Sort Your Johns

There were seven (7) persons named "John Cagle" born before 1790, when records were scarce. Obviously, this might cause some confusion, and, in fact, I have seen MANY genealogies which totally get them wrong. Again....copy/paste on Ancestry.com can definitely be your enemy.

Let's sort out the John's.

1. John “Dutchman” Cagle 1732-1799

b. 1726 Sembach, Germany

d. 1799 Moore County, North Carolina

m. Catherine

This John Cagle is the son of Leonhardt the immigrant. He is the first John Cagle in the United States. He left a will which names ten (10) children and a wife named “Catherine”. Some researchers attribute to him a first wife named Johnetta Hardt as well. It is unclear to me at present the exact evidence and whether this might have been the same woman as Catherine. Until I have more convincing/clarifying evidence, I do not include Johnetta Hardt in my genealogies.

2. John Cagle 1740s-1826.

b. 1740’s Berks County, Pennsylvania

d. 1826 Davidson County, Tennessee

m. Margaret Hardwick

The is also a very early John Cagle. Be his birthdate, we can assume that he was most likely a grandson of Leonhardt the immigrant. He is the most likely candidate for being the Captain John Cagle who supported the British (Tories) in the Revolutionary War. His age (being the only John Cagle old enough), and some family legends of his descendants would support that conclusion. The great majority of researchers believe his father was Charles Cagle of the 1790 Mecklenburg Co, NC census. I, however, think the dates do not line up. Moreover, if he is the son of Charles, then we are faced with having an extra John Cagle who is unaccounted for. Instead, I believe this John Cagle and Charles were brothers, the sons of the enigmatic Karl Wilhelm Cagle. I further believe that Charles of the 1790 census was NOT Karl Wilhelm, which is also commonly believed, but instead his son. My analysis is satisfying in that it makes several ancillary problems with the line disappear.

3. John Cagle 1767-1817.

b. 1767 NC

d. 1817 Burke County, NC

This John Cagle is the son of John Cagle #2. His wife, Lucy Darrow/Darrough, has been mistakenly attributed to numerous other Cagles, and may be the source of some of the greatest Cagle genealogical errors. He died young and left small children. Although his father moved on with several other Cagle relatives to Tennessee, this John Cagle remained in the same area of North Carolina until his death.

4. John Cagle 1782-1851

b. 1782 NC

d. 1851 TN

m. Jane

John Cagle who married “Jane” is often confused with John Cagle #3, above. They are first cousins (or brothers, depending on how you view Karl Wilhelm). This John is the son of Charles of the 1790 Mecklenburg census. It is this John, and not John #3, who followed John #2 to Davidson County, Tennessee.

5. John Cagle 1774-1850

b. 1774 Moore County, NC

d. 1850 Clay County, Indiana

m. Sarah Latham

This John Cagle and the next are easier to separate from the others due to their migrations. He is the son of Henry Cagle and grandson of Leonard the immigrant.

6. John Cagle 1784-1835

b. 1784 Moore County, NC

d. 1835 Lawrence County, MS

m. Priscilla Haynes

John Cagle 1784 was the son of John “Dutchman” Cagle #1. Some genealogies have this John as the son of old David Cagle. I believe this is a mistake.

7. John Cagle 1770-1858

b. 1770 NC

d. 1858 Benton County, Tennessee

m. Malissa Herndon

Here is another John Cagle who is often confused with #3 or #4. Although John #4 emigrated to Tennessee, he is neither the son of Charles, nor the husband of Lucy. Rather, he is most appropriately considered to be the son of George and Rebecca Cagle, and the grandson of old David Cagle.

John Cagle genealogy lineage

1790 Census (Part II): Finding Karl Wilhelm

I.                 Background

Many genealogies mention, at least in passing, Karl Wilhelm Kegel.

Usually, I find these genealogies treat him in one of two ways:

1.      He is simply listed as the child of Leonhardt Kegel, and no descendants are attributed to him, or

2.      He is equated with Charles Cagle of the 1790 Mecklenburg County census.

In my opinion, the confusion probably begins (very innocently) with John G. Cagle. John G. Cagle of Little Rock is the father of Cagle genealogy. He authored many books and was the source of the Cagle newsletter. His research was painstaking. However, he did not have access to the online databases which have reduced months of research to minutes. Most Cagle genealogies can trace their roots back to John G. in some manner.

The problem is that, to my knowledge, John G. Cagle did not address Karl Wilhelm to any degree. His first book, Cagle Census Records of the South 1790 to 1850, makes no mention at all of Karl Wilhelm.

Today, on the other hand, we have solid evidence of the existence of a child of Leonhardt Kegel named Karl Wilhelm, who was christened in Germany as the child of Leonhardt Kegel and Maria Trautwein. This information leaves my best guess as to the sons of Leonhardt as follows:

Leonhardt Kegel and Maria Trautwein

1.      Karl Wilhelm b. 1722

Leonhardt Kegel and Susannah

2.      John “Dutchman” b. 1726

3.      Johan Theobald “David” b. 1728

4.      Leonard b. 1729

5.      Henry b. 1730

II.                Theory

Cutting to the chase, I will state my theory. Later, I will give my reasoning.

It is my belief that Karl Wilhelm was not identical to Charles Cagle of the 1790 Mecklenburg census. Instead, I believe that Karl Wilhelm was the father of that Charles Cagle b. 1740s and his brother, John Cagle 1740s.

Admittedly, this is a bold assumption (and one I’ve never seen made). However, making such an assumption leads to some rather satisfying conclusions, and solves some problematic interpretations.

First, equating Karl Wilhelm with Charles causes a very unsatisfying result regarding ages and dates of death. If these two are the same person, then we are left with the following: 1) Charles Cagle’s age is wrong on the 1790 census, 2) Karl Wilhelm did not marry or have children until his 40s, and 2) Karl Wilhelm was having children at the age of 70.

Second, Charles Cagle of the 1790 census is too young to properly fit as a child of Leonhardt Kegel. He was born 1740s, putting him at least a decade away from the other children of Leonhardt. Making him a grandchild causes his age to make much more sense.

Third, Charles Cagle and John Cagle were both born in the 1740s and were together in Mecklenburg County, away from the other pocket of Cagles. I’ve seen some genealogies which have John as the son of David, but John G. Cagle theorized that they were brothers. I agree. It makes more sense that they were brothers, both the sons of Karl Wilhelm. Also, descendants of both Charles and John moved to Tennessee together. This would make more sense if they were more closely related than previously thought.

Fourth, There is an unexplained "William" in the tax records prior to 1790, which does not correspond to "William" of the 1790 census.

Fifth, is the historical problem of Captain John Cagle the tory of the Revolutionary War. Who was he? Now, the answer to this question is, I think, the most helpful part of the analysis. We are greatly aided in this regard by the family legends and oral traditions of the descendants of Jonathan Cagle. This sub-family of Cagles insists that:

1.      They are descended from Captain John Cagle, and

2.      They are descended from John 1767, who married Lucy.

3.      Captain John Cagle was descended from an immigrant named Charles (Karl), who had only half-brothers.

For both of these statements to be true, we can deduce:

1.      “Charles”, the progenitor of Captain John Cagle is NOT Charles of the 1790 census because that Charles was neither an immigrant, nor had half-brothers.

2.      That Captain John Cagle is neither the son of Charles nor John of the 1790 Mecklenburg census. Both of those men had sons named John; but those sons were too young to have served in the Revolutionary War.

Thus, I propose that the lineage which makes the most sense is

I.                 Karl Wilhelm

A.      Charles b. 1740s of the Mecklenburg County census

                         1.     John b. 1782 married Jane/Jenny

B.      John b. 1740s of the Mecklenburg County census

2. John b. 1767 married Lucy

               a. Jonathan b. 1802

I feel that I should mention here that the descendants of David Cagle and the descendants of Karl Wilhelm by this analysis seem to have been very close. Henry b. 1759 is also in the 1790 Mecklenburg census. And Valentine b. 1753 and descendants moved to Tennessee, although not settling near the descendants of Charles and John. These facts need more sorting.

1790 Census (Part 1)

Something I've been wanting to do for some time is to (re)analyze the 1790 Census and attempt to identify individuals found thereon.

The 1790 US Census has sixteen (16) Cagle heads of household in North Carolina, all of which are traditionally identified as descendants of Leonhardt Kegel. Of these heads of household, there are ten in Moore County, four in Mecklenburg County, and two in Montgomery County.

As follows are the heads of household and the number of MALES in the home (I have purposefully not included females):

*Henry Cagle 1730

                              Peter Cagle 1772

                              Henry Cagle 1770

                              John Cagle 1774

                              Jacob Cagle 1776

                              Martin Cagle1789

                              George Cagle1782

               *Christian Cagle 1761

                              -???

               *William Cagle 1754

                              Henry Cagle 1780

*Leonard Cagle 1729

                              William Cagle 1770

                              Charles Cagle 1779

                              Henry Cagle 1780

                              Robert Cagle 1783

                              John Cagle 1784

                              Paul Cagle 1785

                              Simon Cagle 1790

               *David Cagle

               *Roger Cagle

Conrad Cagle (Roger’s other sons, Roger Jr. and Leonard, are often seen with birthdates of “1780”. I think this to be incorrect and that Roger Sr’s only living son in 1790 was Conrad).

               *George Cagle

*John "Dutchman" Cagle 1726

                              Jacob Cagle 1766

                              Henry Cagle 1770

                              William Cagle 1788

               *George Cagle 1757

                              Isaac 1780

                              Jacob 1790

(Johan Theobald “David” Cagle) 1728 (deceased by 1790)

               *John Cagle 1740s

                              Leonard Cagle 1780

                              Sampson Cagle 1782

                              John Cagle 1767

*Jacob Cagle 1755

                              Jacob Cagle 1773

                              Charles Cagle 1780

                              Henry Pinkney Cagle 1790

               *Valentine Cagle 1753

                              George Cagle 1776

                              Jacob Cagle 1778

                              Valentine Cagle 1787

               *George Cagle 1750

                              Benjamin Franklin Cagle 1774

                              John M. Cagle 1780

                              Charles Robert Cagle 1786

               *Henry Cagle 1759

                              Henry Cagle 1780

                              George Cagle 1782

                              David Cagle 1783

                              -???

*Charles Cagle 1740s

                              Jacob 1766         

                              Leonard 1770

                              John 1782

George 1789

               *Charles Cagle 1770s                    

-???

A few quick notes before we move on...

First, a big shout-out to Leonard and Henry, who not only left wills naming their children, but whose families also work out perfectly when compared to the census. Thanks guys. You make a genealogist proud.

Second, I myself do not think the family attributions above are entirely correct. I plan to address my doubts in future blogs. However, researchers familiar with the first three generations should be able to get their bearings using the above.