Fauquier County Tapscotts - Maria

Harriet had two children—Maria Ann Tapscott, the first born, and Cordelia Tapscott. A third child, John, is sometimes claimed. But John, who appears in an 1860 Fauquier County census with Harriett and Cordelia, was Cordelia’s partner rather than her brother. We will hear more about Cordelia and John in the future. But in this and the next few blogs, we will be looking at Maria and her relatives, an exceedingly complex group of people. Indeed, one could write a single book about Maria and her connections.

Records for both her first and second marriages, show Maria Ann Tapscott, born c1832 according to a weighted average of census data, to be a child of Harriet, but no father is recorded. With a complete absence of evidence, an Eli Penn (also “Pinn”) Tapscott is often claimed to be the father of Maria, and sometimes of her sister, Cordelia. There was an Eli Pinn that lived in Fauquier County at the time and whose sister, Amanda, married Harriet’s half-brother William Tapscott (more on all that later). But that Eli Pinn was born c1823 and would have been a young child when Maria and Harriet were born. No other Eli Penn/Pinn or Eli Tapscott is found in Fauquier County records. We have no evidence of who fathered Maria.

On 6 Apr 1848 in Fauquier County, Maria married John F. Martin. John had been born in Virginia around 1824. A Thomas Martin was a surety for the marriage bond. John and Maria lived out their married life in Fauquier County, where John was first a laborer and then a wheelwright, and where the couple had six known children—Jane E., Virginia A., John Robert. James Henry, Jefferson D., and Louisa.

John Martin died c1863. He is seen in the 1860 census, but when Maria married a second time, to Alfred C. Martin in Fauquier County on 12 Jan 1867, the record showed that she was a widow.

Maria’s second marriage was short, for tragic reasons we shall soon see, but it did result in a child, Carrie. We last see Maria living as a widow 1880 in Cedar Run District with Carrie and the two youngest children from Maria’s first marriage, Jefferson and Louisa.

Eventually we will look at each of Maria’s children, but our next blog is on the ancestry of Maria’s husbands. Be prepared to be bored with lots of data and lots of confusing connections.

Fauquier County Tapscotts – Harriet

Harriett Tapscott

We have already taken a detailed look at Harriet, the apparent daughter of James and Elizabeth (Harriet and Harriott). But note that I use the adjective “apparent.” We need to examine Harriet further. But I warn you. This is exceedingly complicated and rather boring.

Harriet was listed as “m” (“mulatto”) in the 1860 census and as “W” (White) in the 1870 census. No race was given for her in the 1850 census. When she died on 12 Aug 1871, her death record listed her as “Colored.” All this is puzzling since Elizabeth and James were both White, at least as far as we can tell. Perhaps Harriet’s race was inaccurately concluded based on the race of her children, but might there have been other reasons? Could her parentage be different than what we believe?

In Harriet’s death register, Cordelia Tapscott, the informant, is named as Harriet’s mother, an obvious error. Or is it? Could another Cordelia have been an unknown consort of James and might Harriet have named one of her daughters after her mother? That would explain a lot. Nevertheless, the only Cordelia Tapscott living at the time, of which we are aware, was the child of Harriet. (Two Cordelia Tapscotts born c1785 and c1814 and shown in a small number of online trees are easily proven fictional.) At this point we need to continue our earlier look at DNA.

The following table contains summaries of selected autosomal DNA matches for three people shown by paper studies to be descendants of Harriet. For reasons of privacy, I am not naming these individuals, who are the only Harriet descendants whose DNA test results I have access to. (Thank you, One, Two, and Three.) Descendant One is believed to be a descendant of only Harriet’s daughter Maria. Descendant Two is a descendant of both of Harriet’s daughters, Maria and Cordelia, by two different lines. And Descendant Three is a descendant of Cordelia, but also of Harriet’s half-brother, Edmond, a child of Elizabeth Percifull by an unknown suitor. It would, of course, be better for DNA interpretation to avoid a person with two entirely different connections to Elizabeth, but one must use what one can get.

The table shows DNA matches between the three descendants of Harriet with three different groups of people. The first group consists of descendants of Henry the Immigrant through lines believed to not involve James, son of Ezekiel Tapscott. The second is people believed to be descendants of Elijah Percifull by routes that involve no Fauquier County Tapscotts. And the third group is Fauquier County descendants of Elizabeth, but not of Harriet. Shown are the number of matches and the average shared DNA. The larger the centimorgan (cM) number, the closer the relationship.

I must admit that the data are questionable because analyses of the matches are based to a large extent on what others have entered into their trees. Nevertheless, the DNA results in the table provide excellent evidence that Harriet was a child of James. The three individuals tested show a total of 19 matches with descendants of Henry the Immigrant, with a particularly large number (nine) for Edney Tapscott, grandfather of Harriet’s father, James. This is very good evidence that James E. Tapscott was Harriet’s father.

On the other hand, at first glance, the data provide only fair evidence that Harriet was a daughter of Elizabeth. There are matches to Percifull descendants, through both Fauquier Tapscott and non-Fauquier lines. Although this is what we would expect if Harriet’s mother was Elizabeth, the evidence is shaky for two reasons. First, one would expect a greater number of matches.  Second, a small, somewhat isolated, community, such as Cedar Grove and Turner's District in Fauquier Co, could result in endogamy or something similar. Multiple relationships might cause Percifull matches resulting from hidden connections, and this would decrease the already small number of meaningful Percifull matches.

But additional data strengthen the conclusion that Harriet was a daughter of Elizabeth. We will start with a member of the Holder line, a descendant of Robert Francis Tapscott, believed to be a child of a Elizabeth Percifull and a person with the surname “Holder.” That member of the Holder line has, as far as we know, no connections with other Fauquier County Tapscotts than via Elizabeth. We find that the Holder descendant has four matches with people who are descendants of Harriet, but who have no other known connection with Elizabeth. Three of these matches involve lines through both Maria and Cordilla, but one involves only a single line through Cordelia to Harriet, for which there is a match of 9 cM. The Holder descendant is separated from Elizabeth by 5 steps, and the Cordelia descendant, by 6 steps. Thus, there are 13 degrees of separation between the two people descended from their most recent common ancestor, Elizabeth. The Holder and Harriet descendants are fifth cousins once removed. For 13 degrees of separation, we would expect the shared DNA to be 6.64 cM, which is remarkably close to the 9 cM actually observed, considering that the expected range is probably around 0 to 15 cM. Is this proof that Cordelia’s grandmother and Harriet’s mother was Elizabeth Perciful? No. There are too many things that could be wrong, particularly unknown multiple relationships. But it is strong evidence.

The other three matches of the Holder Descendant with individuals believed to be descended from Harriet through both Maria and Cordelia show shared DNA of 39 cM, 35 cM, and 36 cM; however, it is difficult to calculate how much shared DNA is expected when there are multiple relationships. It is admitted, however, that these numbers appear to be higher than expected, which would perhaps be around 13 cM, and that hints of unknown relationship paths.

At this point we are going to say that DNA evidence provides good evidence that Maria and Cordelia were, indeed, children of Harriet and grandchildren of James Tapscott and Elizabeth Perciful. But that we would like more data than what is now available.

Are you a Fauquier County Tapscott (i.e., a descendant of Elizabeth Percifull, with or without the name “Tapscott”)? Do you have DNA results (autosomal, mitochondrial, or yDNA) you could share? Sharing would certainly help our Fauquier County Tapscott research, and your identity will not be divulged. If you have DNA test data on or transferrable to FamilyTreeDNA, I encourage you to join the Tapscott Project. If you DNA data on Ancestry or MyHeritage, please consider sharing them with me (see Ancestry Sharing or MyHeritage Collaboration). (And, of course, I would be quite willing to share my results with you in return, though you would probably find them rather uninformative.) If you have DNA data on GEDmatch, I encourage you to give me your kit number (again, I will do the same for you, if requested). And, finally, I urge males, particularly those with the name "Tapscott," to take a yDNA test and females to take a mitochondrial DNA test. Both tests are available at FamilyTreeDNA though, I admit, they are a rather pricey. (No, I do not get a cut.) To discuss using your DNA test results in research, email me (address below) or leave a comment on this post. Thanks for your help, cousins.