Analysis. The Wife of Samuel Cowan of Cowan's Gap

Watchers
Share

Tapestry

Contents


Return to Old Chester Tapestry|Explanation
Cowan Tapestry
Register
Data
Notebooks
Analysis
Bibliography
Graphics
YDNA
Cowan Links
Index


……………………..The Tapestry
Families Old Chester OldAugusta Germanna
New River SWVP Cumberland Carolina Cradle
The Smokies Old Kentucky



Sources

SourcesDocumentsRelated
Source:Maurer, 1899
Source:Cowan, 1928
Source:Orr and Cowan, 1970
Source:Fleming, 1971:377









Data:Cowan Land Warrants Old Chester PA
Cowan Tax Records|Cowan Tax Records
Data. Cowan's in the 1790 PA, US Census
Document. Excerpt from Orr, January, 1970
Document. Burning of the Old Cowan House
Document. Romance of Cowan's Gap
Document. The Real Story of Cowan's Gap
James Cowan Land Transfer
Notes for Cowans of Cowans Gap
Letter Miller to Cowan 1865



YDNA. Cowan Surname
Mary Unknown
Person:Samuel Cowan (17)
person:Hugh Cowan (7)
Person:Robert Cowan (17)
person:Edward (1)
person:Archibald Cowan (2)
Cowan's Gap Cowans
Octoraro Creek Cowans
YDNA
Wife of Samuel Cowan
The Cowan Homestead
Lower Path Valley Prebyterian Cemetery



The Story

The Short Version:

Genealogists researching the Cowan's Gap Cowan's commonly refer to the "Romance of Cowan's Gap" as a source of their information. The short version of the story is that during the Revolution, a British Officer, John Cowan, met, and woo'd Mary, the daughter of a Boston merchant. The father did not approve, but the couple married anyway and left for Pennsylvania. Here they first settled at "Culbersons Row" near Mechanicsburg, but within a few years decided to go to Kentucky. They got as far as Campbellstown, two days travel to the west, when their wagon broke down. Unable to repair it they trade the wagon for land from 'a passing Indian Chief', settling at Cowan's Gap. Here they raised their family. According to the usual story, Mary survives until past 1858 when at "age 102" she tells her tale to a group of men exploring the area for a possible railway line.

The Sources

The principle sources for this story are:

Document. Burning of the Old Cowan House dating to 1879
Source:Maurer, 1899 The Romance of Cowans Gap
Document. Excerpt from Orr, January, 1970
Source:Fleming, 1971:377 The Cowans of County Down

Fleming's The Cowan's of County Down is probably the best known and widely distributed work. Fleming takes his version from an article in the Cowan Clan United (Orr, 1970). Orr in turn based her article on Source:Maurer, 1899 "The Romance of Cowan's Gap". Maurer's article, however, is not the earliest form of the story; while Fleming's transcription of the story identifies Maurer as the original source, and a member of the party that interviewed Mary Cowan in 1859, this does not seem to be correct. The earliest version of the story is one that appeared in an 1879 edition of the Chambersburg Chronicle by an otherwise anonymous author, probably the editor of the Newspaper. That source cites as its authority the remaining member of a four man party that visited Cowan's Gap in 1859, a man who was 80 years of age at the time the Chambersburg Chronicle article was published.


The Problem

Fleming says that Maurer's 1899 work is a recounting of the 1859 interview he conducted with "Mary Cowan" of Cowan's Gap. This does not seem to be accurate. The 1879 account appeared in an issue of the Chambersburg Chronicle, and was probably written by its editor. The article specifically states that the last person alive, who was in the party who listened to "Mary's" story, was then 80 years of age. The author further requests that this gentleman, should he read the article, provide any needed corrections. Thus, the author of this article, at least, clearly rules himself out as the source of information, and so can not be Maurer. If the 80 year old gentleman that is identified in 1879 as the source of this information were Maurer himself, then in 1899 he would have been over 100 years of age; it seems unlikely that he himself could have published this article, given his age. So, without further information, the source of this story remains anonymous.

Maurer's article, as transcribed by Fleming 1971, is surprisingly similar to the 1879 version, and in more ways than just a repetition of specific facts. While there's no question of plagerism, the presentation of facts is virtually identical, with some word rearrangement and rephraseing. It looks as though Maurer had access to the 1879 article, and used it to prepare his own version, and may have added a few embellisments of his own.

The conclusion here is that Maurer is neither the original author for this story, nor an eyewitness to the events. The version closest to the event remains the Chambersburg Chronicle story of 1879, and this is considered to be the most authoritative.

There are significant differences between Maurer's version of the story (on which both Orr and Fleming base their renditions) and that given in the 1879 newspaper article, as well as the popular interpretation of the data.

1. The newspaper article does not identify the woman at Cowan's Gap by name. Her identification as "Mary" is found only in the later versions of the story;
2. The newspaper article does not identify the womans maiden name as "Mueller"; that also is a later day embellishment, whose basis is unknown
3. The newspaper article identifies the woman's husband as "Edgar Cowan" not "John" as the other versions state.

Looking closely at the information contained in Mauer's version of the story, it looks very much as though he was attempting to reconcile the story in the Chambersburg Chronicle with such "on the ground facts" that he could obtain---specifically, with census results from 1850, and 1860.

Cowans Gap Property

In 1785 Samuel Cowan secured a 104 acre parcel of land at what be came known as "Cowan's Gap". Historically, this area is of importance because "Forbes Road" constructed in 17518, passed through the Gap, heading toward Fort Dusquenes just outside of Pittsburgh. [1] Samuel appears in several local records, including the 1790, 1800, and 1810 census records. The 1810 census identifies him in Dublin Township, Bedford County, which includes the area within which Cowan's Gap now lies.

Census

The 1850 census identifies a household in Todd Township, Fulton County headed by Mary Cowan, age 72. In 1860 the household is headed by William Cowan age 50. The household listings are as follows

1850
Todd Township,
Fulton County
1860
Todd Township
Fulton County
PersonDOBAge
Mary Cowan177872
Hugh T. Cowan179951
David Cowan180446
William Cowan180644
Abram Britton181436
.
.
PersonDOBAge
William Cowen181050
David Cowen179763
Clara Cowen185010
Emma Cowan18528
William18546
Henry18564
Margaret1758102

Despite the differences in family composition, the above records seem to reflect the same household. While Mary, Hugh, and Abraham Button (ref name="Button">The latter is identified as a Black laborer, and is probably a farm hand, rather than a family member.</ref> are absent from the 1860 census, William and David remain, and are similarly aged. Several children have been added, and are probably sons and daughters of William who is now listed as head of household.

James Cowan

Samuel Cowan is known to have been present in the area as late as 1814 when he appears on a tax list. He does not appear in the 1820 census. In his place is a James Cowan, who appears in the 1830 and 1840 census, but is missing from 1850 on.

A critical document for this discussion is the 1848 land transfer from James Cowan to his cousins, William, David, and Hugh T. Cowan. That document pertains to the land originally acquired by Samuel Cowan in 1785, and is the "Cowan's Gap" property visited by the four railroad men in 1859. James identifies himself as Samuel son, and William, David, and Hugh T Cowan as the sons of his fathers brother.

Samuels brother is not named in the land transfer. In 1850 they appear in the household of Mary Cowan age 72. In 1860 William heads the same household, which includes David and a Margaret Cowan (age 102). It does not include Mary or Hugh.

Samuel's Brother

There are four adult male Cowan's in the area by 1790; in addition to Samuel, these include , Hugh Cowan, Edward Cowan, and William Cowan. Presumably Samuel's brother is one of these three Cowans. Hugh and Samuel are clearly related as they secured landwarrants on the same day in 1785, and lived within a few miles of each other in what is now Dublin Township, Fulton County. Edward and William are also clearly related. Edward obtained a land warrant in 1786, and he and William appear living near each other in the 1790 census. William is commonly identified as Edwards son.

The child list of Edward (given in his 1838 will) includes a David Cowan, but not a Hugh Cowan. In addition, he makes bequests to the wife and children of his deceased son William. Thus William son of Edward can not be the William who, together with his brothers David and Hugh, receives the Cowan's Gap property from James Cowan.

By elimination the most likely candidate for Samuel's brother is Hugh. Unfortunately, we do not have sufficient data to conclude that he is in fact the brother of Samuel Cowan whose sons inherited the Cowan's Gap property.



The Mary Cowan who appears in the 1850 census in the Cowan's Gap location, could be his wife. Her age (72, born 1778) makes her a bit too old to be the wife of James, and at the same time too young to be the wife of Samuel. In anycase, by 1860, however, she is gone, either having remarried, or died.

Mary Cowan

Maurer identifies the woman who related the story as "Mary Cowan" and gives her age as 102. The 1878 article makes her age to be 104 years, but does not give her name. The 1850 census identifies as "Mary Cowan" as HOH of a family unit virtually identical to that headed by William Cowan in 1860. Both households include a William and David Cowan, and the 1850 household includes a Hugh Cowan. These later three individuals were identified by James Cowan as the sons of his father's brother. The 1860 census includes "Margaret Cowan" age 102. There's little question that the Cowan households of 1850 and 1860 are located in Cowan's Gap.

The question is whether the Mary Cowan of the 1850 census is the same person as the Margaret Cowan of 1860. Some, for example, might explain this away by saying that her "real name" was "Mary Margaret". This is unsatisfactory Here Maurer may have used data from the 1860 census which does, in fact, identify a 102 year old woman (born 1758) living at this location. The woman's name is given in the census as "Margaret" not "Mary". To make matters worse the same family includes a "Mary Cowan" age 72 (born 1788). The leads us to the question of why Maurer identified Samuel's wife as "Mary". Its possible that one of the other census takers misunderstood the name; either "mary" was really Margaret", or "Margaret" was really "Mary". Alternatively perhaps her name was "Mary Margaret", but what evidence can be pointed to that supports that interpretation? Since the original 1879 story does not give the womans name, we have no way to know from the data currently available what her actual name might have been. Where did Maurer come up with "Mary"? It looks very much like Maurer used "Mary's" name, and "Margaret's" age from the 1850 and 1860 census. Since a Mary Cowan appears as head of household for this same family unit, perhaps Maurer simply used "majority rules"; Since he had the 1879 article at hand, that gives the woman's age as 102 perhaps he felt the change in name was a census takers error. That of course, ignores the wide discrepancy in the age of the woman in the two different census years. Perhaps this was his best solution for trying to make the facts "work". On the premise that "simpler is better", the alternative interpretation is that these are two different woman seems to better fit the data. But if we accept that they were two different woman, who were they? Was one or the other the wife of Samuel? or neither?

Margaret Cowan

Margaret does not appear in the records until the 1860 census (at age 102) in the household of William Cowan (age 50) at Cowan's Gap, along with a David Cowan (age 63), and several younger children. The children maybe William's by a deceased wife, but there are other possibilities.

Essentially this same family group appears in the 1850 census, but with a Mary Cowan (age 72) as HOH, David Cowan (age 46), and William Cowan (age 44), as well as a Hugh T. Cowan (age 51). At age 72 Mary is appropriately aged to be the mother of David, William and Hugh (ages 44 to 51). The identity of David, William, and Hugh is revealed in a revealed in an 1848 land transaction which shows that they are cousins of James Cowan, son of Samuel. This family has come to live on the old Samuel Cowan property because James, in 1848, transferred the land to them in exchange for their taking care of him. Since he is not in the 1850 census, two years later, we can probably conclude that he died shortly after making the transfer. [2] In anycase, this would seem to make Mary out as the most likely mother of David, William and Hugh. Her husband, presumably deceased at this time, could be any of the other Cowan males who appear at an early date in the area: In addition to Samuel, there are at least two other Cowan males in the area: Hugh and Edward. Hugh aquired property in the same general area on the same day, and could well be the uncle to whom James refers in the land transfer of 1848. Edward Cowan lived some distance away (about thirty miles, living at Roaring Spring), but not so far as to rule him out as Samuel's brother.

While we don't know specifically that Samuel, Hugh, and Edward were related, we do have clues to suggest this. First, we know that Samuel and Hugh obtain their land warrants on the very same day in 1785, and lived no more than a few miles apart. While they might be either cousins or brothers, it seems most likely that they were brothers. Edward obtained his land warrant about a year later, and at some distance (roughly 30 miles) away at what is now McKee Gap, near Roaring Springs. All three properties are within the larger area known as the "Great Cove". The timing and general proximity of these three parcels are enough to suggest that the three Cowan's may have been related. This is almost certainly the case with Hugh and Samuel, but we don't have enough direct evidence to say its probably true of Edward. There is, however, a very curious problem in the original 1878 version of the "Mary/Margaret Cowan" story. Namely, unlike later versions of this story, she identifies her husband's name not as Samuel, but "Edgar". This looks like the later authors changed this to "Samuel" because they assumed that "Mary/Margaret" had lived their all her adult life, and was married to Samuel---and it was Samuel who acquired the land at Cowan's Gap. But perhaps the story errors here, and Margaret is in reality Edward Cowan's wife, and "Edgar" is a mishearing of "Edward". Under this view William, David, and Hugh T. would be the sons of Edward Cowan of Roaring Springs. This, however, does not seem to be the case. Edward's will of 1836 lists 12 children, including a David and a William, but not a Hugh. Further, his will indicates that son William has predeceased him, as Edward leaves bequests to Williams wife and children. So, William son of Edward, could not be a son of Samuel's unnamed brother to whom James gave the Cowan's Gap in 1848. While Edward could still be Samuel's brother, his children are not the ones who received the Cowan's Gap Property.

Footnotes

  1. Forbes Road was a historic military roadway in what was then British America, that was constructed in 1758 from Carlisle, Pennsylvania to the French Fort Duquesne at the junction of the Allegheny and Monongahela rivers in what is now downtown Pittsburgh. The road was named for Brigadier General John Forbes, the commander of the 1758 British expedition that built the road during the French and Indian War in Pennsylvania. Forbes Road and Braddock's Road were the two main land routes that the British cut west through the mid-Atlantic wilderness during the war, despite the need to travel over and past a succession of north-south ridges that interferred with east-west travel. From the Wikipedia
  2. The children identified in the 1850 census could have been from a marriage of James. He appears to be married in the 1840 census, which shows him living in the same area as Samuel Cowans land. He is shown as age 40-49, with a similarly aged woman in his household (presumed wife), along with three boys, and two girls.