Diana Powell - 24 Aug. 2008
Corrections to RamblingRoots narrative page for __ Scott
See the appropriate narrative pages for citations and additional details
In early August 2008 I posted a page for an unnamed Scott male whose page carried an “Under Construction” icon. As it turned out, the page required a complete make-over. The original page listed the individual as the father of 7 children, based on wills left by 2 of his presumed daughters. The children were listed as: Mary, John, Elizabeth, Robert, William, Ann and Sarah Scott.
Daughter Elizabeth Scott married #1 Armstrong Beattie and #2 Nickerson Snead. Elizabeth’s will named her sister Sallie Edmondson. Sallie/Sarah wrote a will naming her sister Elizabeth Snead and her brother David Edmondson. The conclusion I came to, which was also put forth on p. 132 of the Annotated 1850 Census for Washington County, was that Sarah was a Scott by birth who married an Edmondson who was deceased by 1850. I added the comment that perhaps Sarah’s “brother” David Edmondson was a sibling of her deceased husband.
Ann was also mentioned in the wills of both Elizabeth (Scott) Beattie Snead and Sarah Edmondson as “sister Ann Scott”. Hence she was added as another Scott sibling. Elizabeth’s will named “sister Polly”; also brother Robert Scott and brother William Scott. Sarah’s will added mention of brother John (deceased) and also named a long list of nieces who were established by other records as the children of Robert Scott. This seemed to tie the 7 siblings together quite nicely.
But there were also things that nagged at me and which in retrospect were important clues. For instance, Sarah Edmondson’s will referenced, but did not name, “the children of my sister Ann Scott”. Did Ann Scott marry another Scott? No such marriage record could be found.
And why was Sarah Edmondson listed as single on the 1880 census? Was it simply one of those oft-cited census errors? But why then couldn’t I find a marriage record for a Sarah Scott to an Edmondson? And just who was the Jane Scott whose 1809 marriage to Moses Edmiston was listed in the abstracted Washington County marriage records? Some researchers suggested she was another Scott sibling, perhaps the eldest. But why wasn’t she mentioned in Elizabeth or Sarah’s wills?
Research into Washington County guardianship records revealed a guardianship bond dated June 16, 1818 where Jane Edmiston was named guardian of David, Sally, Anny and Moses Edmiston. This was clearly the Jane Scott who married Moses Edmiston in 1809. But guardian of David Edmiston? .. guardian of Sally Edmiston?… those names sounded awfully familiar. I began to wonder what I was missing.
The nice neat package unraveled completely when the will of John Scott (Washington Co. WB 5: 269) was discovered. He named his mother Jane Edmiston which immediately suggested she had married first a Scott and then an Edmiston… and indeed “Jenny” Whitely married William Scott in 1794 and then Jane Scott married Moses Edmiston in 1809. And the will clarified that Jane was also the mother of John’s brothers Samuel, Robert and William Scott [and though not named, also the mother of Mary and Elizabeth Scott]. John then named (and referred to them as such) his half brothers and half sisters David and Moses and Sally [Sarah] and Ann [Edmondson].
So Jane wasn’t an older sibling. She was the mother of them all. And Sarah wasn’t a Scott who married an Edmondson - she was an Edmondson all along. And David Edmondson wasn’t the brother of Sarah’s phantom husband; he really was Sarah’s brother - just as she stated in her will. And it turns out that Ann wasn’t a Scott who married another Scott; she was an Edmondson who married a Scott.