This needs to be reviewed to be sure the source of information is properly credited. Also probably needs to be rewritten.
- Rawley and Charles supposedly served in the command of George Washington in the British army at Braddock's Defeat in 1755
- JOHN DUNCAN - John and his brother Rawley Duncan came from Culpepper Co., Va. and settled at Hunter's Ford (now Dungannon) in 1772. John was killed by the Indians at Moore's Fort in 1774. In 1780 his widow, who had remarried sold her land and left the area for Kentucky.
Loveless account of the capture of Martin’s station. It’s just about that family but it describes the events. There were nine from that family taken to Canada. This is the family of John Loveless who married Rachel Van Hook, d/o Samuel. If you do a search for “Martin's Station Captives” you will find a lot about it. There is a list of captives at http://www.shawhan.com/captivesite.html
Account of George Loveless, son of John Loveless and Rachel VanHook: "John and Rachel Vanhook Loveless and their children: George, Sarah, John, Joseph, Nathan, and others to a total of nine persons were taken at Martin's Station. Some of these children are from John Loveless' first marriage to Hannah."
National Archives Revolutionary War Pension Number S4575 On this 15th day of October 1832 personally appeared before the judges of the Court of commission for the county aforesaid (Trumball county, Ohio). George Loveless, a resident of Newton township in the county of Trumball aforesaid, aged 72 years on the 5th day of September last, who being first duly sworn according to law doth in his oath make the following declaration in order to obtain the benefit of the Act of congress, passed June 7, 1832. That he entered the service of the United States under the following named officers and served as herein stated. In the spring of the year 1777 his father, John Loveless, (then residing at a place called Holston and about 12 miles from Wolf Hills Courthouse - then so called in the state of Virginia, was drafted for a six month tour to go to a campaign under Colonel Bowman to Kentucky at which time Kentucky was a part of Virginia. The object of the expedition if he correctly remembers was to protect the inhabitants from Indian deprecations and to reinforce Boons Station then in danger of being beseiged. In which said Detachment, he - the said George Loveless - said service as a substitute for his said father, John Loveless, and joined the detachment at his father's house and was detailed as one of the Packhorse guard while on this march - which was very slow and tedious having to pass through a wilderness of nearly 300 miles distance The station to which we were advancing had previous to our arrival been beseiged nine successive days by a strong Indian force and a few days before and very probably with a knowledge of our advancing raised the seige and marched off. We, during the remainder of the time of service for which we were engaged, did military duty by standing sentry and on scouting parties and hunting to supply the garrison with provisions; he the said George Loveless continued in said service until his time for which the draft was made expired when he said Boons Station by said Colonel Bowman and was discharged which was as he now believes some time in last of October or first part of November in the year 1777 aforesaid. After which he the said George Loveless with a able and expert hunter-woodsman took up our march home through the wilderness to Holstein. In the spring of 1778 he again went to Kentucky with a party to raise corn and in his turn guard the parties at work and in making preparation for the reception of his father's family. But this year they could not remove and he the said George continued through the Winter following and early in the Spring of the year 1779 again planted corn and then joined a party of volunteers (as he believed) under the command of Col. Bowman, Col. Logan, and Captain Harrod and other officers names not remembered. Captain Boon was also of the party perhaps the guide and projector of the expedition as he had been before this a prisoner at the Chilicothe towns. This Detachment rendevouzed on the Ohio River and the boats were brought together with other forces; we took up our line of march for the old Chillecothe towns being about as he verily believes about 300 strong including some mounted men. Col. Bowman commanded the center; Col. Logan the right and Captain Harrod the left wing. After crossing the Ohio River we made forced marches almost night and day until in the latter part of the last day's march we surrounded the Indian town aforesaid and on the 4th day of May 1779 at break fo day commenced the attack on the first five; the Indians fled to their Black House in great trepidation leaving in their __, their ammunition and much of their valuable property. In this battle we had eight men killed and 6 men wounded.
The wounded men we brought with us and also much of their best property and a large number of horses. After we had by a guard and complete defeat of the enemy burnt their town, a retreat was ordered and we were twice in the course of the first day's march attacked by the remaining Indian force but they were soon repulsed with loss and after this continued our return march unmolested in a body until we crossed the Ohio River and then each company dispersed and retired to their former stations. He, the said George Loveless, returned to Riddle Station from the time he was entered a volunteer in said last mentioned expedition until he was dismissed he thinks it must have been about two months as well he can no recollect; he remained at said Riddles Station after this his said return in taking care of his corn at that place and the following Fall went back to Virginia and brought his Father and family from Holstein to Kentucky and on our return to Kentucky about 19 families or perhaps more combined and built on the waters of Licking River a fort called Martin Station.
Here we remained fortified under the command of Captain Duncan; but however by whom commission he the said George does not now know. It is yet fresh in his recollection of several small skirmishes with small parties of Indians while out on scouting excursions but on the 26th day of March 1780 a large party of Indians assailed the station and commenced their attack by surprise; killed some that were out and wounded his father, the said John Loveless, by a shot through the right shoulder and breast but he got into the fort and with the small garrison of about 25 men that had any arms we sustaineth the attack of an Indian force of 500 (as was believed) but the warm reception we gave them induced the enemy to retire. They however soon after made an attempt on Brians Station and there met as warm a reception and so repulsed, divided into small squads, and for a time kept haunting our post and killing some and destroying property and intercepting our reconnoitering parties. Thus situated we held our garrison watchfully until the 26th day of June 1780.
Our station was again beseiged by a still larger force of British Canadians and Indians said to be 700 strong with two 4-pounders pieces of artillery against which with our small force and a garrison constructed only to resist an attack with small arms, who was therefore obliged to accept the terms of capitulation offered us of being prisoners of war to the British Force. This force of the enemy was commanded by Col. Bird of the British; Col. McGee, Captain Elliott and Ginter (sic, Simon Girty (1741-1818)) with Canadian and Indians.
From our place of capture we were taken and carried prisoners by the British detachment down the Ohio River to the mouth of Big Miami; then up the same to a carrying place to M___; then down to Lake Erie and thence to Detroit suffering the severest fatigue, hunger, and cold and wet having lost all our property, clothing, and papers burnt and destroyed after our surrender. He, the said George, with many other of the prisoners was kept prisoner of war until in the year 1784 , the said George, was released or exchanged and sent to Pittsburgh (as he believes) on some mission to Col. Butler. This George saith that he knows of none of the officers or soldiers that are now living by whom he can prove his services or captivity except a younger brother who resides in Milton township in said county of Trumball, and who being a child at the time of the aforesaid capture and was also taken prisoner together with his said Father and family consisting of nine persons and the said George who at the time of said capture was in the twentieth year of his age. He hereby relinquishes every claim whatsoever to a pension or annuity except the present and declares that his name is not on the pension roll of the agency of any state or territory. Sworn and subscribed the day and year aforesaid.
We, residing in the township of Milton in the County of Trumball and state of Ohio hereby certify that we are well acquainted with George Loveless who has subscribed and sworn to the above Declaration and we believe him to be 72 years of age, that he reputed and believed in the neighborhood where he lives to have been a soldier of the Revolution and that we concur in that opinion.
- John Duncan Born about 1767 in Virginia.
From: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: [TWWFA]: Re: Duncan/Dunkin - old post from 9-21-05 Date: October 12, 2006 10:16:39 PM EDT To: TWWFA@googlegroups.com Reply-To: TWWFA@googlegroups.com
This may not help at all but here’s what I have for the Duncan clan that I know of, all supposedly from a book and/or carefully researched material, and the info was sent to me by another researcher (looks like the LDS file to me). I might add I’ve never seen this book. It will take forever to document it. This must have pretty much a mass family migration.
William (I) and Susan (maybe Haldane) stayed in Scotland.
Their children (some with their own children) were the immigrant Duncan clan: William (II) (came with children), Charles, Henry, Thomas, Susan, and Mary. All born in Scotland between c 1658 to c 1677 and died here, most in PA or VA as far as I can tell from info that was given me.
I have no further information for any of them other than my line as follows:
William (II) (b c 1658/59) and Margaret Mcmurde and their children (PA to VA after 1692 if Wm (III)s b-date is correct), all born in Scotland, and most, if not all, probably died in PA or VA: Susan, Elizabeth, Barbara, Henry c. 1685, Thomas, Charles, Margaret, James (died Lancaster PA 1751), Mary & Townsend c 1691 twins, and William (III) c 1692-1781.
The ‘born here’ ones of my line, William (III) and Ruth Rawley, children all born c 1723 – c 1740 or so in VA and died either in VA or KY as far as I can tell, are: Rawley, Charles, William (IV), James, Joseph, John, Mary, Rice, Anne, and Nancy,
Rawley Duncan (1723-1786) & Mary Roberts only had three children that I know of: Jael (c 1751 - m Samuel Stallard and their daughter, Delcena, married James Green, Jr, son of James Sr = Jane Walker Porter = Kilgore), John (c 1753), and Townsend (c 1755).
Rawley died 1786. Chalkley says: “Bill filed 18th May, 1796. “Rawley Duncan obtained a certificate of settlement in 1773. Rawley Duncan died intestate, leaving John Duncan his **only son** and heir. Townsend Duncan is now in possession.”
It specifically says his “only” son. Now, if there was a Townsend occupying his land, and it was not his son, maybe John the heir (b c. 1753) had a son named Townsend old enough to ‘occupy’ the land in 1796. Might have been a nephew or a cousin (they had to have had a zillion of both). Townsend being a family name, who knows. Doesn’t look like it was his son though.
Well – if FTM can’t figure out my tree why should I think I could! It already puts the 2 James Greens in the same generation, as well as the 2 Masons, so if I end up with another Duncan from the same family line my FTM program might just spontaneously combust! Throw a Walker, 2 Porters (no clue who the other one is), Lewis, Waggoner, Hutchinson, Stallard, Todd, Barker, and a Day into the mix and between them they owned a good chunk of SW VA all at <about> the same time. They’re all so intermarried it’s a wonder I don’t have a hump on my back and drool and limp when I walk.
From: TWWFA@googlegroups.com On Behalf Of Bill Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 8:12 PM To: TWWFA@googlegroups.com Subject: [TWWFA]: Re: Duncan/Dunkin - old post from 9-21-05
In this regard also note the following
Morton 1920:350 1755 John Walker [and wife] Ann, 1755, 190 acres, 5p 14s, Walkers Creek. Sold 1765 to Henry Duncan, for 100p, by Duncan 1760 to Samuel Lindsey for 102 p 10s. [NB: dates seem to be in error. Morton has Duncan selling the land in 1760, 5 years before Walker sells it to him.
This is John III selling his land on Borden's Grant prior to his removal to NC. Note that the land is being sold to Henry Duncan. It would be interesting to learn whether the Duncan's of Dungannon on the Clinch River, are connected to this Henry Duncan.
On Oct 12, 2006, at 11:07 AM, Bill wrote:
As an FYI, its seems highly likely that the Duncans who lived on the west side of the river (for the most part) from Dungannon down, are family to Patrick Porter who lived on the east side, roughly at Dungannon. I forget the details but when one of the Duncans died Patrick ended up with a parcel on that side of the Clinch---and it looks very much like it was an inheritance from one of the Duncans. The Duncans are thought to be related to Samuel of Temple Hill through a marriage ---I think Samuel of Temple Hill married a Duncan. And the Duncan's came to the area according to some, from Porter's Bridge---which lies on the Octoraro a mile or so West of Rising Sun.
So the Duncan's seem to tie back to the same area that John III came from, tie into Samuel of temple Hill, and seem to be related to Patrick. Which supports the idea that Samuel of temple Hill was related to Patrick.
There are also connections between the Porter's and John Mitchells on Borden's Lot, and the Mitchells seem to come to the Borden's Grant from the same general area as the Dunkins came from.
There's a broad, loosely woven skein of information that suggests all of these folks are related, and may eventually allow us to pin point Patricks ancestry. By the way, some of the Porter's in the Porter's Bridge area and eastward, seem to use "Patrick" as a given name as well. Again suggesting a connection to our Patrick Porter.
Eventuallyl, all of this needs to be captured on the Wiki so that we can follow the thread more easily.
On Oct 12, 2006, at 10:15 AM, Parsons, Linda #237 wrote:
From: Dan Welch - Date: Wed, Sep 21 2005 12:00 pm Hi Bill;
The Porters associated with Porter's Bridge are, I believe asssociated by some with the Samuel Porter who married Elizabeth Dunan/Dunkin/ etc. I've not found anything beyond tertiary sources to support that.
I have made no study of Pennsylvania Porters but it is interesting to note that extensive information exists for the Dunkins. ***Apparently, the "k" spelling is a key to locating Dunkin information.***
I am from Rawley Duncan's direct line. I used to think the spelling Duncan or Dunkin made the difference until I found this. Now I'm looking at records spelled either way.
The Washington County Surveyors Record 1781-1797 - Page 199 - Benjamin Nicholson...150 ac...Commissioners Certificate...on both sides of Clynch River...Beginning on the north bank of the river at the mouth of a branch...corner to Rawly Dunkins land that he now lives on...on the west side of Bustards Run near the bank of the river...November 20, 1782 - Benjamin Nicholson...300 ac by settlement made in 1774...on both sides of Clynch River adjoining Alexander Richie & Martin Dunkin...August 8, 1781