My maternal line has always been quite proud of their Diamond ancestors. And just like the rock itself, the name also spurs a feeling of strength and richness. So, it was a tad disheartening to learn we may not be true Diamonds, after all.
Week 16: DNA
One of the most fascinating family heirlooms on display at my mother's house is the Diamond-Williams Family Bible. I also remember it from my childhood in my grandparents' house splayed open. It's an oversized bible with embellished lettering and full page illustrations. It also interestingly has singed edges, having survived a house fire. The personal touch is that it contains a record of births and ages of family members, as well as a record for the marriage of my 2nd great grandparents, Emma Virginia Diamond and Benjamin Franklin Williams in January 1900.
Diamond-Williams family bible record of ages.
Diamond-Williams family bible record of births.
But, was Emma truly a Diamond? The bible certainly claimed so, as did the county's records for her marriage, her daughter's funeral home collection record, and of course oral family stories. Initially, I had no reason to believe Emma was anything other than a Diamond!
Emma Virginia (Diamond) Williams in 1917 at Jim’s Run in West Virginia, just before she gave birth to a stillborn baby, Benny.
According to the bible, Emma was born 15 December 1882. Unfortunately, that means the first US census record she appears on isn't until 1900, in which she had already married Ben Williams at the start of that year, so her recorded surname in all available censuses is Williams. Also, she happened to be born in Pennsylvania, which did not begin requiring birth registration until 1906. Furthermore, she was born in Pittsburg, Allegheny County, which did record some births prior to 1906, but had no birth record for Emma. So at first, there's again, no evidence to refute Emma being a Diamond.
The reason finding more birth and surname evidence for Emma is important, is because her father, Alban Frances Diamond, died in 1879. If you're doing the math, you might easily notice that if Emma was born in 1882, there's no way Alban could be her birth father, which would mean Emma is not a Diamond.
Almer Francis Diamond death registration in Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, 7 February 1879. This is the record for Alban Frances Diamond, due to date of passing, profession, and place of last residence, despite misspelled name.
So either her birthdate has been recorded incorrectly, or her mother had an affair with an unknown man following Alban's passing between 1879 and 1882.
I recently submitted a Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) request to the Social Security Administration for Emma's SS-5 application. The social security number applicants were required to name their birth parents, and I was really anticipating a surprise in the "father" field.
The surprise was that Emma did list her father as [Alban] Frances Diamond! And she also listed her birthdate as 15 December 1882.
Emma Virginia Diamond social security application, 27 Sep 1946, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Where did this leave me? Honestly, I'm inclined to believe that Emma was legitimately lied to her entire life and told that Alban was her father. She believed it and told her descendants.
One might question how that could be kept under wraps in a family, with loved ones knowing Alban had passed away long before Emma was conceived, but unless DNA overturns this hypothesis, it's really where the evidence is leading me for now. Plus, there are many other details concerning Emma's parents that could explain the misinformation, but we won't go down that rabbit hole here.
Currently, I am beginning to reach out to known descendants of Emma's siblings in an effort to compare results to Emma's direct descendants (including myself). The goal will be to determine if Emma and her siblings shared both parents or only a mother. While her maiden name will truly always be Diamond, it's quite possible her father's name was anything but.
Comments
Post a Comment