11 children (contrary to Swainson's statement, this was NOT the number of children of THOMAS-he had 13, but is close to the number Thomas's father John had-12).
Mention is made of Caroline Downey marrying one of these men or outright stated she married Thomas. But by what I've seen he said that one of his Scotch-Irish ancestors married a Caroline Downey, not specifying which ancestor, or even --I may be wrong here--saying that ancestor was a Harrod. The ancestor could have been a MOTHER of one of the Harrod spouses. Sharon has found marriages between Downeys and surnames occuring among early Harrod relations by marriage--see her site. He also implies he has Scotch-Irish ancestry or that his Harrod ancestors were Scotch-Irish. I PROPOSE THE FOLLOWING: Could John W. Harrod had gotten his ancestry and names RIGHT but attributed those names to the more famous bearers of those names? That this happens is well-known. If you have seen my Harrod letter on Christine's site you know that Columbus Harrod got his ancestors and their names right, but when he attributed those same names to the most famous bearers of those names, he got something that was neither accurate nor of the same generations as his ancestors of the same names. That is --his first named ancestor was not the James who founded Harrodsburg but was a James a generation later who also lived in Harrodsburg for awhile--the Scott County James Harrod. But the names and relationships he listed for his ancestry are correct, provided we ignore the attribution that his first James was the one who founded Harrodsburg.
Could Thomas be the name of John W. Harrod's great-great-grandfather? Could then John's actual great-grandfather be a son of a Thomas? Maybe even the Thomas in the first family I discussed in this section--the one father fo James, the Thomas who died in Wilson Co. But I just noticed a problem with that. This Thomas does have a grandson John, but he was born c. 1768, NC, and married Catherine Roberson, 2 Nov 1795. This makes it unlikely that John who married Nancy Brewer could be a son of the James who was son of Thomas. But James is the only mentioned son in Carrier and that Thomas may have lived and married in Orange Co., VA. So John who married Nancy Brewer may be the son of another son of Thomas and then Thomas WOULD BE the name of the great-great-grandfather as implied by John W. Harrod, and this would connect two or more Harrod families together!
Note that I have used MY OPINION and MAY BE and COULD BE for my theories, suppositions, or whatever--I have not outright said that these two families are/have to be related or that either is/has to be related to my family. I am merely saying at this point that they positively do not relate to my family in the way as (formerly) believed and that they MIGHT relate to each other and MIGHT relate to my family-but in a generation further back.
Well this is all for now,