Identifying Victims of an Indian Massacre

Identifying Victims of an Indian Massacre John T. Humphrey* T HE FUN OF GENEALOGY for many family historians is the discov¬ ery process unearthing facts on any given ancestor and his family or uncovering information that leads to another generation. But all too frequently the chase for information is limited to data on the vitals of that ancestor. While the identifying information is very important and cannot be ignored, researchers should not limit their pursuit of data to records of birth, marriage, and death. This article will provide rather conclusive evidence that the family historian in the course of finding roudne identifying informauon can often Find clues leading to other kinds of data that is, significant his¬ torical facts about an ancestor. Genealogists need to explore those his¬ torical avenues as well as vital statistics because the other “stuff’ both clarifies the details found in the vitals and brings an ancestor and his family to life. As the reader will see, good genealogical research is also a necessary ingredient because it can clarify some of the details not mentioned in a historical document or even in an accumulation of documents. And when combined, good genealogical and historical research can provide meaningful insights into our collecuve past. As is the case with most histories, facts on this particular family do not appear together in one place or in one source but are found piecemeal — > — i Note:John T. Humphrey is the author of the fourteen-volume Pennsylvania Births series, a two-volume family history entitled Early Families of Northampton County, Pa. (Frack/Seyfried and Repsher/Dietrich families) , the critically acclaimed Under¬ standing and Using Baptismal Records, and numerous articles for the Pennsylvania Genealogical Magazine and other publications. He lectures frequently at national, re¬ gional, and local genealogical conferences. Mr. Humphrey has proved his descent from five separate families who were victims of Indian massacres during the French and Indian War. 101 102 The Pennsylvania Genealogical Magazine in a variety of locations over a period of many years. When put together, however, they tell a rather interesting tale. The event is a massacre that took place in the Pennsylvania wilderness on the night of 10 December 1755. Records uncovered include three eyewitness accounts of the horrific incident. Related to the eyewitness accounts are details found in a deposition taken from a survivor of an¬ other attack and the personal narratives of two women taken captive. Of note, information in the narratives clarified data already told in the eyewitness accounts, Background information and greater detail about the family were discovered in a series of diaries kept by the Moravians at Nazareth and Bethlehem, Pennsylvania. Information found in the more traditional sources, namely deeds and wills, added additional stadstics. But as the reader will note, while the historical records as they relate to the massa¬ cre provide unique and interesting detail on the family, those records remained silent when it comes to naming most of the vicdms of the tragedy. Church records, a more conventional genealogical source, fur¬ nished that data. The story began unfolding when the search for information on an ancestor produced a cemetery record noting that Philippine Weinland, maiden name Boemper, was born 14 November 17531 at Hoeth’s settle¬ ment on the Pohopoko Creek, scene of the 1755 massacre. Although the cemetery record alluded to an interesting if somewhat horrible I Rev. William T. Kluge, “The Moravian Graveyards at Nazareth, Pa., 1744-1904,” Transactions of the Moravian Historical Society, vol. VI (Whitefield House, Nazareth, Pa.: 1907), 137; hereafter cited as Kluge. The source record reads: “Philippine Weinland, m.n. Boemper. . . . Bom at Hoeth 's settlement on the Pohopoko Creek, (the scene of the massacre in 1755, and later the site of the Indian Mission, Wechquetank, ) Nov. 15, 1753." The parenthetical portion appears as such in the quotation; it is not author comment. Note: Variant spellings for surnames and given names is a recurrent problem for any family historian working on Pennsylvania ancestors, and this problem can be particularly troublesome when those ancestors were German. As it relates to the present study, the Hoeth family name is generally found as Hoth in German records, although significant variations do appear. Even more variant spellings for the surname Bomper were found in records both in this country and in Germany. Surnames of German families named in this article have been altered to reflect those names as that can most frequently be found in mid-eighteenth-century Pennsylvania records, one exception being the several Pennsylva¬ nia records that used the spelling “Heath” instead of Hoeth. Other exceptions, of course, are all names appearing in direct quotations. In addition, several given-name variations (Philippine/Philippina/Philipina; Catherine/ Catharine/Katharina) appear in this arti¬ cle as found in the source. Spellings of both surnames and given names as they appear in original records have been retained in the genealogical summary. Identifying Victims of an Indian Massacre 103 event, the entry furnished only a few clues. It failed to name any of the victims and provided no details. An item that yielded more information was found in a general history on the French and Indian War published by the Pennsylvania German Society in 1904. This information took the form of an entry taken from the diary for the Moravian settlement at Nazareth, Pennsylvania. It read in part, “An hour ago came Mr. Glotz and told us that the lOill Instant in the night Hoeth’s Family were killed by the Indians, except his Son & the Smith, who made their escape and the Houses were burnt down.”2 Also found in the Pennsylvania German Society history was the “Ex¬ amination” ofjohn Michael Huth taken on 12 December 1755 at Easton, Pennsylvania. The Huth deposition was typical of many that were taken during the war, but his was an actual eyewitness account of the atrocity. Depositions or Examinations, as they were officially known, were a means by which local authorities were able to attract the attention of the Governor and other Philadelphia men who were responsible for their protection. Examinations also provided a method for obtaining intelligence information on possible perpetrators and the names of pris¬ oners held in captivity. Huth noted in his deposition that he was having dinner with Frederick Heath and his family on the night of December 10 when the cabin was attacked by a Company of Indians about 5 in number. , . . [T]he Indians shot into the House 8c wounded a woman; at the next shot they killed Frederick Heath himself, . .. whereupon all ran out of the House that could. The Indians immediately set fire to the House, Mill and Stables. Hoeth’s wife ran into the Bakehouse, which was also set on Fire. The poor woman ran out through the Flames, and being very much burnt she ran into the water and there dyed. The Indians cut her belly open, and used her otherwise inhumanly. They killed and Scalped a Daughter, and he thinks three other Children who were of the Family were brunt. Three of Hoeth’s Daughters are missing with another f 2 ) . Henry Melchior Muhlenberg Richards, The Pennsylvania-German in the French and Indian War: A Historical Sketch,” The Pennsylvania-German Society Proceedings And Addresses At Germantown, October 25, 1904, vol. XV (Lancaster, Pa.: The New Era Printing Co., 1904), 184-85; hereafter cited as Richards. .1 7 he Pennsy Ivania Genealogical Magazi n e 104 k lÿp -F a .* M i * i *r * r i *ÿ s * I ■* ■ %ÿ* * Itl*!4iU IS * mnilM |! s it / * j iten I SA' fm s M 7 I / WV J ■ * * SIR •J, ■i \ r I , !T* ill 1 P . & .: -m \ -ÿ- ■■ ✓ jr m i // J i s i ■ — & i >» • * r> ■■ 1 < 1t ■- \W' iV* LIViV 3 "s J*7 -'j . . & \> ; I i ! i i4 re® VV V 1 1 8 I §$m # A 1 U f a 5r5 K j -r* * C 4 \ k i I *% .-* *r o ®-t 0 ** P n <tq *tk 1 i— ) % \ % * * «5 1 - V J 3 # .J Vi -5 #- ~*L V illfv «*.' i P v'S V 3 i v V f -I 3 Ilf A 7 i ,#ÿ f + ■* #•* J / \ ■w * ■ 1 « I 8 * * \ > ; “j * * <*s; n *m ■* r* \ T *. . ir # i v O Site of the Hoeth Massacre. Notation at this site reads: “FREDERICK HOETH MASSACRE. Six killed and six women carried away captive. Dec. 10, 1755." © Nazareth Survivors fled to this site. — s 105 Identifying Victims of an Indian Massacre Woman who are suposed to be carried off. In the action one In¬ dian was killed & another wounded; and further this Deponent said not,3 The Huth deposition raised the researcher’s level of curiosity because it provided some detail on what had transpired, but it did not furnish much information about the family the names of the victims Fred¬ erick Hoeth’s wife and daughter who were killed, and the three daugh¬ ters taken captive. But Huth’s deposition did provide a starting point from which to launch a pursuit for names. Huth, however, did furnish the name of the property owner infor¬ mation that could be used to initiate a search for deeds and other kinds of records. It soon became apparent that Frederick Heath was actually Joh. Frederick Hoth, a 1748 immigrant to Pennsylvania from Germany who had settled about 1752 in what is now Chestnuthill Township, Mon¬ roe County, Pennsylvania.4 In the deeds and other documents located and searched, an administration for the estate was found. But no names were given beyond that of the head of the family, Frederick Hoeth, and the administrator of the estate, Abraham Boemper.5 A deed found at the Northampton County Courhouse in Easton, Pennsylvania, indicated that Abraham Boemper held the mortgage on the Hoeth property,6 a fact that probably accounted for his being re¬ sponsible for the administration of the estate. Boemper was Frederick Hoeth’s principal creditor. The most important element here, however, is the mention of another man who probably had some connection to Philippine Weinland. Remember her maiden name was Boemper and she was born on the Hoeth farm in 1753. The contents of Abraham Boemper’s will soon furnished the link, confirming her identity as his granddaughter.7 But the perplexing genealogical question remained: What, if any, was the connection between or among Weinland, and Boemper, and Frederick Hoeth? In addition, many other relevant un- — — — — 3 Richards, 186-87. 4 Ralph Beaver Strassburger and William John Hinke, Pennsylvania German Pioneers, 2 vols. (Baltimore, 1980), 1:381. (Orig. publ. in 3vols., Pennsylvania German Society, 1934); hereafter cited as Strassburger and Hinke. Estate Administration of Frederick Hoeth, Register of Wills, Northampton County, 1 Easton, Pa., estate file no. 101. Northampton County Deed Book Al:18. Estate Administration of Abraham Boemper, Register of Wills, Northampton County, Easton, Pa,, estate file no. 1550. 106 The Pennsylvania Genealogical Magazine answered questions were raised by the fact of the massacre itself: What actually happened on the night of December 10, 1755. Who were the victims? Philippine Boemper Weinland and her grandfather Abraham Boemper were members of the Moravian Church, A record to date has not been found to prove that the Hoeth family members belonged to that church, but they were found to be sympathetic with the Moravians, a fact that proved useful for uncovering additional information on the family. A History of Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, for example, answered the question about the connection between the Hoeth, Boemper and Wein¬ land families. The history noted that Christian Boemper, a neighbor of Friedrich Hoeth, was also Hoeth’s son-in-law.8 Marriage records for the church furnished the name of Christian Boemper’s wife and Friederick Hoeth’s daughter she was Philippina, “the eldest daughter of Frie¬ drich andjohanetta Hoeth from Thai Lichteberg in Herzogthum Zweybrucken.”9 This final bit of information was vitally important because it mentioned a location in Germany where additional information might be sought! Among the many useful records kept by the Moravians were diaries journals kept by Moravian ministers and missionaries on travels throughout their missions. Other diaries were kept for various settle¬ ments and congregations throughout the mid-Atlantic region. In the case of the Hoeth family both types proved useful. A brief account of a visiting Moravian missionary and his wife with the Hoeth family was published in the Dansbury Diaries. Brother Graff noted in his journal for Sunday, 22 December 1754, a service held at the Hoeth home. Among those present was a carpenter from Philadelphia who had worked the whole night to finish the room where the service was held. Present were forty people, members of the Hoeth family, friends, neigh¬ bors, and Hoeth’s unnamed hired hand. Immediately after the sermon — — Joseph Mortimer Levering, A History of Bethlehem, Pennsylvania 1741-1892, With Some Accounts of its Founders and Their Activity in America (Bethlehem, Pa.: Times Publishing Co., 1903), 368. 9 Augustus Schultze, Marriage Records of the Bethlehem Moravian Congregation with Supple¬ mentary Biographical Material 1742-1782. 2 vols., unpublished typescript, Bethlehem Public Library, 1:38; hereafter cited as Bethlehem Moravian Marriage Records. 107 Identifying Victims of an Indian Massacre on 11 December 1954, Brother Graff baptized an infant son born to Friedrich andjohanetta Hoeth.10 The child was given the name Chris¬ tian, suggesting that Hoeth’s son-in-law and neighbor, Christian Boemper, was perhaps one of the sponsors. The missionary went on to note the Hoeths “have good order in their home.” With his own children and those of Schauss (the first name is not given) he says that he conducts brief meetings every morning and evening. Of the Schauss family, the missionary noted, “they reside in Hoeth’s mill. In externals they are very poor.” Graff also reported that “at present five or six German families are living nearby. »*n Moravian records yielded another important piece of the puzzle the second of the three extant eyewitness accounts of the massacre espe¬ cially as it related to the events of 10 December 1755. It was the lebenslauf or personal memoir of Marianne Hoeth, one of the daughters taken captive. Excerpts from her story have appeared in print in various forms, but the most complete version was recently published in a book entitled Moravian Women's Memoirs, Their Related Lives 1 750—1820. In her memoir Marianne noted that after the Indian attack on the night of 24 Novem¬ ber 1755, at the Moravian Mission at Gnadenhutten about 12 miles distant from the Hoeth farm, she . . begged her father to flee . . . but he refused,” saying he had done no harm to the Indians, but only good.12 Two weeks after the Mahony [Gnadenhutten Moravian Mis¬ sion] was burned down, they came in the evening, as we were sitting at supper, and fired shots. My father did not think that the shooting was nearby but rather wanted to go outside and see what there might be. As he went through the front door he fell into their hands. They killed him straight away. Mother and we children leaped out of the back door. My mother jumped into the water and was shot and my youngest sister was also killed immediately. They captured me and my two sisters and they took us away with them. I cannot describe what I felt at loosing my dear parents in such a fashion . . . and at seeing my- —— 0 William N. Schwarze and Ralf Ridgway Hillman, The Dansbury Diaries: Moravian Travel Diaries, 1748-1755, of the Reverend Sven Roseen and Others in the Area of Dansbury, notv Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania., (Camden, Maine: Picton Press, 1994), 146-47; hereafter cited as Dansbury Diaries. Dansbury Diaries, 148. Katherine M. Faul, Moravian Women's Memoirs: Their Related Lives, 1750-1820 (Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse University Press, 1997), 89-94; hereafter cited as Faul. 108 The Pennsylvania Genealogical Magazine self among the wild and unruly Indians. . . . [T]hey showed no mercy, for they tried to torment us however they could.13 While in captivity Marianne met Susanna Nitschman, a Moravian, who had been taken prisoner at Gnadenhutten on 24 November 1755. “They brought us to Diuoigo, where Susanna was killed and my two sisters and I were separated.”14 Initially Marianne was given to an Indian who proved to be wild and evil. In fact, he mistreated her so badly that she was taken from him and given an older Indian woman as her child. Later Marianne was allowed the option of taking a member of the tribe as a husband or suffering death by fire. She married the Indian and gave birth in captivity to a son. At some unspecified point she was allowed to visit her sister who had married a Frenchman living at Fort Duquesne.15 And eventually she escaped with her son and returned on 17 October 175916 to Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, where she died in 1772. Both Marianne and her son are buried in the Moravian Cemetery in Bethlehem.17 Like the deposition of Michael Huth, Marianne’s memoir does not provide much information on the names of the victims her mother, her two sisters taken captive, or her sister who was killed. But she did provide some detail to clarify information found in the Huth deposition. Huth had noted a daughter killed.18 According to Marianne, the “daughter killed” was her youngest sister,19 Huth also noted in his depo¬ sition that the mother’s belly was cut open.20 The reason the Indians did so was that Johanna Hoeth was pregnant at the time. Marianne noted that her mother was pregnant in the fall of 1755 and “. . . she was about to give birth. »21 — 13 Faul, 91. 14 Paul, 91. 15 Faul, 92. 16 Levering, 368. y Augustus Schultze, Guide to the Old Moravian Cemetery of Bethlehem, Pa., 17421910,” Pennsylvania German Church Records, vol. 2 (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 1983), 415, 467. Marianne’s son, Friedrich, “probably named” in honor of her late father, was baptized (the record implies at Bethlehem, Pa.) by Bishop Peter Boehler and the celebrated Indian Missionary, David Zeisberger, “pronounced the benediction upon the departing child.” 18 Richards, 186. 19 Faul, 91. 20 Richards, 186. 21 Faul, 91. l Identifying Victims of an Indian Massacre 109 In the three years between 1752 and 1755 Friedrich Hoeth, with the help of hired hands, one or more servants, and his family, constructed an interesting complex of buildings on the property. Evidence found in the depositions and elsewhere indicates that there were two houses on the property, as well as a bake house, a blacksmith shop, a saw, and a grist mill with a mill race. In the fall of 1755 Frederick Hoeth had a blacksmith working on his property George Casper Heiss, a married man with three children.22 He was the smith who, according to a notation by Moravians in the Nazareth Diary, had escaped the massacre. Heiss provided the third eye-witness account. His deposition or examination was published in the Pennsylvania Gazette on 18 December 1755. Heiss noted that on 10 December, at about five or six o’clock, . . . being at supper in the House of Frederick Hoeth, . . . with the said Hoeth, his Wife, five children and one Philip Fleck, . . suddenly Heiss’s . . . Wife cried out to her Husbnd lamentably, “Caspar, Caspar, come and help me, the Indians are here, they will kill me and the Children.” 23 Heiss, who lived in a house separate from the Hoeths with his wife and three children, ran out of the house with Hoeth “when three Guns were immediately discharged at them.”24 He ran toward his own house which he found filled with Indians. Then he ran back to Hoeth “whom he found lying dead at the Back Door.”25 — 22 John Jordan, “Wekquitank, The Annals of a Moravian Indian Village, 1760-1763,” in William Henry Egle, ed., Notes and Queries: Historical, Biographical and Genealogical Relating Chiefly to Interior Pennsylvania, annual vol., 1897 (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 1970), 154; hereafter cited as Notes and Queries. 23 The Pennsylvania Gazette (18 Dec. 1755), HSP Facsimile, vol. 11: 203; hereafter cited as Pa. Gazette (18 Dec. 1755). This same deposition was also published in Notes and Queries, 155. A reproduction of Pennsylvania Gazette text was originally located on the Internet through Accessible Archives Search and Information Server; these transcriptions slightly modify the text to conform with modern language usage. Of interest, two depositions were taken from the survivors of the Hoeth massacre. The examination of John Michael Huth was taken by Williams Parsons at Easton, Pa on 12 Dec. 1755, two days after the event. The examination of Caspar Heiss was taken before Justice Timothy Horsfield at Bethlehem, Pa., a day later, 13 Dec. 1755, three days after the event. On 1 8 Dec., only five days after the Heiss deposition was taken, the text was published in the Pennsylvania Gazette. News traveled more quickly than one would expect in the mid- 1700s; only eight days after the massacre, readers of the Gazette learned of the tragedy. 24 Pa. Gazette (18 Dec. 1755): 203. 25 Pa. Gazette (18 Dec. 1755): 203. 110 The Pennsylvania Genealogical Magazine From there he proceeded to the mill to fetch a gun which he used to kill an Indian keeling before another door. After he discovered more Indians in his own home he jumped into the “Smith’s Shop.” Here he heard his wife cry out “mournfully” as she was led away. After several unsuccessful attempts to free his wife, [he perceived] they would be too many for him, [and] he went to the Mill, and took with him the aforesaid Boy, and went through a Swamp to the House of one Serfass [a neighbor, Philip Serfass] where he [Heiss] found a number of Men stand¬ ing Guard. . , . [Heiss returned to the Hoeth farm the next morning with several neighbors] where they found the Dwell¬ ing-house, Saw-mill and Grist Mill . . all burnt down. The Body of [Frederick! Hoeth almost consumed in the Flames,and his Wife lying in the Mill-race partly burnt, one of the Children, about ten Years old lying dead and scalped; and this Affirmant [Casper Heiss] supposed his own three Children were con¬ sumed in the Flames.26 It appears Heiss may have assumed that his own three children “were consumed in the Flames as he saw his own house set on fire.”27 It appears that Michael Huth might also have made the same assumption, because he had noted in his deposition that “He [Michael Huth] thinks three other children of the family . . . were burnt.”28 Which family? Huth could have been referring to the three Heiss children or to Hoeth’s three daughters, who he says were “missing.” One cannot be too careful about making assumptions because, although Huth’s deposition was recorded two days after the event, many of the details of what happened during the night of 10 December 1755 in darkness, under uncommon stress were forgotton, unrecorded, probably unknown. The deposition of another victim of a separate Indian raid, Leonard Weeser, furnished information on the whereabouts of his (Heiss’s) wife and, possibly, the Heiss children. Weeser, who was taken captive on 31 December 1755, noted at Diahogo that he saw “ye wife of a Smith, who „29 lived with Frederick Head, 8c three children. But were those the three children of Hoeth or Heiss? -i — — 26 Pa. Gazette (18 Dec. 1755): 203-4. 21 Pa. Gazette (18 Dec. 1755): 204 28 Richards, 186-87. 29 Richards, 193. Identifying Victims of an Indian Massacre 111 Caspar Heiss’s deposition provided more detail on the events of that tragic night than the accounts of John Michael Huth and Marianne Hoeth, but like them he (Heiss) failed to furnish Timothy Horsfield (the Justice who took the deposition) with the names of the victims. He did not identify by name his own wife, or their three children, or — — Frederick Hoeth’s dead child, or any survivors. Heiss had noted in his deposition that after leaving the scene of the Hoeth massacre he proceeded to the home of Christian Boemper, Hoeth’s son-in-law, “about a half a Mile distant,” where he found “the Buildings consumed, the People being all fled.”30 Christian Boemper, his wife Philippina, and their daughter were not casualties of the De¬ cember massacre, suggesting that they might not have been at home when Indians visited their farm on that fateful night. Rather, they were probably at Bethlehem where many fleeing settlers had sought refugee. Moravian diaries note that the massacre at Gnadenhutten in Novem¬ ber of 1755 had sparked a mass exodus from the area. The journal entry for Nazareth, on the day following that massacre reads, “This evening there came upwards of sixty of our neighbors for lodgings.”31 Christian Boemper and his wife are not listed among the refugees at Nazareth.32 They were possibly at Bethlehem, where they could have been staying with Christian’s father, Abraham, and his third wife, Rachel Isselsteyn, who lived there. Christian’s safety was short lived. There was a second massacre. A Moravian diary entry for Bethlehem, dated 19January 1756, reports that Philip Servas and Peter Hoffman had gone with a group into the area near Hoeths to tend to the poor livestock. Hoffman and Servas returned and escaped “the hostile hands into which all the others had fallen, among them poor Christian Boemper, whose father had warned him in advance not to go.”33 News of Boemper’s demise reached Nazareth first. A diary entry for Nazareth dated 18 January 1756 noted, , . , news that young Boemper with some of the soldiers and farmers who had gone behind the Blue Mountains in order to 30 Pa. Gazette (\S Dec. 1755):204. 31 Richards, 178-79. an “Diary of Nazareth, year 1756,” unpublished typescript, Whitefield House, Nazareth, Pa., 62, 66-68; hereafter cited as Nazareth Diary, 33 The Bethlehem Diary, year 1756, Volume XVI, original manuscript, Moravian Archives, 20. (Ann Sherwin of Raleigh, N.C., helped with the translation of this particular diary entry.) 112 The Pennsylvania Genealogical Magazine get their cattle have been attacked by the Indians and most of them have been killed.34 Two depositions related to the second massacre are known to have been taken. To date one has turned up that of John Adam Huth, ser¬ vant of Christian Boemper and brother to John Michael Huth, survivor of the Hoeth massacre in November. The first mention of the second Huth deposition recorded in a microfilm of original records for Northampton County at the Historical Society of Pennsylvania was noticed and noted many years ago.35 More recently a printed copy of the deposition was found in the Pennsylvania Gazette, published 29 January 1 756. The second deposition relating to the attack on Christian Boem¬ per, that of Nicholas Yeisley, has to date not been located. John Adam Huth in his deposition noted that he was nineteen years of age and a servant of Christian Boemper. On 15January 1756 he (John Adam), his brother Michael Huth, and Christian Boemper set out for Nazareth. With them was their father Valentine Huth, their sister Eliza¬ beth, Lawrence Kunckle, Nicholasjeisley, “old Fried,” his son Nicholas, and Captain Trump. They proceeded over the mountain and spent the night at the home of John McDowell. On 17 January, six of Captain Trump’s soldiers accompanied the party to Waibert’s farm where they “found all comsumed.” From there they went to Peter Hess’s and then on to Nicholas Wieser’s, where “all was laid in Ashes and the Hogs, Sheep, and Cows lay dead about the Place.”37 Eventually thirteen of the party proceeded to the Hoeth farm. When we got into the Lane, we found three of Christian Boemper’s Hogs lying dad [dead]. . . . But when we came to the Creek, which we were obliged to cross, the Indians fired upon us before we were aware of them. ... I shot at one of the Indians as did Christian Boemper several times. ... I was shot in the — — 34 Nazareth Diary, 65. Original handwritten documents relating to Northampton County, Pennsylvania. The Historical Society of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, (hereafter cited as HSP); microfilm roll no, XR698. 36 The Pennsylvania Gazette (29 Jan. 1756), HSP Facsiiile, vol. 11: 231; hereafter cited as Pa, Gazette (29 Jan, 1756). Originally found on the Internet through Accessible Archives Search and Information Server in slightly modified form. All Pennsylvania Gazette cita¬ tions both for the 18 Dec. 1755 issue and the 29 Jan, 1756 issue— correspons to pages in the facsimile publication. 37 Pa. Gazette (29 Jan. 1756): 231. QE ' — Identifying Victims of an Indian Massacre 113 Leg, and as I was pulling my Master’s Great-coat off, I received a shot in the Arm, which broke it.38 John Adam went on to note that the Indians murdered his father, and “They then got up with my Sister, and one of them took her under his Arm, and knock’d out her Brains; I heard her cry, Help me, but heard her no more,”39 John Adam managed to drag himself away from the scene, in the process discovering the body of his dead brother Michael. During the ensuing night John Adam made his way to his father’s farm where he hid under some straw. He was eventually rescued byNicholas Jeisley and Nicholas Fried and taken to Nazareth where he was attended by a physician, Dr. Matthew Otto.40 Samuel Depui, in New Jersey, recorded that on 22 January 1756 a company of thirty-eight soldiers went to bury the dead. “They found eight, Boemper being one. Five had been scalped, stripped naked and laid across the road in three places.»41 Victims of the 10 December Hoeth massacre were buried on Hoeth’s farm on 14 December 1755 by soldiers under the commands of Captain Solomon Jennings and Captain Doll,42 Captain John Arndt made an official count of the dead and missing from the this massacre. Included in the tally were Frederick Hoeth, his wife, one of his daughters and another girl, both underage, and two men. Three of Hoeth’s daughters, the Smith s wife, and two of his children were taken prisoner.43 38 Pa, 39 Gazette (29 Jan, 1756): 231. Ibid. Among the debits paid by the administrator of the estate of Christian Boemper was 10 shillings paid in cash to J. Adam Huth after his escape from the Indians. The same estate File noted the payment of 12 pounds to the doctor for “attendence and cure and for amputation of his arm.” (Estate file #102 for Christian Boemper, Register Of Wills, Northampton Co.) John Adam Huth remained with the Moravians. He died 28 Jul. 1802 at Christian Spring, a settlement of Single Brethren near Nazareth, Pa. Cemetery records note that “He lost an arm in the fight and massacre at Hoeth’s on the Pohopoko, in 1755, and barely escaped with his life.” Those same records note he was born 28 Sep. 1737 in Hanau, Germany. (Kluge, 120). 40 Amelia Stickney Decker, That Ancient Trail: The Old Mine Road, First Road of Any Length Built In America (Trenton, N.J.: Petty Printing Co., 1942), 43. See also, New Jersey Archives 20:578. 41 Richards, 180. Six Months on the Frontier of Northampton County, Penna., During the Indian War, October 1755-June 1756,” Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography 39 (1915): 348; hereafter cited as PMHB. “List of Pennsylvania Settlers Murdered Scalped and Taken Prisoners by Indians 1 755-1 756,” PMHB 32 ( 1 908): 309. A<y 114 The Pennsylvania Genealogical Magazine Perhaps the most complete record of victims of this conflict with In¬ dians in Pennsylvania is a list assembled by Conrad Weiser. Weiser’s list, which is in the Manuscript Department of the Historical Society of Penn¬ sylvania, confirms the tally recorded byjohn Arndt six killed and six taken prisoner on 10 December 1755. Weiser’s tally for the massacre that took place on 17 January 1756 near the Hoeth farm is eight killed and two taken prisoner. Killed were Christian Boemper, Felty Huth, Michael Huth, Lawrence Kunckel, and four soldiers. Taken prisoner were a daughter of Valentine Huth and a boy.44 Noticeably absent from all of these records, including the three eye¬ witness accounts, are the names of the victims. That missing information was finally located elsewhere in church registers in Germany and Phila¬ delphia. The location in Germany where the Hoeth family originated was re¬ corded in Moravian records as previously noted. Church records from Baumholder and Thai Lichtenburg have been examined by Annette Burgert, and information she found on several members of the family was published by her in Eighteenth Century Emigrants, Volume II, The West¬ ern Palatinate,45 A further search of the German church records used by Mrs. Burgert, and also the entries of the Familienbuch der Evangelischen Kirchengemeinden Burg Lichtenberg und Pfeffelbach, disclose thatJohan Frie¬ drich Hoeth and his second wife, Johannetta Margaretha Kirschgarten, were the parents of ten children born in Germany.46 Records found in Pennsylvania furnished the names of three additional children born after the family’s 1748 immigration to the Quaker Colony. The three eyewitness accounts and the reports of Conrad Weiser and John Arndt all agree that those members of the Hoeth family killed by Indians on 10 December 1755 were the father, the mother and a daugh¬ ter. Marianne Hoeth in her lebenslauf notes that the daughter killed was her youngest sister. Based on personal accounts plus the entries found in church registers in Germany and Philadelphia, the identity of those killed can be stated with certainty. They were:Joh. Friedrich Hoeth, age 43, his wife Johanetta Margaretha Kirschgart, age unknown, and their — — 44 Burgert, Annette Kunselman, Eighteenth Century Emigrants: Volume II, The Western Palatinate (Birdsboro, Pa.; The Pennsylvania German Society, 1985), 175-76. Rudi Jung, Familienbuch, der Evangelischen Kirchengemeinden Burg Litchtenberg und Pfeffelbach 1324—1 798 (Bonn, West Germany, 1995) , 320-21 ; hereafter cited as Familienbuch Burg Litchtenberg und Pfeffelbach 46« The Narrative of Marie Le Roy and Barbara Leininger: For Three Years Captives Among The Indians,” PMHB 29 (1905); 418. A Identifying Victims of an Indian Massacre 115 youngest daughter born in Philadelphia, Mary, age 6. Moravian records report that a son escaped. He was Friedrich Ludwig, age 17. Of note, his parents were killed two days prior to Friedrich Ludwig’s eighteenth birthday. The records also agree on the three daughters who were captured, One of the daughters was Marianne, who returned to Bethlehem. Mari¬ anne, eighteen years of age at the time of her capture, does not name her sisters in her memoir and there is no reference by name to the other women in the depositions. Identities of the two sisters not named by Marianne can be established by an obscure document entitled “Narrative of Marie Le Roy and Bar¬ bara Leininger,” Marie and Barbara lived with their families on Penn’s Creek in Union County, Pennsylvania, where in 1755 they were taken prisoner. The girls wrote their account after having spent three years, mostly in Ohio, with their captors. In the narrative they provide the names of prisoners they met while in captivity. Included among the many names are those of “Mary [Marianne], Caroline, and Catharine [Catherine] Haeth [Hoeth], three sisters from the Blue Mountains.”47 Caroline and Catherine were captured, at the ages of sixteen and eight respectively, along with Marianne.48 Catherine, born in 1747, eventually returned to live in Philadelphia, where she was a member of the Moravian Church. Marianne in her Ubenslauf mentions a “sister who married a Frenchman in the Fort,”49 Evidence strongly suggests that sister referred to was Elisabeth Catherina Carolina, born in Germany in 1739. Caspar Heiss in his deposition mentioned having been present at dinner with Frederick Hoeth, his wife and their five children.50 Evidence from asunder records suggests that those five children were Marianne, Elisabetha Catherina Carolina, Katharina Charlotta, Friedrich Ludwig, and Mary. The question now becomes: What happened to son John born in Philadelphia in 1750 and the son Christian baptized December 1754 almost a year before these tragic events? They’re still not accounted for, but the search goes on! 'ÿÿ4 48 Birth /baptismal records for the family in Germany disclose that Catherine Hoeth was named Katharine Charlotta Hoth and her sister Caroline was named Elisabetha Catherina Carolina Hoth, 49 Faul, 92. 50 Pa. Gazette (18 Dec. 1755): 203. 116 The Pennsylvania Genealogical Magazine It is hoped that readers of this narrataive have come to appreciate the value of thoroughly researching information both on historical and ge¬ nealogical levels. A variety of records related to the massacre yielded surprising detail on what happened on the Hoeth farm during the In¬ dian attack on that dark December night in 1755. The names of Hoeth’s wife and their children were found in church records in Germany and Philadelphia information that afforded an opportunity to identify the victims. The Hoeth situation stands in stark contrast with what we know about the Heiss family, the other victims of this tragedy. In the absence of good genealogical research so far, all we or any historian can definitely say about Caspar Heiss is that his wife and children were taken captive by Indians at the Hoeth farm during the night of 10 December 1755. Until church or other records containing additional information on this fam¬ ily are found, they shall remain nameless fortunately for us, a fate not shared by the Hoeths! Fruit of the difficult and time-consuming Hoeth research is priceless solid genealogical documentation savored by all Hoeth descendants! And well worth the effort. — — — Genealogical Summary Johan Friedrich Hoth was baptized 29 March 1712, the son of Johannes Hoth of Lichtenburg, Germany, and his wife Maria Magdalena Aulenbach 51 Johan Friedrich Hoth immigrated to Pennsylvania with his family on the ship Two Brothers. He signed his name to the Oaths on 15 Septem¬ ber 1748 in Philadelphia.52 His first wife, Maria Catharina, died in Tallichtenberg on 20 March 1733 and was buried the next day.53Johan 51 “Baumholder Reformed Churchbook,” unpaginated manuscript, microfilm no. 0493258, Family History Library, Church of Jesus Christ of Later-Day Saints, Salt Lake City Utah (hereafter cited as Family History Library). 52 Strassburger and Hinke, 1:378-79. 53 “Thallichtenburg and PfefFelbach Churchbook,” unpaginated manuscript, micro¬ film no. 0493254, Family History Library, “Thallichtenburg Reformed Churchbook.” Identifying Victims of an Indian Massacre 117 Friedrich Hoth married a second time on 4 March 1734Johanetta Margaretha Kirschgart, the daughter ofJohann Hartman Kirschgart who was born in Mainz, Germany,54 died in Lichtenburg, and was buried 5 Octo¬ ber 1738.55 Johanetta Margaretha Kirschgart Hoth was murdered by Indians on 10 December 1755 along with her husband, and was buried four days later on the family farm in present-day Monroe County.56 Known child ofjoh. Friedrich Hoth and his first wife Maria Catharina is: 1. Maria Dorothea Frederica; b. 13 Mar. 173357 Known children ofjoh. Friedrich Hoth and his second wife Johanetta Magaretha Kirschgart are: 1. unidentified child; bp. 15 Jan. 1735; d. 15 May 173658 2. Maria Philippina Wilhelmina Henrietta; bp. 25 Mar. 173659 3. Marianne; b. 24 May 1737; d. 13 Apr. 1772; bur. Moravian Cemetery, Bethlehem, Pa.; m. an unidentified Indian while in captivity60 4. Joh. Philip Ludwig; b. 28 Sep. 1738; d. 12 Mar 173961 5. Elisabetha Catherina Carolina; bp. 19 Oct. 173962 6.Johanna Elisabetha Henrietta; bp. 20 Oct. 1740; d. 13 Feb. 174163 7. Johanna Wilhelmina Louisa; bp. 12 Oct. 1742; d. 29 Dec. 174264 8. Friedrich Ludwig; bp. 13 Dec. 174365 54 “Thallichtenburg Reformed Churchbook,” marriages. “Baumholder Lutheran Churchbook,” unpaginated manuscript, microfilm no. 0493257, Family History Library. 56 Richards, 180, 186. 57 “Thallichtenburg Reformed Churchbook,” baptisms. co Famitienbuch BurgLicktenbergund Pfejfelback,” 321 . A corresponding record confirming this birth has not been found in the church register. m “Baumholder Lutheran Churchbook,” baptisms. fin Faul, 90. Marianne, in her lebenslauf, states: “I was born in 1737 on May 24 in the town of Lichtenburg in the duchy of Zweibrlcken,” Her record of birth and/or bapdsm have not been located to date in a church register in Germany. is"| “Thallichtenburg Reformed Churchbook,” baptisms. “Baumholder Lutheran Churchbook,” baptisms. “Baumholder Lutheran Churchbook,” baptisms and burials. 64 Famitienbuch Burg Liehtenberg und Pfeffelbach, 321 . A corresponding record confirming this birth has not been found in the church register. 65 “Thallichtenburg Reformed Churchbook,” baptisms. 118 The Pennsylvania Genealogical Magazine 9. Joh. Sibilla; bp. 26 Mar. 174566 10. Katharina Charlotta; bp. 24 Apr. 174767 11. Mary; b. lljul. 174968 12. John; b. I7jun. 175069 13. Christian; b. 11 Dec. 1754; bp. 22 Dec. 175470 Christian Boemper was born ca. 1732 in Suriname,71 the son of Abraham Boemper and his first wife Alida Pairson.72 He was murdered by Indians on 17 Jan. 175673 and was buried shortly thereafter in present-day Mon¬ roe County, Pa.74 He m. 9 Feb. 1753 Philippina Hoth.75 She was baptized 25 Mar. 1736 by the Lutheran pastor at Lichtenburg, Germany.76 66 Familienbuch Burg Lichtenberg und Pfeffelbach, 321. A corresponding record confirming this birth has not been found in the church register. Familienbuch Burg Lichtenberg und Pfeffelbach, 321 68 Abstract, Records of the First Moravian Church, Philadelphia, HSP, Phi MR: 18; hereafter cited as First Moravian Church Records. See also,John T. Humphrey, Pennsylva¬ nia Births: Philadelphia County, 1644-1765 (Washington, D.C., Humphrey Publications, 1994), 232. 69 First Moravian Church Records, 18. '0 Dansbury Diaries, 147. 71 Webster s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary|s.v. Suriname”: Formerly Dutch Guiana or Netherlands Guiana, located in northern South America between Guyana and French Guiana; currendy a republic; until 1975 a territory of the Netherlands. Lebenslauf of Abraham Bomper (1705-1793), Moravian Archives, Bethlehem, Pa, Moravian records note that Christian Bomper was born in Suriname where his father was living from about 1722 to 1739. Two marriage records for Abraham were found in the register of the Dutch Reformed Church in Suriname. Records of births and bapdsms for the period of time when Christian was born have not been found to date. Given the condition of the church register for this particular congregation these records may no longer exist. Christian’s father, Abraham, noted in his lebenslauf that his son’s mother was his first wife. 73 Pa. Gazette (29Jan. 1756): 232. 74 Decker, 43, 75 Notes and Queries, 154. Marriage information for Christian Boemper and his wife, Philippina Hoeth, can be found in the cited source, but a search of records at the Moravian Archives in Bethlehem, Pa,, failed to produce an original document that could be used to confirm the marriage date. 76 “Baumholder Lutheran Churchbook,” baptisms. J— Identifying Victims of an Indian Massacre 119 Known child of Christian Boemper and Philippina Hoth Boemper: 1. Philippina; b. 14 Nov. 1753; d. 12 Dec. 1835, Nazareth, Pa.77; m. 22 Sep. 1778 John Weinland78; b. 3 Sep, 1750; d. 28 Oct. 182979 Philippina Hoth Boemper m. second 16 Apr. 1759 at Bethlehem, Pa. so Hirst Hirt/ John Known children of John Hirt/Hirst and Philippina Hoth Boemper Hirst: l.John; b. 4 Dec. 1766, Philadelphia81 2. William; b. 15 Dec. 1768, Philadelphia82 3. George; b. 7Jun. 177383 77 Kluge, 137. 78 William H. Egle and John B. Linn, eds "Records of Marriage Prior to 1810,” Pennsylvania Archives, 2d ser., Vol. 9 (Harrisburg, Pa.: State Printer, 1896), 381. 79 Kluge, 132. 80 Bethlehem Moravian Marriage Records, 1:38. o| First Moravian Church Records, 18. 82 First Moravian Church Records, 19. 83 Abstract, Records of Christ Church, Philadelphia, Pa. HSP, Ph2E:2 ( 1769-1794): 803. See also,John T. Humphrey, Pennsylvania Births: Philadelphia County, 1766-1780 (Washing¬ ton, D.C.: Humphrey Publications, 1995), 243, The First Moravian Church, Philadelphia, lists births for two children of Philipina and John Hirst: John (4 Dec. 1766) and William (15 Dec. 1768). Christ Church, Philadelphia, shows one birth of Philippina and John Hirst: George (7Jun. 1773). The Christ Church records also include entries for two children of Pheebe and John Hirst: Thomas (24 Dec. 1774) and Ann (26 Oct 1777). A record of Philippi na’s death has yet to be found, but one possibility is that Philippina may have died between June of 1773 and December of 1774, and Pheebe could have been John's second wife. Or might there have been two Philadelphia fathers named John Hirst— one married to Philippina, the other married to Pheebe? Obviously, further research is needed.