Alzheimer’s Clinical Trials

This morning I received notice of a press release about the results of a recently completed clinical trial for Alzheimer’s. As someone who is participating in a number of various studies, I was of course quite interested – especially when I found that this trial was of the same drug that I have recently agreed to participate in a clinical trial for.

Here is a link to the press release - https://investors.biogen.com/news-releases/news-release-details/lecanemab-confirmatory-phase-3-clarity-ad-study-met-primary

Here is a link to a comment on this result from the principals at Penn Medical Center where I have been participating in studies - https://pennmemorycenter.org/lecanemab/

As Dr. Wolk notes, “This is an extremely encouraging development…” And as Dr. Karlawish notes, “in the history of Alzheimer’s disease, I hope that Tuesday, September 27^th, 2022 will become one of the great events.”

While I agree with those comments, the clinical trials will continue. The one that is mentioned in this press release lasted for 18 months and showed that the drug caused slower declines. But more study is needed. The trial that I have signed up has further aspects that will be studied. Primarily, this study is looking at individuals who do not yet show any MCI (Mild Cognitive Impairment) where the one in the news release studied those who already had symptoms of Alzheimer's. But there are additional differences as well. First, the study population will be divided into two groups – one with intermediate level of the amyloid plaque and one for those with a more elevated level.  And while this first study gave the participants infusions on a bi-weekly basis, the trial that I have signed up will have a bi-weekly infusion for those with elevated plaque and monthly for those with only an intermediate level. Both options will last for four years.

[Amyloid Plaques]

 

AHEAD Study

For those who are interested, here is further information about the study that I have signed up to participate in - https://pennmemorycenter.org/research/open-research-studies/ahead/.

Right now, I am in the multi-stage qualification process. There are several aspects of this qualification process. Here is a summary from the consent form I signed this summer:

Stage 1A – blood biomarkers

This stage is for evaluation of the blood biomarkers to see if I have the APOE4 gene which is an indicator that I am susceptible for Alzheimer’s. If I did not, then I would not be eligible to move forward with the screening process, but since I am already scheduled for my 1B visit, this is confirmation that I must have the APOE4 gene. (For more info see https://www.nia.nih.gov/news/study-reveals-how-apoe4-gene-may-increase-risk-dementia)

Stage 1B – questionnaires and test of memory and thinking

This evaluates my mental skills pre-study and establishes a baseline against which future yearly tests can be compared. I’ve done these before for other studies – they are intense, but I am prepared for them.

Stage 2 – Amyloid PET scan

Looks for whether the amyloid plaques are present in the brain at the intermediate or elevated levels or if they are not present. Those with the intermediate level participate in one trial that has once-a-month infusions, those with the elevated level are in a separate trial that has twice-a-month infusions. If there are no amyloid plaques available, then the person is ineligible.

Stage 3 – learn the PET scan result and the blood biomarker result

The person is able to withdraw at this point if they desire. Otherwise, they will sign the consent form for the appropriate arm of the study.

Stage 4 – MRI Scan

Looks for any issues that might make the person ineligible. Since I’ve already had one of these for another study, I don’t anticipate any issues here.

Stage 5 – Tau PET scan and optional Lumbar puncture

Two other things that are associated with those who have Alzheimer’s. The Tau tangle does not have levels associated with it at this time, but is monitored during the study. The lumbar puncture (which I have already had for another study) tries to measure directly the level of amyloid plaques in the brain fluid and they can compare those results to the PET scan in stage 2.

 

Once I’ve gone through all the above stages (and at this point I am expecting that I will continue to qualify for the study), then the periodic infusions will take place for the next four years.

One of my initial concerns was the number of visits that this study would require me to travel to Philadelphia where the research is taking place. This has been alleviated through two different means. First, they are now offering a Lyft service so that I can ride instead of drive for all the necessary visits to Philly. Secondly, while all the stages of the testing will be in Philly as well as the first few infusions (so they can observe any side-effects if there are any), after that they will have a visiting nurse who can do the infusions in the home (this will save not only the travel, but all the time needed with an hour+ each way for just a short infusion). I’ll still have to go to Philly at least once a year, but that’s not much compared to having to do it monthly or bi-weekly.

As I noted above, I’ve already going through stage 1a and my stage 1b visit is scheduled for 3 weeks from now. I recognize that no study is without a certain amount of risk, but I believe that the risk (which they have ensured I understand) is far less that the potential benefit – perhaps for me, but even more importantly for others in the future.

 

The other studies (which are not clinical trials of drugs) are also continuing. I do one of them online every two months (Web APT). Another is annual and requires a trip to Philly for mental evaluation (ABC – Aging Brain Cohort). And I recently received an invitation for a second occurrence of the MTL (medial-temporal lobe) study when I am in Philly for the ABC study. I did this combination ABC-MTL visit last year so I’m expecting several hours of very intense mental activity for the two back-to-back. So far, I have not shown any reduced mental acuity in any of these tests. But the future is always uncertain. My father did not show any obvious symptoms until he reached his 80s. So, I will continue on.

 

Bottom line – you can pray for me as I go through this clinical trial. But also I encourage you to participate in these types of trials if you have the opportunity.

Pierpont Family Coat of Arms – Part 2

Since I published part one on this topic a few days ago, I’ve done quite a bit more research into the topic of coats of arms. There have been several legs of this research which I’d like to document here.

 

Additional Confirmation of the Pierrepont COA and the Crest

The example I gave of the full COA for Evelyn Pierrepont, Duke of Kingston-upon-Hull was published in 1764 when Evelyn was the second Duke (from 1726-1773). I recently discovered another publication from Guillam in 1724 which also had the crest of the Duke of Kingston.

[Guillam 1724]

 

This publication was during the time of the first Duke, also Evelyn (grandfather of the 2^nd Duke), who held that title from 1706-1726. Prior to 1706, he had been Earl of Kingston as well as Baron Pierrepont and Viscount Newark from 1690. As you can see here, the COA during his time also had the crest of a “lion rampant sable”.  

The Guillim publication has COAs for all the Dukes of England at the time. There are only 24 of them, giving some indication of how important Evelyn Pierrepont was in society. The writing below the COA identifies him as “The most Noble Prince Evelin Duke of Kingston, Lord Privy Seal, and Knight of the most Noble Order of the Garter.”

Evelyn held the title Lord Privy Seal twice, from 1716-1719 and again from 1720-1726, one of only a few who had two terms of that title. That position is the 5^th of the Great Officers of the State, following the Lord High Steward of England, Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain, Lord High Treasurer of the United Kingdom, and Lord President of the Council. In the past this person was responsible for the personal (privy) seal of the King and thus would have had a lot of regular interaction with him. Evelyn served in this position under King George I. In recent years the Lord Privy Seal title is more honorary and has been given to the Leader of the House of Lords or the Leader of the House of Commons.

 

The Russell Coat of Arms

Several years ago, someone gave me a gift of a set of drink coasters which were labeled “Heraldic Coasters”. These had on them a family COA with the name “Russell” underneath.

[coaster]

The shield on the very fancy COA has a red lion on a white background (what I now know is “argent, lion rampant gules”) and a motto of “Che sera sera”. There is no crest above the shield. The label on the back of the package says, “The name Russell has been known in Ireland since the Middle Ages, and although of English origin it is now found in many parts of the country. There was never a Russell clan as such, but many individual Russells have left their mark on Irish history. Famous family members include the artist and poet George Russell, or AE.”

This is a great example of what scholars call “misappropriated coats of arms”, i.e. the practice of taking a coat of arms associated with one person with a particular surname and saying that it thus belongs to everyone with that surname. In many cases, even the COA is just made up as well.

My Russell surname has been handed down to me over several generations with the earliest ancestor I have been able to confirm as being Robert Russell who was an immigrant from Scotland to the US around 1750. He was an illiterate Scottish farmer, and certainly not the possessor of a COA. And he was not from Ireland as this “Heraldic Coaster” gives as the origin of the name.

In fact, you can find these kinds of coasters/mugs/sweatshirts, and much other merchandise available all over – and attributed not just to Ireland, but also to Scotland and England. Just a big marketing ploy to sell you merchandise, with no real genealogical connections at all!

But as you look at the hundreds of images that pop up when you type “Russell coat of arms” into a search engine, there is a similarity to them. They all have a red lion on the shield – usually standing (rampant) but sometime not. Some of the shields have a black bar across the top with three stylized shells. Those that have a crest generally have a goat. Many do not have a motto, but when they do it is “Che sera sera”.

I am well aware that this are simply a marketing ploy and that they have no real meaning to me. So these coasters sit unused in a desk drawer. But what it the basis for the design?

In searching, I have found that this plain shield with a standing red lion and a black bar with three shells is the shield of the Duke of Bedford. The first creation of that title dates back to 1414, but after several other creations, the title went extinct in 1495. The most recent creation began with the title of Baron Russell in 1539, followed by the Earl of Bedford title in 1551 and the current Duke of Bedford title in 1694. Thus, it’s been in the Russell family for over 300 years with the current Duke being the 15^th. But unless one is descended from one of that specific Russell line, any uses (such as the mention of this coaster being Irish), is definitely a misappropriation.

Interestingly, in Guillim’s book, the COA for the Duke of Bedford is just a few pages before the COA for the Duke of Kingston and is also one 24 Dukes from 1724, with the then holder being “The most Noble Prince Wriothesley Duke of Bedford” who was the 3^rd Duke.

 

Other Russell Ancestors

While my direct Russell lineage is quite definitely not traceable to the Dukes of Bedford and my coasters are a good example of misappropriate of a COA, there are other individuals in my family tree – on the Pierpont side – who carry that surname. Might they have been entitled to the use of that COA?

 

Noadiah Russell (1659-1713)

It is well documented that Joseph Pierpont, a son of the Rev. James and my great*6 grandfather, married Mary Russell, the daughter of Noadiah Russell, the pastor of the Middletown, CT, church and a contemporary and friend of the Rev. James Russell. Where did his Russell ancestors come from?

Noadiah’s father was William Russell (1611-1665). He had come to New Haven in 1639 as a ship’s carpenter. There he married Sarah Davis in 1644. Noadiah was born in 1659 and was sent by his parents to Harvard where he graduated in 1681 and began his life of service in the ministry.

There are hundreds of family trees in ancestry.com that indicate that the father of William Russell (1611-1665) was Sir William Russell (1558-1613), the 3^rd Earl of Bedford. But this makes little sense for two reasons. First, the father of a ship’s carpenter is not likely to be an Earl. And second, Sir William was only known to have had one son, Francis, born in 1587. Thus, we need to ignore all the incorrect family trees that have been proliferating.

 

Riverius Russell (1756-1834)

Much closer genealogically, and through my grandmother, Sara [Blackman] Pierpont, my great*4 grandfather, Moses Sperry, married Mary Russell, the daughter of Riverius Russell. Riverius was also from a long-time New England line of Russells and traces his ancestry back to William Russell (1605-1661) who was an immigrant from Herefordshire to Cambridge, MA. [All these William Russells are getting a little confusing, aren’t they?] But, very like the case of Noadiah’s ancestry, there are then hundreds of family trees in ancestry.com that link this William back to the Bedford Russells, albeit through several different routes.

Some say that William was the son of Lord Edward (1572-1627). But Edward died without issue, so this is obviously incorrect. Others say that William was descended from Lord Francis (1527-1585) through his son William, but that is not correct either. Finally, others say that William is the son of John Russell (1553-1584) who was the 3^rd Baron Russell. This one is possible and I am still investigating it. But not being a 1^st son, John had been bypassed with all the Earl/Duke titles and thus he was not entitled to use the Russell COA.

It seems that Americans have a penchant for wanting to link their family trees back to titled families in England. Is this like their obsession with coats of arms?!

 

 

Pierpont Family Coat of Arms

What is a Coat of Arms? And what does/should the Coat of Arms for the Pierpont family look like? These are questions that have been haunting the Pierpont Family Association for the entire 100 years of its existence. Let’s see if we can get a definitive answer.

 

The Question

The first meeting of the Pierpont Family Association (PFA) was in 1924. It did not take long before the question of a Coat of Arms (COA) came up. Here are the years that it was discussed and the notes from our minutes of that year on it.

1926 – “A discussion was held in regard to the Pierrepont Coat of Arms and Frederick H. Pierpont and Nathan M. Pierpont were appointed a committee to see about procuring copies for those who wish them.”

1927 – “The report of the committee on Coat of Arms disclosed the fact that there are two Coats of Arms and so no decision had been reached as to which was authentic.”

1928 – “The President gave further information of the Coat of Arms. The committee had not formed a decision, what was to be done. Motion was carried for committee to continue investigation.”

1929 – “Mr. Nathan Pierpont reported no progress on Coat of Arms but was going to gather what he could in the future.”

1937 – “The subject of Coat of Arms was brought up and was left to Nathan Pierpont and Gertrude Croft to report on at the 1938 reunion.”

1938 – “The Committee and the Coat-of-Arms reported little activity and their work was to be carried over for another year.”

1960 – “Mrs. Hedman was Kathryn Pierpont before her marriage, and she gave an interesting talk on genealogical research of ‘The Pierpont-Pierpoint Families of Maryland, Virginia, and West Virginia.’ She had with her, copies of her book, copyright 1953, giving results of her research, also copies of the Pierpont coat of arms, suitable for framing.”

1961 – ‘Marion Pierpont gave an interesting explanation of the Pierpont Coat-of-Arms, comparing the one used by the Pierpont-Pierpoints of Virginia, and shown in Kathryn Pierpont Hedman’s Genealogy.”

1977 – “Marian Kraft read newspaper clippings belonging to her mother, Margaret Hall … at which time a Coat-of-arms was discussed.”

As you can see, from 1926-1929 no progress was made. Ten years later the question was still outstanding, and no resolution had been made. There was some discussion in the 1960s when we had a visitor from the MD/VA branch of the family. And there was last some discussion in the late 1970s. But there was no resolution.

 

What is a Coat of Arms?

One of the best explanations I have found is here. As it notes, the parts of the official COA are a motto, a crest, a helm, and a shield. Some COAs, including the one for the Pierpont family have Supporters. Non-official parts, which are left to the discretion of the artist include placement of the motto, addition of a wreath or a mantle, the shape of the shield, and the style of the helm or helmet. Each COA has an official written description called a “blazon of arms” which is a system of code words that denote colors, placement and styling. I’ll discuss the blazon of arms for the Pierpont COA in more detail below.

Examples of the Pierpont COA

I’ve collected a large number of examples of the Pierpont COA. Some of these are really only portions of the COA, like just the crest or just the shield. Some are missing portions due to space considerations. And many are uncolored because they are printed in black-and-white, or they use materials other than paper and thus the use of color is not possible. I’ll make brief comments about each, then discuss the various elements of the COA afterwards.

 

This is the one that was presented in 1960 above. Because it is printed in black-and-white the colors are not shown. 

This one is from a silver plate owned by the Charles Pierrepont, 2^nd Earl of Manvers (see here). The crest is missing due to space considerations. It is on silver so there are no colors. The shield is a composite with the Pierrepont shield on the left and the Meadows shield (here) on the right.

 

This one is from a church in Crowle, England (see here), and is for Sydney Herbert Pierrepont, 3^rd Earl Manvers. Being space constrained it only contains the shield and helm. Like the prior example, the shield is a composite with the Pierrepont shield on the left and one for his wife from the Duc of Coigny on the right.

 

  Yet another related to the Earl Manvers, this one is in the form of an ironwork fence (see here). All the elements are in this one, but it is all painted blue.

 

 This is small stamp on a book from the Henry Pierrepont, 1^st Marquess of Dorchester. Due to size and placement, it only contains the helm and crest (with the crest under the helm instead of above it). It is one of four that are attributed to him here, all with slightly different designs. (Two of them have wings on the side of the fox, two only have the fox.)

 

This one is currently used by the MD/VA branch of the Pierpont/Pierpoint family. As it’s used as a sign, it contains only the shield. It is also somewhat simplified as I’ll discuss more below.

 

 

This is the one that I recently obtained that was printed in 1764. It is by far the most complete and the only one that contains all the elements and proper colors. I also note that the genealogy charts which accompany this contain a crest with a “fox passant gules” which is labeled the “original crest”.

 

This one was used by James Pierpont, the immigrant to MA in 1652. It can be found here. This is only the shield portion of the COA.

 

 

This one was used by Charles Pierpont in Boston in 1790 as a bookplate. It also contains only the shield. I’ll address the color of the lion below.

 

 This one is in stone and is for Henry, Marquess of Dorchester and can be found in private hands in Scotland.

 

Finally, here is one that is available for sale commercially. The motto is on the top and the standards have been left off in favor of an artistic wreath on the sides. The Pierpont name has been added to the bottom.

   

Elements of the Coat of Arms

Here is the full blazon (description) of the COA that can be found here.

 

Coronet

Coronet of a Duke

Crest

A Lion rampant Sable, between two Wings erect Argent.

Escutcheon

Argent, semée of Cinquefoils Gules, a Lion rampant Sable.

Supporters

On either side a Lion Sable, armed and langued Gules.

Motto

PIE REPONE TE (Dutifully restore you)

 

With all the above examples, let’s now look at the various elements of the COA.

Motto

The Pierpont motto is pie repone te, Latin for “in pious confidence” (although there are other alternative translations in some places such as the above and there are some misspellings as “ripone” instead of “repone”). On all the above examples which contain the motto, this is consistent.

Supporters

The terms used above mean black (sable) lions with red tongues (langued Gules). Where the standards appear in the above examples, this is consistent except for those examples that have no color.

Shield/Escutcheon

The words above can be translated as “Silver, field of red five-sided figures, with a standing black lion.” (Argent is from the Latin argentum, the same root word for the chemical symbol of silver “Ag”. Gules is the Latin word for red, and sable is the Latin word for black.) All the shields above (which have color) are consistent with this description except two. The bookplate of Charles Pierpont uses a red lion instead of a black one – perhaps for visual effect. And the sign for the MD/VA Pierpont/Pierpoint family omits the lion – perhaps because that amount of artistic painting is a bit much (I know it would be for me!)

Helm/Coronet

The “normal” helm would be a simple helmet of an armored knight. However, for anyone who is titled (Baron/Viscount/Earl/Marquess/Duke), they would substitute a crown that corresponds to that rank. Since many of the above examples are for such titled individuals, most of them have crowns in them.

Crest

There are three different crests in the above examples. Assuming the proper colors, the first example from the MD/VA Pierponts has a fox with a raised paw (in Latin terms a “fox passant gu.” For red fox with raised paw). The book stamp from Henry has a fox without a raised paw but with wings on the sides (a “fox gu, between two wings argent”). (Some of the other examples of the book stamp lack the wings.) The one for the Duke matches the blazon above as it has “A Lion rampant Sable, between two Wings erect Argent”, as does the Manvers fence and the commercially available example. Thus, there are not two, but three different crests. This is likely the basis of the notes from the 1927 PFA meeting which noted that there were two COAs. It’s not the full COA, just the crest that has some ambiguity.

 

The Two Crest Problem

Besides the above examples, there is a book, “Fairbairn’s Book of Crests of the Families of Great Britain and Ireland” that was published in 1905 in London. The first volume contains the following entries about various Pierpont-related crests:

 

Pierpont, Hants, a fox gu. 32.2

Pierpont, Shropsh.: (1) A fox passant gu. 32.1. (2) A lion rampant sa., between two wings expanded arg. 9.2

Pierpont, Shropsh., a lion rampant sa., between two wings arg. 9.2

Pierpont, Notts, same crest. Pie repone te.

Pierrepont, see Manvers, Earl.

Pierrepont of Holme Pierrepont, Notts, Duke and Earl of Kingston (extinct), a lion rampant sa., between two wings erect arg. Pie repone te. 9.2

Pierrepoint, a lion rampant sa., between two wings arg. 9.2

Pierrepont, a fox passant gu. Pie repone te. 32.1

 

Manvers, Earl, Viscount Newark and Baron Pierrepont (Pierrepont), Thoresby Park, Ollerton, Notts, a lion rampant sa., between two wings erect arg. Pie repone te. 9.2

 

The figures referred to are in volume 2 and are reproduced here.

  

Looking at the examples as well as Fairbairn’s book, it appears that the use of the two fox crests predate the use of the lion crest. The lion is consistently used by the Earl/Duke of Kingston as well as all the Earl Manvers which succeeded them. So, let’s look at some points on the Pierrepont family timeline to see approximately when the change was made.

In the book, “A Registry of American Families Entitled to Coat Armor”, published for the Genealogical Association by William Armstrong Crozier in 1904, there is an entry which reads as follows:

                PIERREPONT. Massachusetts. James Pierrepont, Ipswich, 1652.

                Argent semée of cinque-foils gules a lion rampant sable. [the shield]

                CREST – A lion rampant sable between two wings erect.

                MOTTO – Pie repone te.

 

This is the ancestor of all the members of the New England PFA. But since the COA picture above of what was assigned to James was only the shield portion did Crozier have any actual evidence that James was using the lion crest, or was he simply looking at the Pierrepont lords in England at the time and attributing the crest being used there to James?

For some of the answer to when the fox was used, let’s go to the family home of the Pierrepont family, Holme-Pierrepont. One of the objects in this ancestral home is the tomb of Sir Henry Pierrepont from 1499. The History of Nottingham notes the following when describing his tomb – “The mantled helmet under his head carries the original family crest of a fox passant.” This is echoed in another website about Nottingham where it states – “The effigy’s head rests on a great helm with a fox passant crest.” It later notes when referring to an effigy which is believed to be of Edmund Pierrepont c. 1370, “The crest on the great helm has been broken off, but may well have displayed a dog (or a fox) consistent with the other memorials.”

We also know from above that Henry, Marquess of Dorchester, was using the fox crest. He lived from 1606-1680. From Fairbairn’s book above, we also see that the fox was used by the Pierpont of “Hans.” – that would be Baron Gervase Pierrepont (1649-1715) of Hanslope. But he only held this position from October 1714 until his death in May 1715.  Finally, the reference to “Shrops.” would be William Pierrepont (1607-1678) who lived at Tong Castle in Shropshire before moving to Thoresby.

Using all this data plus our knowledge of the Pierrepont family, what is the most likely time for the change to occur from using the fox crest to the lion crest?

 

The period from the late 1600s to the early 1700s were a time of turmoil in the Pierrepont family. We know that Henry, Marquess of Dorchester (1606-1680), would have likely continued using the fox crest until he died in 1680. Except for his Marquess title (which reverted upon his death), he passed his other titles to his grand-nephew Robert (1660-1682) who only had them for two years, then they went to Robert’s brother, William (1662-1690) for just eight years. Thus, it’s unlikely that the change would have occurred during that period as Robert died quite young and William suffered from apoplexy.

Meanwhile, William (1607-1678) was also using the fox crest (without any titles), but both he and his son Robert (1637-1666) predeceased Henry (1606-1680). Also, Gervase (1649-1715) had begun using the fox crest as we know that he used it in 1714-1715 when he was Baron Pierrepont of Hanslope.

In 1690, Evelyn (1665-1726) inherited the titles from his older brother William and later he was created the first Duke of Kingston-upon-Hull in 1706. Since his uncle Gervase was already using the fox crest, first in Ireland, then in Hanslope, and there is no evidence that the fox crest was ever used in conjunction with the Duke title, it is quite likely that the use of the lion crest was begun by Evelyn in 1690 and continued from that point on.

Thus, the fox crest was an official crest of the Pierrepont family from its inception several hundred years earlier until the death of Gervase in 1715. The lion crest likely began being used in 1690 and there was a 25 year overlap until it became the sole family crest of the then Duke. It was then passed on to the second Duke in 1726, continued by him until 1773, and then was used by Charles Medows when he adopted the Pierrepont name in 1788 and later became the crest of the new Baron Pierrepont and then the Earl Manvers.

Meanwhile, the New England Pierpont line had come to America around 1640. The only record of a COA used by them initially was the isolated shield. The attribution of a crest to the family did not take place until later and by then the lion crest was the only one to be found in the English Pierrepont family. Also, the MD/VA branch of the Pierpont/Pierpoint family had also come to America. But if they had a family crest, it would have been the fox crest as the lion crest was not being used until several decades later.

 

Conclusion

So, which crest is the “right” one? As is often the case, the answer is, “it depends.” The crest that would have been correct for our immigrant ancestors would have been the “fox passant gules” as that was the crest in use at the time of their immigration. But since the use of that crest ceased over 300 years ago, if we want to use a crest for the family today, the “lion rampant sable with two wings erect argent” is more appropriate.

Sibling Cousins

It recently occurred to me that although I’ve spent a fair amount of time looking for cousin connections among others – such as people in our church and my high school classmates – that I’d not spent much time examining those even closer to me, namely my siblings (who obviously have the same list of ancestors as myself) and the spouses/partners of my siblings. So – time to rectify that oversight. First, I’ll look at my siblings and their spouses/partners (looking for cousin connections to me and my siblings), then I’ll do the same with my wife’s siblings and their spouses/partners (looking for cousin connections to my wife and her siblings).

 

My Siblings and Their Spouses/Significant Others

I’m the oldest of five alphabetically named children, my siblings being Beth, Charles/Chuck, Dawn, and Edward/Edd. We also alternate boy/girl/boy/girl/boy – how great is that! I’ve documented before that my wife and I are cousins multiple ways. But when looking at others, I generally just look to find one common ancestor to verify a cousin-connection and that’s what I’ll do here. I was surprised to find some interesting parallels with similar results for both of my sisters and both of my brothers.

My sister, Beth, has been married twice, and is currently living with a life-partner (going on 9 years already!). I was not expecting to find a connection with her first husband, Gerry, as his name, Meskun, had a distinctly Eastern European sound to it. Indeed, I found that his paternal grandparents were from Lithuania. But his mother’s side had a more English-sounding name and so if there was a connection, that’s where I would be apt to find it. Because Gerry was from NE CT, I tried to see if any of his ancestral lines were from colonial CT. After several lines ended early with immigrants in the 1800s from England/Ireland/Canada, I did find some that went back further. I hit paydirt when I determined that Beth and Gerry were 9^th cousins, twice removed, via a common ancestor, Robert Lockwood (1600-1658).

Similarly, Beth’s second husband, Bob Rumsey, has a lot of CT connections, in addition to many in NY, ME, and MA. I was able to find a cousin connection, 9^th cousin, once removed, via a common ancestor, John Beach (1623-1677). However, Beth’s current partner, Dave Ciarcia, is not related as all his grandparents are from Italy.

Turning next to my brother Chuck, it’s quite obvious that he is not a cousin with his wife, Joanne [Hundt]. Her ancestors are all from either Germany or Denmark, although some of her ancestors have been in the US since the early 1800s. But since the Russell family has no DNA from either of these countries, he is not married to a distant cousin.

For my sister Dawn it’s exactly the same situation as with my sister Beth, except that she was widowed twice. Both of her husbands were from CA, but both their family lines go back to the east coast. Thus, her first husband, Mike Roberts, was her 11^th cousin via Thomas Holbrook (1599-1677). Similarly, her second husband, George Haskin, was her 10^th cousin, once removed via Thomas Dibble (1613-1700). Finally, just like Beth, her current partner, Ron Brower, has no cousin connection as his ancestors are from Germany, Norway, and Ireland.

Lastly, my brother Edd is parallel to my brother Chuck. His wife, Ingrid Engler, is from Germany and thus there is no cousin connection to her.

Two sisters – both with two former husbands who were each cousins and a current partner who is not a cousin. Two brothers – both with wives who have no cousin connection.

 

My Wife’s Siblings and Their Spouses/Partners

My wife, Donna [VanDeCar] has six siblings. The youngest, Ann, never married, so that leaves five that need investigation. Let’s look at them in age order.

Her older brother, Charles/Chuck, married Sarah [King] [Lane] (they later divorced, and Sarah has since passed away). She was a member of the local Odawa tribe. Being a native American, one would think there would not be any cousin connection here. But I did some research on Sarah a few years ago (see here) and the results were surprising. Thus, I can restate here that Chuck and Sarah were 10^th cousins, twice removed, via a common ancestor, William Towne (1598-1673).

The next brother, William/Bill, married Marge [Wiklanski]. As is obvious from her surname, her ancestry is from Poland and Austria, and thus there are no cousin connections there.

Next is Bob. He married Cherie [Bradshaw] who has also recently passed away. But in checking, her ancestors all came from Germany or Denmark or were recent immigrants from England. There is no cousin connection there. Bob has since joined with a new life-partner, Julie Scott. But Julie’s ancestors are from Germany and Ireland, or they are immigrants to the southern part of the US from England. No connections there either.

After Bob comes Carl. He first married Leslie Camper. Her ancestral lines are all from the southern US and thus there are no cousin connections there. Carl then married Julia Flemming and I have not discovered any connections to her ancestors. Finally, he married Stephanie Vonsoden and there are likewise no connections to her ancestors.

The last of the siblings who married is Cora/Pixie. She has been married four times. The first was to Rick Velin. On his father’s side his ancestors are from Sweden and the Czech Republic. But although his mother was from the west coast, and his maternal grandmother was of Czech origin, his mother’s father’s ancestral lines go back over several generations to the east coast. Thus, I have found that Rick was an 11^th cousin via George Wheeler (1605-1687). Pixie’s second husband was Ernest Sills. His father’s ancestors were from the southern US and his maternal grandfather’s ancestors were from Prussia. But his maternal grandmother’s ancestors, like Rick’s maternal grandfather’s, can be traced back to the east coast. Through these ancestral lines I have found that Ernest was a 9^th cousin, twice removed, via Joseph Bates (1620-1706).

Pixie’s third husband was Leslie Westbrook. Many of his ancestors were recent immigrants from England/Russia, but some of his paternal grandmother’s ancestors can be traced back to New England where we find that Leslie is a 9^th cousin via Thomas Dibble (1613-1700) [the same person who is the common ancestor between my sister Dawn and her husband George]. Finally, Pixie’s last husband was Rodger Grody. He has a number of ancestral lines that originate from Germany or Canada. But one of his ancestral lines goes back to New England where he is an 11^th cousin of Pixie via John Fiske (1619-1684).

Thus, besides the several cousin connections that my wife and I have and the unexpected connection through an Odawa Indian, the only cousin connections of my wife’s siblings are the four that her sister has through each of her marriages.

My Parents’ Courtship

My parents had an interesting courtship as it was done entirely via letters during my father’s time in the Navy in WWII. He was initially exempt from having to serve as he was serving in a critical defense industry (Scovill was a major manufacturer of brass shell casings). But as things were heating up – both in Europe and in the Pacific – he was finally drafted into the Navy and reported for duty on 21 July 1944. For the next eight months he was in training – first in boot camp at Sampson NY (July 1944-October 1944), then basic engineering school at Gulfport MS (October 1944-December 1944), and finally at diesel school in San Diego CA (December 1944-February 1945). It was during this period of training in the US that his primary correspondence with my [eventual] mother was taking place, as letters back and forth to the South Pacific where he was often on the move took quite a bit longer. (You can see his overall schedule of service here.)

My mother had recorded the story of their courtship in a series of stories that she wrote (you can read this one here).

“Our YTC kept going during the war and we used to write group letters to some of the boys. One night one of the boys wrote to Vernon, who, by then, was in the Navy, that I was knitting ‘little things’. I was; they were for friends. When Vernon got the letter, he questioned me about that. To have some fun, I told him, “You should know, you’re the father” We kept up this repartee via letters. I told him I had quadruplets, named Abigail, Buster, Carmen and Dudley. Then I complained that I needed money to take care of them, so he made a $1,000,000 bill and sent it to me. Then I told him we really should get married for the sake of the children, so he sent me a marriage certificate. I would come home from work and the rest of the family was already at the table. My mail would be at my place, and when there was a letter from Vernon, I would read it aloud. Everyone got a kick out of it. He said his buddies used to wonder what he was laughing about when he read mine. In the meantime, I had broken up with Art, although Vernon didn’t know it, but he began to get interested in me and I was in him, but I didn’t let him know it. But 10 days after he came home, he proposed, and I accepted. That was in April. We were married in Sept.”

I’ve got this story basically memorized, so I had not looked at the details for several years. But recently I came across a note that my great-aunt Edna had written where she mentioned the last name of “Art”, my mother’s former boyfriend before she was courted by my father. I’ve done some further research there – but that’s another story for another day. However, it got me thinking about the timeline of my parents’ relationship.

My mother’s letters to my father have mostly been lost to history – there is very little space to store things on a small boat so I presume that he must have discarded them. But my mother did keep all the letters he sent to her, so I’ve gone back to read them to see what other hints they contain to support the story she wrote above.

 

An Innocuous Beginning

My dad travelled from CT to NY to report for induction. It appears that the YTC at Mill Plain gave him a going away party on Thursday, 20 Jul 1944. That party was coordinated by my mother and her parents. My father took the train on Friday afternoon, had his physical, etc. on Saturday. On Sunday, 23 Jul, he wrote a quick one-page letter of thanks to my mother. The letter began simply, “Hi Syl,” and said, “Thank your Ma & Pa again for everything,” and was signed simply, “Vern.” He added a “P.S. Don’t forget to write yourself.”

It appears that for the next few months all the letters he wrote were addressed to the entire YTC and not personally to my mother, so she would not have saved them in her personal archives. Then came the letter referred to above where she was “knitting little things”. This happened around the end of October – about 3 months after my father’s service began and about the time he was transferred from NY to MS for further training.

 

The Repartee

Thus it was that in October the playful repartee about my mother knitting little things kicked things to a new level. On 29 October, my father sent her a postcard. It began simply with the same “Hi Syl”. But then there are the fateful sentences, “What’s this I hear about you & the baby shop? Have you been holding out on me?! My, My!! – and to think you wouldn’t tell me, one of your best friends!!”

Her response the following week would have included her humorous response, “you should know, you’re the father.” On 9 November, in the next letter that my mother saved, he begins the letter as follows: “Dear Mom, Well I’m just about the happiest man in 3 states. … I just finished handing out cigars to all the fellows, - now I only hope it’s a boy! Just when is this blessed event going to take place, Mom?”

The next part of the letter is something that I had forgotten. I knew about the suggested names for the quadruplets, but here in November that was not yet part of the story. My father had some suggestions for baby names. He wrote, “If it’s a boy – I like Wilmer as a name – yes – Wilmer Fauntleroy sounds swell. But if it’s a girl … how’s about Sarah Margaret – that’s just about the prettiest name I know of – or maybe Isabella-Barbara?”

Personally, I’m glad that these suggestions got relegated to the wastebin and forgotten by the time I was born 4 years later. I can’t imagine going through life with the name “Wilmer Fauntleroy”! And I have no idea where those names came from. My wife and I used to tease our children (while they were growing up) that we should have named them after our paternal grandparents – meaning that Chris would be “Archibald Erskine” and Kim would be “Vera Gertrude.” But at least those names were rooted in our family history and were meant to be a joke. But Wilmer Fauntleroy!

The final page of this letter addresses another aspect of their rapidly growing relationship as my father states, “Say – if we don’t want a scandal we had better hurry up & get hitched or else people will talk!! … You just set the date & I’ll get an emergency leave & we’ll get hitched up together proper.” He then signs the letter “Your loving, tho’ anxious, ‘hubby’”

From “To Syl … from Vern” to “Dear Mom … your loving hubby”. Quite a change!

 

Taking it to the next level

The prior letter exchange marked a change in their relationship. Just 10 days later, on 19 November, the opening of my father’s next letter begins, “Dearest wife.” He’s also gotten a letter from my mother’s sister, Vi, as he notes that he received it ok. The last paragraph of his letter includes the following: “I couldn’t have a finer wife – and mother. Sweet, thoughtful, generous, kind, a wonderful companion. … I’m getting sentimental, I guess – but then I always do – when I think of you. I have your picture in my wallet – and your image in my heart.” He concludes, “As always, your loving husband, Vern”

In the next letter, just 5 days later on 24 November, he opens “I’m getting rather confused – first your sister says we are married & then you say we aren’t! Now is we is or is we ain’t?” She’s also evidently told him that she had quadruplets, but he responds, “I am especially sorry that you won’t let me see the quadruplets! They are my pride & joy. Have you named them almost yet?”

 

The “Marriage”

[Marriage Certificate]

 

I’m not entirely sure when my father used his drafting/writing skills to prepare the above “Marriage Certificate”. It had to be sometime after his writing the letter of 9 November. But you will notice that it is dated 16 October 1944. It appears that he pre-dated it so that it was before the playful “announcement” from my mother that she was knitting “little things” and that he was the father. This “Marriage Certificate” was not sent to my mother until he enclosed it in a letter on 20 December 1945 – over a year later. In that letter he says, “Oh yeah – I finally found our marriage certificate!! Am sending it to you so you can save it.” But whether he actually drew it up at the end of 1944, or not until later, it was about this time in 1944 that every letter was sent to “Mom” from “Pop”.

 

Settling Down

There was only one more letter sent by my father that year – on 11 December. The names for the factitious quads of Abigail, Buster, Carmen, and Dudley had been chosen. He remarks about them in most letters from that point on and managed to find a picture of some quadruplets that he labeled with their names (although poor Dudley’s picture was of a girl!)

[Picture of the quadruplets]

 

At the end of 1944, my father went to diesel school in San Diego and from there to the South Pacific in March 1945. That environment was a lot more hectic and the logistics of sending and receiving letters from the US did not lend itself to frequent communication. Letters tended to be longer and with a minimum of a month in between them during 1945. He usually began with “Dear Mom” and ended with “Pop”. The funny repartee was replaced with information about where he was and what he was doing, although there were references to the “kids” in nearly every letter. Finally, in December 1945 came the announcement that they would be returning back to the US where the ship would be decommissioned. Since my father’s term of service had begun quite late, he had to remain with the ship through that process and would not be back in CT until April. But without the pressure of war and his naval duties, he had more time to write.

His focus began to shift from military duties back to what his life would be once he was out of the service. A letter from 2 April 1946 begins, “My dearest, darling, adorable, sweet, precious wife.” Her response (which he did save), begins “My darling husband,” but then goes back to their humorous style when she says, “When your letter came yesterday saying you would be (might be) home by Easter, my heart jumped. Why, I’m sure I don’t know. I’m not even interested in you much.”

But the quadruplets have not been forgotten. She also writes, “The children are getting very anxious to see their Daddy. Do you realize that they are a year and four months old and you’ve never seen them.” [This means that they assigned their birth as early November 1944 as this is now 6 April 1946.]

Finally, a few days later in April, he returned home for a short leave before having to go to the US Navy Yard in Brooklyn to complete his term of service. The courtship – which began with a note from someone else that she was “knitting little things”, then to the humorous response of “you should know, you’re the father”, then to fictional quadruplets and a pre-dated “marriage certificate” – turned into something real and concrete. My father proposed to my mother just 10 days after he finally got to see her in person. They were married less than four months later – using the intervening time to complete his Navy service in Brooklyn, using his separation pay to buy the house and land they would live on for the rest of their lives, and making all the necessary arrangements for their marriage. It’s a great love story!