Hi Dmitri;

I have been meaning to bother you with this for quite some time. With your knowledge of historical research, and the city of Philadelphia, I would very much like to read your reaction to this dilemma.

I posted this in my Journal #9, as a part of NoMoJoPo last year About a 19th century Naval Officer. To save you having to read the entire post the important facts, and questions follow here;

I found a private family history was published in 1910 that includes a section about the ancestry of the Leib family and even a paragraph about Thomas, his wife and children. As it always seems to happen the more answer you find, the more questions they raise. Journal #9



However my biggest puzzle was when I located his grave

According to records he was either 48 or 49 years old at the time of his death. Had he been born in 1806 he would only have been 5 years old when he joined the navy and 45 at the time of his death.

I have found a baptism record for Caroline Leib dated 1801, if the date of both births are off by three years it would place Thomas birth in 1803 it would put him at 8 years old when joining the navy, too young to go to sea, but such things were done so the family could draw his salary and the child would gain seniority. He would have been 14 when he was assigned to a ship, usually the minimum age for active duty. Perhaps the numbers carved in stone are wrong?

Laurel Hill Cemetery was only established in 1836, so obviously the infant had been moved from another site. If her date of birth from the earlier grave had been mis-read and someone had added Thomas' date only knowing he was two years older could explain the problem. Except that he was survived by his wife and three children. The tombstone is obviously quite expensive, and you would think they would have corrected it.

Any thought will be appreciated.

According to records he was either 48 or 49 years old at the time of his death. Had he been born in 1806 he would only have been 5 years old when he joined the navy and 45 at the time of his death.

I have found a baptism record for Carline Leib dated 1801, 'the usual ceremony omitted (this indicates an infant who is not expected to survive long). If the date of both births are off by three years it would place Thomas birth in 1803 it would put him at 8 years old when joining the navy, too young to go to sea, but such things were done so the family could draw his salary and the child would gain seniority. He would have been 14 when he was assigned to a ship, usually the minimum age for active duty. Perhaps the numbers carved in stone are wrong?