A Sister Emerges From the Shadows

Although he's not my direct ancestor, George W. Geiger is an important source of information that is helping me pole-vault over my patrilineal brick wall.

Born in 1841, George Geiger was the grandson of Mary (Kirk) Geiger (1774-1832). Mounting evidence has led me to speculate that Mary was the sister of my fifth great-grandfather Thomas Kirk (1778-1846).

George is indispensable to my research because he compiled details about his immediate family's history. Those records endured over time when many others were lost to fire or poor record keeping.

Among his research were exacting details about his grandmother:

Mary (Kirk) Geiger was born in Virginia in 1774. She was of Irish descent and daughter of Joseph and Sarah Kirk. She had two brothers and one sister.

Pinpointing Joseph and Sarah Kirk as Mary's parents has allowed me to infer that they were also Thomas' parents.

If Thomas and Mary were siblings born to Joseph and Sarah Kirk of Virginia, who was the unnamed sister?

Finding family

Although George Geiger's surviving notes do not name Mary's three siblings, there is a candidate up for consideration to be the sister.

When Thomas Kirk died in December 1846, the Licking County, Ohio probate court appointed three men to appraise his estate. One of them was Hugh Ford.

Court-ordered appraisal of Thomas Kirk's estate, names Hugh Ford
March 13, 1847

At the time of Thomas' death, Hugh was his neighbor and lived on a farm to the north in Monroe Township, Licking County.

Detail of 1847 Monroe Township, Licking County, Ohio map
highlighting land owned by Thomas Kirk and Hugh Ford

Fifteen years earlier, on November 29, 1831, Hugh and his wife Ann bought their Monroe Township farm in two separate land transactions. According to their son Hugh Ford Jr., the Ford family moved to the farm in 1832 from Belmont County, Ohio, where they had lived since about 1803.

Curiously, the two deeds were witnessed by, drum roll, please...

Thomas Kirk!

Monroe Township, Licking County, Ohio land deed, purchased by Hugh Ford
witnessed by Thomas Kirk

In 1831, at the time of these transactions, Thomas Kirk lived in Licking Township. He didn't move to Monroe Township, south of the Fords, until seven years later in 1838.

Why would Thomas Kirk be a witness on two land deeds for Hugh Ford who lived ninety miles to the east in Belmont County?

Was there a relationship between the two men?

Identifying the unnamed sister

I began digging into the identity of Hugh's wife Ann.

Again, according to son Hugh Ford Jr., Ann Ford "was born December 26th, 1777, and was married to Hugh Ford September 18th, 1800." Ann lived to be enumerated in the 1850 US Federal Census, which gave her birth location as the state of Virginia (just like Thomas and Mary!).

Junior also wrote that his mother was the daughter of a man named Joseph Kirk.

Kirk!

Ann's maiden name was Kirk!

Ann's father, like Mary (Kirk) Geiger's and likely Thomas', was named Joseph Kirk!

What were the odds that Thomas would be a witness on two land deeds for a man who lived ninety miles away and was married to a woman born in Virginia who was the daughter of a Joseph Kirk?

Prior to his appearance in Belmont County, tax records placed Hugh Ford across the Ohio River in Brooke County, Virginia. Hugh appeared on Brooke County tax records from 1797 to 1802.

It's worth noting that Thomas Kirk was also in Brooke County from 1799 to 1803. It was here that he met and likely married his wife Sarah Bonar.

A brief notation from a Brooke County minister confirmed that Hugh Ford and Nancy Kirk were married on December 18, 1800 [note that this date is three months later - to the exact day - than the marriage date given by their son Hugh Jr]. Also, Nancy was, according to FamilySearch, a common diminutive nickname for Ann.

1800 Brooke County, Virginia marriage of Hugh Ford and Ann "Nancy" Kirk

Presumably Hugh and Ann (Kirk) Ford moved from Brooke County, Virginia to Belmont County, Ohio in about 1803.

According to Bonar family history, Thomas and Sarah (Bonar) Kirk moved to Captina in Belmont County after they left Brooke County. Did Thomas and Sarah follow his sister and brother-in-law into the burgeoning Ohio frontier?

It's also worth flagging the naming patterns employed by all three Kirks:

• It appears that Hugh and Ann Ford named their first four children after their parents. Two of the four were Henry and Rachel - the names of Hugh's parents. The other two were Joseph and Sarah. We know Ann's father was Joseph, so can we infer that her mother was named Sarah? If yes, that would suggest Ann was also the child of a Joseph and Sarah Kirk just like Mary (Kirk) Geiger and Thomas Kirk. Furthermore, Ann's last child, a son, was named Thomas Kirk Ford (middle name Kirk!). Was this an homage to her brother?

• Mary (Kirk) Geiger's first two children were named Joseph and Sarah.

• Thomas Kirk also had children named Joseph and Sarah.

The paper trail seems to suggest a family relationship. What do you think? How off the wall are my interpretations?

Next up is to try and find DNA matches - if possible at this distant relationship level - to help prove that Thomas Kirk and Mary Geiger were siblings with Ann Ford. The research journey continues.

Seeking Sisterhood: A Mitochondrial Research Project

For too long I've neglected the women.

My research has narrowly focused on my fifth great-grandfather Thomas Kirk (1778-1846). If you weren't sporting the Kirk surname or carrying the male Y chromosome, you were secondary to my genealogical investigation.

That's about to change. My Kirk family research is shifting gears and moving in a different direction. Perhaps this approach will yield previously overlooked clues that will help identify Thomas Kirk's parents.

Ladies of Suspicion 

Aside from his wife and daughters, three women have surfaced with biographies that curiously intersect with Thomas Kirk's life.

Were they related to Thomas? Could their histories help bridge the research gaps and pinpoint my Kirk ancestral origins?

The three suspects are Margaret (Kirk) Beard, Mary (Kirk) Geiger, and Ann (Kirk) Ford.

Margaret (Kirk) Beard
With no corroborating documentation, some genealogies claim that Margaret was an older sister to Thomas Kirk. Born twenty years before Thomas, indeed she would be a much older sister. Admittedly, the large age gap doesn't preclude them from being siblings, but it seems more likely - to me - that they would be aunt and nephew (or cousins).

According to an unsourced family history published in 1975 (The Beard Family Genealogy: The Beard Family From Virginia to Ohio and West by Glenneta Schott), "John Beard married Margaret Kirk who was born in Cork County, Ireland April 12, 1758 and who died July 7th 1850 in Ohio."

The Beards lived in Licking County, Ohio - where Thomas Kirk made his home - and are buried in the Beard-Green Cemetery - just steps from Thomas' final resting place. 

In 1812, the Beards sold 100 acres in Licking County to Thomas.

Before moving to Ohio, the Beards lived in Berkeley County, (West) Virginia. On June 17, 1786, they were grantors selling 25^1/2 acres in that county where, coincidentally, Joseph Kirk, a possible father to Thomas, Mary, and Ann, also lived.

Land indenture, John and Margaret Beard sell 25.5 acres
Berkeley County, (West) Virginia 17 June 1786

John Beard was tightly affiliated with Joseph Kirk and his wife Sarah. John even appeared in court with Sarah when the Kirks fell behind on their farm's rent.

Mary (Kirk) Geiger

Mary Kirk, born in about 1774, married Anthony Geiger in 1797 in Martinsburg, Berkeley County, (West) Virginia. John Beard was named a surety (bondsman) on their marriage bond, linking the Beards and Geigers.

Anthony Geiger and Mary Kirk marriage bond with John Beard as surety
Berkeley County, (West) Virginia, 26 September 1797

Mary and Anthony also lived in Licking County, Ohio, and she is buried in the Beard-Green Cemetery just steps from the graves of both the Beards and Thomas Kirk.

Perhaps most compelling of all, a handful of Thomas Kirk's descendants are autosomal DNA matches to descendants of Mary (Kirk) Geiger, confirming a genetic link that supports the theory that they were siblings.

Ann (Kirk) Ford
Ann Kirk was born in 1777, and married Hugh Ford in 1800 in Brooke County, (West) Virginia. They eventually moved and settled in Licking County.

Thomas Kirk was in the area, too, enumerated in Brooke County personal property tax records from 1799 through 1803. Did the Kirks move from Berkeley to Brooke County together?

The Fords named one of their sons Vatchel Ford. The unusual first name was also the name Thomas gave to his eldest son.

In 1838, Thomas Kirk moved from Licking Township to Monroe Township (both located in Licking County). His new farm was south of the Fords who also lived in Monroe Township. In 1847, following Thomas' death, the Probate Court appointed Hugh Ford to appraise the value of Thomas' estate.

Detail of Monroe Township, Licking County, Ohio 1847 Land Owners Map
Kirk and Ford farms

In The Genealogy of the Ford Family, a letter from their son Hugh Ford Jr. - who consulted a family bible in the possession of his sister - noted that Ann Ford was the daughter of Joseph Kirk. Of the cast of characters, this is the only one to have a parent named by an immediate family member who would be best positioned to know. Descendants of Mary Geiger often allege - without documentation that I've seen - that her father was also a Joseph Kirk.

If naming conventions are important, it's worth noting that Thomas Kirk, Margaret Beard, Mary Geiger, and Ann Ford all named a son Joseph.

Mitochondrial DNA Research Project

Could I use DNA - specifically mitochondrial DNA - to determine whether these women shared a common maternal ancestor, supporting the claim that they were sisters?

Mothers pass their Mitochondrial DNA on to all of their children. However, only a mother's daughters can pass that same mitochondrial DNA - mostly unchanged - on to her children.

This unique inheritance pattern allows us to trace a direct maternal line back in time following the path of the mitochondrial DNA.

If I can trace a living direct female descendant from Margaret Beard, Mary Geiger, and Ann Ford, we can test the mitochondrial DNA to see if they match.

If the descendants of all three women share the same mitochondrial DNA, we would know that - at some point in history - they shared a common maternal ancestor.

A match would also complement the pieces of the paper trail that hint at a closer family relationship between the three. To be clear, a mitochondrial DNA test wouldn't tell us that the women were sisters, but it could confirm that as a genetic possibility. And that's what this research project endeavors to prove.

If you are a direct female descendant of one of these women, you're eligible for a mitochondrial DNA test with Family Tree DNA. Congratulations! Reach out to familysleuther@gmail.com.

Virginia Is For Lovers: Finding Thomas Kirk In His Father-In-Law's Hometown Tax Records

For 15 hours over two rainy days, I researched my heart out at Salt Lake City's famed Family History Library.

I stared at digitized records on computer screens until I was bleary-eyed, and trawled through enough miles of microfilm to circle the earth, twice.

Slowly, my steadfast research surfaced exciting new details integral to my chief genealogy obsession: my fifth great-grandfather Thomas Kirk.

An Exciting Discovery
On Saturday, with a few short hours before closing time, I made an exciting discovery - a collection of tax records that spanned 1797 into the early 1800s.

"Tax records?" I hear you asking with a yawn.

Admittedly, tax lists don't sound that exciting, but, I believe these particular documents account for five previously unaccounted years of Thomas Kirk's life. Five!

Furthermore, these records position him, for the first time, in the state of Virginia, corroborating the birth location given by his children to census enumerators in 1880 and 1900.

Thomas and his wife Sarah Bonar were early settlers in Licking County, Ohio. An 1806 Licking County tax record was, before this weekend, the earliest known record for Thomas. It indicated that the Kirks were in the Buckeye State by 1805 (the year the 1806 record assessed).

My speculative pre-Ohio timeline for Thomas went something like this:

• Born in Virginia in 1778, 
• Married Sarah Bonar in about 1804 (perhaps in Brooke County, Virginia or maybe Belmont County, Ohio), and 
• Their first child, my fourth great-grandfather Vachel Kirk, was born in Ohio in 1805.

Thomas' exact birth location in Virginia or any of his whereabouts before his arrival in Ohio were a mystery. I feared records of his pre-Ohio movements might have been destroyed during the Civil War.

On Saturday night, I walked away from the library's hallowed stacks with five new records that just might fill in missing years in the timeline of Thomas Kirk's life and give my research new avenues of pursuit.

Snooping Around His Father-In-Law
One of my primary research goals for this trip was to examine land, tax, and probate records for Brooke County, Virginia (now West Virginia).

Sarah Bonar's parents William and Jane (McCulloch) Bonar lived in Brooke County. According to the Bonar Genealogy, compiled by Dorothy Elizabeth Rine Brown, "Brooke Co was referred to as the 'wilderness' by frontiersmen" and William Bonar was documented as one of the county's early "home-seekers."

Brown wrote that the Bonars spent their entire lives in the county: "Here on their plantation William and Jane lived and died and reared a family of four sons and six daughters." Among those daughters was Sarah, Thomas' soon-to-be wife.

Surely Thomas Kirk would eventually bound onto the scene in Brooke County. How else was he going to meet and marry Sarah? The question was would he stick around long enough to leave his mark on the paper trail.

Brooke County's personal property tax lists, dating to 1797, survive and are available online.

I opened the first record and began my review of names. The lists are in alphabetical order by surname.

I quickly found Sarah's father William Bonar on the 1797 tax list, but there were no Kirks enumerated that year.

1797 Brooke County (West) Virginia Personal Property Tax List

I moved on to the 1798 tax list. Again, there was William Bonar yet no Kirks.

I loaded up the 1799 tax list. William Bonar was there as expected, but there were some new names under the Ks. Making their first appearance in the records were three Kirks. One of them was - drum roll, please - named Thomas!

1799 Brooke County (West) Virginia Personal Property Tax List

In addition to Thomas, the list included a John Kirk and a Caleb Kirk.

The first column in the tax list denoted, "White above 16". All three Kirks have a mark in this field.

The fourth column (the only other field with a notation) tracked the number of "Horses, Mares, Colts & Mules." John Kirk had none and, accordingly, was assessed no personal property tax. Both Thomas and Caleb Kirk had one and were each assessed a 12 cent tax.

The relationship, if any, between Thomas, John, and Caleb is unknown. Research needs to be done on the identities of these other two men.

Curiously, neither John nor Caleb were names that my Thomas Kirk gave to any of his sons, initially suggesting to me that they were not family names and raising some doubts about a familial relationship between the three men. But, alas, the tax records provide no answers on this front and only raise more questions. It remains interesting that three men surnamed Kirk appeared in the same county in the same year.

Over the next four years, Thomas Kirk was enumerated in Brooke County's personal property tax lists.

In 1800, Thomas and John Kirk were enumerated one after the other. John still didn't own any horses, but Thomas now owned two and paid a 24 cent tax. Caleb Kirk disappeared from the tax list entirely.

1800 Brooke County (West) Virginia Personal Property Tax List

In 1801 and 1802, Thomas and John Kirk appeared again - the only Kirks enumerated those years. In both years, Thomas paid a 24 cent tax for his two horses. John still did not own a horse.

1801 Brooke County (West) Virginia Personal Property Tax List

1802 Brooke County (West) Virginia Personal Property Tax List

In 1803, both men were enumerated for the fifth year in a row. However, John's personal fortunes were finally on the upswing. He now owned two horses, like Thomas, and was assessed a 24 cent tax (congratulations?!).

1803 Brooke County (West) Virginia Personal Property Tax List

In 1804, the year after Ohio became the 17th state to join the United States of America, Thomas Kirk was on the move. He no longer appeared in the tax list, although John Kirk remained with his two horses.

1804 Brooke County (West) Virginia Personal Property Tax List

John Kirk disappeared from Brooke County's personal property tax list the following year in 1805; himself now on the move.

Inference Is All I Have
How do I know that the Thomas Kirk enumerated in the Brooke County personal property tax lists between 1799 and 1803 is my fifth great-grandfather?

I don't, definitively.

The records simply don't afford me the luxury of a clear-cut answer.

However, when I triangulate this information with other research and family lore, the appearance of a Thomas Kirk in this particular area during this particular time is certainly eyebrow raising.

Just consider the facts:

• My Thomas Kirk married Sarah Bonar in about 1804.
• A Thomas Kirk appeared in Sarah Bonar's home county between 1799 and 1803.
• A Thomas Kirk disappeared from that county in 1804, the same year family lore speculates he married Sarah and moved across the Ohio River to Belmont County, Ohio.

This Thomas Kirk was simply in the right place at the right time.

I have also reviewed Brooke County's land tax records for this time period. It's noteworthy that Sarah Bonar's father, William Bonar, appeared on those lists and paid tax for sizable amounts of acreage. However, no men surnamed Kirk appeared on those lists. Thomas' absence from these lists doesn't strike me as unusual. He was a young man of 21 just starting out in the world. He would need to amass some fortune before he could purchase land.

Perhaps Thomas and Sarah saw greater opportunity for their new family in the wilderness of Ohio where vast amounts of land lured young pioneers with promises of wealth. That narrative would fit with known Kirk family and American history.

Pulling At Threads, Stitching a Research Path Forward

I would be remiss if I didn't also flag that among the tax lists were two other men who played a role in the story of Thomas Kirk:

• John Beard, who was married to a Margaret Kirk and sold Thomas Kirk 100 acres in Licking County, Ohio in 1812, was enumerated on Brooke County's tax lists beginning in 1798.
• Hugh Ford, who was married to Ann Kirk - an alleged sister to my Thomas Kirk, appeared on the tax lists from 1797 to 1802.

Hugh and Ann (Kirk) Ford moved to Belmont County, Ohio. Did Thomas and Sarah (Bonar) Kirk follow them there before continuing on to Licking County?

Although no marriage record has surfaced for Thomas and Sarah in either Brooke or Belmont counties, perhaps an 1804 tax record survives for Belmont County that enumerates Thomas Kirk.

Oh the possibilities! With new clues at hand, the sleuthing continues with renewed vigor. 

What A Tangled Web Genealogy Weaves

Digging and prying into my fifth great-grandfather's ancestral origins keeps turning up curious clues.

I've uncovered a sticky web of connections that link a cast of characters to my ancestor, Thomas Kirk. Each player not only shares the Kirk surname, but also a slew of ties that bind them and hint at a likely family relationship - perhaps even siblingship.

There are four persons of interest in this tangled web: 

1. Margaret (Kirk) Beard
2. Mary (Kirk) Geiger
3. Ann (Kirk) Ford
4. Vachel Kirk.

Margaret (Kirk) Beard: With no corroborating documentation, some genealogies claim that Margaret was an older sister to Thomas Kirk. Born twenty years before Thomas, indeed she would be a much older sister. The large age gap doesn't preclude them from being siblings, but it seems more likely - to me - that they would be aunt and nephew (or cousins).

According to an unsourced published history (The Beard Family Genealogy: The Beard Family From Virginia to Ohio and West), "John Beard married Margaret Kirk who was born in Cork County, Ireland April 12, 1758 and who died July 7th 1850 in Ohio."

The Beards lived in Licking County, Ohio - where Thomas Kirk made his home - and are buried in the Beard-Green Cemetery - just steps from Thomas' final resting place.

In 1812, the Beards sold 100 acres in Licking County to Thomas Kirk.

Mary (Kirk) Geiger: Mary Kirk, born in about 1774, married Anthony Geiger in 1797 in Martinsburg, Virginia (now West Virginia). John Beard was named a surety (bondsman) on their marriage bond, linking the two couples.

Mary and Anthony also lived in Licking County, Ohio, and she is buried in the Beard-Green Cemetery just steps from the graves of the Beards and Thomas Kirk.

Several descendants of Thomas Kirk are autosomal DNA matches to descendants of Mary (Kirk) Geiger, confirming a genetic link that estimates the common ancestors to be the parents of Mary and Thomas - strongly hinting that they were siblings.

Ann (Kirk) Ford: Ann Kirk was born in 1777, and married Hugh Ford in 1800 in Brooke County, (West) Virginia. They eventually moved and settled in Licking County. 

They named one of their sons Vatchel Ford. The unusual first name was also the name Thomas gave to his eldest son.

In 1838, my Thomas Kirk moved from Licking Township to Monroe Township (both located in Licking County). His new farm was south of the Fords who also lived in Monroe Township. In 1847, following Thomas' death, the Probate Court appointed Hugh Ford to appraise the value of Thomas' estate.

In The Genealogy of the Ford Family, a letter from their son Hugh Ford Jr. - who consulted a family bible in the possession of his sister - noted that Ann Ford was the daughter of Joseph Kirk. Of the cast of characters, this is the only one to have a parent named by an immediate family member who would be best positioned to know. Descendants of Mary Geiger often allege - without documentation that I've seen - that her father was also a Joseph Kirk.

If naming conventions are of import, it's worth noting that Thomas Kirk, Margaret Beard, Mary Geiger, and Ann Ford all named a son Joseph.

Vachel Kirk: Vachel Kirk was born in 1783 and settled in Butler County, Ohio. His unusual first name was the same that Thomas gave to his eldest son (and Ann Ford gave to one of her sons). 

Vachel's eldest son was named Thomas Kirk.

A living direct male descendant of Vachel Kirk is a close Y-DNA match to nearly a dozen direct male descendants of Thomas Kirk, confirming a shared paternal ancestor.

Untangling the Family Web

I could continue to trip over these similarities forever trapped in this web, but if I could just identify autosomal DNA matches between Thomas Kirk's descendants and those of each of these characters then I could begin to assign familial relationships. 

Of course, the priority would be linking to Ann (Kirk) Ford because she's the only one with a named parent.

The challenge, of course, is twofold: 

First, finding the descendants who have DNA tested. 

Second, hoping that enough autosomal DNA has carried through the many generations and still appears in test results in a sizable enough amount to identify matches.

Neither is an easy task, but when has unraveling a centuries-old genealogy mystery ever been easy? But the stakes have never been higher. Untangling this web may be the only key to revealing Thomas Kirk's family and ancestral origins.

Tracking Ancestor Movements: Pining For A 19th Century Ankle Bracelet

Have you ever struggled to pin down an ancestor's movements?

Do you ever wonder, "when did he go from here to there?" Surely I'm not the only genealogist who wishes he could go back in time with an ankle bracelet.

This is the case for my fifth great-grandfather Thomas Kirk.

At some point shortly after the turn of the 19th century, he moved from his purported birth state of Virginia to Ohio where he raised his family, died, and was buried.

Establishing A Timeline of Events
The location and date of Thomas' marriage to Sarah Bonar are unknown, but it's believed to have occurred in approximately 1804 in Ohio County, Virginia where she was born (now West Virginia).

To complicate matters further, even Bonar family histories lost track of Sarah once she married Thomas. The wonderful Bonar Genealogy published by Dorothy Elizabeth Rine Brown in 1969 (and made available online by her son) includes lengthy portraits of Sarah's siblings, but only a few sparse lines for her:

"Sarah Bonar, m ______ Kirk. The records of the late Tabitha Bonar Wilson say that Sarah "Sallie" married a man by the name of Kirk, and that they lived at Captina, Belmont Co, Ohio."

The Bonar family didn't even remember the first name of the man she married! Clearly, the Kirk family was the Bermuda Triangle of documented family history.

Sarah married Thomas, moved to Ohio, and slipped away. However, not without that gleaming geographic clue: according to the Bonar genealogy they initially settled in Captina, Belmont County, Ohio.

I have no idea where the town of Captina is today, but Belmont County is just across the Ohio River from Ohio County, Virginia.

Losing My Census
Frustratingly, census enumerations provide limited help in this case. Census records do not exist for Ohio before 1820, and the situation in Virginia isn't much better.

Virginia's 1790 census is missing and the 1800 enumeration survives for only two counties, and neither is Ohio County - where I might expect to find the Bonars and perhaps a courting Thomas Kirk.

Censuses do provide an interesting indirect clue. Thomas and Sarah's eldest child, Vachel Kirk, was born in Ohio according to the 1880, 1900, and 1910 enumerated responses of his three children, positioning Thomas' family in the Buckeye state by the time Vachel was born in approximately 1805.

Here a Sister, There a Sister
When I read that Thomas and Sarah began married life in Belmont County, I was reminded of another connection to that area.

I've been eyeing a couple - Hugh and Ann Ford - who were Thomas' neighbors in the final years of his life in Licking County, Ohio. Ann's maiden name was Kirk and she was one year older than Thomas.

According to a biography of their son Hugh Jr., Hugh and Anna (Kirk) Ford lived in Kirkwood Township, Belmont County, Ohio in 1815 and "remained until April 1832" when they moved to Monroe Township in Licking County.

Thomas bought 171 acres in Monroe Township beginning in 1838. Was it to be nearer his sister and brother-in-law?

Before that move, Thomas lived on land that he purchased in 1812 in Licking Township. Curiously, he appeared on tax records before that year. In fact, he paid taxes on land in Licking Township as early as 1806, suggesting that he was in the area as early as 1805.

If he was paying tax on land in 1806, does that mean he owned land at that time? Would a resident have paid tax on land they were just renting? This may suggest that there's a pre-1812 land record I need to track down, perhaps in Fairfield County (Before Licking County was established in 1808, Licking Township fell within the boundaries of Fairfield County).

The likelihood that Thomas was in Licking Township by 1805 reminded me of yet another person of interest.

A published history of Licking County included a handful of biographies of prominent citizens. One of those was for Isaiah Geiger who was the grandson of Anthony and Mary Geiger. Mary's maiden name was Kirk and she was about six years older than Thomas. Was she another sister?

Isaiah's biography noted, "His grandfather emigrated to this county from Virginia in 1805, when his father [Jacob Geiger] was six weeks old, and first settled in Licking township."

Did Thomas travel to Licking Township with his sister and brother-in-law in 1805? That theory would fit with my working timeline.

Now the hard work continues to prove or disprove, and without the help of a tracking device...