Tag: Anna Craig Rankin

Enter Spade and Columbo: Autosomal Evidence

It pays to have friends who excel at family history research and know DNA stuff. In that category, I am lucky to know Spade and Columbo. Y’all have met Spade before at least twice.[1] He is a California guy, famous for slurping Cutty Sark and hanging up on people. I don’t know where Columbo lives or what he drinks, if at all. Like Spade, though, he usually gets his man.

The two genealogy detectives are distant cousins. Both are descended from Adam Rankin who died in 1747 in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, and his wife Mary Steele Alexander. Spade has a solid gold paper trail back to Adam and Mary. Columbo’s chart has one, um, interesting link, but it is still golden. Spade is descended from Adam and Mary through their son James and his wife Jean Campbell Rankin. Columbo descends through their son William and Mary Huston Rankin.

That brings us to an article published here on October 29, 2023 concerning Joshua and Mary Rankin Cox and her purported parents, John and Anna Craig Rankin.[2] That article wonders whether there was a relationship between those Rankins and Adam’s line. The article suggests some speculative possibilities — with no evidence as far as the eye could see.

It also pays to admit it when you don’t know nuthin’ and ask for help. Enter Spade and Columbo, both of whom have done autosomal tests, as have three of Columbo’s close relatives. Between them, they have numerous Cox matches. Spade sums up the autosomal evidence as follows:

“There’s zero chance that Mary Rankin Cox was not a very close relative of Adam Rankin d. 1747.”

Of course, we are still in the dark about how Adam and Mary Rankin Cox were related. DNA leaves that for us to figure out. Here are some possibilities:

…  Mary Rankin Cox and Adam Rankin were siblings.

…  Mary Rankin Cox was Adam’s niece; thus her alleged father John and Adam would have been brothers.

…  Mary Rankin Cox was Adam’s daughter.

Here is what Spade has to say:

“Lady, you ask so many questions I’m going to have to demand my usual retainer pretty soon. But this one’s on me: I go with siblings as the relationship between Adam Rankin and Mary Rankin Cox. Her oldest child would have been born about 1726, while Adam and Mary Steele Rankin were also having children in the 1720s. Joshua Cox, Mary Rankin Cox’s husband, died the same year as Adam, 1747, also in Lancaster County.  That looks like Mary and Adam were from the same generation. I think she would have been  Adam’s younger sister. Looks to me like there are too many matches at too many centimorgans to say that the connection extends back another generation.”

Columbo, on the other hand, opines that the John who was allegedly Mary Rankin Cox’s father was Adam’s brother, which puts Mary in the role of Adam’s niece. That theory gets support from the oral family legend that Adam of Lancaster County had a brother John.

The notion that Mary Rankin Cox may have been Adam’s daughter seems like forcing Cinderella’s shoe to fit. The argument in favor is that Mary had a proved brother William, while Adam had a proved son William. The glaring flaw here is that Adam’s will didn’t name a daughter Mary or a son-in-law Cox. Adam did give his married daughter Esther Rankin Dunwoody a cash bequest, so he wasn’t just omitting daughters. If there was ever a surefire way to stir up resentment, or even a will contest, failing to give a child at least a token bequest qualifies.

The other issue with the theory that Mary Cox was Adam’s daughter arises from the plethora of William Rankins in the area. Why pick on Adam’s son William to be Mary Cox’s brother out of all the William Rankin possibilities who appeared in Franklin County? Equally as reasonable — although just as speculative — Adam Rankin and Mary Rankin Cox could well have had a brother William, who would then have been the Rankin named in Joshua Cox’s will.

Spade’s argument sounds more persuasive. My only addition is the fact that Joshua Cox’s will, written in April 1747, provides that his children should be “put to trades” at age sixteen.[3] That suggests some of his children were born in the 1730s. His son John, named an executor, was probably indeed born by 1726. That seems to support Spade’s opinion that Mary Rankin Cox may have been Adam’s younger sister.

In short, there doesn’t seem to be any compelling logic dictating the type of family relationship between Mary Rankin Cox and Adam Rankin. Also, there is the niggling matter of evidence, which is entirely lacking in this matter. Does anyone reading this have any other ideas, evidence, or suggestions? If so, please share!

Meanwhile, I owe you the next installment in Adam and Mary’s descendant chart. Soon.

See you on down the road.

Robin

            [1] See articles written by or featuring Spade here and here.

            [2] See the article about Mary Rankin Cox and her possible parents at this link.. So far as I know, the only evidence of the existence of John and Anna Craig Rankin is a Cox researcher’s letter in a Franklin Co. historical society.

            [3] Lancaster Co., PA Will Book A: 131. The clerk’s transcription twice calls the testator Joshua and once John. In the margin where the deceased’s name is written, “Joshua” is struck through and “John” is written in. This may be the reason many people refer to this man as “John Joshua Cox” or “Joshua John Cox.” In any event, the will names as executors Joshua’s wife Mary and son John, with Joshua’s brother-in-law William Rankin to assist his wife. Joshua left two-thirds of his estate to his children, but identified by name only his sons John and Richard and a daughter Mary. The will also provided that his children should be “put to trades” when they reached age 16. That suggests at least some of the children were born after 1731, since the will is dated 22 April 1747. John, named an executor, was probably of age in 1747 and thus born by 1726.

Dr. Seuss again: “Thing 4,” need help!

Sometimes one has to belly up to the bar and admit she hasn’t a clue. This is one of those times.

Also, how could I possibly have omitted Thing 4 from my last post? He is one of the William Rankins who gives some of us gray hair. Or, to be accurate, more gray hair. If you are mystified by the Dr. Seuss and “Thing 4” references, please read the previous article on this website.

There are at least two sources attesting to the existence of Thing 4:

  • The 1747 Lancaster County, Pennsylvania will of Joshua Cox naming as executors his wife (given name not provided) and his brother-in-law William Rankin.[1]
  • A letter dated April 13, 1995 from Lucille Cox Thompson to the Kittochtinny Historical Society in Chambersburg, Franklin County, Pennsylvania. Ms. Thompson identified a John Rankin and Anna Craig as the parents of (1) Mary Rankin who married Joshua Cox and (2) William Rankin. It also says that Joshua and Mary Rankin Cox’s daughter married John Craig.

The letter goes on to say that John and Anna Craig Rankin arrived in the Colonies circa 1720 and settled in “Upland, Pennsylvania.” That borough is now in Delaware County, which was created in 1789 from Chester County.

Here’s the scanty outline chart the above information defines:

1  John Rankin m. Anna Craig

    2 William Rankin

    2 Mary Rankin m. Joshua Cox

      3 Mary Cox m. John Craig

So … who was the William Rankin with a sister Mary Rankin Cox?

I don’t know. The Rankin DNA Project doesn’t have a member who claims descent from William, son of John and Anna Craig Rankin.[2] He could be the same man as the William who married Victory Alcorn in Cumberland County and went to North Carolina, AKA “Thing 1.” Or he could be the same man as the William who married Mary Stewart in Franklin County and went to Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, AKA “Thing 2.” He might even be the same man as “Thing 3,” William Rankin of Indiana County, Pennsylvania. If anyone out there has a theory, please say so.

Here is another question: who was the John Rankin whose wife was Anna Craig?

Again, I don’t know. He was almost certainly not the John Rankin who died in Lancaster County in 1749. That John Rankin’s will named his wife Margaret,[3] while his family’s oral history identifies his wife as Jane McIlwee.

However, the surname Craig – which appears twice in the above minimal chart –  caught my attention. If you are a Rankin researcher or follow this blog, you know that Adam and Mary Steele Alexander Rankin of Lancaster County (created from Chester) had a son named Jeremiah. He died in a mill accident in Cumberland (created from Lancaster) in 1760. Jeremiah Rankin’s wife was Rhoda Craig.

As you undoubtedly know, colonial families frequently intermarried. If you find Rankins and Rankin descendants who married Craigs — e.g., John Rankin/Anna Craig, Jeremiah Rankin/Rhoda Craig, and Mary Cox/John Craig — a reasonable inference is that the Rankins were related. Alternatively or additionally, that the Craigs were related. But how? That, my friends, is the $64,000 question, to use an outdated metaphor.

Jeremiah’s father Adam Rankin allegedly had a brother John, according to an oral family legend that has become the conventional wisdom. Adam’s brother John, claims the legend, was the John Rankin who died in Lancaster County in 1749, two years after Adam died there. The problem with this part of the legend is that Y-DNA tests of both men’s descendants conclusively establish that the Adam who died in 1747 and the John who died in 1749 were not genetically related in the paternal line. They could not possibly have been brothers.

There are several possibilities here. Perhaps (1) the legend is just flat wrong about Adam having a brother John, or (2) the legend identified the wrong (albeit extremely convenient) John Rankin as Adam’s brother.[4] Enter a hoary genealogy maxim: family legends nearly always contain some element of truth, even if the details are frequently in error. What immediately sprang to mind was this: could the oral legend be right that the Adam who died in 1747 had a brother named John, but Adam’s brother was the John Rankin who married Anna Craig rather than the John who died in 1749?

Alternatively, might it be possible that John and Anna Craig Rankin were the parents of Adam died 1747, rather than John and Adam being brothers? The Cox family oral history, which is probably due as much deference as the Rankin family oral history, is that John and Anna’s daughter Mary Rankin Cox and her husband Joshua came to the colonies about 1720, which is supposedly when Adam arrived.

Those theories suggest two alternative speculative short charts for the line of Adam d. 1747:

Theory 1: John and Adam were brothers …

1  Unknown Rankin parents

2 John Rankin m. Anna Craig

2 Adam Rankin m. Mary Steele Alexander

OR Theory 2: John was Adam’s father …

1 John Rankin m. Anna Craig

2 Adam Rankin m. Mary Steele Alexander

2 Mary Craig m. Joshua Cox

2 William Rankin

I am not endorsing these theories, just throwing them out there as food for thought. I hope to find someone having relevant information and/or thoughts to offer on the subject.

See you on down the road.

Robin

            [1] Lancaster Co., PA Will Book A: 131.

                  [2] Not all members of the Rankin DNA Project provide a family tree. One of them could be descended from John and Anna Craig Rankin.

                  [3] Lancaster Co., PA Will Book J: 211.

                  [4] The fact that Adam d. 1747 and John d. 1749 were not related in the Rankin line is one of several aspects of the legend that make me wonder whether it was created relatively recently — i.e., in the 20th century — rather than having been handed down from generation to generation since the 18th or 19th century. Some of Adam’s and John’s descendants appear never to have heard the legend. Rev. Adam Rankin (son of Jeremiah and Rhoda Craig Rankin and grandson of Adam and Mary Steele Alexander Rankin) was apparently not familiar with the legend. Nor was Richard Duffield Rankin, a great grandson of the John Rankin who died in Lancaster in 1749. See this article about the legend.