Back in 2014, I worked on the origins of the St. John family at the Salt Lake Institute. The debate was between the family being from Antwerp in the Spanish Netherlands [now Belgium] or having roots in Wales.
My conclusions at the time leaned toward Antwerp, but not with absolute certainty. That research project has gathered dust since then.
Loose ends existed on both sides of the argument. The time has finally come to try to tie up those loose ends.
I have plenty to examine:
[1] a copy of the article that promoted the Antwerp origin.
[2] a rebuttal article stating the case for Welsh origins.
[3] my own research on both theories.
[4] numerous articles on the Welsh families.
[5] my SLIG project report and summary findings.
Perhaps I missed something last time around. One item is missing from the Welsh research that is crucial - the will of Thomas St. John's will. Likewise, similar documentation is missing from the other side.
What is known:
[1] Matthias St. John, the immigrant, was the son of Christopher St. John.
What needs to be determined:
[1] Was Christopher born in Antwerp, Wales or possibly London?
[2] Was Christopher's father Mathias of Antwerp or Thomas of Wales?
Let the fun begin!!!!
Tuesday, April 23, 2019
Thursday, April 18, 2019
Historical Perspective
In my humble opinion, one of the failings of our current "politically correct" attitude is the inability for a great number of people to put things in historical perspective. 20th and 21st century values seldom apply to events that took place 50, 75, 100 or 300 years ago.
What people believe to be abhorrent today was accepted in other eras. Many people cannot grasp that fact.
Let's take a look at a few examples:
[1] World War II's Pacific Campaign came to an end, in part, due to the US decision to drop the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Between 90000 and 166000 Japanese lives were lost. People have ranted in recent years about the evils of the decision to drop the bombs on the two Japanese cities. What were the alternatives? Continue the war until Japan elected to surrender? Launch an allied invasion of Japan? Experts have estimated that Allied forces would have met with extreme civilian resistance in addition to military opposition. The cost in lives among the Allies would have been upward of one million. Weigh the options. 100000 Japanese deaths and an end to the war or upwards of a million US and Allied casualties as a result of invading Japan? How many of those decrying the use of the atomic bomb in 1945 would have never been born because their fathers were killed invading Japan. Look at the bigger picture.
[2] Slavery is and was an abhorrent institution. It became a primary basis for the economy of the southern American colonies and eventual states. Slavery began as indentured servitude in 1619. Native American tribes were enslaved for awhile, but that practice failed. The tribes enslaved other Native Americans and colonists. Some were adopted into the tribe, others were sold back to their people, others remained enslaved. Europeans were sold into servitude in the colonies. Most could work off their indentures in seven or so years. Yet there were rules in place that could extend those indentures indefinitely. The first African servants were brought to Virginia in 1619. Most were prisoners captured by other African tribes, traded to European and American slave traders. Slavery existed in all 13 colonies. Gradually slavery faded in New England and most of the northern colonies by the outbreak of the American Revolution, but continued as an economic foundation in the South.
The institution continued to be hotly debated and spread westward as more states joined the Union. Southern states believed in states' rights and felt that the federal government had no right to interfere in what policies the states followed, including slavery. Some slaveowners believed slavery would die a natural death and should be allowed to do so. Actual slaveowners made up a small percentage of the Southern population. Slavery was outlawed in 1863. Attitudes toward the former slaves took almost a century to change, in some cases it hasn't. Slavery is still a worldwide problem. It now comes under the heading of "human trafficking."
For centuries slavery was an accepted institution. It existed in America from 1619 until 1863. It existed. That cannot be denied, no matter how one feels about it. From 1619 until well into the 1700s, it existed in all colonies. There's a fair chance that an ancestor may have owned a slave in any of the colonies before the Revolution. If southern roots are found on the family tree chances are much stronger. For nearly 250 years slavery existed in America and was accepted by many, right or wrong. You have to live with the choices made by your ancestors.
[3] Treatment of Native Americans has been an issue since the first treaty was broken. The Native Americans were not the peaceful farmer-hunters that some make them out to be. Some tribes definitely were. Others were warlike tribes that preyed on their peaceful neighbors. Weaker tribes formed alliances against those encroaching on their territory. Stronger tribes forced weaker ones to find new homes. Once Europeans arrived, some tribes formed alliances with them. Others instantly opposed the whites' arrival. Some colonists purchased land from local tribes in good faith. Others took it.
Tensions existed early and continued until the last of the tribes were defeated during the late 1800s. For centuries stronger, more technologically advanced cultures have conquered less advanced cultures. Was the westward migration of an Iron Age culture across the American continent at the expense of a Stone Age culture any different. It was more recent and impacted American history more than, say, the Mongols moving across Asia into Europe.
Was the treatment of the "American Indian" fair and just? No. Did it happen? Yes.
[4] Immigration is a real hot topic nowadays. Do we close our Southern borders? Do we let everyone from foreign countries who wants to enter the US? Do we institute immigration reform?
Let's take a look back at a few groups from other countries. The Irish Catholics were refused work and lodging for decades. "No Irish need apply" signs hung in windows across America. They took jobs as servants, miners, railroad workers, soldiers and any low paying job they could get. Similar treatment awaited Italians and immigrants from predominately Catholic southern European nations.
As railroads were being built, Chinese workers were brought in to help build them. German and Scandinavian immigrants came into the country as the 19th century progressed.
The main thing that these groups had in common was the desire to better themselves. They settled in their own communities and neighborhoods for support. They worked hard, [generally in legal endeavors,] to provide for their families. As time passed, they assimilated into American culture. These people did not expect handouts, just the opportunity to work, provide for their families [or bring them to the States] and become Americans.
Sometimes we forget the efforts of our own ancestors to give us the opportunities we have today.
The above views may not be popular. We have to realize that our opinions today aren't those of two generations ago. You can't apply 21st century values to 19th century events and understand them in context.
What people believe to be abhorrent today was accepted in other eras. Many people cannot grasp that fact.
Let's take a look at a few examples:
[1] World War II's Pacific Campaign came to an end, in part, due to the US decision to drop the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Between 90000 and 166000 Japanese lives were lost. People have ranted in recent years about the evils of the decision to drop the bombs on the two Japanese cities. What were the alternatives? Continue the war until Japan elected to surrender? Launch an allied invasion of Japan? Experts have estimated that Allied forces would have met with extreme civilian resistance in addition to military opposition. The cost in lives among the Allies would have been upward of one million. Weigh the options. 100000 Japanese deaths and an end to the war or upwards of a million US and Allied casualties as a result of invading Japan? How many of those decrying the use of the atomic bomb in 1945 would have never been born because their fathers were killed invading Japan. Look at the bigger picture.
[2] Slavery is and was an abhorrent institution. It became a primary basis for the economy of the southern American colonies and eventual states. Slavery began as indentured servitude in 1619. Native American tribes were enslaved for awhile, but that practice failed. The tribes enslaved other Native Americans and colonists. Some were adopted into the tribe, others were sold back to their people, others remained enslaved. Europeans were sold into servitude in the colonies. Most could work off their indentures in seven or so years. Yet there were rules in place that could extend those indentures indefinitely. The first African servants were brought to Virginia in 1619. Most were prisoners captured by other African tribes, traded to European and American slave traders. Slavery existed in all 13 colonies. Gradually slavery faded in New England and most of the northern colonies by the outbreak of the American Revolution, but continued as an economic foundation in the South.
The institution continued to be hotly debated and spread westward as more states joined the Union. Southern states believed in states' rights and felt that the federal government had no right to interfere in what policies the states followed, including slavery. Some slaveowners believed slavery would die a natural death and should be allowed to do so. Actual slaveowners made up a small percentage of the Southern population. Slavery was outlawed in 1863. Attitudes toward the former slaves took almost a century to change, in some cases it hasn't. Slavery is still a worldwide problem. It now comes under the heading of "human trafficking."
For centuries slavery was an accepted institution. It existed in America from 1619 until 1863. It existed. That cannot be denied, no matter how one feels about it. From 1619 until well into the 1700s, it existed in all colonies. There's a fair chance that an ancestor may have owned a slave in any of the colonies before the Revolution. If southern roots are found on the family tree chances are much stronger. For nearly 250 years slavery existed in America and was accepted by many, right or wrong. You have to live with the choices made by your ancestors.
[3] Treatment of Native Americans has been an issue since the first treaty was broken. The Native Americans were not the peaceful farmer-hunters that some make them out to be. Some tribes definitely were. Others were warlike tribes that preyed on their peaceful neighbors. Weaker tribes formed alliances against those encroaching on their territory. Stronger tribes forced weaker ones to find new homes. Once Europeans arrived, some tribes formed alliances with them. Others instantly opposed the whites' arrival. Some colonists purchased land from local tribes in good faith. Others took it.
Tensions existed early and continued until the last of the tribes were defeated during the late 1800s. For centuries stronger, more technologically advanced cultures have conquered less advanced cultures. Was the westward migration of an Iron Age culture across the American continent at the expense of a Stone Age culture any different. It was more recent and impacted American history more than, say, the Mongols moving across Asia into Europe.
Was the treatment of the "American Indian" fair and just? No. Did it happen? Yes.
[4] Immigration is a real hot topic nowadays. Do we close our Southern borders? Do we let everyone from foreign countries who wants to enter the US? Do we institute immigration reform?
Let's take a look back at a few groups from other countries. The Irish Catholics were refused work and lodging for decades. "No Irish need apply" signs hung in windows across America. They took jobs as servants, miners, railroad workers, soldiers and any low paying job they could get. Similar treatment awaited Italians and immigrants from predominately Catholic southern European nations.
As railroads were being built, Chinese workers were brought in to help build them. German and Scandinavian immigrants came into the country as the 19th century progressed.
The main thing that these groups had in common was the desire to better themselves. They settled in their own communities and neighborhoods for support. They worked hard, [generally in legal endeavors,] to provide for their families. As time passed, they assimilated into American culture. These people did not expect handouts, just the opportunity to work, provide for their families [or bring them to the States] and become Americans.
Sometimes we forget the efforts of our own ancestors to give us the opportunities we have today.
The above views may not be popular. We have to realize that our opinions today aren't those of two generations ago. You can't apply 21st century values to 19th century events and understand them in context.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)