Proving Thomas              

(Authors note: Sometimes in family history people get lost along the way. The job is to find them, and to tell their story if only for a wee bit.)

As always, unapologetically unedited...

 As I've started to parse out the different branches of my grandmother Gertrude (Burson) Record's side of the family tree, one of the more interesting stories I have encountered is the somewhat strange and bittersweet tale of a Revolutionary War soldier, an ancestor of mine by the name of Thomas Kent. Thomas was my great-grandmother Gertrude's alleged great-great-grandfather, so yes, I've had to go back a year or two to tell his story and attempt to connect the dots. Not to get lost in the mix of how he connects to me or to any of the rest of the story, I have added a screenshot below to better give you an idea of the genealogy:

Above: Pedigree chart from Gertrude (Burson) Record to Thomas Kent

Thomas Kent's connection comes through the marriage of his daughter "Susannah" to George Burson. Sadly, evidence of this marriage is largely anecdotal and appears to have been passed down by word of mouth rather than documented with vital records. George Burson certainly did marry a woman named "Susannah," as reflected on old land deeds, notably in Columbiana County, Ohio where "this story" takes place. However, if she was "Susannah [Kent] daughter of Thomas Kent who married George Burson" more work needs to be done.

Thomas Kent is reputed to have lived to be 103 years old.    

  

Much of the information we have about Thomas Kent comes from his 1833 application for a Revolutionary War pension (see cropped image above). The pension application "records" him in the first person telling about his life, where he was born, where he lived, and when he served. It follows his story from Prince William County, Virginia, through Loudon County, Virginia, and further to Columbiana County, Ohio. The pension application doesn't tell us the names of his wife or his children. Thus far, I am aware that no LW&T or other document has been found confirming the names of his wife or children. Family trees state that Thomas Kent had seven children, with another account referring to two of his children as simply "unnamed."  

However (and this is where it gets tricky) there is no daughter named Susannah.     

      

     Above: My descent through their son Thomas Burson who married Harriett Reeves begins here.

For the sake of argument and history, and based on the 1932 book History of the Burson Family, we will assume that Susannah was indeed a "Kent." Whether or not she was the "daughter of Thomas Kent" and further, if so, that she is the same daughter [Susannah] who married George Burson we can only infer. We can prove based on his pension statements that " a Thomas Kent" lived in [Fairfield township] Columbiana County, Ohio, (born in the year 1746 per his pension application) and is listed in the 1830 census. He is the correct age to be Susannah's father in the cemetery records that state "Susannah, wife of George Burson" was born in 1776.                                 

                              

To supplement this, we can prove that "a George Burson" lived in Elkrun Township, Columbiana County, Ohio in 1830. He is the right age to be the "George Burson who married Susannah" and his wife is the right age to be "Susannah" the alleged daughter of Thomas Kent.                           

We also see that the distance between the Kents and the Bursons of Columbiana County, Ohio in 1830 is negligible even by 1830 standards:          

While it seems like we have made a good that "Susannah, daughter of Thomas Kent, married George Burson" we haven't and at this point and maybe we never will. There is one thing left though that might help our assertion that the old Burson Genealogy is correct. At the bottom of the pension application for Thomas, where he is asked the names of the men who can attest to his military service and his character in telling the truth, there, at the bottom of the application are several of the Burson men. Most notable though, is the name of, George Burson.

While not proven, Thomas Kent has perhaps inadvertently named his son-in-law George Burson (and husband of his daughter Susannah) to attest to his statements!       

 Here is a transcription of the "Interrogations" for the RW pension application of Thomas Kent:

                           

                     

So while we haven't proven it, we have certainly added to the evidence in favor. I don't know about you, but at this point, I'm pretty comfortable calling Susannah, George Burson's wife, Thomas Kent's daughter.

But if you thought this was where the story ended, you might be mistaken. You see, somehow along the way, we managed to lose our ancestor Thomas Kent. Only in 2004 was it discovered that Thomas Kent's grave had been labeled as belonging to someone named "Benjamin Kent" and that the grave, incorrectly named, had also been abandoned for one hundred and fifty years or better.             

                               

    Our relationship to, and the story of our ancestor Thomas Kent, has been mislabeled and lost in time. In closing, I should mention that my Ancestry.com DNA profile matches 42 other people who also claim descent from Private Thomas Kent, late of Columbia County, Ohio.

103 years old!

Rest in peace, Grandfather.

⚐