America 250

[This is an ongoing Facebook project that I've decided to share here as well,
 slightly revised and expanded, with additional photos and links.
Check back for updates through 4 July 2026.]



As the United States celebrates its 250th anniversary this year, it gives me a chance to share some stories of my family's history and how it intersects with our country's. Once a week until Independence Day, I'll add to this dual timeline.

1610 First up is the first of my ancestors to land on this soil: Stephen Hopkins, an 11x great-grandfather. He arrived here in 1610 as part of a rescue mission to the struggling Jamestown colony, after himself surviving a shipwreck that stranded him for a time in the Caribbean. His exploits are believed to have inspired the character Stephano in Shakespeare's The Tempest.


Stephano, center.
By Johann Heinrich Ramberg - Cornell University, Public Domain 

After a few years at Jamestown, Hopkins returned to England, but soon after was recruited in London to join the Mayflower's voyage, because of his firsthand experience of the New World. His knowledge ended up being crucial for the Mayflower passengers during their earliest years. There is a terrific book about Hopkins if you want to learn more about his fascinating life: A Stranger Among Saints: Stephen Hopkins, the Man Who Survived Jamestown and Saved Plymouth, by Jonathan Mack.


1620 After sixty-six days at sea, 102 people arrived at modern-day Cape Cod on the Mayflower, Stephen Hopkins, his wife Elizabeth (Fisher), and three Hopkins children among them. Four passengers had already died at sea, while another fifty or so did not survive the first winter, including the Hopkins' infant son Oceanus, so named because he was born at sea during the voyage.


In addition to Hopkins and Fisher, I am descended from eleven more of the survivors, a mix of Puritan separatists, servants, and recruits from the London Merchant Adventurers. 11x great-grandparents are Edward Doty, Peter Browne, John Tilley, Joan Hurst, Isaac Allerton, Mary Norris, Francis Cooke, and Constance Hopkins (daughter of Stephen and his first wife); and these 10x ggs: John Howland, Elizabeth Tilley and Mary Allerton.


A few years back during a trip to New England, we visited the Plimoth Patuxet Museums, a wonderful recreation of both the “pilgrim” homes and those of the native Wampanoag people, with amazing, historically accurate buildings and skilled reenactors inviting you to learn, participate, and maybe even share a meal. I can’t recommend it enough.


from left: Mr Allerton, an interior, some Wampanoag
photos courtesy your humble blogger, 2019

A friend once accused me of being smugly proud of having historic (rather than merely historical) ancestors. I’m really not; “fascinated” would be a better descriptor. I certainly can’t claim any of their achievements–all I did was discover I was related to them. And you might be too! It’s believed that up to 10% of Americans have Mayflower forebears.


Whether it’s a new country or just a new ancestor, remember: they’re already there, just waiting to be discovered. The rest is up to you.


1640 The Great Migration had begun. By 1640, nearly 20,000 people--mostly English--had emigrated to the colonies. A couple dozen of those brave voyagers were ancestors of mine. Despite many struggles, these years were a time of great opportunity and rapid change. Six additional future New England states had been established as colonies, joining Virginia and Massachusetts: New Hampshire in 1623, New York in 1624 (by the Dutch), Maryland in 1634, Connecticut and Rhode Island in 1636, and Delaware in 1638.


Along with these new colonies and towns came new political philosophies. The earliest and most important was the Portsmouth Compact, from 1638, which defined an independent colony that would be Christian in character but non-sectarian in governance. A 12x gg of mine, John Coggeshall, was one of the Compact’s signers. He was later the first President of the Colony of Rhode Island.


The Portsmouth Compact, 
in the Archives of the State of Rhode Island.
Grandpa John's signature is the fourth from the top.


Another town established in 1638 was Providence RI. John Greene, 11x gg, was one of its twelve original proprietors. His son John’s next door neighbor was Benedict Arnold, son of another proprietor.



1639 added more new settlements, and I have ancestors among those founders, including:


* Guilford CT by Thomas Norton and Francis Bushnell, both 11x gg.
* Newbury CT by Edward Woodman 9xgg and Percival Lowell 10x gg.

* Hartford CT by Thomas Hungerford 10x gg.
* Milford CT by Robert Treat 11x gg and Edmund Tapp 12x gg. 

* Newport RI by John Coggeshall--again--along with Jeremiah Clarke 12x gg and Nicholas Easton 11x gg.


Sites around Newbury, including (left to right), the First Landing Place,
a memorial headstone for Edward Woodman,
and Lowell's and Woodman's names on a memorial plaque.
Interestingly, the names that appear are an incomplete list;
 if descendants did not make a contribution, their ancestor's name did not appear.

Photos courtesy of your humble blogger, 2019.

And in 1642, John Greene [idem] and Samuel Gorton, 11x gg, founded Warwick RI.


Along with John Coggeshall, mentioned above, grandpops Clarke, Easton, and Gorton also served as (respectively) the 2nd, 4th, and 5th Presidents of the Rhode Island colony. Young Benedict Arnold–no relation–was 10th, for what it’s worth.


Needless to say, their wives were there as well, but with women not allowed to own land or hold office–yet!--their contributions, alas, are not recognized,  beyond appearing in surviving marriage and birth records, and if lucky, a will.

Percival Lowell, mentioned above, is one of my “Gateway Ancestors.” They are folks who arrived here during the Great Migration and whose verifiable roots connect them back to English royalty and aristocracy. If you’ve got any New England ancestry, you might discover a Gateway Ancestor too! You can read more about how I made that discovery on here.


1650s Despite seemingly unending promise, the New World still suffered from many of the old problems. Slavery and indenture, as well as religious persecution were common. 


Although I have no slaves in my family tree, there are at least two indentured servants, Daniel Cone 9x gg, and James Claghorn 10x gg. Both were Scottish prisoners of war captured after the Battle of Durham, involuntarily dispatched here in 1650, arriving on the ship Unity.


Cone was sold to John Gifford, of "The Company of Undertakers of the Iron Works of Lynn,” and subsequently worked in the harsh conditions of one of Massachusetts’ ironworks for six years. We’ll meet him again in a future post.


A memorial to the Scottish Prisoner of War
at Saugus Ironworks National Park.

photo courtesy of your humble blogger, 2019.

Claghorn was indentured as well, but three years later married his master’s daughter, Abigail Lombard, who was eight months pregnant at the time. They clearly weren’t Puritans.


You can read more about Claghorn and Cone in a previous post here.


More pious ancestors of mine, Lawrence and Cassandra Southwick (née Burnell), 11x ggs, were early Quakers. In 1657, while living in Salem MA, they were fined and briefly jailed for their beliefs, then a year later they were jailed again for almost five months along with son Josiah, 10x gg. Two of their other children were sentenced to slavery in Barbados for being Quakers, but were spared. (Almost two hundred years later, that  incident inspired John Greenleaf Whittier’s poem “The Ballad of Cassandra Southwick.”) Instead, the extended family left for Shelter Island NY, where Lawrence and Cassandra died of starvation and exposure in 1660. (We’ll hear more about Salem in a future post as well.)


The modern uproar about things like Christian nationalism, or statues and memorials–among so much else–is nothing new. You can read about a controversy that took place over one hundred years ago regarding a proposed memorial to the Southwicks here.


1660s & early 1670s The 1660s and early 1670s continued to build on established Colonial foundations. The first generation of American-born colonists were now making their mark, continuing to expand their dominion by founding more cities, and establishing new laws and traditions.


Daniel Cone, having worked off his indenture, married, and no doubt wishing to distance himself from the iron works, removed himself from Lynn MA in 1662 to become one of the founders of Haddam CT, along with his wife, Mehitabel Spencer, 9x gg. Her name does not appear on the commemorative plaque, of course. She was the daughter of founder Gerard Spencer, 10x gg, and his wife Hannah about whom we know so little that her maiden name has not been discovered. Happily, the settlers purchased the land from the Wangunk tribe.

photo courtesy of your humble blogger, 2019

A few years later, Mr and Mrs Cone would move again, to be among the founders of East Haddam. Daniel's name appears on a similar plaque there as well, along with two of his Spencer brothers-in-law (and presumably, their wives), and Thomas Hungerford Jr, a 9x gg whose father has been mentioned already.

During our New England Road Trip I got to see a lovely old book, The Old Chimney Stacks of East Haddam... by Hosford B Niles. There was a chapter on the Cones, including this evocative passage, mentioning Daniel's son (and my 8x gg) Stephen Cone, who married Mary Hungerford, 8x gg, daughter of the aforementioned Thomas Hungerford Jr.

Stephen used to interest his grandchildren by relating how the family often sat on the back door-step and listened to the howling of the wolves as they were driven from the forest.

photo courtesy of your humble blogger, 2019


In 1663 another seminal document was signed, the Rhode Island Royal Charter. It is notable because it was the first to acknowledge that the indigenous peoples owned their land, and that Rhode Island could establish its own laws and elect its own leaders, as long as they did not conflict with English laws. Two ancestors already mentioned, Nicholas Easton and Samuel Gorton, appear as "primary purchasers and free inhabitants" in the document. Among those named as deputies are John Coggeshall [idem] and two more first generation colonist relations, 11x great-uncle John Coggeshall Jr and 10x uncle John Greene. The ubiquitous Benedict Arnold pops up again as Governor.


A detail of the original Charter, on display
at the Rhode Island Statehouse.

photo courtesy of the NPS

Another ubiquitous figure is Robert Treat [idem]. In 1666, leading a group of Puritans from Connecticut, he founded the town of Newark NJ. Captain Treat negotiated with the Lenni Lenape tribe for the desirable land along the Passaic River. He wanted to call it Milford, after the Connecticut town he had founded then departed (itself named after the village in England from whence many of its first inhabitants hailed). Another of the founders, Abraham Pierson, was a former preacher in Newark-on-Trent in England, and thought their new home should be called "New Ark of the Covenant." Pierson won out, although the name soon became shortened to Newark. I expect Treat did not mind, as he still had much to accomplish, as we'll soon see.
"Robert Treat Directing Landing of Founders of Newark,"
poster by Adolph Treidler, 1915.

courtesy of the Library of Congress

Late 1670s & 1680s Not every ancestor can be illustrious, of course. Most often they remain anonymous, every genealogist’s frustration. Some have deep flaws, or are merely products of their time. You only need to look around your own Thanksgiving table, perhaps, to see what I mean. But as Gertrude Stein–no relation, but a favorite author–once wrote: “Let us repeat what history teaches history teaches.” Although it is easy to focus only on the good, it is essential we also fully acknowledge the difficult parts of our past.


I’ve already written that 11xgg Robert Treat founded towns and championed religious freedom. But not all his actions were as admirable. In the mid-1670s, throughout the Colonies, relationships with the indigenous peoples were often strained, if not outright hostile. Tensions escalated between the groups, attacks were made, culminating in what is now known as King Philip’s War. “King Philip” was the English name of the Wampanoag sachem, or leader, Metacomet, who pushed back on what he saw as the colonists’ overreach and breach of treaties. There was soon violence on both sides. 


Treat participated in the Great Swamp Massacre–as bad as it sounds–in 1675, as Commander-in-Chief of the Connecticut Colony forces, and served in that role through the duration of the war, which finally ended in 1678. To this day, King Philip’s War remains the bloodiest battle per capita in US history with an estimated
10% or more of the English population slaughtered; the percentage of the Narragansett and other tribes was even higher.

The Great Swamp Battle Monument, 
Kingstown Rhode Island  
photo courtesy Society of Colonial Wars, Rhode Island Chapter

During that same period, Treat was appointed to the Governor’s council, serving until he was elected Governor himself in 1683. In 1687 an unsuccessful challenge was made to Connecticut’s sovereignty, resulting in the perhaps apocryphal tale of the Colony’s Charter being hidden in a nearby oak tree. Treat’s name is often associated with the tale. At any rate, he was re-elected each year as Governor until 1698.


My ancestors are not all Yankee, however, and of course not all paternal. The earliest immigrant name I’ve discovered on my mother’s side is 9xgg Henry Connelly. He arrived in 1689 from County Armagh, Ireland, along with some brothers (accounts vary as to how many and what names), at Old Albemarle Point, now known as Charles Towne Landing in South Carolina. (The Connelly branch is also unique in that it is the only wholly Irish part of my ancestry. Later forebears–in fact, also from County Armagh!–were Scots-Irish. But more on them later…)


Charles Towne Landing State Park,
South Carolina.

Henry and his family did well. Below is an excerpt--typically titled for it's era--from William Elsey Connelly's 1910 book THE FOUNDING OF HARMAN'S STATION, WITH AN ACCOUNT OF THE INDIAN CAPTIVITY OF MRS. JENNIE WILEY AND THE EXPLORATION AND SETTLEMENT OF THE BIG SANDY VALLEY IN THE VIRGINIAS AND KENTUCKY, TO WHICH IS AFFIXED A BRIEF ACCOUNT OF THE CONNELLY  FAMILY AND SOME OF ITS COLLATERAL AND RELATED FAMILIES IN AMERICA


These brothers were men of fortune and affairs, and they obtained large grants of land from the proprietors of the colonies, one such grant embracing, it is said, a portion of the present site of the city of Charleston. It is said, too, that they never parted with the title to this tract. They engaged in town building and the purchase, subdivision and sale of large tracts of land in various colonies, but principally in Virginia and the Carolinas.


So I guess we’re back to town foundings once more.

You can find a good overview of King Philip’s War here.




#America250

more "wicked...."

I have written in the past about relatives who lived outside of societal norms and even the law, and shared stories about both a ghost and a spook, but never a witch--until now. 

Edward Farrington, a paternal 9x great-grandfather, was born in Lynn, Massachusetts in July, 1662, and indicted on two counts of witchcraft. But before we get to all the witchy stuff, some background.

Not Edward Farrington.
"Ginger Witch," by AstraZero.

Edward's father, John Farrington (1622 - 2 May 1666) was born in Olney, England, and came to the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1635 as a young man with his parents, settling in Lynn.

A few years later, father and son were among a party sent by Governor Winthrop to establishment an English settlement in what is now Southampton on Long Island, New York, at that time claimed but not occupied by the Dutch. An arrangement was made between the English and the actual first inhabitants, the Shinnecock Nation and the town of Southampton was founded. 

We know that John Farrington stayed in Southampton at least a few years, then returned to Lynn (and the historical record) by at least 1660, when he married Elizabeth Knight (abt 1642 - 1705). John was a cooper and farmer. Four years--and three sons later--he died. Elizabeth, a young mother of three boys including Edward, quickly remarried, and steps out of our story as well.

On 9 April 1690, Edward Farrington, now 27, married Martha Browne (abt 1670 - 22 May 1738) in Andover, Massachusetts. Their first daughter, Elizabeth (my future 8x gg) was born in December, and ultimately they had at least six children (records differ), the last born in 17-- "But we want to hear about the witch!"

"...four or five years since, in the town of Andover aforesaid wickedly, maliciously, and feloniously a covenant with the Devil did make and was baptized by the Devil and unto Him renounced his first baptism & promised to be the Devil's both body and soul forever, and to serve the Devil and signed the Devil's Book, by which diabolical covenant by him with the Devil made in manner and form aforesaid. The said Edward Farrington is become a detestable witch against the peace of the sovereign Lord & Lady the King & Queen, their crown & dignity, and the laws in that case made and provided."

That was Grandpa Edward's first indictment. Dated 13 January 1693, and witnessed by his own hand.  (Transcription modernized for convenience.)


Edward Farrington's indictment.
Photo courtesy of the Massachusetts State Archives.


The second indictment against Edward, brought the same day as the first, was slightly more mundane. He was accused of using

"Certaine Detesteable arts called witchcrafts  & Sorceries Wickedly and Mallishiously and felloniously" 

against Mary Warren, who was supposedly

"Tortured Afflicted Pined & Tormented Consumed Pined & wasted against."

Well then. That indictment was witnessed by Ann Putnam, one of the primary accusers in Salem. Belonging to one of New England's most prominent families, Ann began naming names at age twelve, when she first claimed she had been "afflicted." Ultimately she personally accused nearly one third of Salem's suspected "witches." Perhaps karmically, she died relatively young after years of actual chronic illness.

Mary Warren was apparently prone to fits and convulsions, whether genuine or not. Soon after Edward's indictment, she renounced all her accusations, after which she was accused and tried for witchcraft herself. Hysteria was in the air. Like Ann Putnam, Warren never married and died in her mid-thirties.

If their names seem familiar, it is because Mary Warren and Ann Putnam were immortalized as characters in Arthur Miller's 1953 play The Crucible. For those of you who forget your high school English class, Miller used the mass hysteria, suspicions, unsupported accusations, and persecution of "others" during the Salem witch trials as an allegory for the McCarthyism occurring in his own era. Sadly, it seems to be as timely today as when it was written.

From the original production of The Crucible.
Photo courtesy of Getty Images

Despite the two indictments, Edward Farrington was not tried, nor convicted. By May 1693 the craze had ended, the trials ceased, and everyone still in custody was pardoned by Governor Phips. (Some suggest it was because his own wife was now one of the accused.) Edward returned home to wife Martha and daughter Elizabeth, had more children, and lived an otherwise eventless--or at least undocumented--life for another fifty-odd years. 

"Captain Alden Denounced," Anonymous, 1878. 


Of course, it did not end so well for some of the accused. Edward Farrington was just one of over two hundred people who were called out, of whom thirty were found guilty and twenty put to death. In 2019, we visited the 
Salem Witch Trials Memorial Park. It was moving and tragic, even without knowing the family connection. The Museum had a thought-provoking exhibit about witch-hunts throughout history, that came down to the simple formula:

"fear + a trigger = a scapegoat." 


At the Memorial Park. Rebecca Nurse also appears in The Crucible.
Photo by your blogger.


I've only recently added Edward Farrington to my family tree, through a breakthrough in a brick wall provided by another online researcher. (Thanks again, Chip!) As I mention, I was not aware when we visited Salem that I had an alleged witch among my ancestors.

What I did know, however, was that some of the Putnam family appear in my extended family tree as well, on my maternal side, which perhaps adds a genetic twist to my parents' acrimonious divorce, but I digress. I did not consider them much, though, as the relationships were distant and not blood: two descendants of Ann Putnam's grandfather, Sarah Putnam (28 Nov 1708 - 13 Apr 1802) and Rachel Putnam (6 Sep 1757 - 10 Oct 1847), married, respectively, a 6x great granduncle of mine, Joseph Steele (1706 - 23 Feb 1788) and Samuel Steele (19 Feb 1751 - 13 Dec 1811), a 1st cousin, seven times removed. 

Families are interesting, and so is history. Considering my own family history always makes me think, and feel a profound connection to this country. Today's meditation?
"We are only what we always were." --Arthur Miller


"positive science" update

Since my last update two years back, there's been another iteration of my Ancestry DNA result. And I took a Y-DNA test to help me break through the brick wall of my Burnett line. Get comfy, put on your lab coat, and let's do some science!

First, the Ancestry update, pictured here:


Yes, that is a lot of purple.

As before, in 2020, Ancestry has made some changes in their categories. Finland is entirely new (tell that to the Kalevala poets), and Sweden has gained Denmark without the tragic nuisance of invading. And of course, graphics can be deceiving. That massive purple blob, "Eastern Europe & Russia," that takes up so much of the map represents just 1% of my DNA, and that all coming from just one of my 2x great-grandmothers, Annie Miller (28 Jan 1865 - 2 Jul 1921), who was born in Szczecin, Poland to Polish parents. Anyway. Looking at the actual numbers, it breaks down like this:

Sweden went up from 36% to 46%
England & Northwest Europe went way up from 10% to 32%
Norway stayed more or less the same
Scotland plummeted from 32% down to 7%
Germanic Europe also dropped, from 12% to just 2%
And Finland and Eastern Europe/Russia both popped up at 1%
  

Of course, my DNA hasn't changed. And some of it is due to Ancestry gathering more data and consequently refining. But it is still baffling, which leads me to a few questions and observations.

My current Scandinavian mix is definitely odd. I am legitimately 37.5% Swedish and Danish; those countries represent three of my eight great grandparents. Ergo, 37.5%! But that's it, no other ancestors are geographically close. So even if all of their genetic contribution made it into my DNA, a near statistical impossibility, it really should be closer to that previous 36%. And that doesn't even take into account Norway, which I mentioned in my previous update.

England/Northwest Europe and Scotland did a flip flop, but their combined totals are still nearly the same at about 40%. Fair play, as my Brit cousins might say. Germanic Europe and Eastern Europe/Russia are also pretty spot on. 

But what's the deal with Finland?



Anyway. Ancestry's DNA test is an autosomal DNA test, which takes into account both sides of your family tree, but only for about five or six generations.  Which makes those geographic anomalies all the more perplexing if you have a well-documented family tree for the last couple hundred years. Apart from some brick walls, mine is. And between what's documented and what's historically known about migration patterns (e.g., if you find three consecutive generations born in Sweden in the 1800s, for example, it's pretty likely the previous generation was from there too) there shouldn't be too many geographic surprises.

While waiting for Ancestry's last biennial update, I was also persuaded to take a Y-DNA test, which only tests Y (male) chromosomes. So rather than including your entire family tree, it basically goes from your father to his father to his father, and for centuries rather than a few generations. With my Burnett line coming to a dead end in exactly six generations at Isaac Burnett (1780 - May 1860), I need help.

Isaac had ten children, and they--and their spouses and children--are all accounted for. His wife, Deborah Grindle (25 Feb 1784 - bef 1870), through her mother, Hannah Lowell (23 Jan 1759 - 1802), leads me back to my "Gateway" ancestor, whose line takes me all the way back to English royalty, which I wrote about here. Yet, despite researching for years to find Isaac Burnett's parents, or a sibling, or anyone, I'
ve had no success. He just shows up in Maine in 1780, apparently out of nowhere. 

So I mailed off for my kit, did the swab, and waited. When my results became available, I was thrilled... for about ten minutes. Then absolute frustration took over. Not only was I trying to learn an entirely new website that is not exactly what they call "intuitive," I was also faced with a slew of genealogical jargon, with words like clades and haplogroups indiscriminately used as if they were common enough to appear in "Goodnight, Moon."

When I finally stumbled onto a page of the website I thought I could understand, a list of my Y-DNA matches, I was practically palpitating. Now my questions would be answered, my Burnett ancestors revealed! The long list of names was mostly comprised of multiples of names like Martin, Donnelly, Mullican, O'Toole.... Admittedly, there were two Burnetts.

Diligent readers will note a couple things: that these are Irish surnames, and I have no Irish DNA. And that out of over two hundred matches, just two had the surname Burnett, when the majority should have. Your father then his father then his father, remember?

Grasping at straws, I remembered that in my family tree there is a Janett Mullickan (bef 1718 - ?), the wife of a maternal 6x grand-uncle, William Steele (1710 - 23 Feb 1788). Father, then his father, then his father...? Nope. An aunt, by marriage, on my mother's side. Wrong three ways.

Luckily, I had a mentor who helped me understand how the website is laid out, and what some of the most relevant lingo means. What she couldn't answer is where my Burnetts were. 

Despite the "Burnett Project" having 37 distinct Haplogroup categories, with further subgroups ("Descendants of Thomas Burnett b 1785 Workington England & Sarah Outterside," or  "John Burnett and his wife Lucretia"), 
I fit into
none of them. No other Burnetts son of Burnetts match with me. So either I was a fascinating anomaly, an entirely new line!--possible, but unlikely, as Grandpa Isaac had ten children, and they all had between four and ten (so many Nathaniels and Isaacs and Marys and Deborahs), the broods decreasing slightly through the generations--or... 

My mentor did have one suggestion, and out popped another bit of genealogical argot, this one an acronym: "NPE." It's short for "Non-Paternal Event," a polite way of saying "oopsie." Or bastard. That one I understood. 

Apparently that is one of the most common consequences of a surprising, if historical Y-DNA test result. It's like an episode of "Springer," but on PBS. She discretely asked if I had considered this--which I hadn't.  

I hadn't, in part, because I share autosomal DNA with descendants, both male and female, of four other children of Isaac Burnett and Deborah Grindle, beyond just their son, my 3x gg Nathaniel Spalding Burnett (12 Mar 1826 - 10 Oct 1885). So unless Grandma Deb cheated on Isaac so often that almost half their children weren't his, that didn't seem likely. 

What then? The next suggestion was to try to locate another living, male Burnett descendant (through male descendants) 
of Isaac Burnett, and have them get a Y-DNA test as well. If we matched, then we were a brand new Burnett line! It seems like more of an honor than it is, though, because it would get us no further in our lineage. I've tried a few leads, but none of them have responded.

My last line of inquiry is still inconclusive. Looking more closely, I noticed that my ancestor, Nathaniel, was (now) believed to be the last of Isaac and Deborah's ten children, born twenty-two years after their first child, Margaret "Peggy" Burnett (17 May 1804 - 7 Feb 1884), and after a four year gap from his next oldest sibling. Isaac and Deborah's next two children were girls as well. The three eldest sisters would have been between 22 and 18 years old when Nathaniel was born. None had married--yet. Is it possible that Nathaniel is the illegitimate child of one of them, passed off as their mother's and father's?

That would explain the autosomal DNA matches to Isaac's children; the DNA would be from wife Deborah, or possibly even Isaac, as he would actually be my 5x gg, not 4x. But the male to male to male Y-DNA would no longer be Burnett.

I dug through the US Federal Census pages for Newport, Maine for 1820 and 1830. The population now of Newport is about 3500; it was even less then. I expanded my search to the few neighboring cities, looking for any likely Grandpa 
Martin, Donnelly, Mullican, O'Toole.... I didn't find any.



Newport, Maine a few generations later.
No Burnetts, or any other relevant surnames.


I may never know. Science keeps improving, more records get discovered and digitized every day, more people are becoming interested in finding their roots. So I'm hopeful.

If nothing else, we've got another Ancestry update next year to look forward to.