Analysis:Hugh Porter

Contents 1 Background 2 The problem 3 Family movements 4 DOD's and POD's 5 Children

Return to Carolina Cradle|Explanation The Tapestry Families| Old Chester| Carolina Cradle| SWVP| Germanna| New River| Cumberland|

Porter Tapestry Register Analysis Notebooks Data Graphics Bibliography Index YDNA

Background

Hugh Porter is identified as a brother in the 1749 will of William Porter of Chester Co PA. Hugh and William are commonly shown as the son of Nathaniel Porter and Violet Ogelsby of Adams County PA.

Their lineage, as commonly accepted,(based on Ancestry Family Trees, as of June 2009) is shown below,

The problem

Most lineages on Ancestry identify Hugh's wife as "Violet Mackey", father unknown. Violet is a relatively rare name in the 18th century, but common in the Porter genealogy. Four of the sons of Nathaniel Porter and Violet Ogelsby as shown above, identify a daughter Violet. (Not shown at the moment is Violet daughter of Hugh Porter, but many lineages for his family shown him with a daughter Violet.) Given the relative rarity of the name it is surprising to find a son whose mother was named "Violet" marrying a woman whose name was also "Violet". The coincidence seems improbable, and may suggest an error in the commonly accepted lineages. Either a) Hugh is not the son of Nathaniel Porter and Violet Ogelsby, or b) his wife is not a "Violet", or c) its a passably strange coincidence.

The first possibility is discussed elsewhere, [insert link], and the third possiblity is ignored for the moment. The question that is addressed immediately, is whether Violet Mackey is the wife of Hugh Porter. Direct evidence to support (or refute) this idea has not been found. "Hard data" for Hugh is relatively sparsely represented on the internet (as it is for most of these Porters---lineages abound, but pointers to information sources other than the ephemeral are difficult to find. However, from unsourced statements that are found on the web, we can say something of Hugh's (and presumably his wife's) history.

Family movements

The following is based primarily on the lineages presented on Ancestry^[1] for Hugh Porter and wife Violet Mackey, and son of Nathaniel Porter and Violet Ogelsby. Chester County, PA.

First, we can infer from William Porter's will of 1749, wherein he identifies his brother Hugh (presumably the Hugh who is said to have married Violet Mackey), was in Chester County as late as 1749.

Guilford County, NC. In light of the above we have the following unsourced statement made in one of the lineages on Ancestry:

Hugh and Violet removed to Granville District/ Orange County, North Carolina and purchased 393 acres of land on 14 February, 1757, on the East Side of the North Fork of Haw River and High Rock Creek. Hugh Porter was commissioned Justice of the Peace for Orange County in 1757. Land purchase records show purchase in this area for Hugh Porter Jr., William Porter, and Adam Porter.
Key: Black circle--where High Rock Creek enters the Haw River. Hugh Porter acquired land in this area in 1757. Purple cross-hatched circle--Approximate area on Moon Creek where Patrick Porter was living by about 1760.

Thus, according to most genealogists Hugh Porter son of Nathaniel Porter and Violet Ogelsby, has moved to Guilford County NC by 1757. Here he apparently became integrated into the community, becoming a Justice of the Peace. Those that place him here usually have him as the son of Nathaniel and Violet. Some have him coming from PA, but others have him coming directly from Ireland.

Pendleton Co., SC Some genealogists place Hugh in Abbeville, Pendleton Co, SC. circa 1800, or earlier, usually without citing any basis for this. Some have him coming directly from Ireland, from PA, from North Carolina, or some combination of the above. The common element in this is that NONE supply much if any basis for whatever migration history they attach to him.

DOD's and POD's

Some genealogists indicate that he died in Guilford NC, but others indicate that he moved on to Pendleton County, SC. It is instructive to look at some of the DOD and POD's given for him on Ancestry:

These differences in DOD's and POD's probably reflect a confusion of one sort or another, and probably reflect DOD's for different individuals all named "Hugh Porter". Without knowing the specific sources for items 1, 2, and 3, it is not easy to say exactly what is going on. Item 4, however, is based on a specific record, the will of a Hugh Porter in Abbeville SC, written in 1808. This Hugh Porter is sometimes identified as the Hugh who married Violet Mackey and son of Nathaniel Porter and Violet Oglesby. This conflicts, of course, with the DOD's others give that Hugh (1785, 1795). A simple explanation would be that this will is for the son of Hugh son of Nathaniel. Since Hugh Jr. does appear to be present in Guilford County (land records mentioned above) this interpretation would be consistent with the idea that a Hugh Porter did settle in Abbesville, coming from Guilford County. In that interpretation, the question becomes, did his father Hugh Sr. also come to Abbesville? Ultimately, resolving this and similar questions requires original source data, rather conclusions perhaps based on original sources, but for which the connection to those sources has long been severed. These conclusions seem to have been accepted, passed around, and incorporated in peoples lineages as "factual", but the absence of a connection to the underlying sources makes the conclusions themselves difficult to interpret, and often conflicting. We can say with some certainty that Hugh Porter, son of Nathaniel and Violet, did not die in both Guilford County, AND Abbesville, SC. Perhasp A Hugh Porter died on those dates in both places, but not the same Hugh Porter. Deciding who died where and when is only possible if you can get at the underlying sources that support those dates and places.

Children

There are a number of children identified in the Ancestry lineages for Hugh Porter and Violet Mackey. The names listed on any given lineage vary considerably. This could be because individual genealogists are being selective in the children they list, or because they are combing children for different Hugh Porters.

The following summarizes the most common children's name listed for this couple:

Two names that we would think would be associated with this Hugh Porter son of Nathaniel and violet, that are not listed above, are "Adam" and "William" both of whom are shown in land records as acquiring land in Guilford County about the same time as Hugh Sr. The Hugh, Jr. that acquires land their is presumablly Hugh Sr.'s son. Perhaps Adam and William are relations but not sons; in anycase, no one seems to have picked them up in their lineages.