Children of John Gill born c1733

(Note! Not much documented in this family, trust everything here as suggestive, unless the documentation as quoted is unequivocal!)

It appears that most of these children removed to Mississippi.

            John Gill c1733-<c1785?, son of James Gill, marr 1st c1753 Mary Jackson, 2nd Agatha Murphey <1762.

					|
	________________________________________________________________________________________
	|					   |			|			|
John Gill c1754 				Mary Gill		Reuben Gill	      Hugh Gill
m. 1st Mary Ward? 				C1758-c1820		c1768-c1820	      in SC in 1822
2rd Agnes Dick					John Bryan Hart		1st Tempie Jordon
	|					To MS 9 children	2nd Nancy Smith
	|								To MS
	|								   |
	_________________________________________________	   	   |
	|	    |	      |	           |		|		Joseph H. Gill 1811
John Gill, III	Mary Gill  James Gill	Hugh Gill   Rebecca? Gill	John Gill 1808-16
c1773?-1828	1790-1827  1780		1780	    ??			Sarah Ann (Sallie)Gill c1809
3rd Eliza Faust Jas Martin SC?		SC?	    John Richie		Mary Ann Gill
4th Alsey Gill	To MS		    	    	    SC or MS?		Eliza Gill c1813
to MS									Daniel? Gill
	|								Effie? Gill
Ellender Gill bc1790 							Thomas Murphy Gill c1818
John Gill, IV b1796							Hughriah Gill
Nancy Gill								Hugh? Gill
daughter								Sarah Gill <1797 MS
Reuben R. Gill b1803-5							Lovicey Gill <1797
Uriah Gill b1799							Child Gill born >1797
T. Jefferson Gill b1809							
James Gill
William T. Gill
Peter Alexander Gill
Lucinda Gill
Harrison M. Gill
Louisa Gill
Lavonia Gill

_______________________________________________________________________

Note Mary Gill who married John Bryan Hart may have been born later, and she may have been a daughter of John Gill born c1754. Reuben has to be a son of John Gill born c1733 in order to have been descended from Agatha Murphy.

Records and conjecture DAR Applications Under John Gill born c1733 There are several accepted DAR applications under John Gill bc1733 (some state c1730) married Mary Jackson, but no documentary proof nor logic for the assignment or dates was to be found in the supporting documents file in the DAR National Library in Washington, D.C.  The South Carolina Murphy records show that this man married second Agatha Murphy, supported by the appearance of the given name "Murphy" (Thomas Murphy Gill), a son of Reuben Gill.  It may be that better DAR documentation could be found in the local chapter of the initial applicant, which would be #638260, I believe.  It may also be that the original DAR applicants had additional data or knowledge, perhaps a Bible birth year, and this documentation may be in the local DAR chapter supporting documents file. DAR application 638260-A654 (supplement A654 added onto the existing DAR application 638260) was filed by Faraba Elizabeth Price Jones in 1985, through John Gill, I's, daughter Mary Gill who married John B. Hart, and states that the wife of John Gill, I, or MS-1, who was the mother of Mary Gill was in fact Mary Jackson.  Mrs. Jones resided in 1985 in Pt. Gibson, Mississippi. I wrote a letter to her in 1992 which was unanswered and unreturned.  In this application, A654, which is an addendum to the original, 638260, it is stated that John Gill, born c1730, perhaps in Virginia, died after 17 Feb. 1785 in SC. This application gets honors for asserting Virginia instead of using the mariner connection.  This application states that daughter Mary Gill born c1758 in Richland Dist., SC, died in Lawrence Co., MS ca1820, married before 1787 in SC to John Bryan Hart born c1760 in New Bern, NC, died in Lawrence Co., MS before December 1822.  This DAR application went against the tides of both Cupit and Andrea, and was clearly correct. I also note that the dates in this DAR application are consistent with all extant documentation quoted herein (again, this does not mean it is correct!). Mrs. Lucy Gill Price was adamant that John Gill, MS-1, born c1733, was married to Mary Ward, and that Mary Ward was one fourth Indian. She may have been the second wife of John Gill born c1733, or the first wife of the John Gill married Agnes Dick if the more recent dates obtain, option 2, and the one I have chosen as most likely - (again, this does not mean it is correct.), or in fact, John Gill, I, born c1733, may have successively married: Mary Jackson, Mary Ward, and Agnes Dick. The last possibility then leaves the John Gill in Peyer im Hoff's company unassigned, and the oral traditions of revolutionary war service indicate that a record should exist. He is stated to "have been married many times," but, most folks were until the 20th century. Wards lived adjacent to the Richland Gills and some of both removed to Barnwell County (that part which is now Allendale County). The Father of the Mississippi John Gill is denoted  by me as John Gill, MS-1, meaning one generation back from the John Gill who removed to Mississippi. There is no documentation that John Gill born c1733 is John Gill, I, (MS-1) of the Mississippi records, although the DAR record above asserts that they are the same. The difficulty lies is the ambiguity in birth year of John Gill, I, (MS-1), c1733 or c1754. Early family records stated c1733.

            However, Mr. John Cupit overwrote many of his records by hand, changing the c1733 to c1754, a generation later. I think it is clear from the documents sent to me by Mrs. Evalyn Gill, that Cupit himself overwrote the dates, as at least one of his later manuscripts has the later dates typewritten. Basically this problem may be summed up by stating that there is a generational ambiguity in these records. Tit for tat, DAR application 678003 of Mrs. Marva Lee Kyzar Reeves of Bogue Chitto, MS, crossed out Cupit's typed 1773 birth date for John Gill, II (MS) and hand wrote 1754 (DAR supporting documents file, Washington, D.C.), precisely the inverse of Mr. Cupit! In Cupit's papers, the following records are found: In "Gills Claimed by Lucie Gill Price to be Her Ancestors", Mrs. Kate Gill Elam did not assign a date for this man, but in one, "Uriah Gill Family", "as compiled by Mrs. Kate Elam", she states that John Gill, II, (MS) was born during the Revolutionary War. Mrs. Lucie Gill Price, in "Gills Claimed by Lucie Price to be Her Ancestors," claimed a 1733 date for John Gill MS-1. The First John Gill, John Gill, MS-1, could have been any of four identifiable John Gills: (1) John Gill born c1733 married Mary Jackson etc., (2) John Gill in Peyer im Hoff's company, (3) John Gill married Agnes Dick (who I believe was the same #2, the John Gill in Peyer im Hoff's company), or (4) John Gill of Barnwell.        

           Peyer im Hoff's company was preponderantly from Fairfield Co., a known location of John Gill married to Agnes Dick, and I think those two are probably the same. If John Gill, MS-1, was born as early as c1733, he could only be the John Gill who married Mary Jackson and Agatha Murphy. If John Gill, MS-1 was in fact born as late as 1754, then he probably was the John Gill in Peyer im Hoff's company, whom, evidence favors as being the same John Gill who married to Agnes Dick. In turn, the only possible assignment of John Gill (who signed his name) married to Agnes Dick is the son of John Gill born c1733. At this moment, they may be linked to John Gill, MS-1, in three ways: (1) two of the known children of Agnes Dick match the names of children stated as those of John Gill, MS-1, (2) this is the only known unassigned revolutionary war record, and (3) this assignment provides a "missing generation" which resolves the issue of the dates. If I adopt, for the sake of discussion, option (2), that John Gill, MS-1 was that John Gill who married Agnes Dick, then we may perhaps assign as children every line identified in Richland Co., SC.  There are other variants of possibilities for this family which seem to fit the data less well.

Return to James Gill

Return to South Carolina Gills

Return to Mississippi Gills

Return to John Gill born c1733

Return to Gill State Selection Page

Copyright ©1997-2015, Frank Oliver Clark, Ph.D. These documents may be freely used for private purposes, and included in your own genealogy. However, these documents are copyrighted and may not be sold, nor given to anyone who may attempt to derive profit from same.