Back when I was a teen aged kid, in the 1970's, before
computers and the internet, I started working on my family history. As a teenager, I was very intimidated by the librarians and
archivists in some repositories. They
definitely did not like genealogists, and they did not like children. I had to get permission to step inside
several archives, including interviews.
The staff at the American Antiquarian Society in Worcester often stopped
to ask me what I was doing in the building, but I had a badge and my name was
on the “researcher” list when I was fifteen.
It was difficult at
times to untangle what I was reading in the vital records. Can you imagine finding some sort of mystery
and not having Twitter, Facebook or email to instantly consult with fellow
genealogists? None of my teen friends were
helpful, and the genealogy class I attended was full of retired people who were
new at genealogy, too. I didn't know a
single experienced genealogist, except my genealogy teacher. There were no genealogy clubs. I was on my own!
And so, upon studying my 5x great grandmother, I found her
marriage record to be very confusing.
Working backwards from my 4x great grandparents, Andrew Munroe and Ruth
Simonds, I saw that they were married on 22 March 1785 in Woburn (now
Burlington), Massachusetts. Ruth’s
parents were Caleb Simonds and Susanna Converse. Andrew’s parents were listed as Andrew Munroe
and Mary Simonds. In trying to find Mary’s marriage and parents,
I ran into problems.
It turned out that Mary Simonds was really Mary Mixer, daughter
of Joseph Mixer and Mary Ball and the widow of Daniel Simonds. She was married to Daniel Simonds in 1749, to
Andrew Munroe in 1763 (and had a son, Andrew, jr.), and to Caleb Simonds (cousin
to Daniel) in 1774. Caleb Simonds was married
twice, first to Susanna Converse in 1746 (and had a daughter Ruth), and then to
Mary (Mixer) Munroe.
Yes, Ruth Simonds married her step brother. Eleven years after Caleb and Mary married,
she married Andrew Munroe, Jr. on 22 March 1785.
Susanna
Converse m. Caleb Simonds m. Mary Mixer
m. Andrew Munroe
I I
Ruth Simonds m. Andrew Munroe, Jr.
I
Luther Simonds Munroe
(my 3x great grandfather)
Not only was
this eye brow raising to me at age fifteen, it was difficult to sort out on my
own. However, it slowly unraveled, and was
quite a relief to find that everything worked out without any incestuous
marriages.
Then I found
out that Luther Simonds Munroe had married Olive Flint in 1826, and her parents
were named John Flint and Phebe Flint.
Can’t you just hear me saying “Here we go again!”
Since this
time, I've found several cases of step siblings marrying in my family
tree. Also first cousins marrying, lots
of second cousins and third cousins marrying, and siblings marrying the widowed
spouse of a sibling. I think I've seen
it all, over and over, which is not unusual in early colonial New England, and probably not
unusual anywhere else.
Click here for my Simonds lineage:
http://nutfieldgenealogy.blogspot.com/2012/12/surname-saturday-simonds-of-woburn.html
Click here for my Mixer lineage:
http://nutfieldgenealogy.blogspot.com/2012/09/surname-saturday-mixer-of-watertown.html
-------------------------
To cite/link to this blog post: Heather Wilkinson Rojo, "He married his Step Sister?", Nutfield Genealogy, posted February 28, 2013, ( https://nutfieldgenealogy.blogspot.com/2013/02/he-married-his-step-sister.html: accessed [access date]).
Heather, I haven't been in the American Antiquarian Society in many years, but when Bill and I went, we were both interviewed. It must be their policy regardless of age.
ReplyDeleteBarbara, it was probably a former policy. I went last fall with my mother, and we just had to apply for a researcher card, no interview.
DeleteAt NARA (Archives II in College Park, MD) you have to take a computerized course and "quiz" before getting your researcher card and being allowed beyond the visitors intake room -- but no real "interview" as such. There are strict rules on what can be taken into the research rooms and they have ceiling cameras to watch the researchers. :-)
ReplyDeleteA very interesting story of what you had to go through and the confusing family story that unfolded. I think you might have another post in describing the details of how you pieced all that together -finding Mary was actually Mary Mixer, etc.
I've taken that NARA quiz at the main archives on the mall at Washington DC. It just expired. I wonder if have to take the quiz all over again the next time I go there? I think the strictest library is Widener at Harvard. I couldn't even get inside!
DeleteMy gg grandparents were first cousins, eugh! I guess it was perfectly acceptable to them.
ReplyDeleteI have several instances in the family of step siblings marrying and first cousins marrying as well.
ReplyDeleteI don't know what is more confusing - cousins (and cousins-once-removed) marrying or having an ancestor with 2, 3, or 4 spouses! (I have a variety in my tree.) It's the cousins-once-removed who marry that make visualizing the family tree quite challenging. I always have to hand-draw a chart.
ReplyDeleteMy New England ancestors seem remarkably separate, considering they would have been acquainted with one another for generations. They didn't "hook up" until my parents in 1955. But back in medieval times, I have at least one instance of step-brother/step-sister marriage (Ralph Neville, Mary Ferrers), and a few first cousins marrying. The Catholic church kept a pretty tight rein on consanguinity, though.
ReplyDelete