Transcriber's Comments:

1. Document Provenance:

   Preceding is a copy of an untitled one-page manuscript prepared sometime in the 20th century probably by Margaret Amelia Holsinger [Payne] (1889-1984) or perhaps one of her sisters (Nettie?).

   Manuscript is held by Margaret's daughter M, and is copied (for the second time in ten years) here August 2002 by their grandson/son Daniel Charles Thomas (1950-living). I attest that this is a verbatim copy, exactly punctuated and typed as in the original--including corrections made by the original author (mis-struck letters were overstruck in correction).

2. Physical Structure:

   Objective structure is three paragraphs and a list, but at the end of the list a last paragraph blooms.

   Subjective structure:

   1. First Paragraph: Grandparents and parents of Jane Gilmore Williams Hargrove.
   2. Second Paragraph: Marriage and westward emigration, Jane Gilmore and Abraham Williams.
   3. Third Paragraph: Life/death details of Abraham and Jane, with character notes about Jane.
   4. List: Abraham, Jane, and children, with details of one son-in-law's service in Civil War.

      Subjective structure is to follow the descent quickly and briefly through the four generations and the emigration westward, with the focus constantly returning to Jane Gilmore Williams Hargrove. The first sentence of the document creates the first three generations in one breath: "John and Janet Gilmore, grandparents of Jane Gilmore Williams Hargrove"; the fourth generation will be Jane G.W.H.'s children listed at the end. The third paragraph, after noting her husband's trade and death, is dominated by a description of Jane's final years with her daughter and son-in-law Pettegrew. The list of children then follows; a few names have some dates.

3. Original Author Style:

   Note author's usage of abbreviations of states, and especially the non-capitalization of the word "river" after the proper name of the Ohio River--which usage occurs twice. Considering the particular and constant care taken with capitalization of the abbreviations of the word "County" (Co.) and various states (Kans., Ark., Nev., Pa.) whose consistent abbreviations must be taken as deliberate, we must assume that the de-capitalization of the word "river" twice in "Ohio river" must also be deliberate.

   Style of abbreviation and capitalization: Kansas is abbreviated only once, but is spelled out twice. Nevada is spelled out twice, and abbreviated twice. Iowa is always spelled out. Pennsylvania is spelled out only once, and seven times abbreviated as "Pa"; however, it should be noted that the abbreviation for Pennsylvania appears several times in the list of children WITHOUT a period, unlike the author's treatment of Arkansas and Nevada.

   The capitalization style reflects the author herself, whom we know (if Margaret or her sister) was originally trained to write around the turn of the 19th to 20th century. Style implies the document was written before the official naming of all states with two-letter zipcode abbreviations (or that the writer refused to use them). Her non-capitalization (i.e. "Ohio river" instead of "Ohio River"), is curiously, the very example (i.e. Ohio river) used in Webster's dictionary rules of capitalization in and edition of the early 20th century, which includes the critique: "a practice not favored by authorities." This practice has gradually changed. The power of "authorities" to thus control the language of "the people" is an entirely separate subject only mentioned here.

   A few typographical errors are corrected by overstriking, these errors are not reproduced in this copy, because the writer corrected them. Two errors, however, were missed, and are reproduced here. (1) "married William James Hollingsworthin Milton, Van...." (reader will please insert mental space before in.); and (2) "Samamtha Melissa" (probably meant to be "Samantha").

   The spelling (or orthography) of the text is remarkably correct; Cincinnati, Mississippi, Keosauqua, etc., as well as words like "conscientious" are all standard or "correct" according to the official spelling adopted as a national standard in the century before the writer of this document was born. However, "dysentary" (in the third paragraph) is mis-spelled (it should be "dysentery"), and "ceceder" (in the first paragraph) should (nowadays) properly be spelled "seceder," but this typist (in 2002) wonders if that variant spelling is deliberate, and might in fact be a dialectical variant handed down from the generations before. Is it not curious that such a mispelling of such an important word was not corrected by simply overstriking the first "c" with an "s" yes? Especially with so many other difficult words spelled correctly. Research remains to be done on the history of that particular church movement (18th century?) to determine if they actually "mis"spelled their own name. (*Grin*)

   This typist's attention is also drawn by the phrase closing the third paragraph: "retained her faculties remarkable" and wonders if the writer meant "remarkably" or whether this is in fact a dialectical usage (similar perhaps to "ceceder" instead of "seceder"?). Or... perhaps this typist is over-reaching himself, and is now writing, not just reading, between the lines.

4. Original Author's Comments/Attitude:

   Particular reference is also made by this typist to the parenthetical remark in the first paragraph: "Nancy Smith (our branch)" from which the re-typist Daniel infers that this manuscript was typed after the marriage of Margaret's older daughter V to L.S. The differentiation implicit in the comment "our branch" is taken as evidence for dating this manuscript after that marriage, in order to differentiate the Smith branches, obviously.

   Just possibly it represents evidence that the manuscript was originally written by Margaret's sister, and it might also be taken as evidence for personal bias of the author--whichever sister that was--but this critique is a bit of a stretch... not much (for those of us who knew the firm character of the sisters) of a stretch, but yes, a bit.

   No such comment is made about the name Williams, therefore it is also infered by Daniel that this manuscript was written before Margaret's granddaughter S married J.W. (1964).

   Secondly, reference is made to the author's comments of characterization:

   1. "They were Scotch Presbyterians and later became ceceders. They were a God-fearing people, moral and conscientious, strong mentally and physically. They were Scotch-Irish." (Re: John & Janet Gilmore, pair #1 in the narrative).
           One could write volumes on social heirarchy and ethical standards encoded in those few words. At the time of emigration (a hundred years and more before the author wrote this manuscript), "Scotch-Irish" was "better" than Irish but "not as good" as English. In one sense, the moral pronouncements must be taken at face value: that was to be understood as being the character of the people described. But in another sense, this was to say, in the societal power-level of meaning, that these people were, quite simply, not to be considered "white trash," which was precisely what many "English" thought about Irish and Scotch-Irish. Every silver lining has a dark cloud.
   2. "...always a devout Christian, strong and vigorous mentally and physically, bright and intellectual and retained her faculties remarkable to the close of her long and useful life." (Re: Jane Williams-Hargrove 1807-1893.)
   3. Bla bla bla bla blaaaa have you any wool?

5. Subject Matter: Document gives, with the briefest narrative, the bare bones of the American epic: the emigration westward of one particular family in four generations.

6. Possibility of previous material sources.

   "Andrew Smith Williams, their eldest son, states that when the family left Pennsylvania, they went to West Virginia intending to locate below Wheeling, but did not like the country so turned back to the Ohio river. They boarded a flat boat and went to Cincinnati. In a short time they went on down the Ohio river to the Mississipppi, thence to St. Louis, Mo., and to Keokuk, Iowa. From there they moved to Farmington, Iowa, and settled on a farm."

   This section is fascinating not only for the detail it offers about the family journey (oh to have been a fly upon that flatboat cabin wall!), but also for the notice that the eldest son "states that..." which implies that the author had recourse to some other documentary sources, possibly a letter or diary or reminiscence of this Andrew Williams or someone who had talked with him. The use of present tense "states that" is in keeping with the literary conceit by which written material (like a book) is spoken of in present tense (as in "Shakespeare says that that is the question"). The two possible writers of this document reproduced here, grandmother Margaret and her sister, were the grandchildren of Andrew's sister. Had one or both of them seen a piece of writing from Andrew? More research is needed to answer this question. Internet search on book by Andrew Smith Williams?

7. Nevada: A further movement westward.

   The last chapter in the saga briefly written in this document is, of course, the relocation of the central woman, Jane Gilmore Williams Hargrove, beyond Iowa into Nevada, to the home of her daughter and son-in-law Pettegrew. Carson Valley. Perhaps there we will find her grave, and who knows: more new cousins?

   UPDATE, SEPTEMBER 2002

   Selina Ann Pettegrew obituary: http://www.rootsweb.com/~nvgenweb/obits/nvobitsP.html