Nathaniel Elliott (c.1763 – 1840s) and Anna Durgin (1765-06-09 – 1830s) were my 4th-great-grandparents, being the parents of Jacob Elliott, and the nexus of two “Elliott mysteries”, since Nathaniel’s parents are uncertain, and Anna’s mother Hannah Eliot’s ancestry is undetermined.

The spelling of Elliott varies considerably in records, so the differences are generally not diagnostic.

Nathaniel and Anna married in Sanbornton, New Hampshire on 1789-12-07, and thereafter were often on the move, based on land and census records.

Residences

From records we can get an idea of where they lived at various times:

• 1765: Anna was born in Epping, NH.
• 1789: Nathaniel and Anna marry in Sanborton, NH, Nathaniel’s residence specified as Sanbornton.^ref
• 1791: Nathaniel “of Concord” acquires land in Canterbury, NH.^ref
• 1794: Nathaniel “of Concord” sells the Canterbury property (with Anna) and acquires land in Thornton, NH^ref.
• 1796: Nathaniel “of Thornton” sells land in Thornton.^ref ref
• 1810: Nathaniel and Anna are listed in the census in Pittsfield, NH.
• 1830: Nathaniel and Anna are listed in the census in Monkton, VT.

Children

No complete list of their children exists, but we have some information.

Known children

The following children, or probable children, of Nathaniel and Anna have been identified:

• William D. (1790-12-07 – 1859-10-25), very probably. He married first Jane Thurston on 1812-10-12 in Starksboro, Vermont^ref, and second Clarissa Bunker^ref (1802–1881), and moved to Rush Lake, Wisconsin. Clarissa remarried to James Jewell.
• Joseph (1792-11-11 – 1850-10-02). He married Betsey Seavy 1813-12-20 in New Hampshire. He is mentioned in the NH history below, and a descendant assigns him to Nathaniel and Anna in an old database.^ref
• Harris/Harrison (c.1801 – after 1870), likely.^ref He married Sally Page.
• Jacob (1804-03-17 – 1891-10-11), my great-great-great-grandfather.
• Betsy (1809-02-28 – 1889-12-22), very probably. She married Hiel Page Mallory, born in Canada, on 1828-11-19^ref, and moved to Marshall, Illinois.

Census counts

Census records in 1810, 1830, and 1840 show counts of family members in certain age ranges:

Anna presumably died in the 1830s. I have not found the couple in the 1790, 1800, or 1820 censuses; they may have been missed, or living with another family.

So, Nathaniel and Anna probably had at least nine children, of which five are accounted for. Betsy was born in 1809 when Anna was 43, and there is no indication she had children after 1810; while she may have had children after 45 who died or moved out by 1830 and left no further trace, it is unlikely. They also may have had children who died young and weren’t recorded, although chronologically it would be hard to add more than one or two.

Jacob may be thus guessed to be their seventh or eighth child.

“Elliott mysteries”

The Elliott origins of both are unclear.

Nathaniel

One New Hampshire history book lists Nathaniel as the son of Edmund Elliott and Mehitable Worthen^ref, both of who can be traced back further. However, such histories are often not reliable, and other published works do not include Nathaniel among their children^ref, and furthermore birth records have been found for their other children, but not for Nathaniel. This couple still remains the best hypothesis, and there may be a reason (such as the family moving) that Nathaniel was not as well recorded.

There is a “Nathand Elliott”^ref or “Nathaniel”^ref, of a different line than Edmund, born 1765-10-10 in Pelham, NH. The former is likely a mistranscription for “Nathaniel”; however, I will conventionally identify this person as Nathan-d. While he could conceivably be Nathaniel, the name alone isn’t enough for this to be a convincing theory without other evidence. Most likely, Nathan-d is a different Nathaniel who moved to Danville, VT.^ref

Anna

Anna was born 1765-04-09, the daughter of William Durgin (1717 – 1789) and Hannah Eliot (c.1722 – 1809-06-17), the tenth of 13 children.^ref William’s ancestry is well-documented for several generations. However, Hannah’s Elliot parents are unidentified.

One proposal is that Anna’s mother Hannah was the daughter Hannah of Edmund and Deborah (Huntington) Elliott. This could make Nathaniel and Anna first cousins, as this couple were also parents of the above Edmund Elliott. This second Hannah is otherwise unaccounted for, and she fits geographically, as well as socially, since contact with her relatives would be expected. However, solid proof that the two Hannahs are the same is lacking, although there is some DNA evidence in support. Deborah is a granddaughter of William Huntington.

Research prospects

There is a large project to collect records of all Elliotts of New England, although it has apparently not been updated since 2006. If documentary evidence exists, it will have to be something missed by this project.

There is also hope from DNA evidence.

DNA

Y

The Y chromosome can track male-line relationships over many generations, and thus could confirm or disconfirm descents. In the case of the Elliott line, I know of three sources of Y data:

• There is an old Elliott DNA project (only available in archive as of 2022), with a spreadsheet of Y chromosome STR data, but with limited testing by today's standards (at most 37 markers). Three of the kits are important.
• There are FamilyTreeDNA projects which are relevant, two in particular being the Elliott DNA project and the Border Reivers project. They have STR data and sometimes SNP testing, but no detailed genealogical information, with, at best, a most-distant ancestor, who is often not clearly identifiable. The three kits noted above are also found in these projects, but in only one case with further testing.
• I know of a single 23andMe test which is relevant (or, rather, two but as father and son they are identical). 23andMe only offers limited SNP testing.

Put together, there are four individuals, which I give handier labels:

• E-1: FTDNA kit 30728 (aka A7QTF) is a documented male-line descendant of Nathaniel’s son Joseph. The kit has been tested on 37 markers, not a large number.
• E-2: FTDNA kit 24463 (aka 4BSF7) is a documented descendant of Nathaniel’s supposed great-grandfather John Elliott^ref, and was tested on only 25 markers. However, this kit differs from the previous one and so is not related, which weighs against this relationship.
• E-3: FTDNA kit 154065 (aka A6J2Q) appears to belong to the line of Nathan-d (see above), although not closely.^ref It has had expansive SNP and STR testing, and does not match any of the others. There are also discrepancies between different pedigrees, which needs to be examined.
• E-4: The 23andMe kit is on GEDmatch as M746813 and is a documented descendant of Nathaniel’s son William. The haplogroup is R1b-L21, which is quite large and thus can only weakly support a match. There may be negative tests of this kit which would help, but I have not looked into this.
• E-5: FTDNA kit 721497, a more recent testee who is a purported closer relative of Nathan-d.^ref His haplogroup is E1b-BY198334, which matches neither Nathaniel or E-3. However, the paternity of Admiral (see chart below) may be uncertain.

This chart summarizes the documented relationships; for E-1 the exact generation count is not known to me:

E-1 has not had SNP testing, but is a somewhat close match to a cluster of Elliotts in haplogroup R1b-FT6052, which is a subclade of R1b-L21. Thus from this limited information it is at least likely compatible with E-4.

Due to the small number of markers in E-2, it is hard to confidently place, but it is similar to known R1b-L21 groupings. However, it does not match any known Elliott cluster, so the chance it represents a non-paternity event somewhere in its line is higher, which makes it less of a threat to Nathaniel’s claimed descent.

E-3 has been tested as R1b-BY184744, which is exclusive of R1b-L21. This weighs against Nathan-d being Nathaniel, but since there are many generations, where there might be an error, this is not definitive. The evidence from E-5 also weighs against this identification, although the evidence from E-3 and E-5 partly cancel each other.

More testees could break this open. There may also be genealogical details about already tested FTDNA kits that could help.

Autosomal

I have a series of autosomal matches which lend support to the theory that Hannah Eliot is the daughter of Edmund and Deborah. The following chart shows projected relationships between several individuals matching me and each other on a segment of chromosome 19:

In each case the match is shown as a range of base pairs in millions; in some cases there are other segment matches not in this range. The key Hannah Eliot whose parents are uncertain is highlighted. Notes:

• I have a few matches through my ancestor Jacob Elliott, of which SM is only one example.
• I also have a match on this segment (5–16) to a 4th-great-grandaughter of a Sally Durgin who married Edward Philbrick and was born in Sanbornton, NH and died in Concord, NH^ref; Sally’s parents are unidentified, but it is all but certain she is related to Anna Durgin.
• RD has another Tewksbury descent with one generation more than that above.
• This evidence would equally support Hannah being a daughter of one of Edmund’s brothers, but from what is known of their families they can all be ruled out.

With long-range autosomal matches there is always a chance of red herrings, and I have a lot of colonial ancestry, so this evidence is suggestive but not definitive.

Conjectural ancestry

The plausible ancestry of Nathaniel and more doubtful ancestry of Hannah are highlighted with tiered tinting. Combining speculated descents would make Nathaniel and Anna first cousins. Other theories, such as Hannah’s father being a different but closely related Elliott, might make them, for example, second cousins.

… of Nathaniel

Note that Nathaniel’s conjectured paternal grandparents are second cousins through the Haddon sisters, a potential multiple descent.

… of Anna

Edmund and Deborah continue as above.