THE HOUSE OF THE BURGESSES:
EVALUATING THE EVIDENCE
This book was begun in 1964 by questioning immediate relatives, and working outwards and backwards through successive family layers. I proceeded on this basis for about ten years, until I had pushed the line as far back as I could go; I then began running each male line down to modern times. I've had reasonably good success in identifying and finding current descendants of these lines, and in locating cooperative individuals in each branch to help complete them.
William Burges was ultimately pinned to a place and time certain: the Northern Neck of Virginia in late April of 1712 (when he presumably died). I was left with a series of key questions which I will now address:
Where did the Burgess family originate?
More specifically, where did William Burges live prior to his arrival in Richmond/King George Co.? I have no answer to this, and I personally doubt that the question can be answered, or that the line can be extended past the 1712 barrier, without some genetic evidence that will indicate a possible place of origin overseas, or some affiliation with an apparently unrelated Burgess line that can be traced to a more distant origin. It is conceivable that, should all surviving seventeenth- and eighteenth-century records ever be made directly accessible in some master computer data base, a verifiable reference to William Burges will emerge from the shadows (certain family lines can only be traced in one direction); but the chances of this actually happening are, I think, slim. One realizes very quickly in looking at this man's estate inventory that he possessed few goods or other real property, and this lack of estate, personal or otherwise, does not bode well for successful searching elsewhere. Also, the name William Burges is relatively common in English and Scottish records, appearing in many surviving parish registers from this period; and one must presume that many such records are lost or unindexed. There were also Burgess families living at this time in many of the British colonies, including Barbados, other parts of Virginia, Maryland, and Ireland, as well as cognate names that could have been altered to Burgess in France, Germany, Spain, Portugal, etc. So, barring the development of new leads from DNA research, the line ends with William.
Of William himself, the only records that survive are his will and inventory. The former was dictated to friends or acquaintances from his deathbed, presumably at his home (one of the bequests is the bed on which he died), and recorded several months later in the far-distant Richmond County courthouse. Since he left little property and certainly no land, the primary rationale for the will seems to be that his wife (who is unmentioned) had predeceased him, and that his four underaged and/or unmarried children were about to be left orphans, and therefore needed to be provided for. The will mentions three daughters who cannot (and perhaps will never) be traced, and one son, Edward Burgess.
Were these William's only children?
The question is unanswerable; on the one hand, the primary raison d'être for William's will was the provision of a guardian for William's unattached children, and there was no need to mention any other siblings who could already have been provided for; on the other side, two of the daughters were of age (though unmarried), and the ages of the children suggest a family terminated ten or more years earlier by the premature death of the wife, and perhaps complete as stated. The only other male Burgess who appears anywhere close to William's location during this period is Joseph Burgess, and it is apparent from later records that he was living in the southeastern section of King George Co. that was traded to Westmoreland Co. in 1777. William's will strongly suggests that he had no close relatives living nearby (including older married children), who would otherwise, under the norms prevailing at that time, have adopted and/or raised his four children; that William, his wife, and his family derived from some other comparatively distant location; and that William was a relatively recent immigrant at the time of his death.
Where did William live?
The only location specified in his will is St. Marie's (i.e., Mary's) Parish in Richmond Co., which at that time encompassed the south side of the rise between the Rappahannock and Potomac Rivers (in other words, the watershed down to the Rappahannock), from Richmond County to the Blue Ridge Mountains, including what is now Richmond Co., part of Westmoreland Co. (the section that now crosses the ridge to the Rappahannock River), and what are now the southern halves of King George, Stafford, and Fauquier Cos. This is a very broad area, potentially encompassing many hundreds of square miles.
One must therefore examine the other persons mentioned in William's will, including Jeremiah Bronaugh (the guardian), the Copleys (witnesses), and the three men who inventoried William's estate. The most important of these is the guardian, who can only be Jeremiah Bronaugh I (1670-1749), a major plantation owner on Lambs Creek in what is now King George Co. (the other two men of this name in northern Virginia during the early-to-mid-eighteenth century were Jeremiah Jr. [1702-1747], and his first cousin who lived in Prince William Co.; both of these were too young to have been the guardian mentioned in William Burges's will). The Bronaughs are said in some sources to have emigrated from Scotland in the 1670s, although more recent research suggests a Huguenot origin; David Bronaugh, Jeremiah's father, is recorded as having bought his 350-acre estate on Willow Creek in Old Rappahannock County on 24 Apr. 1671 (Old Rappahannock Co. Deed Book 1668-1672, p. 219-220). Old Rappahannock County then encompassed both sides of the Rappahannock River to the ridges separating the watershed lines from the flanking river valleys. There is no doubt that Jeremiah Bronaugh Sr. later inherited part of this plantation.
The Bronaughs were middling-level landed gentry, prosperous enough to be recorded in numerous county transactions throughout the changing jurisdictions of the Northern Neck. The Bronaugh plantation undoubtedly used numerous slaves, indentured servants, and other white employees to work the farm, some as overseers, and others as tradesmen (smiths, carpenters, etc.). Probably William Burges was one of these laborers, or he may have leased fifty or a hundred acres of land from Bronaugh or one of his neighbors. Certainly he thought highly enough of Jeremiah Bronaugh to make him the guardian of his children (lest we make too much of William's will, however, it should be noted that Jeremiah Bronaugh is recorded several times in county records with similar "adoptions").
The Copleys may also have lived in the Lambs Creek area; they appear several times in Richmond and King George County records, but never as land owners, and never in sufficient detail to pin them to a specific location. Nonetheless, it seems reasonable to infer that William Burges knew Jeremiah Bronaugh and lived somewhere nearby. He probably extracted a promise from Bronaugh that William's daughters would be honorably married off and that his son would be trained in the art and science of farming, and given a chance to buy his own plot at some future date, in exchange, of course, for their free labor over a certain number of years. It was a common bargain and a fair one, for the times. Since such duties would normally be assumed by surviving relatives on either side of the family, one may also presume that none were close at hand, or (less likely) that they were too poor to assume financial responsibility for the children.
Where was Edward Burgess's land located?
The presumed son, Edward (I say "presumed" because we cannot be absolutely certain that the Edward mentioned in William's will as his son is the same Edward that appears in later records), bought land in 1731 in King George Co., at which time we know that he was of age (one had to be twenty-one to conduct legal transactions). Judging from the ages mentioned in his father's will, and the ages of his children, he was probably closer to thirty at the time, born in the late 1690s. His land, unlike that of the Bronaughs, was not even close to prime, being located near the dividing line between the counties, where water was scarcer, and where growing tobacco, the primary cash crop, and transporting it to the rivers for export, would be more difficult. He owned a couple of slaves and some livestock, grew a variety of crops, and raised cattle, sheep, and horses, mostly to feed his own family, selling off any surpluses. We know from the original deed that Edward's land was in the "never-never" land that straddled the then unsurveyed county lines, and that his farm switched back and forth between King George and Stafford Cos. at least twice without having actually moved. Attempts to pinpoint the exact location of Edward's land have shown that it was probably located where a housing development now stands, on the bluffs east of Arnolds Corner, on State Route 3 about two and one-half miles west of the current county courthouse at King George.
Why was Edward's land not sold until 1797?
After Edward's death his fourth son, Moses Burgess, remained on the original homestead to take care of Margaret Burgess, Edward's widow. She died in 1783, and several of the Burgess heirs immediately instigated lawsuits calling for the distribution of the estate. However, in his response to one of these actions, the elder executor of Edward Burgess's will, Garner Burgess, stated that he had been unable to gain a fair offer for the land. Within a year of Margaret's death Moses left King George Co. and moved to Orange Co., VA, leaving his oldest son, Lunsford Burgess (and presumably Lunsford's family), on the Burgess farm. Lunsford apparently died about 1789 (he last appears in the personal property tax lists in 1788). Thereafter the farm is recorded on the land tax records as belonging to the "Burgess heirs." Moses Burgess died in Orange Co. at the end of 1796. By this time three of the brothers had died, along with several or perhaps all of their sisters. The family again made an effort to sell the land in early 1797, and the owner of an adjoining plot in King George Co. made an offer, but they discovered that to clear the title, Edward's executors' heirs-at-law had be located to sign the deed of sale.
Who was Edward's wife?
Previous researchers have assumed that Edward's wife, Margaret Burgess, was a Garner, because their oldest son was named Garner (the Garners were a prominent family on the Northern Neck, particularly in Westmoreland Co.). However, a 1725 estate record for Henry Fewell mentions legacies to two daughters, including "Margaret Burge," and I believe this Margaret was Edward's wife. The Fewells lived in the same part of King George Co. as the Burgesses and Bronaughs, and there is no other Burge or Burgess family mentioned in county records as living anywhere closer to these families than Joseph Burgess, about eight miles distant, and he seems wholly unrelated. This is not proof, merely presumption, but it seems a reasonable one to make. It also might explain where the name Henry Burgess came from, two generations later.
Why, then, did Edward and Margaret name their oldest son Garner? Judging from eighteenth-century naming patterns common in this region, the connection could have been either familial or personal, and is as likely to have come from either the father's or mother's side of the family, or perhaps of their parents. When Edward's son, Moses Burgess, named his daughter Catharine Ellis Burgess, after her prominent great-grandmother and step-great-aunt on her mother's and stepmother's side of the family, respectively, it was a clear indication that names often skipped generations before being used again. Perhaps if Catharine Burgess had been male, she would have been named for her great-great-grandfather, Charles Ellis, whose name was given to her uncle, Charles Ellis Bennett. The Garners may have helped the Burgesses in some way, or Garner may have been the maiden name of William Burges's unknown wife.
Who were Edward's children?
We are fortunate that one of the few documents surviving from the pre-Civil War period in Stafford Co., Virginia is Liber O, which contains the will of Edward Burgess. That document mentions six children, including five sons, Gardener [sic], William, Edward, Moses, and Rubin, and one unmarried daughter, Mary. The latter is the Mary Burgess recorded in the St. Paul's Parish Register as having been born in 1736, who married Nathan Skipweth White in 1759, a few months after her father's will was written, and about the time he died. Four other daughters have been uncovered in a series of Fauquier Co. lawsuits from the 1780s disputing the distribution of the Burgess estate: these include Margaret Burgess, who married her cousin John French, a son of Catherine Ellis and Mason French, in 1750; Anne Burgess, who married Joseph Rogers in 1749; Lettice, who married John Engles (later English) in 1737; and Sarah, who married Joseph Reddish about 1747. It is obvious that several of these women had to have born in the early 1720s, pushing Edward and Margaret's marriage date back to about 1720.
The First Generations
Establishing a relationship between the William Burges who died in Richmond County in 1712 and the Edward Burge(ss) who bought land in King George County in 1731 depends both upon William's noncupative will, which mentions an Edward Burges as a male heir, and a demonstration of proximity in time and space between the two. If Margaret Fewell "Burge" is Edward's wife, then he was married and living in King George Co. in 1725, thirteen years after his presumed father's death, and thirteen years after he was put into the care of Jeremiah Bronaugh. If William lived near Jeremiah Bronaugh, as seems likely (but which cannot be conclusively established), the chances of a coincidental occurrence of these names lessens considerably, given the scarcity of Burgess family names and cognates in this region at this time. There were several other Burgess families living on the Northern Neck in the late 1600s and 1700s, but the members of these two groups are generally recorded in counties closer to the end of the peninsula (except for Joseph Burgess of Westmoreland Co., who appears in the St. Paul's Parish Register). Although there is no hard proof of Edward's relation to William, this scenario remains the most probable and reasonable explanation of the known facts.
Edward Burgess's relationship to the five sons mentioned in his will is much more certain. Reuben Burgess, the youngest of his sons, can be tracked to his final resting place in North Carolina through a combination of personal property tax lists and land records, all of which mesh exactly, moving from Stafford Co. to Albemarle Co. in 1789 and to Rowan Co., NC, a decade later; when one adds his uncommon given name to the mix, the result is conclusive. Similarly, Moses Burgess, Edward's fourth son, is said in his initial Orange Co. deed to be a resident of King George Co.; his subsequent records are complete through his early death.
The movements of Edward Burgess Jr., the middle son, are less easily measured. From 1764, when Edward Jr. is mentioned as a witness to a Stafford Co. deed, to his first appearance in the Prince William Co. personal property tax lists in 1782, Edward is absent from the records for almost two decades. In fact, the relation between the Edward Burgess of King George and Stafford Cos. and the Edward Burgess of Prince William and Fauquier Cos. can only be demonstrated by the fact that several of the Fauquier County Burgess's descendants were given the middle name "Price" (derived from Edward's wife's family), including a set of twins, Edward and Sarah Price Burgess, who were clearly named for their grandparents. This cannot be coincidental.
The relation to their father of the two older sons of Edward Burgess Sr., Garner and William, can be legally demonstrated through the sale of the original Burgess land in King George Co. in 1797, sixty-six years after its purchase by Edward. Under the terms of Edward's will, his executors were his wife, Margaret (who died in 1783), and Garner and William. By 1797 both of these sons had themselves died, but their own legal heirs sold the land in their stead. Garner left a will naming his oldest son, Edward Burgess, and oldest son-in-law, Matthew Neale, as executors, and these two men represented his estate in the sale; William Burgess died intestate in Stafford Co. in 1780, leaving two or three sons, one of whom (another Edward Burgess) was selected to represent his interest.
The Fourth Generation
Of Edward Burgess Sr.'s five sons, four left detailed wills and probates; only William died intestate. Garner Burgess mentions three sons in his will: Edward, John, and James; the subsequent probate indicates that James died unmarried and intestate in 1798. Edward Burgess III is easily tracked to Culpeper (later Rappahannock) Co. through personal property and land tax records, and through the fact that he acted as the legal representative of his late father in the sale of the original Burgess land. He left no will, but his widow, Francis (who died in 1851), did, and his descendants are firmly established through tax, census, and legal documents. Garner's second son, John Burgess, left Fauquier Co. right after the death of his mother in 1802, moving to Bourbon Co., Kentucky by 1804, to Harrison Co., Kentucky in 1809, and finally to Putnam Co., Indiana, by the 1840s. The relation between the Fauquier County John Burgess and his counterpart in Harrison County can only be proven through comparison of two matching signatures on documents signed thirty years apart, one in Virginia, one in Kentucky. He left no will, but several 1846 settlement deeds and other tax, marriage, and land documents in Kentucky and Indiana tie together his children in a web of paper that leaves possible few other conclusions regarding the relationships of these individuals. Nonetheless, the absence of a comprehensive settlement of his estate makes this family the least firm of the lines deriving from Garner Burgess.
Edward Sr.'s second son, William Burgess, died intestate, leaving two known sons, Henry and Edward Burgess, who moved with their stepfather to Kentucky in the 1780s, and a possible third son, William Jr., whose potential existence and relationship is tenuously supported by family tradition and by a surviving 1779 Stafford Co. petition to the Virginia Legislature, which includes the signature of one "William Burgess Jr." No further record has been found for this line, and its inclusion should be regarded as speculative. William Sr.'s son, Edward Burgess of Bourbon and Scott Cos., Kentucky, acted as the legal representative of his father's estate in 1797 when he cosigned a deed selling the original Burgess lands in King George Co., Virginia. His descendants are well established through a wide variety of interlocking legal, census, tax, and personal records. Henry Burgess of Bourbon and Fleming Cos., Kentucky, is tied to the Scott Co. Burgesses through two documents in Bourbon Co. linking him to Ralph Hughes, his step-father, and to James Hughes, his step-brother and brother-in-law; and through the marriage of his grandson, George Washington Burgess, to his brother Edward's granddaughter, Marietta Dungan. Since the Scott Co. line was more prosperous than its Fleming Co. counterpart, and since Henry's son, John Henry, was living in Indiana at the time the couple met, it is unlikely that their courtship was accidental. Henry's descendants are enumerated in a series of Fleming County lawsuits filed in the 1840s and '50s between and among the Burgess family and their Mauzy in-laws, leaving all other relationships in this line solidly documented.
The family of Edward Burgess Jr. of Fauquier Co., Virginia, included three sons enumerated in his 1819 will: William, John, and Mason. John remained in Fauquier Co., and his will, subsequent probate records, family Bible record, and tax and census records tie together his children in a comprehensive package, leaving no doubt as to their exact relationships. William Burgess is recorded in the personal property and land tax records of Fauquier Co., originally with his father, until he left the area in 1804. He settled in Shenandoah Co. with several related families, and then moved to Muskingum Co., Ohio by 1817, again with relatives of his wife's Redman family; personal property tax records for Fauquier and Shenandoah Cos. exactly match these comings and goings, and a nineteenth-century biography of his grandson, George Washington Burgess, specifically names the latter's grandparents as William Burgess and Susan Redman, providing the final proof. William's 1839 will delineates his children, and all have been successfully traced with the exception of his daughter Lucinda, who may have died unmarried. The odd given name of Bedy for his oldest son further cements this family to the Redman line, since his wife's uncle was Bedy Redman. However, the family of a Bede D. Burgess born about 1820 in Muskingum Co., whose line has been added at the end of William's section, can neither be established nor disestablished at this time, and its listing here should be regarded as speculative.
Mason Burgess also left Fauquier Co. in the earlier 1800s, moving to Jefferson Co., Kentucky, where he is recorded for several years in the early tax and census records as Peyton Burgess, and then again as Mason, the dates of departure and arrival in the personal property tax rolls again matching those of Fauquier Co. He settled in Orange Co., Indiana, about 1817, the related Cornwall families moving at about the same time to nearby Vigo Co., Indiana, and just across the state line in Edgar Co., Illinois. The tracing of this family depends partially on Mason's unusual given name, and also on his connection to the Cornwall line, whose movements match those of the Burgess family (Mason's sister Sarah, who married Jeremiah Cornwall, died in Edgar Co.). Mason's 1845 will delineates all of his children, and all later relationships in this family are clearly established through a confluence of legal, tax, census, and land records.
Moses Burgess's will identifies two surviving sons, John P. B. and Edward; his third son, Lunsford, apparently died before the father. Lunsford is identified in the St. Paul's Parish Register as Moses's son, and is recorded in the personal property tax lists of King George Co. through 1788, after which point he has not been found in any subsequent records; he may have left two underaged sons, Garner and William, mentioned as being apprenticed in 1792 in neighboring Spotsylvania County, but of whom there is no further record. John P. B. Burgess moved to Halifax Co., Virginia, near the North Carolina border. In the 1830s he sold his remaining property under court order, as part of a settlement of a lawsuit brought against him by his in-laws, the Deshazers; included in the sale was a slave named Bumberry or Bunbury, a name identical to that of a slave he received in the division of his father's estate in 1816. His children are associated with him in the personal property tax lists of Halifax Co., and in a financial note that formed the basis of the above-mentioned lawsuit; and one of his sons, Williamson Burgess, married one of the Jacksons, several of whom also intermarried with the Deshazers, many members of both families moving west with the Burgesses in the 1820s and '30s to Robertson Co., Tennessee. Edward Burgess of Kanawha Co., Virginia (later West Virginia) is tied to his father through several deeds recorded in Orange Co. in which he sells off his share of his father's estate, being noted specifically as a resident of Kanawha Co. Although Edward did not leave a will, his two sons, Garland and John, are continually associated with him in the personal property tax lists of Kanawha Co. through 1845, when they move to Missouri as a group; and it is clear that these sons are listed with their father in the 1820-40 censuses. Included at the end of this section is the family of John Meredith Burgess, whose descendants intermarried at several points with those of Edward's branch, and whose daughter, Caroline Burgess McCown, went west with the Burgesses, but who does not otherwise appear to be connected to the direct line. John Meredith Burgess's origin is unknown.
Reuben Burgess left a will which mentions three sons: William, Reuben Jr., and Thomas. These children moved with their father and their own families to Albemarle Co., Virginia in 1789, and thence to Rowan (later Davie) Co., North Carolina in 1799. William and Reuben's five or six sons can be identified by proximity (they appear either to have lived together or very close to each other), but only one, Samuel, can be firmly attached to the proper parent, and he probably died without heirs. The families of James and Moses Burgess are probably (but not certainly) extinct in the male line; John Burgess moved with his family to Union Co., Illinois, in the 1830s, leaving one son, John Z. Burgess, who has descendants. Edward Burgess died in 1840, leaving several daughters and two sons, Franklin and Lindsey, who died without heirs male; Edward's widow, Eleanor, also moved her family to Union Co., IL, in the 1840s. Thomas Burgess moved to White (later Putnam) Co., Tennessee in 1815; his relation to his father is confirmed through his son Anderson Burgess's personal biography, published a century ago in a Warren Co., Missouri history. Anderson's account also lists all of Thomas's children, whose subsequent fates have been traced through a combination of probate, census, tax, and legal records, with the exception of one of Thomas's younger sons, William W. Burgess, whose fate remains unknown.
Correcting a Genealogical Error
The most prominent Burgess family in colonial America was that of Colonel William Burgess of Anne Arundel, Maryland, whose wealth, influence, and progeny have been chronicled in several sources, especially Anne Arundel Gentry, which details and documents his numerous descendants for a number of generations, and upon which I have partially relied for the argument given below. Many genealogists have tried to tie their Burgess lines to Colonel William's offspring. About forty years ago a researcher hired by descendants of the Rappahannock Co. line proclaimed that the original Edward Burgess, who died in 1759 in King George Co., was the same as the Edward Burgess mentioned as a son of Samuel Burgess (a grandson of Col. William Burgess of Maryland). This "same name" theory was rediscovered in the 1950s by an amateur genealogist from another branch who had located descendants of the Rappahannock Co. family, and who wholeheartedly embraced the earlier researcher's solution to the problem of the Burgess family's origins, but made no effort to confirm it. Other cousins then spread the theory without vetting it further; it was then published in Virginia Settlers, Volume II, by A. Maxim Coppage III (Utica, KY: McDowell Publications, 1988, p. 103-105).
Unfortunately for the proponents of this notion, the facts are these: Edward Burgess, the oldest son of Samuel Burgess of Anne Arundel Co., Maryland (who was a grandson of Col. William Burgess), was christened on 14 Apr. 1717. The christening of a child in those days did not necessarily occur immediately, but usually the event was not long delayed, occurring at the first convenient visit by the family to the church after the birth, and in any case within six to eighteen months. It is highly unlikely that Edward Burgess son of Samuel Burgess was born earlier than 1715. However, Edward Burgess of King George Co., Virginia purchased one hundred acres of land in King George Co. in 1731, and it is indisputable that this farm is the same land later sold by his Burgess heirs in 1797; also, he was married by 1720, and had a daughter born by 1722 at the latest. Under the law prevailing at the time, minors had few legal rights, and those rights could only be exercised in their name by their parents or legal guardians until they reached their majority. At this time males attained their legal majority at the age of twenty-one. If Edward Burgess of King George Co., VA, was indeed the same person as Edward Burgess of Anne Arundel Co., MD, how could he have bought his farm, or married, or had children? It is simply not possible, and would not have been allowed. A minor would not have had the legal power to enter into any such agreements.
There is a further difficulty overlooked by these earlier researchers. Samuel Burgess of Anne Arundel County had three sons mentioned in the christening records: Edward, Benjamin, and Richard, in that order. Yet in Samuel's later will, which was probated during the lifetime of Edward Burgess of King George Co., Richard Burgess, known to be the third son of Samuel, is specifically mentioned as Samuel's oldest son. The only way this document can be interpreted is that Richard is Samuel's oldest surviving son, and that his two brothers are dead. But if his brother Edward is dead, he cannot be Edward Burgess of King George Co., who is very much alive during this period.
Finally, there is the problem of names. Naming patterns are very pronounced during this period, and while not themselves a final indication of relation or non-relation, can constitute a powerful prohibitive argument against one family being related to another. The naming pattern of Col. William Burgess's line does indeed favor the names Edward, William, and John, as does the family of Edward Burgess of King George Co., VA. However, Col. William's immediate descendants also frequently employ such names as Basil, Michael, Mordecai, Samuel, and Richard for their males, while Edward's line uses such pet names as Garner, Moses, Reuben, Lunsford, James, Thomas, Joel, and Anderson. There is not one Basil, Michael, Mordecai, Richard, or Samuel in the Edward Burgess family until a much later period; at the least, one would expect a profusion of Samuels if Edward was the son of Sam. But he isn't, and all the wishing in the world that one might be connected to a prominent family won't make it so.
Correcting Another Genealogical Error
In the late 1970s a history of the descendants of Thomas Burgess of Putnam and Cumberland Cos., Tennessee was published. Although basically sound in its presumptions, the book made two unfortunate conclusions based upon a coincidence of similar names occurring in the local region. The author identified his ancestor, Thomas Burgess of White (later Putnam) Co., TN, with another Thomas Burgess of White (later Warren) Co., TN, who received a Revolutionary War bounty grant. But the earlier Thomas Burgess was resident in White Co. by the year 1800, being recorded in the census there, while the ancestor of the Putnam and Cumberland Cos. line clearly did not leave North Carolina until 1815, his movements being delineated in surviving tax and deed records, and his connection to his father being stated in a county history biography later published by his son, Anderson Burgess. The Warren Co. family can similarly be followed down the generations without difficulty. In fact, the families do not appear to be connected.
A second error was made by the Tennessee researcher in identifying the children of Thomas Burgess's son, Joel Burgess, who was also called Joseph in some records and "Joe" by his descendants. Another apparently unrelated Burgess line in neighboring Jackson Co. had as its progenitor one Josiah Burgess, also called Joseph or Joe, and his possible grandson Joe Burgess (son of James Burgess), who died in 1911 in Jackson Co., leaving many hundreds of contemporary descendants. The latter individual was mislabeled in the Tennessee book as the oldest son of Joel Burgess. The problem is compounded by the fact that many of the members of this line drifted down into the Cookeville, Putnam Co. area in the early twentieth century, apparently intermingling with the original Putnam lines, who moved north from the White-Putnam Co. border region at about the same time.
Joel Burgess left no will or settlement deed, and neither did Josiah Burgess, but Joel's place of residence is known to have been southern Putnam Co., nowhere near the Jackson Co. Burgess families, who stayed during this period well north of the Jackson-Putnam county boundary. Here again, naming patterns are very different in the two families. Also, the 1840 census conforms exactly in numbers to the names and ages we have for Joel's family. Joe Burgess of Jackson Co. was born in 1833, and is listed with James Burgess of Jackson Co. in 1850. Joe clearly and consistently indicates in the 1880, 1890 (a sliver of which survives and has been published for Jackson Co.), 1900, and 1910 censuses that both of his parents were born in South Carolina, and this attribution corresponds with that of his presumed father, James Burgess, in the 1850 census for Jackson Co.; the older members of the Putnam Co. families just as clearly state that they and their ancestors were all born in North Carolina. The two families are not the same, and Joe Burgess's descendants have not been included in this book.