Remind me again - Why am I here?

If you ever want elegant proof that standardized testing is utter bunk, you need only look to me. I have formally tested out as scoring in the top 1% of the population on an official, proctored IQ test. And that test stopped at the 99th percentile. The score itself probably probably score out closer to 99.9 percent given how many points it was above and beyond the 98% to 99% breakpoint. But they did not normalize the scores out that far on that test so I can only speculate.

The point being I am alleged to be "smarter than the average bear".

Alleged. Key word there. Clearly my actions belie my testing. Doing these cemetery excursions into the hinterlands clearly exhibits idiocy far more than intelligence. 

This latest trip definitely qualifies as further proof of my actual idiocy.

I posted previously about setting off cross-country to locate and photograph a never previously photographed cemetery, and how I was ill prepared for the excursion. Then I related getting lost in the woods finding another never before photographed cemetery - again, cross country,

Well moron me, I went for the Trifecta. Another one out in the woods that has never been photographed. Homes Cemetery.

I am an idiot.

At least the weather was not entirely against me. Warm, but not too hot and humid. In a matter of a couple of weeks that is certain to change. It will become a veritable sauna and the vegetation will be impenetrable.

This time I was back to the same area as the Patman Cemetery a couple of weeks back. I had noted this one 'around the corner' at that time and noted that I needed to return and research it. 

When I actually plan one of these excursions I try and do as much research as possible about the location. Satellite maps and Google Street View (where that is an available option) are great resources to plan an attack.

But they are far from perfect as I would learn. The hard way.

I am certain that everyone has seen an electric transmission tower tight of way at least once, if only in a movie. Picture those massive towers stationed at regular intervals with dozens of large cables stretching across the landscape. Recall how all the trees are removed for about 50 or 75 yards to either side of the towers leaving a swath of open space miles long. 

Got that image? Good.

Now visualize this. The coordinates for the cemetery are about 100 or so yards off one of these corridors somewhere around a third of a mile from the road. Looking at the satellite view it should be a relative snap to get to. Follow the tree line along the power line corridor until you get about even with the cemetery then turn into the woods and BINGO!

Oh, how wrong I was on that approach!

Turns out that there are a significant number of ravines blocking the way. And I mean ravine. Not some little wash or gully. Not a low point that you can't see until you are in it. No. I mean the kind of deep barrier that castles would envy as protection from an invading horde of barbarians. 10 plus fee deep and anywhere from 6 to 30 or 40 feet across, and running for hundreds of feet mostly perpendicular to my direction of travel.

I keep hearing Gandalf bellowing, "You shall not pass!"

I am forced to backtrack and go into the woods early to find safe passage around these obstacles. 30 years ago I might have tried crossing them. But at my age the last thing I need is to break a leg while solo out in the wilds. Contrary to all opinions I have managed to learn a little prudence over the years. I don't expect to live forever. But neither do I desire to die of stupidity.

Fortunately this is more deer hunting acreage and that means paths cut through the timber. And lucky for me they follow more or less the direction I am traveling.  

Somewhere about a quarter mile in I see a large open space ahead. This should mean a bit of easy progress.

"Should" seldom means "Does". You would think I would have learned that by now.

Yes, there is an open expanse ahead. But getting to it at this point would mean scaling down a minor cliff face about 15 feet straight down. Remembering that Down is easy and Up is really hard I start looking for a wiser point to traverse from. That means many yards perpendicular to my path further into the trees.

Great.

Once I do manage to get to the open expanse my alarms go off. I am about to enter an obvious flood plain. That could mean lots of mud and soft soft. Not the friends of anyone on foot.

Fortunately it has been long enough between rains that the ground is very firm. No problem crossing the space.

But problem proceeding further. Naturally.

Instead of a ravine this time I encounter a running creek. Not a lot of water, just a deep and wide creek bed. Way more than you can just step over. And the opposite bank is not flat. It immediately starts going steeply uphill. While it might be possible to take a run and jump the creek, there is nowhere remotely safe to land on the other side. Remembering that I don't want to break a bone out here on my lonesome, I start following the creek further into the woods looking for a safe place to ford.

Eventually I find a good spot, cross, and resume my trek (yeah - this is a trek by this point in the experience). That entails making my way up that steep slope on the opposite side of the creek and up about 100 feet in elevation. 

Yay. Fun. 

Yes, I am using all the appropriate techniques to make the slog as easy as possible - rather than climbing straight up I take an angled approach with switchbacks as the terrain allows and dictates. Now if you remember you grammar (grade?) school science then you will recall that using an inclined plane (essentially the path I am following up this hill) does reduce the effort required to move something to a higher point it does so my increasing the distance traveled so the overall energy expenditure is not reduced.  

So while each step I take is a little less taxing, I have to take a LOT more of them to reach my goal. More simply put, I am beat like a rented mule and leaking from every pore in my body. Still, as I have noted in the past, I am far more stubborn than smart. So on I go.

Eventually (and thankfully with no more ravines, creeks, gullies, or cliffs) I spot the unmistakable glint of galvanized chain link fence through the trees, and it is almost precisely on the coordinates given for the cemeteries.

Sadly, what I found is a severely neglected site with two large trees that have toppled over the area. And vines, briars, and undergrowth rule the day.

Surprisingly, the headstones themselves are in fairly good condition aside from some vegetation covering them. And more than a few limbs and saplings in the way. I managed to get good photos of everything visible. But one of the fallen trees effectively blocked access (At least blocked unless I was willing to crawl to get to it. I was not so willing) to the back third of the fenced in area. I could not see any obvious graves there, but doubtless there are some.

Naturally the actual number of graves I found did not match those recorded in Find A Grave. There are at least two more burials than are recorded. Probably more. I found at least five obvious field stone markers. These are clearly graves as they are deliberately placed in row and columns evenly set with the space necessary for a grave. The pattern is far to clear and obvious to be anything else. Factoring in the cemetery space I could not access I estimate there are spaces there for at least 8 more graves. Perhaps there are, perhaps not. It would take serious logging crew with heavy equipment to clear the fallen tree before the ground could be properly searched and logged. Anything else would simply result in more damage to the fencing and anything under the tree trunk. To be honest, though, that damage is all be inevitable as the tree rots and collapses over time because there is zero probability that anyone will take on the expense to preserve the site.

Looking back to Find A Grave there are three logged memorials for which I cannot find a stone. Perhaps these are among the field stones. Perhaps not. 

Correction. 6 field stone markers, not 5.

Great. I get to do a lot of research. And submit the resulting updates to Find A Grave. Keen eyed readers will already note one significant submission needed. 

Missed it? The cemetery is recorded as Homes Cemetery. The last name on all the markers save the shared obelisk is Holmes.

But that has to wait until I am back at the warren rested and washed. The immediate future my focus is on getting my old, fat, exhausted butt back out of the woods. Fortunately the return is easier than the entry.

Let me tell you. Air Conditioning is one of the greatest inventions in history! A few minutes cooling off and hydrating in the car and I was ready to head out again.

I will save the telling of the rest of the day's adventure for another time. There is still too much to go on this cemetery to venture off on other matters just yet.

Let the research begin!

Back home, rested, washed, and in front of the computer I began looking in to the people laid to rest in the cemetery. 

Three of the marked graves are for children. I have a particular itch to see that children's graves are linked to those of their parents in Find A Grave. This is of no real import in the grand scheme of things. But it is a thing with me nonetheless. 

I start with what appears to be a married couple and go from there. What I find only makes me crazy.

I mentioned earlier that there are three marked children's graves: Emma E. Sallie D, and William Holmes. All born between 1880 and 1896. Emma survived only 2 and a half months. Sallie a mere 8 months. And William the longest at two years and three months. All three are linked in Find A Grave to Thomas Henry Holmes and his wife Martha (Collins) Holmes. Thomas was born about 1849 and Martha in 1856, so the years these children were born absolutely 'fit' with their being Thomas and Martha's children.

But not so fast there, Skippy.

Looking at the 1900 US Census I find a problem. If you are not familiar with the various censuses, you should know that in certain census years additional questions are asked. In 1900, one of these was asking how many children a woman had born and how many survive as of the census enumeration. I have come across many cases in my research recording where a woman had lost several children prior to the 1900 census.

Well, damn! Martha is recorded as having born 6 children with 6 surviving. Houston, we have a problem. Either Martha lied on the census or these three children are not hers. And I cannot find where Thomas ever had another wife.

Hmmm.... Perhaps these are children of one or more of Thomas's five brothers? I flesh out as much as possible on their branches of the tree and cannot come up with anything definitive.

First brother Ira's wife, Susan failed to record child counts in 1900 even though there are children listed in the household the census.

Second brother Jeremiah has no record of marriage OR children. Indeed, he appears to vanish after the 1860 census.

Third brother Joseph's wife, Ruina, reports 4 children with 3 surviving in 1900. So one possibility there. BUT! As of 1880 they are living many mile away in another county. So highly unlikely any of these children would be theirs.

Fourth brother Carter lived until 1940 (not bad for someone born in rural Georgia in 1843!). His death certificate states he is married, but give nothing about who is wife might be. Nor can I find any other record of him in the preceding years. He died in the same county as brother Joseph was living, so it could be that is where he spent much of his adult life and where any wife and/or children would be buried. No way at this point to know.

Fifth brother Joshua's wife, Georgia, reports zero children born. They only married in 1897 so none of the three children in question would logically be theirs.

Thus endeth the list of brothers with nothing reasonably indicating whose children these might be.

I entertained the idea that they might be siblings of Thomas. For a few seconds. Their father was born in 1789 or 1790. And he appears to have died about 1880. So no. As Jerry Springer might say, "He is NOT the father!"

Damn. This is a mystery that is not going to be solved any time soon, if ever. 

Beyond the children, I am curious about the Collins couple I find in the cemetery. This appears to be Martha's Brother and his wife. Makes a certain amount of sense.

That leaves me with the questions of the people with Find A Grave memorials recorded in the cemetery but for whom I do not see a physical marker. These are:

Bessie Mae Holmes (1879-1932)

Joe Henry Holmes (1888-1919)

Mary E Holmes (1882-1882 - three days only)

Bessie appears to have died a spinster living in Decatur, Ga (right around the warren location!), Her death certificate gives her burial place as Lexington, Ga. This Holmes Cemetery is close to Lexington, so it fits that she is buried there. Perhaps in an unmarked grave, or perhaps in a marked grave in the inaccessible portion and the marker is not visible through the vegetation. 

Joe Henry appears o be a sad story. Little in the way of records exist for him. The truly revealing piece is his World War I draft card where he is deemed 'physically deficient' and an epileptic. That condition at that time and place was utterly life limiting. Little surprise that he died so young having never married. I cannot locate a death certificate. But he is last listed in the 1910 census still living in his father's household. So it is not a leap of logic to have him buried in this cemetery.

Mary E may as well be a ghost or a myth. If the dates in Find A Grave are accurate then she lived as mere three days in February of 1882. The only evidence of her ever living would be an entry in a family bible or a story handed down through the years. Or perhaps a notice in a local newspaper. I know from harsh experience that there were few newspapers in the area, that few of those survive, and the only copies available are in the bowels of the University of Georgia in Athens. None of them are available on-line, so if I want to pursue that line I have to travel and do the hours of research on-site. 

Not in the cards.

So what does all this sum up to? 

Three children whose parentage is unprovable.

Two adult offspring whose burial is probable though apparently unmarked.

One infant whose entire existence seems to be pure conjecture let alone its burial location and parentage.

All this in a cemetery that is exceedingly difficult to access at all, much less properly investigate and document. 

It appears there may be living relatives and/or descendants. I can only wonder if they even know about the site, much less give a flying leap at a rolling donut about what happens to it.

With that I can calling a lid on this escapade. On to more productive matters.