I Found Sarah Kirk’s Missing Footstone

I found my fifth great-grandmother Sarah (Bonar) Kirk’s missing footstone!

While researching Sarah and her husband Thomas Kirk’s genealogy in the 1990s, Donald and Theresa Kirk (4th cousins twice removed) traveled to Licking County, Ohio and photographed their graves in the Beard-Green Cemetery. At that time, both Thomas and Sarah’s headstones were already cracked in half. Thomas’ headstone had metal brackets clamping the two pieces together. Unfortunately, the upper portion of Sarah’s headstone - with her biographical information - was missing. 

Thomas and Sarah (Bonar) Kirk's graves with their original stones broken in half.
Author pictured in 2023.

Thomas Kirk's original headstone intact. 
Photographed by Donald and Theresa Kirk in the 1990s.

The upper piece of Sarah's headstone must have been missing for a long time because she wasn’t recorded in the two censuses of cemetery burials conducted in 1940 and again in 1970. Sarah, who died in 1835, was now buried in a nearly unmarked grave following decades of exposure to the elements.

Sarah’s grave would have been anonymous except for one clue. Donald and Theresa also photographed her original footstone. Her initials “S.K.” were carved in the stone and provided the only evidence that it was Sarah who was buried beside Thomas.  

Sarah (Bonar) Kirk's footstone pictured in the 1990s by Donald and Theresa Kirk.

When I made my first trip to the Beard-Green Cemetery in July 2017, I discovered that the upper portion of Thomas’ headstone and Sarah's footstone were now both missing. I searched for them without success.

During a subsequent visit to the cemetery in July 2020, I found the tip of a buried stone alongside the headstone for their son Vachel. Firmly embedded in the ground, I was unable to excavate it. I assumed I had discovered Sarah’s missing footstone. 

Vachel Kirk's original headstone with a stone buried alongside.

In spring 2021, I worked with a local monument company to place a new headstone for Vachel and asked that they dig up what I figured was Sarah’s long lost footstone. They were able to pull it out. Unfortunately, the stone was broken and no longer included the portion with initials. I thought we’d lost more of Sarah’s history.

The unearthed footstone (from alongside Vachel's headstone) was broken and didn't include the portion with initials. At first, I assumed it was Sarah (Bonar) Kirk's footstone.

That assumption was undone this past June. I made a speedy road trip to Licking County and stopped at Beard-Green to clean up the Kirk graves and place new flowers. While tidying around Vachel’s grave, I noticed the telltale signs of a stone buried behind his original headstone. 

In June 2023, I noticed a new stone emerging from behind Vachel's headstone.

I’ve been over that patch of ground countless times during my four previous visits and I've never seen any signs of a buried marker. Perhaps the landscaping crew had recently uncovered some topsoil that revealed a portion of the stone. I was able to unearth the rest of it and immediately spotted the initials “S.K.” 

I was stunned! I quickly realized that I had found Sarah’s footstone that was last seen in the 1990s. The 188-year-old stone was buried in the exact area where Donald and Theresa had photographed it 30 years ago.

I uncovered the stone that turned out to be Sarah (Bonar) Kirk's original footstone with her initials "S.K."

If that was Sarah’s footstone, it immediately raised the question of whose footstone I found in July 2020. Because of its location near the Kirk graves and that it’s made from the same type of stone and is approximately the same width as Sarah’s, I presume it’s Thomas’ original footstone. 

Sarah's newly discovered footstone (left) leaves me speculating that the other footstone belongs to Thomas Kirk.

I plan to work with a monument company to discuss preservation options and whether the markers can be safely reset. If you have experience with footstone restorations or recommendations, please share in the comments.

The Professor Wrote My Family History

Genealogy is more fun when you're able to collaborate with cousins on the research process. There's nothing like being able to bounce ideas off of someone who's equally curious and passionate about shared family history.

Even better when you find a cousin who's deeply invested in your shared family history and has already produced significant research.

Finding the Professor

While conducting desk research on Brooke County, (West) Virginia - the location where I speculate my fifth great-grandparents Thomas Kirk and Sarah Bonar met and married - I came across the research of a Bonar descendant.

I read with interest the work of Mr. Bonar who mentioned the existence of a family diary indicating that William Bonar, Sarah's father and my sixth great-grandfather - was born "on the Roenoke."

Excited to learn of the existence of a family diary, I wondered whether it still survived and if it made any mention of Sarah and her husband Thomas.

After some speedy online research, I located Mr. Bonar on Facebook and sent him a message introducing myself and asking about the diary.

Happily, he responded:

"The 'diary' is very short—not a real diary, just some comments about the family. It was in the possession of the Wells family of Wellsburg WV."

Mr. Bonar added that he had a photograph of Sarah's brother G.D. Bonar, his direct ancestor, which he was happy to share.

The Professor's Surprise

Our correspondence shifted to email, where Mr. Bonar divulged the wonderfully surprising news:

"I have written a book about our pioneer ancestors, William Bonar and Jane McColloch."

Mr. Bonar, I learned, was a retired university professor who spent years researching and writing the history of my sixth great-grandparents William and Jane (McColloch) Bonar - Sarah's parents. Published last year, he still had copies available.

He kindly shipped a book to me, which I read with great gusto. 

A copy of the book detailing the history of my sixth great-grandparents William and Jane Bonar

How often do you come across a professor who has researched, written, and professionally published your family history?! 

Not often!

I learned so much about the challenging circumstances that confronted the settlers pushing into Virginia's northwestern territory. Encroaching into the lands of Native American communities, conflict raged and led to an often volatile and uncertain existence. 

He painstakingly detailed 18th century frontier life in Virginia, while acknowledging the "dearth of original records" that makes it very difficult to tell the story with specificity for any one person from this era. I've certainly learned that from the many challenges I've encountered with my own Kirk family research.

My Elusive Ancestors

The book reiterated that the Bonar family lost touch with my fifth great-grandmother Sarah Bonar. 

There's only passing mention of Sarah Bonar and her marriage to Thomas Kirk. The book notes that she married a man by the name of Kirk and that they lived in Captina [Belmont County, Ohio]. That's it! Blink and you'll miss it.

This brief reference originally comes from Dorothy Rine Brown who, in 1969, published the Bonar Genealogy.

Her book explained that, "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."

Again, no known first name for the mysterious Kirk husband. Pedigrees are provided for each of William and Jane (McColloch) Bonar's children with the disappointing exception of my Sarah. There's even a sad blank line where Thomas' first name should be. Sarah and Thomas really disappeared from the Bonar family radar.

Tabitha (Bonar) Wilson was a daughter of G.D. Bonar, and niece to my Sarah (Bonar) Kirk. Her proximity in both time and relationship lends credibility to her claim that Thomas and Sarah Kirk settled in Captina Creek in Ohio after marrying most likely in Brooke County, (West) Virginia.

Both books make it clear that there's a need and place for my own history of Thomas and Sarah (Bonar) Kirk to provide the missing pieces.

My chief genealogy goal this year is to publish a family history on Thomas and Sarah (Bonar) Kirk. Clearly, this book would fill a void that even the professor couldn't.

Sarah Kirk Emerges: Using Pre-1850 US Census Enumerations to Locate A Missing Daughter

Thomas and Sarah (Bonar) Kirk, my fifth great-grandparents, had a daughter named Sarah. 

That much we know is true, but, beyond her existence, Sarah is largely a mystery. 

She disappeared from the record trail. No one knows if she married, stayed singled, died young, or migrated westward like many of her siblings who left their native Ohio.

What is known, as I wrote last week (see Searching for Sarah), is that she existed and that she was alive - unmarried - in 1848 when she sold 16.5 acres that she inherited from her father's estate.

Last week, I followed the trail of a Sarah Kirk who was enumerated with a months-old child in the household of the Stottlemyer family in an Ohio county just across the dirt road from where Thomas Kirk farmed. Apparently she was single. There was no husband enumerated with her in the household. 

Could this Sarah Kirk possibly be Thomas' daughter unmarried and with a newborn? I thought maybe yes until I found another Sarah Kirk closer to home.

Another Sarah Kirk Enumerated in 1850

In 1850, Thomas Kirk's son James Kirk was enumerated with his wife, Kezia, and their young children (aged 11, 9, 7, 5, and 4). Also enumerated in the household - after the five young children - was a 20-year-old Sarah Kirk.

1850 US Federal Census: Jersey Township, Licking County, Ohio

Who was this 20-year-old Sarah Kirk? Could this woman, who was born in 1830, be the daughter of Thomas and Sarah (Bonar) Kirk?

Initially, I was skeptical that Sarah (Bonar) Kirk, born in 1784, gave birth to a child in 1830 when she was 46 years old.

However, I now believe that this did in fact happen, and that the young woman living with James Kirk in 1850 was in fact his sister and Thomas' daughter Sarah Kirk.

Here’s how I came to that conclusion.

We Know Thomas Kirk Had a Daughter Named Sarah

Thomas and Sarah (Bonar) Kirk had four daughters:

• Jane Kirk
• Rachel Kirk
• Anna Kirk
• Sarah Kirk

We know these women were their daughters because, after Thomas died in December 1846, each of his surviving heirs inherited an equal portion of his farm in Monroe Township, Licking County, Ohio.

Beginning in 1848, a quitclaim was finalized with a single buyer by the name of William Gossage. The agreement stipulated that all of Thomas’ children – legal heirs to his estate – would convey their inherited portion of the farm (16.5 acres each) in a series of endorsed land transfers to Gossage. The quitclaim essentially required all the living children (heirs) to be put on the record.

The existence of Sarah Kirk, the long-rumored daughter, was confirmed in an endorsed land transfer dated May 15, 1848. Siblings Sarah and James each sold their 16.5-acre plot together in this same land transaction. This land transfer revealed that Sarah Kirk was using her maiden name and presumably unmarried in 1848.

Two years later, when a 20-year-old Sarah Kirk showed up in James’ household on the 1850 census, it was eyebrow-raising because he had been paired with his sister Sarah in the quitclaim land transaction.

But was the Sarah who lived with James in 1850 his sister who sold land with him in 1848?

Finding Sarah - Thomas Kirk's Daughter - in 1850

After reviewing the 1850 census, it was clear that this Sarah Kirk was not one of James and Kezia’s children. This Sarah was born four years before their 1834 marriage. This Sarah was at least nine years older than the eldest child, a daughter. In fact, the eldest child was an 11-year-old girl by the name of Sarah Kirk. I’m going to go out on a limb here and speculate that they didn’t have two daughters named Sarah. Furthermore, the 20-year-old Sarah Kirk was enumerated last - after the children - suggesting that she was separate in some unarticulated way from the immediate family.

To answer the question of relationship, I relied on the age of the 20-year-old Sarah Kirk and turned to the pre-1850 census records for Thomas Kirk’s family.

Before 1850, the US Federal census only enumerated the head of household by name (Thomas Kirk, in this case) and included hash marks for everyone else living in the home. The marks corresponded to the appropriate sex and age range.

Through a process of elimination, could I determine whether Thomas had a female living in his home who was born in 1830 thus matching the age of the Sarah Kirk living with James? Yes, is the short answer.

Using Pre-1850 Censuses to Surface Sarah Kirk

For this exercise, I relied on the age of Thomas’ four daughters provided in the 1850 census. My assumption was that these ages were likely to be more accurate than ages that would appear later in life and on tombstones.

In 1850, Thomas’ three other daughters were aged as follows:

• Jane (Kirk) Tracey: 34 years old
• Rachel Kirk: 31 years old
• Anna (Kirk) Rhodes: 25 years old

The earliest surviving Ohio census is for the year 1820. In Thomas’ 1820 household (excepting his wife Sarah Bonar), there were:

• Two females under the age of 10

Subtracting 30 years from the 1850-enumerated ages of Thomas' daughters, it’s possible that these were Jane Kirk (four years old in 1820) and Rachel Kirk (one year old in 1820).

1820 US Federal Census: Licking Township, Licking County, Ohio

In Thomas’ 1830 household (excepting his wife Sarah Bonar), there was:

• One female under the age of 5
• One female aged 5-9
• Two females aged 10-14

Subtracting 20 years from the 1850-enumerated ages, it’s possible that these were Anna Kirk (five years old in 1830), Jane Kirk (fourteen years old in 1830), and Rachel Kirk (eleven years old in 1830). Could the female under five years old be the Sarah Kirk born in 1830, perhaps just months old when the census was enumerated?

1830 US Federal Census: Licking Township, Licking County, Ohio

In Thomas’ 1840 household (excepting his second wife Anna Bailey), there were:

• Two females aged 10-14
• One female aged 15-19
• One female aged 20-29

Subtracting ten years from the 1850-enumerated ages, it’s possible that these were Rachel Kirk (twenty-one years old in 1840) and Anna Kirk (fifteen years old in 1840). In 1840, Jane Kirk was enumerated living with her husband Lloyd Tracey. So who were the two females aged 10-14? Anna Bailey, Thomas' second wife, had a daughter, Lavina, from her first marriage. In 1840, Lavina was eleven years old – a perfect match.

That left one more female aged 10-14 to account for in Thomas’ 1840 household. If Sarah Kirk was born in 1830, she would be ten years old in 1840 – making her another perfect match.

1840 US Federal Census: Monroe Township, Licking County, Ohio

All told, the pre-1850 census records matched perfectly with Thomas Kirk’s known daughters and affirmed the likelihood that the Sarah Kirk born in 1830 - and living with James in 1850 - was in fact Thomas and Sarah (Bonar) Kirk’s daughter.

What became of Sarah Kirk remains a question.

She clearly had a difficult life as the youngest child in Thomas Kirk's household. Her mother, Sarah Bonar, passed away when she was about five years old, and then her father, Thomas, passed away when she was sixteen years old.

It seems likely that her brother James Kirk, who was the administrator of Thomas' estate, was her guardian. That would explain why she appeared with him on the 1848 land transaction and 1850 census.

James probably received some kind of remuneration from Thomas' estate for this caretaking, but, of course, those details went up in smoke when the Licking County courthouse burned in 1875 destroying Thomas' probate file.

Dueling Sarah Kirks in 1850

One more thought before this story comes to a close.

Mindful of the disappearance of Sarah Kirk after 1850, I can't help but wonder if the Sarah Kirk who lived with her brother in Licking County in 1850 was the same Sarah Kirk who was enumerated in the Stotttlemyer household in neighboring Delaware County in 1850.

The enumeration of James Kirk's 1850 household occurred on August 8, 1850.

The enumeration of the Stottlemyer's 1850 household occurred nearly a month later on September 2, 1850.

Did Sarah move away to give birth out of wedlock and spare her family shame? It would help if I could find some way to link the Stottlemyers to the Kirks, but I haven't yet found any connections.

To be sure, there are differences between the two Sarahs. It looks like the Sarah Kirk living with the Stottlemyers was 26 years old and her baby was three-months old (am I reading those ages correctly?). But ages can be given or written wrong, right? 

For now, this is where the Sarah Kirk story rests until a new clue emerges and shines light on her story's end.

Your Relatives in Virginia, I Presume You Know But Little of Them

For two years, Anna (Kirk) Rhodes corresponded with her husband Jacob who, during the Civil War, served as a Private in Company B commanded by Captain Ira P. French in the 76th Regiment of the Ohio Volunteer Infantry.

Between 1862 and 1863, a dozen letters - dictated by Jacob to fellow soldiers who hand-wrote his remarks in pencil - recounted the harrowing hardships faced by Union troops as they marched across the United States and engaged "the Rebels" in battle.

In July 1863, Jacob succumbed to disease in Memphis, Tennessee. Anna was left a widow with children to raise.

The letters, now yellowed and faded, survived and are cared for by Anna's descendants.

It was just last year that I discovered that Anna was a daughter of my fifth great-grandparents Thomas and Sarah (Bonar) Kirk (Will The Real Kirk Daughter Please Stand Up?). This discovery soon connected me with a direct descendant of Anna and Jacob who shared the preserved correspondence with me.

Among the many papers were also letters from Anna's brother, James Kirk, who had moved from Licking County, Ohio - where Thomas and Sarah Kirk settled and raised their family - to Crawford County, Illinois. There were also notes from a Kirk nephew (son of Anna's brother Vachel) and niece (daughter of Anna's brother Joseph). 

A single letter from Anna's maternal uncle provided insight into her mother's family.

The Bonars of Virginia

Among the faded correspondence was a note in careful penmanship from Greenberry Dorsey Bonar, brother to Anna's mother - and my fifth great-grandmother - Sarah (Bonar) Kirk. Greenberry D. Bonar was a member of West Virginia's House of Delegates, representing Ohio County in 1865.

This is the only note I've seen from anyone of this generation and provides insights on the Bonar family who still lived in (West) Virginia.

Written on August 2, 1864, the single page with text on both sides is the first that G.D. Bonar has written to his niece following the death of her husband.

G.D. Bonar writes to niece Sarah (Kirk) Rhodes, page 1

G.D. Bonar writes to niece Sarah (Kirk) Rhodes, page 2

---

Transcription:

Home August 2nd, ‘64

Mrs Anna Rhodes, Dear niece

Your kind letter came to hand. We was truly glad to get it. I have had but little correspondence for several years with my Licking County friends and we are pleased to renew it. 

We had heard of the death of your husband previous to the reception of your letter we were truly sorry to hear it. We are very sorry that you are left a widow with so large a family to provide for. But we should be resigned to God’s will implore his protecting care and do the best we can under the circumstances. 

Your relatives in Virginia I presume you know but little of them. Your Mother’s brothers and sisters are all living except your Aunt Becch (sic.) Brady, we are all old men and women. I am the youngest of the family but one and I am 63 years of age. My oldest Brother, James, visited us this summer. He is 78 years old enjoys good health walks about comfortable. Your Aunt Katherine is 82 years of age. She is very corpulent and uses crutches in walking. Your Aunt Betty makes her home with Brother George. 

My fellow citizens are somewhat exercised about the draft. The quota of our County Ohio is 248. We have had no trouble heretofore in raising volunteers, by the County paying a liberal bounty. I presume our County will pay $300 bounty but it is doubtful about getting volunteers sufficient to fill our quota. 

Wheat crops are very light. Corn good prospect’s good. Hay tolerable good. Apples a fair crop. 

Please excuse me for not answering your letter sooner. Write soon and let me know all you can about our Licking County friends. I have forgotten the names of your Aunt Beccy’s sons in-law. Please write their names and tell me if they have heard of James W. Brady recently. Your friends in this section are enjoying their usual health. My children are all married. Wife and I are an old couple but we carry on our business as usual.

Your affectionate Uncle
G.D. Bonar


G.D. Bonar
West Liberty
Ohio County
Virginia

---

Isn't it miraculous that a letter written nearly 155 years ago still survives?

I was struck by the mini-portraits G.D. Bonar, my sixth great-uncle, shared about his and Sarah (Bonar) Kirk's siblings still living in (West) Virginia. His presumption that Anna knew "but little of them" underscores how quickly family history was lost in an era when geography made communication quite arduous and infrequent.

He paints an interesting picture of life during the Civil War and the challenges recruiting men to serve; a difficulty often overlooked in romanticized recollections of the war. His matter-of-fact updates on the crops highlight that the Bonars were farmers, and it was an update that would mean something to Anna (whose own father was also a farmer).

Regrettably, he doesn't make mention of Anna's parents, Thomas and Sarah Kirk (who died in 1846 and 1835 respectively). My hopes for detailed reminiscences that would shed light on their personalities or answer all of my Kirk genealogy brick walls were dashed, but who knows, perhaps there's another letter out there awaiting discovery.

Absence Makes The Heart Grow Fonder: Now Where's That Marriage Record?!

Sometimes the absence of evidence is just as important as finding a record.

I remind myself of this lesson each time I search for the marriage record for my fifth great-grandparents Thomas Kirk and Sarah Bonar.

In genealogy, it's one of the go-to documents. Family historians begin their research with three primary vital records: birth, marriage, and death.

Yet every time I search for the Kirks' nuptials, I come up empty handed. The absence of the record makes my obsession yearning to find it grow unabated.

The Kirk Family's Nuptials in Family Lore 

Kirk descendants have long searched for a marriage bond, banns, license, certificate, announcement, or anything to confirm exactly when and where Thomas Kirk and Sarah Bonar were married.

A family history published in 1992 concluded that they were "probably" married in 1804 in Belmont County, Ohio. A handful of online genealogies parrot this date and location without corroborating documentation.

The date seems likely considering it preceded the birth of their eldest child, Vachel Kirk, who was born in about 1805 in Ohio. In 1880, 1900, and 1910, Vachel's three children each reported to census enumerators that their father's birth location was Ohio.

Furthermore, an 1806 tax record assessing liability for the prior tax year positions Thomas and Sarah Kirk in Licking County, Ohio in 1805.

The Bonar Genealogy, published by Dorothy Elizabeth Rine Brown, details lengthy biographical portraits of each of Sarah's nine siblings, but offers surprisingly little about her. In fact, the genealogy was unsure of her husband's first name.

Brown wrote that, "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 County, Ohio."

Perhaps this is where earlier Kirk family histories landed on the Belmont County location.

Location, Location, Location

Sarah's parents, William and Jane (McCulloch) Bonar, raised their family in the northern panhandle of Virginia (now West Virginia). County boundaries shifted over the years, but by 1797 the area was split between Ohio and Brooke counties.

Northern panhandle of West Virginia, Wikimedia Commons

Last week, I shared my discovery that Thomas Kirk arrived in Brooke County, Virginia (now West Virginia) in 1799 and appeared in county personal property tax lists through 1803.

With confirmation that Thomas was in Sarah's neck of the woods, surely they married in the area. Known marriage locations for her siblings support this theory.

Surviving marriage records and genealogies indicate that of the ten Bonar children, at least four - and maybe as many as seven - were married in Brooke County, (West) Virginia.

An elder sister, Catherine, married "before 1803" and is said to have lived "up back of Wheeling" when first married, suggesting that she, too, was likely married in Virginia - bringing the total number to eight. It appears that a single brother, James Bonar, was married in Belmont County, Ohio in 1816. He is the lone outlier confirmed to have married outside Brooke County, and did so twelve years after Thomas and Sarah's likely wedding date.

It seems most likely that Sarah and Thomas would marry in her home county. Wouldn't it raise eyebrows for a single woman in the early 1800s to ride off across the border into the wilds of the Ohio frontier before marrying?

In the National Genealogical Society's Research in West Virginia guidebook, Barbara Vines Little writes that, "During the colonial period and the first half of the nineteenth century, Virginia law required either the posting of banns or the posting of a marriage bond in the bride's county of residence prior to marriage."

If the law said the marriage had to be posted in the bride's county of residence and most of her siblings were married in their home county, then the search should definitely begin in Brooke County. Fortunately, FamilySearch has digitized Brooke County marriage licenses dating back to 1797.

The Search Is On

I trawled through Brooke County's records eager to find evidence of the Kirk Bonar marriage. But I kept trawling with no discovery. As I neared the end of the record set, I landed on an explanatory slide.

I was given an explanation why I hadn't found - and may never find - their marriage record: "These records probably do not contain all the marriages in Brooke County, as many were not recorded due to laxity or religious beliefs."

In the National Genealogical Society's Research in Virginia guidebook, Eric Grundset writes that, "Although religious requirements for recording marriages have existed since the earliest days of Virginia, surviving pre-1800 documentation is uneven and incomplete. By the late eighteenth century and into the early nineteenth century the records improve, but there are many unions not found in church or government registers."

In other words, despite the religious and legal requirements for recording marriages, the documentation is known to be incomplete. The marriage between Thomas Kirk and Sarah Bonar may have been lost to history due to "laxity or religious beliefs."

There's Always A Fire

What about the church? Maybe the marriage was recorded in a surviving church volume?

It just so happens that a Brooke County chapel with a congregation founded in 1785 still exists today. Kadesh Chapel is a Methodist Church that has served parishioners for more than two centuries.

Many of the Kirk descendants were Methodist. A Brooke County Methodist chapel with roots to the late 18th century sounded very promising.

Does the Chapel have surviving church records that I could review?

I reached out to the pastor to share my quandary and ask for his help in determining whether any records survived. He investigated the question over the course of several weeks while I waited with fingers crossed for good news.

"I have run into a roadblock," came his unfortunate reply. "Our present keeper of the Church records has informed me that her records do not go back further than 1940's. The woman who had possession of Kadesh Chapel's records had a fire in her home and all was lost."

There was a fire and all was lost is essentially - tragically and now comically - how many of my Thomas Kirk research endeavors end.

The Search Is On, Again

Before falling into despair, Barbara Vines Little advises that, "Researchers should check the records of adjacent counties (or states) when the marriage cannot be found in the county of residence."

This turns the research spotlight to three other locations: 

• Ohio County, (West) Virginia, located to the south of Brooke County.
• Belmont County, Ohio, located along the western border of Ohio County, (West) Virginia. 
• Jefferson County, Ohio, located along the western border of Brooke County, (West) Virginia. 

Ohio County, (West) Virginia: Again, FamilySearch has digitized marriage licenses for Ohio County dating to 1790. Unfortunately, Thomas Kirk does not appear in the groom's index and no marriage record was found as I trawled through the volume (in a desperate hope that the indexer had overlooked their marriage).

Belmont County, Ohio: A descendant of Thomas and Sarah Kirk personally reviewed the marriage volumes in Belmont County. She shared that she "actually went through the marriage book in St. Clairsville [county seat for Belmont County] which started in 1803. Someone else looked for me in land grants for the period from 1800 - 1805. Nothing was found."

The digitized marriage index for Belmont County, Ohio, recording marriages between 1803 and 1821 does not include a Thomas Kirk. While I'm willing to investigate in the name of an exhaustive search, I remain skeptical that they married in Ohio instead of her home county in (West) Virginia.

Belmont County, Ohio 1803-1821 Marriage Index for Ks

Jefferson County, Ohio: At the moment, I'm in a holding pattern researching this county. The marriage records are not freely visible online at FamilySearch. I'll need to get myself to the Family History Library or a FamilySearch center with viewing rights.

Foiled By Laxity or Religious Beliefs?

It seems that a marriage record for Thomas Kirk and Sarah Bonar does not survive, perhaps lost in a devastating fire. Or it may never have been recorded for posterity due to "laxity or religious beliefs."

Yet I can't help but remain hopeful that a bound volume of marriage registers will be discovered tucked away in the dusty nether-regions of a courthouse attic, or a family bible will finally surface, or Jefferson County was in fact where they tied the knot, or... 

The possibilities are endless yet the search seems to have concluded that there is no surviving marriage record to be found. So now, if you'll excuse me, I'm skulking off to a dark corner to shed my tears and let it go.

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. 

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...

Ancestor Patronus: Encounters With Spirit Animals

I'm in the midst of a family history road trip in Licking County, Ohio.

My fifth great-grandfather Thomas Kirk settled in the County by 1805. In the years ahead, he farmed and raised a family of 13 children with his wife Sarah Bonar until he was "accidentally killed" in 1846.

My first stop when I arrived in Licking was to the Beard-Green Cemetery to pay my respects at his grave.

Searching for my family, I combed through the headstones - many of them dating to the first half of the 19th century. There were dozens of stones to eyeball. The first burial dated to 1810, and most of the graves are for descendants of Benjamin Green and John Beard, two of the early settlers of the County.

Beard-Green is surrounded by the Dawes Arboretum with a thick growth of trees defining its border. I discovered Thomas and Sarah Kirk on the edge of the cemetery with the remains of their original headstones at the entrance of a trail leading into the dark woods. Both headstones are broken with the top portion - and any inscription - now missing.

Thomas Kirk (left with yellow flowers) and Sarah (Bonar) Kirk (right with purple flowers)

I was excited to finally be able to pay my respects at the grave of the man who has consumed so much of my brain power as I research the identities of his parents and their ancestral origins.

My excitement doubled when I discovered the footstone for their eldest son and my fourth great-grandfather Vachel Kirk. Genealogies indicated he was also buried in Beard-Green, but it was thought that his stone no longer stood.

Just beyond Thomas' grave I found a headstone with its inscription completely weathered away. The grave had a footstone (which is common for many of the burials in the cemetery). I saw that there were two letters inscribed on the stone. I crouched down to better make out the engraving. To my great delight I read aloud: "V. K."

Vachel Kirk. It was him, I was sure of it. I checked the cemetery census and there was no enumeration for any person with those initials. The proximity to Thomas and Sarah made it certain in my mind.

Vachel was a young man when he died in 1832. He was married with three young children. I speculate that when he died, he was buried on the edge of the Beard and Green families' cemetery at the request of Thomas. In 1835, Sarah died and the family buried her near her eldest son. Thomas followed her in 1846 when he was laid to rest next to the mother of his children.

Vachel Kirk's footstone

Following my discoveries on the cemetery's edge, I wandered back into the main grounds to review other headstones. Just minutes after finding Vachel's footstone, something caught my eye at the cemetery's edge where I had just paid my respects to my Kirk ancestors.

A doe emerged from the trees by their graves, delicately stepped past Vachel's stone and made its way into the cemetery.

The doe's presence startled me at first, but then struck me as a sign - perhaps of thanks for discovering Vachel's grave.

Encounters With Spirit Animals
The encounter gave me chills and reminded me of the magic of Harry Potter.

In the Harry Potter novels, one of the most powerful spells in all of wizardom allows the conjurer to create a protective shield called a Patronus.

The Patronus is "...a guardian which acts as a shield...a kind of positive force, a projection of...hope, happiness, the desire to survive..."

They usually take the form of an animal. Harry Potter's Patronus was a stag, and his mentor Dumbledore's was a phoenix.

Was the doe an ancestral guardian?

What Does The Fox Say?
The young doe wasn't my first encounter with a spirit animal guiding me to my ancestors' graves.

In the mountains just west of Denver is the small town of Idaho Springs - once known for its booming mining industry. In the town's cemetery rests my fourth great-grandparents Thomas and Susan Elizabeth (Day) Stevens.

Thomas was killed in a horrific mining explosion in November 1886.

On a trip home to Colorado earlier this spring, I went to see his burial for the first time. Walking along a dirt path searching for his grave, I stopped at the sudden appearance of a fox. It was completely unafraid and alternated between keeping me under a watchful eye and facing in the direction of the Stevens' graves.

Between the doe and fox, I can't help but feel my ancestors are guiding me with spirit animals as though I'm a Disney character whose genealogy is being guided by an unseen hand.

Hey, I can use all the help I can get. Send me a herd of spirit animals! I just wonder how Elizabeth Shown Mills would advise me to cite my animal friends as a source...

Have you had similar goose bump-inducing experiences during your family history research?

Exhausting Research: An Examination of Everything And The Kitchen Sink

Who was the father of Thomas Kirk (1778-1846), my fifth great-grandfather?

Finding an answer has been a difficult, arduous journey. A burned county courthouse, destroyed census enumerations, and lost family lore have obscured the truth.

Naming Patterns Provide Clues
The Kirks were presumably of British Isles extract. Irish and Scottish naming customs directed that the eldest son be named after the father's father. Could it be that simple? Figure out the name of Thomas' eldest son and assume I have my sixth great-grandfather's name? Something tells me that Elizabeth Shown Mills is going to want a little more evidence explained, but let's have a look-see.

We can get a sense for how traditional Thomas was by reviewing his wife's genealogy. Thomas was married to Sarah (Bonar) Kirk. Her parents were William and Jane (McCulloch) Bonar.

The customary naming patterns directed that the second son be named after the mother's father and that the eldest daughter be named after the mother's mother.

The Kirks appear to have adhered to naming customs.

The Kirks' second son was named William and their first daughter was named Jane. Bingo! We have a match aligned with the naming traditions. But was it just a coincidence?

Kirk family genealogies agree that Thomas' eldest son was Vachel Kirk born in 1805. Great! Should I be looking for a Vachel Kirk? It is an unusual name that doesn't often appear in records. Perhaps Vachel is a family name?

In Search of Vachel
A November 1809 land record shows a Vachel Kirk from Fayette County, Pennsylvania purchasing land in Knox County, Ohio. Curiously, Knox County borders Licking County along the length of its southern border. Thomas and Sarah (Bonar) Kirk lived in Licking County in 1809 and for the duration of their adult lives. The appearance of this unique name and purchase of land near to my Kirks makes this Vachel a person of interest.

Vachel Kirk from Fayette County, Pennsylvania buys land in Knox County, Ohio

The 1810 US Federal Census still exists for Pennsylvania and, sure enough, there is a Vachel Kirk in Fayette County enumerated in Union Township. I've traced this man forward as he moved and settled in Ohio. Quick facts:

• He was in Butler County, Ohio by the time of the 1820 census. 
• Two of his children, who were alive for the 1880 census, said their father was born in Pennsylvania. 
• He died in April 1836. 
• His headstone indicated that he was born in June 1783.

This birth year confirms that the Butler County Vachel Kirk was not the father to my Thomas Kirk who was born in 1778. Instead, they were contemporaries only fives year apart in age. Perhaps they were brothers or cousins.

Written In The Stars Blood
Were they family? DNA Tests held the answer.

I found a living direct male descendant of Vachel Kirk (1783-1836) willing to take a Y-DNA test. His results came back and were a very close match to the handful of direct male descendants of my Thomas Kirk (1778-1846), confirming that there was a shared common male ancestor between the two lines.

Vachel and Thomas were indeed family. Unfortunately, the Y-DNA test couldn't determine the exact relationship. We need to examine autosomal results to see if common DNA still exists after generations of recombination. This research initiative is still ongoing.

However, now that we've established that this Vachel Kirk was related to my Thomas Kirk, let's get back to his Pennsylvania roots. Is that where my Kirk family originated, too?

Thomas' Starting Point
Thomas died before census records provided birth location information. However, five of his children lived long enough to provide this information when the 1870, 1880 and 1900 censuses asked for parents' birth location.

The general consensus was that Thomas was born in America and likely Virginia with only a few outliers (Come on, Nancy! Was it Ohio or New Jersey? One of these is not like the other!).

Daughter Jane listed Ireland in the 1880 census (contradicting her US-born response in 1870). Her Ireland response may hint at her father's ancestral origins and not necessarily his actual birth location. As Barry McCain, a Scots-Irish researcher, wrote, "Scots-Irish in Colonial America...often described their ethnicity as simply Irish."

Mindful that they're related, how do I reconcile their birth locations: Thomas in Virginia and Vachel in Pennsylvania?

Disputed Territory

In the 1700s, both Virginia and Pennsylvania claimed the area that would become Fayette County (where Vachel lived in 1809 when he bought land in Ohio and 1810 when he was enumerated on the census). 

Virginia and Pennsylvania were locked in a land dispute pre-1780.

The competing territorial claims resulted in duplicate legal and civil systems existing side-by-side. Citizens' loyalties - either to Pennsylvania or Virginia - afforded them the choice to determine under which state's jurisdiction they lived. The confusion came to an end in 1780 when agreement was reached on addressing the border conflict.

If the Kirk family was from the Fayette County area, this would mean that Thomas Kirk, born in 1778, could claim that he was born in Virginia. However, after the 1780 border resolution, Vachel's birth in 1783 would leave him born in Pennsylvania.

As a result, it's possible that both men were born and raised in the same location while the borders and state jurisdictions changed around them.

I Believe The Children Are The Future

Who are the Kirks I should be looking for in the Fayette County, Pennsylvania area? 

What if I review the names of both men's children and their grandchildren to determine the most frequently reoccurring names? Could I infer that they are traditional family names handed down from one generation to the next? I could then scan Fayette County for Kirks with these same given names, and start with those individuals for closer inspection. 

Thomas and Sarah (Bonar) Kirk had thirteen children (in alpha order): Andrew, George, Greenberry, Hugh, James, Jane, Joseph, Nancy, Rachel, Sarah, Thomas, Vachel, and William. 

Of these children, nine had children of their own. A quick glance at his nearly 60 grandchildren reveals that the most commonly occurring names for Thomas Kirk's grandsons were James (occurring 6 times), Thomas (occurring 4 times), and Joseph (3 times) followed by Elijah/Elisha and John (each used twice).

The most common names for Thomas Kirk's granddaughters were: Sarah (occurring 4 times), Mary (occurring three times), and Catherine, Euphemia, Martha, Rachel, and Rebecca each being used twice.

Is it any surprise that Thomas and Sarah were among the most popular names for their grandchildren?

It's interesting that James was the most popular male name. I found no instances of Thomas' grandchildren named Vachel.

Now, when we examine the Butler County Vachel Kirk's six children (Helen, John, Mary, Nancy, Thomas, and Vachel), only three lived to adulthood and had children of their own.

The most common names for Vachel Kirk's grandsons' were Franklin, John, Joseph, and William. Each was used twice.

Thomas Kirk's most frequently used grandson name, James, did not make an appearance among Vachel's grandsons. However, John and Joseph did overlap.

Vachel Kirk's most common granddaughters' names were Emma (twice) and Mary (three times). The only overlap between the two men's granddaughters was the name Mary - the most common woman's name ever! 

Everything And The Kitchen Sink
This exhausting chain of research gives me a foundation from which to begin exploring Fayette County, Pennsylvania for new clues.

Certainly, any Kirks named John, Joseph or Mary will gain closer scrutiny.

Any genealogists with 18th century Pennsylvania research tips or recommendations? I'm all ears (after this quick power nap).