Introduction
The information presented in this chapter is historical. The information presented here is from three basic sources, professor Herman Lau of Karlsruhe, Germany, and from Charlotte, Hellmut Zehrung of Frankfort, Germany, and we are greatly indebted to William Zaring of Champaign, Illinois.William researched and wrote what I have called chapter 1. In 1974, with the help of the German consulate in Chicago and an agency in Germany, professor Lau was contacted. He agreed to help locate Zehrung ancestors and after a two year search found the Zehrung family record in the Evangelical church at Bad Marienberg. Older records, from the archives at Wiesbaden, were shared to us by Charlotte and Hellmut.

We are indebted to Charlotte and Hellmut for sharing and tracking down information, including one search behind the iron curtain. All of this began when Florence Lytle found their address in a phone book in Frankfort. The Zehrung name is very rare in Germany. This information was then sent to professor Lau who made the initial contact with Charlotte and Hellmut. On April 1, 1976 Charlotte and Hellmut wrote a letter to the United States telling us about the Zehrung family and name in Germany.

Charlotte and Hellmut hired a genealogist to trace their line. They then shared with their US descendant�€™s information which they had collected from the archives at Wisebaden. These included photocopies of family records that were written in small hand and script. The following is a translation of this information.

CHAPTER ONE

MYTHS AND MYSTERIES

Among the myths and mysteries there are two, quite different, accounts of the origin of the Zehrung family in America. In Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois, the family origin is given in at least ten different publications that collectively report the following, which I refer to as the Ludwig Legend.

The immigrant ancestor was Ludwig Zehrung who, by family tradition, was thought to be a descendant of the House of Zähringer through Berthold V. Ludwig emigrated from Baden about 1725 and settled among the Indians about two miles east of Jonestown, PA. The ancestral family farm adjoined church land on which Ludwig, with others of his faith, built the Swatara Church. Ludwig was a prominent business man who made several voyages to Germany on behalf of himself and others. In 1773, while on such a voyage, Ludwig died and was buried at sea.

In Kentucky and Missouri, the family origin, as preserved by oral tradition, is the following. The immigrant ancestor was a Hessian soldier, who, after the Revolution, hiked into Kentucky and settled. In Missouri the account that is preserved is more detailed. They report that three Zaring brothers fought with Cornwallis. Following Cornwallis' defeat at Yorktown, the three brothers headed west. While encamped on Bull Skin Creek, in Kentucky, they were fired on by Shawnee Indians. One was killed and the other two separated. One went north, crossed the Ohio River and settled in Indiana, the other headed south and settled near Shelbyville, KY.

Here we have two irreconcilable accounts. Which of these is correct? I contend that neither is correct, and later I will present evidence for my contention. The fact is that at the time of this writing the entire truth is not known and it may never be known. Nevertheless, it is interesting that each of these accounts, which I view as legend, contains an element of truth.

In 1997, I came in contact with Prof. Daniel Bly, who teaches European History at Bridgewater College, Harrisonburg, VA. He made some interesting comments on family legends and the Ludwig Legend fits the family mold as described by Daniel. I quote from his E-mail dated December 8, 1997.

First, family traditions and legends are never ever factual, chronological accounts of the family. Even our own accounts of our own lives are those things we selectively choose to remember or recount. Family legends and stories serve a variety of functions.

(1) They provide a distinct identity that sets your family apart from others.
(2) Paradoxically, they also confirm that your family was in the mainstream of the flow of historical events. ("We were there" and therefore deserve to be considered full participants in American history.)

(3) They confirm specific family values. These can vary but often strong religious or patriotic devotion is affirmed. It can be a sense of victim hood - constantly cheated out of great wealth - always victimized by the powerful, never getting a break. You would be surprised how many people have a strong sense of "disenfranchisement". Frequently legends reaffirm the importance of hard work, clean living, and a strong sense of morality that triumphs or on the other hand a sort of "Robin Hood" kind of mischievousness and flaunting of convention can be important to convey for families.

One can get all these if you deal with many branches of a very large family. Another thing to remember is that ordinarily common Americans (most of our ancestors) had no interest in or time for genealogy. Only aristocrats seemed interested in family lines. Then in the period after the Civil War upwardly mobile and successful professionals and their families began to get interested in genealogy apparently as a way of affirming their new found social status. They wanted to prove that they "deserved" their position by rising above lesser circumstances or various obstacles through hard work and superior moral virtue or by finding connections with distinguished noble families of old or ties to famous people. In the 1880s and 90s and early 1900s all the early genealogical work was done by or for lawyers, doctors, judges or distinguished business people and there was a virtual cottage industry of writing biographies of "leading citizens" for local histories or writing genealogies linking people to famous or important people of the past. All it took was a similarity of name or locale to jump to a conclusion - often in all sincerity.

Once in print there was no stopping the stories from being accepted as true or even elaborated on by others who remembered this or that "fact" from their own past or what they thought they heard grandfather say. It would take the "Titanic" to hold all the men who crossed the Delaware with Washington if every family tradition were really true.

Daniel also reminded me of something I had forgotten and that was the ant German sentiments that existed in early America. A letter from Benjamin Franklin to Peter Collinson, dated May 9, 1753, fully conveys the prejudices of that day. I reproduce parts of this letter from Diffenderffer's The German Immigration into Pennsylvania.

I am perfectly of your mind, that measures of great temper are necessary touching the Germans, and I am not without apprehensions, that, through their indiscretion, or ours, or both, great disorders may one day arise among us. Those who came hither are generally the most stupid of their own nation, and as ignorance is often attended with great credulity, when knavery would mislead it, and with suspicion when honesty would set it right; and, few of the English understand the German language, and so cannot address them either from the press or pulpit, it is almost impossible to remove any prejudices they may entertain. Their clergy have very little influence on the people, who seem to take pleasure in abusing and discharging the ministry on every trivial occasion. Not being used to liberty, they know not how to make modest use of it. * * * They are under no restraint from ecclesiastical government; they behave, however, submissively enough at present to the civil government, which I wish they may continue to do, for I remember when they modestly declined intermeddling with our elections; but now they come in droves and carry all before them, except on one or two counties.

Few of their children in the country know English. They import many books from Germany, and of the six printing houses in the Province, two are entirely German, two half German, half English, and but two are entirely English. They have one German newspaper, and one-half German Advertisements intended to be general, are now printed in Dutch (German) and English. The signs in our streets (Philadelphia) have inscriptions in both languages, and some places only in German. They begin, of late, to make all their bonds and other legal instruments in their own language, which (though I think it ought not to be), are allowed in our courts, where the German business so increases, that there is continued need of interpreters, and I suppose in a few years, they will also be necessary in the Assembly, to tell one-half of our legislators, what the other half says. In short, unless the stream of importation could be turned from this to other colonies, as you very judiciously propose, they will soon out number us, that all the advantages we will have, will in my opinion, be not able to preserve our language, and even our government will become precarious.

Anti-German prejudices continued in America well into the Twentieth Century. My grandfather was denied membership in a society because he was viewed as being German, or at least that is the story that was passed down to me. My father became furious at the mere suggestion that we were German. We were as American as apple pie.

Within a generation of their arrival in America, Johannes's descendants were spelling their names in six different ways. I assumed that this was because of growing illiteracy but Daniel Bly suggests that it was more likely an effort to conceal the fact that they were German.

With that brief digression into ethnic prejudices let me now return to the central theme of this chapter, the Ludwig Legend. How I came to understand that the published accounts of our family�€™s origins are legends is an interesting story that I will tell in more detail than is necessary. My reason for doing this is simply that these details may be of interest to others who are working on their own family history. Those who are not interested may skip the remainder of this chapter.

I grew up in Henry County, KY, knowing nothing of my own family history and believing that the Zarings of Shelby County, KY, the ancestral home of my family, were the only Zarings in the entire world. It seemed that everyone I met thought my name unusual if not strange.

I knew my Grandmother Zaring well, but my Grandfather Zaring died when I was only three. Grandfather was known to me only through a few stories my father told me. In 1950, while a student in Lexington, KY, I met an elderly man who knew Grandfather when they were both very young. I planned to ask him about Grandfather but delayed doing so until it was too late. My interest in the family history also developed too late to ask my father questions. But following his death in 1956, I asked my aunt, Celia Zaring Neal, if anyone know anything about the family history. She assured me that she did and she promised to write. On the 19th of February, 1957, she wrote me a letter in which she described our line back to my great great grandparents Jacob Zaring and Christianna Caplinger. Aunt Celia's letter is now a treasured document in my collection because it was the first major piece of information that I received, and because soon after she wrote to me she suffered a massive stroke that left her bedridden until her death in 1975.

If this account seems a bit morbid that is not my intent. Death is a reality and a genealogical obstacle. The moral here is that it is never too late to begin a family history, but the sooner you begin the better.

After receiving Aunt Celia's letter, fourteen years passed before I really began serious efforts to compile this family history. I did spend some time in the library at the University of Illinois looking for information on the Zaring family but I found little, largely because I did not know what to look for or how to search. I did learn that there were Zehrings in Pennsylvania but I was sure that they were a different family. They were German and I had been told that the Zarings were English. How anyone could believe that "Zaring" is an English name is beyond my comprehension, but that is what I had been told and that is what I believed.

Early in 1971 I began to correspond with my uncle, Charles Zaring, and I was pleased to learn that he had been collecting information for years. Our correspondence continued for many, many years and generated about two hundred pages of material. This collection of letters was a valuable source of information to which I turned as I reconstruct the events that lead to this history. For helping to preserve this correspondence, I am deeply indebted to Aunt Esther, Uncle Charles's wife. During the first two years of my genealogical quest I did not keep copies of outgoing letters, consequently I had only one side of the correspondence. In February, 1973, Aunt Esther typed 34 pages of the letters that I had addressed to them. I greatly appreciated this very helpful and unsolicited contribution.

In February, 1971, Uncle Charles reminded me of the Hessian soldier story. It was a story that I had heard before, although I really do not recall when I first heard it. Another uncle, Boyd Zaring, was fond of this story. He seemed to find some pleasure in the claim that the Zarings fought in the Revolution on the wrong side. Aunt Celia rejected this account, perhaps because she wanted our family record to be more American.

The first item offered in evidence for the Hessian soldier story was sent to me by Uncle Charles, a copy of an article, published in the Shelby Sentinel, of Shelbyville, KY, at a date unknown to me. This article entitled, John Zaring and Descendants, states that "John Zaring, the immigrant, a native of Pennsylvania, came to Kentucky at a very early day and located on a farm near Brownsboro, in Oldham County, Ky." Although the word "immigrant" and the phrase "a native of Pennsylvania" are contradictory, I could not ignore the possibility that this John Zaring was the legendary "Hessian soldier" and possibly the father of our Jacob Zaring. So, back I went to the library to find again the information on the Zehrings of Pennsylvania and to search for information on Hessian soldiers. I had little trouble locating a list of Hessian officers, but there were no Zarings listed. That was not a surprise. My search for a list of Hessian enlisted men produced nothing. The focus of my search soon shifted when I found information in the Pennsylvania Archives on five Zehrings who served in the Lancaster County Militia during the Revolution: Henry Sr., Henry Jr., Ludwig, Christian, and Philip. In addition The Official Roster of the Soldiers of the American Revolution Buried in Ohio, claimed that Christian Zehring was the son of Ludwig Zehring who settled in Pennsylvania about 1725, having emigrated from Baden, Germany. These were interesting finds for two reasons, they established that there were Zehrings in this country prior to the Revolution, and it was my first contact with the Ludwig Legend.

In March, 1971, several exciting discoveries were made. Uncle Charles found old deeds in the Jefferson County courthouse in Louisville, KY, one of which proved that Jacob Zaring's father was Philip Zehring. In addition these deeds established that Philip came to Louisville before 1794 from York County, PA, and his wife's name was Catherine. A check of the 1790 Federal Census revealed a Philip Zering in York County. It seemed quite likely that this Philip of York County was our Philip of Louisville, but was he also the same Philip who served in the Lancaster County Militia?

About the same time that Uncle Charles found the deeds in Louisville, I found Israel Daniel Rupp's A Brief Biographic Memorial of Joh. Jonas Rupp, and Complete Genealogical Family Register of his Lineal Descendants, from 1756 to 1875, with an Appendix, W. Philadelphia, L.W. Robinson, 1875. Hereafter I will refer to this simply as Rupp's Biographic Memorial. To this volume Rupp added an appendix devoted to the Zehring family history. According to Rupp the Zehring family was founded by Ludwig Zehring who came from Baden, Germany, to Pennsylvania, prior to 1732 and perhaps as early as 1725. He settled among the Indians about two miles east of Jonestown which is now in Lebanon County. Ludwig is reported to have had sons and daughters, but only four sons were named in Rupp's account: Henry, Ludwig, Mathias, and Christian.

There are some strange features of Rupp's account. Although daughters are mentioned none are named. The account is not a flowing one. Breaks in the flow suggest that Rupp pieced together material collected from more than one source and did not edit it well. For example, some information on Christian is given three times and the three accounts differ.

Rupp named three of his sources, Judge William M. Zearing of Chicago, Jacob Zehring of Powell's Valley, PA, and Rev. Jacob D. Zehring of Pennsylvania. It should be noted that Judge Zearing and Jacob Zehring are descendants of Henry Zehring and Rupp's account contains 56 pages on Henry's descendants. Rev. Jacob D. Zehring is a descendant of Christian Zehring and Rupp's account contains five pages on Christian's descendants. But only two and a half pages are devoted to Mathias and Ludwig collectively. It appears that Rupp simply recorded material that he received from his three sources and did little editing. This material covered two lines well, two lines sparsely, and omitted other lines. Perhaps Philip belonged to this family and his line was omitted because none of Rupp's sources knew about him.

At this point I began a search for information that might connect Philip and Ludwig. I wrote to the Register of Deeds and the Register of Wills in Lancaster, Lebanon, and Berks Counties, PA, and was informed that they had no deeds or will for Ludwig Zehring. I wrote to the Land Office in Harrisburg for a copy of a land patent that Rupp claimed was issued to Ludwig Zehring and discovered that the patent was not issued to Ludwig, but to Henry Zehring. Furthermore, the York County Historical Society reported that there are no deeds, will, or other documents for Philip Zehring in York County.

All of my efforts to locate information on Ludwig and Philip came to a dead end. With this effort stalled I broadened my search and discovered a collection of phone books in the University of Illinois Library. Using names and addresses from these phone books I began to write to Zehrings, particularly those in Pennsylvania, in the hope of finding a lead. I didn't find one. Then in 1972 a friend, Jean Evans, introduced me to the Genealogical Helper, a publication devoted to genealogy and to assisting people who are working on the same lines. In back issues of the Helper, I found names of six people who were researching the Zehring family. I wrote and received answers from each of the six. One contained the new lead that I needed.

On July 13, 1972, Mrs. Florence Lytle wrote to tell me her Zehring line. By this time I had collected enough information that I knew Florence's line well except that she claimed that it began with an immigrant named Johannes Zehring. I wrote back to tell Florence about my line and pointed out that my records showed that her immigrant ancestor was Ludwig Zehring. In a letter dated August 21, 1972, Florence sent me a copy of some birth records published in the February, 1969, issue of the NSDAR Magazine. These records were from the Swatara Reformed Church of Jonestown, PA, and they established that Philip Zehring and Catherine were in the Jonestown area in 1776. This discovery destroyed the Hessian soldier story by tracing our line back to a Zehring who was here before the Hessians arrived. At this point I dismissed the Hessian soldier story as simply the figment of someone's imagination. But in addition to all of this, Florence also sent me a copy of a letter that she had received from Ruth Gallon, dated November 2, 1967. Ruth claimed that our immigrant ancestor was Johannes Zehring and that he arrived in Philadelphia on September 29, 1753. A deed on file in Sunbury, PA, listed the heirs of Johannes as Henry, Ludwig, Mathias, Philip, Christian, Elizabeth, and John. It was a simple matter to secure a copy of this deed, and other documents, and verify Ruth's claim. Here are the facts.

In 1755, Johannes was living on Indian land in what is now Snyder County, PA, but was then Cumberland County. This land was on Middle Creek. On October 18, 1755, Indians attacked a settlement north of Johannes on Penn's Creek. Of the 25 people in the Penn�€™s Creek settlement, thirteen men, an elderly woman, and one infant were killed. The remainder was presumed to have been taken into captivity. (See John Blair Linn's Annals of Buffalo Valley, Pennsylvania.)

The Penn's Creek attack was the first action by Indians in what came to be known as the French and Indian War. Under the threat of this attack, Johannes fled. Whether he ever returned to his land on Middle Creek, I do not know, but writing in 1877, Linn stated in his Annals: "The Zehrings have still descendants there." In this sentence "there" refers to land on Middle Creek. In 1765, Johannes filed a claim for his land on Middle Creek and was granted a patent. Later he sold this land to John Rush, but died without executing a deed. In 1774, Johannes�€™ heirs conveyed title to John Rush. This deed is on file in Sunbury and it is the one called to my attention by Ruth Gallon. Latter Ruth told me that she learned about this deed from a cousin Claude Pierce Dickson. Claude was researching his Kerstetter ancestors and found the deed sometime in the 1960s.

Having now identified the immigrant as Johannes Zehring and his date of arrival as September 29, 1753, the next step was to try to locate Johannes's home in Germany. On November 5, 1973, I wrote to the German Consulate in Chicago to ask where in Germany I could write for help. They sent me several addresses and on November 16, 1973, I wrote to two places. While waiting for a reply I began to think about something that had concerned me for some time, the correct spelling of the name.

All members of the Kentucky branch of the family use the spelling "Zaring" in spite of the fact that they are all descendants of Philip, who apparently used the spelling "Zehring". An Illinois branch of the family, adopted the spelling "Zearing." They are descendants of Henry Zehring. A Virginia branch used "Zehring," and the Ohio branch that I knew about at that time, used "Zehring." This information seemed to me to suggest that "Zehring" was the most commonly used spelling, and hence was probably the original spelling. But I was puzzled by certain church records and deeds in Pennsylvania, where the spelling "Zehrung" occurred. Having convinced myself that "Zehring" was surely the correct spelling, I initially ignored the "Zehrung" spelling as simply careless recording or a result of the fact that spelling was generally not standardized in the eighteenth century. Then I found a photocopy of Johannes's signature in Volume II of Strassburger's Pennsylvania German Pioneers. When Johannes landed in Philadelphia, he signed two oaths. The signatures are in German script and so, for me, they were unreadable. Strassburger read one signature as Johannes Zehring and the other as Johannes Zehrung. That seemed to me to suggest that Johannes was simply careless or perhaps Strassburger had misread one of the signatures.

One day, I was discussing this matter with a friend Peter Braunfeld, who was born in Vienna and who knew old German script. He explained to me that in old German script an "i" and a "c" are identical so a dot is placed over an "i." Furthermore a "u" and an "n" are identical so a mark, called a u-stroke, is placed over a "u." Armed with this information and Peter's example of a u-stroke, I examined my photocopy of Johannes's signature and saw that the u-stroke was clearly present in both signatures. Strassburger had indeed misread a signature but not the one I originally thought. My observations were later confirmed by Prof. Herman Lau, a German genealogist who lives in Karlsruhe, Germany.

Having established the correct spelling of the original name it was natural to ask about its meaning. There appear to be two possibilities. There is a German word "Zehrung", now archaic, with the meanings, "consumption, expenses, bill (at an inn), provisions, victuals, waste, loss through shrinkage." In Martin Luther's translation of the Bible in a passage that reads "Sie nahmen Zehrung mit auf den Weg" which roughly translated says, "They took provisions with them on their way." In this Biblical passage "Zehrung" probably means food or other necessities but at a later date it came to include money to cover expenses. Consequently "Zehrung" may be an occupational name. Perhaps our early ancestors were innkeepers and called "Zehrung" because of the bills they presented their guests or because they supplied provisions for their guests. I must point out that there are no known documents that suggest our ancestors were innkeepers. The oldest known records identify them as farmers.

Another possible meaning of our name was suggested to me in a conversation with Felix Albrecht, a colleague in the Department of Mathematics. I have forgotten whether Felix was German or Swiss, but German was a familiar language to him. He told me that in German the suffix "ung" is used to form patronymics. In this case the name "Zehrung" would identify us as descendants of someone named "Zehr." When I asked if he knew of anyone named Zehr he said no but there are probably lots of old German names that have been lost.

I had no way of deciding which, if either, of these two possible meanings of our name was correct until 1993 when I bought German-American Names, by George F. Jones. Although the name "Zehrung" was not listed in Mr. Jones's book the name "Zehr" was, and the meaning attributed to it was "nourishment." I wrote to Mr. Jones and received the following interesting reply.

Thank you for your letter of January 26. As you write, the word Zehr or Zehrung had many meanings. It is believed that the word was originally related to "tear" and referred to the tearing (and consumption) of meat. Later it meant nourishment in general; and by the time German names were developing, Zehr most often meant a victualer or tavern keeper, and Zehrung or Zehring meant the child or descendant of such a person. Of course there may have been some profession, unknown to us now, in which a person consumed something, but that becomes idle speculation.

Several months passed with no reply from my inquiries to Germany. On April 25, 1974, I wrote again. But having learned from Peter Braunfeld that Germans are impressed by titles, I wrote my second letter on departmental stationary and signed my name and title, Associate Professor of Mathematics, University of Illinois. Within a few days I had a reply. Peter's advice had proved to be sound. This advice was based on an experience that Peter had, while on sabbatical leave at the University of Karlsruhe, in Germany, a year or so earlier. Let me review Peter's interesting story.

One Sunday, in Karlsruhe, Peter received a call saying that his father was seriously ill and he should come home. He threw a few things into a bag and headed for the airport. He had no money and since it was Sunday he could not go to the bank. When he arrived at the airport he offered the ticket agent his American credit card which they refused to honor. He explained to them that their American agent had accepted this card when he bought a ticket to come to Germany. They agreed that in New York they would be happy to accept the card but not in Germany. Peter suggested that they fly him to New York and when they landed they could use the card to pay for his trip. No, that was not possible, the ticket must be paid for here and now and American credit cards were not acceptable. At this point Peter began to search through his billfold to see if he had anything that they would accept. As he laid a variety of things on the counter, the ticket agent saw his University of Karlsruhe identification card and asked, "Are you a Professor at the University?". Peter said "Yes," and fifteen minutes latter he was in the air and on his way home. Remembering this story, I always use departmental stationary and my title when I write to Germany and I always get an immediate and full reply.

My reply from Germany suggested that I write to a Prof. Herman Lau who did genealogy as a hobby. On June 6, 1974, I wrote to Prof. Lau and explained my problem. I told him the entire Ludwig Legend about descent from the Zähringer family of Baden, Germany, and about Johannes Zehrung who arrived in 1753. He answered on June 16 and told me that he would search for me if I would pay his expenses. I agreed and he set to work.

Prof. Lau first pointed out that the Zähinger family was Catholic and Johannes was German Reformed, so it was not likely that Johannes was a member of the Zähringer family. Moreover, he added, with what I took to be a superior attitude, that it was not likely that a member of the Zähinger family would be a "common farmer". I did not bother to explain to Prof. Lau that we farmers are a proud people. In my line I am the first non-farmer in about 16 known generations. Nevertheless, I thought that Prof. Lau's conclusion was probably correct. The claim of noble descent had always seemed to me to be unfounded and probably wishful thinking, a view that my exchanges with Prof. Bly had strengthened. In fact I had already found a history of the House of Zähringer that stated that Berthold V, died without a surviving male heir.

To help Prof. Lau with his search I sent him every bit of information that I had on our German origins. I sent him an account of the claimed connection to the Zähinger family, even though Prof. Lau had previously rejected the idea of such a connection. When I learned that Judge William Zearing of Chicago claimed that he had visited the Duke of Baden, I forwarded that information. Prof. Lau thought a visit with the Duke so absurd that he rejected that idea without even investigating. I sent a photocopy of the signatures of those who, with Johannes, signed the two oaths in Philadelphia. From these signatures, Prof. Lau confirmed the spelling "Zehrung".

From my correspondence with Zehrings in Pennsylvania and from published sources, I had learned that there were two locations that were claimed to be the ancestral Zehring home, Freiburg and Heidelberg. Freiburg is the ancestral home of the Zähringer family. Zähringer is a place name taken from the ancient village of Zähringen, now a suburb of Freiburg. Prof. Lau pointed out that Freiburg was a Catholic city while Heidelberg was German Reformed. Since Johannes Zehrung was German Reformed the search started in Heidelberg, but nothing was found.

In December, 1974, I wrote to Mr. Harold Kuderer in response to an ad that I ran across concerning the Zähringer Echo, which I mistakenly assumed to be a genealogical journal. Mr. Kuderer was kind enough to answer my letter and to explain that the Zähringer Echo is the newspaper of Zähringen. He sent me an interesting drawing of the old village of Zähringen, showing the ruins of the Zähringer castle . And he told me something interesting. He claimed that the Zähringers presently living are not related to the Ducal family and indeed are not all related to each other. The claim that modern Zähringers are not of noble descent and from different families, revived in my mind the possibility that Johannes Zehrung might be a Zähringer descendant.

In 1976 things began to come together. By then I had discovered a lady in Oregon, Mrs. Frances Brown, who was interested in the Zehrung family and who believed that our ancestors originally lived on the Rhine River near Koblenz. Furthermore, a friend, Florence Lytle, while traveling in Germany, had found the name and address of Hellmut Zehrung, in a phone book in Frankfurt,. I forwarded Hellmut's address to Prof. Lau. By then, Prof. Lau had located three different Johannes Zehrungs, and had begun a search for Ludwig Lupp, a Reformed minister who was on the same ship on which Johannes came to America. Then, in a letter dated February 15, 1976, Prof. Lau wrote to tell me that he had found a record of our Johannes Zehrung in the church records of the Evangelical Church of Bad Marienberg. Bad Marienberg is in the Westerwald region of Germany. In Johannes's day it was a small village known simply as Marienberg.

Knowing that Prof. Lau had located Johannes by tracing Rev. Ludwig Lupp, I wrote to Herbert B. Anstaett, who had been so helpful to me in the past. Herbert was the Executive Secretary of the Evangelical and Reformed Historical Society. Their archive is located in the Philip Shaff Library in Lancaster, PA. I asked if they had any information on Ludwig Lupp and Herbert sent me a four page article. From this article I learned that Lupp had been born in 1733 at Marienberg, in the township of Beilstein and, incorrectly as I learned later, in the province of Hesse-Nassau. The name of the province called to mind the Hessian soldier story and spawned the following conjecture.

We know that Germany, as a nation, did not exist in Johannes' day. What we think of as modern day Germany, was a collection of principalities in the eighteenth century. If Johannes was asked what his nationality was he perhaps claimed to be a Hessian, meaning a person from Hesse. It was not until the American Revolution that "Hessian" came to mean, in this country, a German mercenary who fought with the British. If Johannes' children told their children that their grandfather was a Hessian, then the scene was set for the Hessian soldier story as the meaning of the word "Hessian" changed.

While this seemed to be a plausible explanation when I thought of it in the early 1990s, it was shot down in 2000 by Margit Göttert who pointed out that Marienberg was never in Hesse nor was it in Hesse-Nassau. It belonged to Nassau-Dillenburg and was under the Prince of Oranian a branch of the family that still reigns in the Netherlands and Luxembourg. Consequently, I do not know how, or why, the Hessian story began and it is not likely that we ever will know. Indeed, except for a natural curiosity, it is no longer a matter of any genealogical importance.

But the Ludwig Legend is a different matter. Until this problem is resolved, we can never be positive who our immigrant ancestor really was. Was he a farmer who remained in a remote area of Pennsylvania as the land records indicate, or was he a business man who traveled back and forth between America and Germany as the Ludwig Legend claims? Let me review the problem beginning with the facts that are known.

The Ludwig Legend is referred to in no less that ten publications spanning a time period from 1875 to 1929. The oldest and most detailed account that I know of, is that given in Rupp's Biographic Memorial. In order to explain why I think it is a legend, I want to reproduce everything that Rupp had to say on the subject. I begin with a statement from page 105.

D. - Maria Elizabeth Rupp born Oct. 15, 1762, Lancaster, now Lebanon co., a few miles south of Annville: baptized by Rev. Conrad Tempelman; Sponsors, John Umberger and wife, m. 1781, Henry Zearing b. Mar. 20, 1760 - son of Henry, and grandson of Ludwig, a native of Baden, Germany, who emigrated prior to 1732, and settled two miles east of Jonestown, on a large tract of land, adjoining lands of Stephen Winger, Henry Dubs, Lehman Groh, and Church lands, on which stood the "long-ago decayed German Reformed Church, as early as 1729, (See Appendix A.)".

In the appendix we find the following more detailed account.

The lineal descendants of Ludwig Zaering, Zaehring, or Zehrung; the American Patriarch, do not spell their names alike. Zearing seems to be the usual spelling of the descendants of Henry Zearing, whose Family Register is given in a preceding part. See pp. 105-156.

The Hon. W. M. Zearing of Chicago, maintains that Zaehring is only a variation of the name on assuming title. Wellington's name was Wellesley; but his titled name was Duke or Lord of Wellington. In a letter dated Princeton, Bureau co., Ill., 15th Nov., 1869, Hon. Zearing has given copies of inscriptions from monuments, which go far to show the original spelling of the name. See his letter in Appendix C.

As to the origin of the name Zearing, there is a diversity of opinion. W. Mentzel, in his history of the Germans, says, "The descendants of the Duke of the Province of Zeyring, above Judenburg, were called Zaehringer. p. 245.

In the Chronicles of Freiburg, the Legendary origin of the name is as follows: Their ancestor carrying on charcoal burning in the Black Forrest Mountain, accidentally found or discovered silver in the earth or ground, with which the smoldering wood was covered. He gradually collected silver amounting to an immense treasure. On a time, an Emperor took refuge on Kaiser Stuhl Mountain, in Breisgau; fell into great distress, who promised to give his daughter's hand to the person that would come to his relief. The owner of the immense treasure laid his ponderous riches at the Emperor's feet. The fortunate owner was wedded to the young Princess and created Duke, who afterwards built the Castle of Zaehringen." - Mentzel, p. 245.

Part of another Legend runs thus, "The Emperor, on presenting his daughter said to his son-in-law, Zuehe, (old German for Ziehe) move, take possession of the province; accept of this Ringer (ring) as a memento; your name shall be Zaehringer.

A family tradition, seemingly credible, is this: Ludwig, the American Patriarch of a most numerous progeny, descended from the Ducal Zaehringer; probably from Berthold V., the founder of Bern, the Margraf of the Baden line.

Note. - The Zearing family name, in a direct line of succession, is traceable to more remote antiquity than some other of the European rulers. Its luster was not only unobscured, but stood preeminent through the dark ages, and was rescued amid the throes and convulsions of receding and ascendant nations."

Ludwig I. emigrated from Baden perhaps about the year 1725. Some time after his arriving in Pennsylvania, he domiciled, prior to 1732, on a tract of land among the Indians, which he subsequently located by virtue of a land warrant, granting him 130 acres, for which he paid 20 pounds, 10 shillings, 11 pense. See Patent Book AA, 14, p. 109 at Harrisburg. See, also, p. 105, ante.

Note. - It was not til 1732 that Thomas Penn, son of William Penn, purchased the land in this region from the Delaware Indians. Pa. Arch. I., 404 - 412.

In 1732, and later, Allumapes or Sassoonan was King of the Delawares, whose chiefs were Pokehais, Metashichay, Aiyamackan, Papawmamen, Ghetypeneeman and Opekasset. Col. Rev. III., 321.

As early as 1723, some Germans from Scholarie, N.Y. settled on and along Tulpehocken and Quitapahilla, a tributary of the Swatara. At a council, held 1728, in Philadelphia, Allumapes, the Delaware King, alludes, plaintively to the Germans settling on Tulpehocken, etc. "I am now an old man - must soon die. My children may wonder to see all their father's land gone from them without receiving anything for them. The Christians now make their settlements very near; we shall have no place left of our own to live on; this may occasion a difference between their children and ours, hereafter; we would willingly prevent any misunderstanding that may happen."

In conclusion, Allumapes said, "I desire that the Christians and Indians should have one head, one heart, one body. I look upon all as but one people, and desire that they may always so continue. We have many among us who are as little children - weak and helpless. We should not, because of weakness, have any misunderstanding - each should be head without any disturbance; for we are one people." - Col. Rec. III., 319. See "Original Fireside History of German and Swiss Immigrants in Penn'a." Part III, by I. D. Rupp.

Ludwig, by reason of his superior education, was a man of unbounded influence, in his day and generation. He transacted much business for his countrymen, both in America and Europe. He was ever faithful in trusts committed to his care. He crossed and recrossed the Atlantic once and again, nay, repeatedly, as Factor - transacting business for others in connection with his own. In what proved to be his last voyage, about the year 1773, he was accompanied by his third son, Mathias. On this voyage he sickened - died, in transit. His body was committed to the deep.

I have it from Jacob, one of Ludwig's descendants, (see p. 133, ante.) that Mathias had accompanied his father on his last voyage. This has been the family tradition - muendliche Ueberlieferung, for years. In 1860, I copied the following from a Bucks County newspaper, published April 16, 1776, which corroborates Jacob Zearing's statement: -

"Jacob Fischer, Schuldiiener, moechte gern wissen wo Heinrich Schuhmacker von Ingelbach hingekommen, welcher mit mir in dieses Land gekommen, 1773. Auch danke ich dem M. Zehring das dass er mich, aus einem beschwerten Europa in ein so edles Land gefuehrt, etc."

Roughly translated the preceding passage reads "Jacob Fischer, school teacher, would like to know the whereabouts of Heinrich Schuhmacker of Ingelbach, who came with me to this land in 1773. Also, I thank M. Zehring for the fact that he brought me out of a troubled Europe into such a grand country." Ingelbach is near Altenkirchen and about 12 miles west of Marienberg.

The phrase "muendliche Ueberlieferung," in the paragraph preceding the German one, means "oral tradition."

Let me now speak to questions raised by Rupp's account. The most puzzling item is Rupp's reference to our immigrant ancestor as Ludwig. Initially I had no reason to question this but, as I explained earlier in this account, there are no land records, there is no will, and no tax records for Ludwig. Our immigrant ancestor was named Johannes and I view that as a fully documented fact. On arriving in Philadelphia, Johannes was required to sign two oaths and his signature has been preserved. Under the name Johannes or John, we have land records at Harrisburg, a deed at Sunbury, and an Orphan's Court Record at Lancaster.

The land records at Harrisburg show that the ancestral Zehring farm adjoined church land. Rupp referred to this land and the "long-ago decayed Reformed Church." On July 15, 1973, I wrote to Herbert B. Anstaett, Executive Secretary of The Evangelical and Reformed Historical Society, at Lancaster to ask what church this might have been. He referred me to Mr. A. Hunter Rineer, Director of the Massachusetts State Library. Mr. Rineer informed me that the church in question was the Swatara Church and that in 1765 the congregation divided into St. John's Church of Christ in Jonestown and St. John's Church of Christ in Fredericksburg. Let me digress a moment to tell a bit about this interesting old church.

I have searched for information about the Swatara Church and the two St. John�€™s Churches every since I first learned about them several years ago. The Swatara Church and the first St. John�€™s were union churches, consisting of both a Reformed and a Lutheran congregation. The early history of St. John�€™s in Jonestown remained a mystery to me until I received a letter from Evelyn Isele, dated November 20, 2000. Evelyn wrote a bicentennial history of Jonestown and in response to my questions told me that in 1765 the St. John�€™s Church was built on the corner of south Broad Street and Mulberry Alley. This was a frame building that also served as a school. The cemetery next door, that Evelyn referred to as the Old Reformed Church, was the first in Jonestown. This is probably the cemetery that Egle refers to in his History of Lebanon County as the old Lutheran an Reformed Cemetery, �€œthe oldest in town�€�. According to Egle, writing in 1883, no burials have been made here for �€œthe last three-quarters of a century.�€� Egle lists tombstone readings for eight people, one being �€œHeinrich Behring, d. Jan. 24, 1798, aged 37.�€� This is surely Henry Zehring Jr.

According to Evelyn�€™s history, St. John�€™s was built on land �€œobtained from William Jones, subject to a ground rent of one red bean per year.�€� In 1883, Squire Zehring was reported to have lamented, obviously tongue in cheek, that the church had failed to pay its debt. They now owed the heirs of William Jones 118 red beans. Presumably this was Christian Decker Zehring, who was known as Squire.

In 1804, the Lutherans sold their interest to the Reformed Congregation and built their own Zion Evangelical Lutheran Church on the corner of Market and King Streets. There are Zehrings buried in their cemetery. In 1810, the Reformed Congregation built a brick church on south King Street, with an adjoining cemetery, on the corner of King and Queen Streets. This cemetery still exists and there are Zehrings buried there. This 1810 date fits with what Egle tells us about the old Lutheran and Reformed Cemetery. Of the eight people buried there, no one died prior to July 20, 1810.

In 1865, the Reformed Congregation dedicated a new church in its present location on Market Street. Building materials for this new church were obtained by dismantled the old church on King Street.

Evelyn remembers the old frame church on Broad Street. It was not torn down until 1960 when a parsonage was built on the site. In 1963 the tombstones were removed to the cemetery on King Street and the cemetery was paved over to make a parking lot. The old cemetery on south Broad Street is of interest because it is quite possible that members of our family were buried there. If this cemetery was in use from 1765 to 1810 there were surely more than the eight people buried there that Egle reported, but apparently no record has survived of the unmarked graves. Perhaps Johannes Zehrung and his wife Anna Marie Crumm lie under the pavement in the parking lot on south Broad Street.

Rupp claims that Ludwig settled at Jonestown prior to 1732, but as we know Johannes did not arrive in this country until 1753. There is a plausible explanation of Rupp's claim that Ludwig came "prior to 1732". I quote again from Rupp, "Note - It was not till 1732 that Thomas Penn, son of William Penn, purchased the land in this region from the Delaware Indians." It is clear from the context that by "this region" Rupp means the area in and around Jonestown.

Recall that in 1755, Johannes was living on Indian land in present day Snyder County. If the family tradition preserved the fact that the immigrant settled on Indian land and if one believed, as Rupp did, that this immigrant settled near Jonestown, then Rupp had to believe that he settled there before 1732 because after that time the land no longer belonged to the Indians.

Note that Rupp does not use the German umlauted "a", i.e. "ä", but uses instead, the English equivalent "ae". Rupp next speaks to the question of the spelling of the name and he cites Judge William M. Zearing as the source of his information. It appears to be Judge Zearing's contention that the original name was "Zearing" but it became "Zaehringer" on the assumption of title. Judge Zearing gives no evidence that the original name was "Zearing" nor is that even suggested by histories of the Zähringer family.

Rupp cites a letter that he received from Judge Zearing, dated November 15, 1869, a letter that Rupp reproduced in his family history as Appendix C. In this letter Judge Zearing states that "You may perceive a variance of name, betimes, all owing to usages, Baronial or otherwise, and where the name occurs, there should be no hesitancy in giving it the correct and uniform name of Zearing, - ." The Judge refers to Zearing Castle, presumably meaning Zähringer Castle, he refers to Zearing history, and clearly means Zähringer history, and he refers to a village that he visited in Germany as "Zearingville." One does not have to know German in order to know that there is no village in Germany named "Zearingville." Possibly Judge Zearing is referring to Zähringen, but if so, to render this as Zearingville is an incredible abuse of the German. The German suffix "-en" is used to make place names. But all of the several German speakers that I know tell me that this suffix has no English counterpart and by no stretch of the imagination should it ever be rendered as "-ville." My point is simply that if Judge Zearing is referring to Zähringen, then referring to it as Zearingville shows at least poor scholarship, if not an intent to misrepresent.

Rupp provides us with two different legends on the origin of the family name. The first of these is indeed from Wolfgang Menzel's History of Germany, but Rupp does not quote it quite accurately. Menzel says: "His descendants received the surname of Zaehringer, from Zehring, a place above Judenburg." Judenburg is a city and what "above" means is not completely clear. It might mean "north of Judenburg", and it might mean "on a hill overlooking Judenburg". Rupp kindly omits part of the legend of the charcoal burner who became a duke and "Maddened by prosperity, he longed for human flesh, and caused a boy to be killed and roasted. While feasting on this unnatural food, he was seized with remorse, and, in atonement for his crime, erected the monasteries of St. Ruprecht, and of St. Peter, in the Black Forest."

I do not know the source of Rupp's second legend. But I cannot resist making a few observations concerning the two accounts. Rupp misspelled Menzel's name. Why is this of interest? In German a "z" is sounded like "tz" so "Menzel" is pronounced like "Mentzel" is spelled. Anyone proficient in German would know this. Rupp is reported to be well versed in German. In Rupp's quotation from Menzel the "province" is identified as "Zeyring above Judenburg." It is very strange that here the name is spelled with a "y". The only explanation that I can give for this spelling is that in old printed German, an "h" has part of the letter below the line and looks very much like a "y". Rupp is reported to have known six languages one of which was German. Surely he would know the difference between a German "h" and a "y". But a matter of greater importance is that in German, "Ringer" does not mean "ring". According to my German dictionary �€œRing�€� means �€œring,�€� but �€œRinger�€� means �€œwrestler.�€� This observation suggests that the second legend may not be from a German source and it again raises questions about Rupp's knowledge of German. I should, of course, point out that my knowledge of German is at best marginal and so I have little basis for criticizing Rupp.

I found it of interest that in his Biographic Memorial, Rupp states of himself that at age four he was sent to school to learn German. I take that to mean that German was not his first language. His education appears to have been quite limited. He attended school for five years after which he went only four months out of the year. And there is no mention of college. It would appear that Rupp was largely self-educated. This would explain why some of his writings, in my opinion, reflect poor scholarship. Having raised questions for which I have no answer, I must now leave the matter for the reader to ponder, but I must add one thing. I would not want to be thought ungrateful because of my criticisms of Rupp. Many of us are heavily indebted to Rupp for preserving so much of the history of the German community of his day. I am just trying to understand the Ludwig Legend and Rupp, perhaps by accident, became a focal point of that legend.

Rupp states that "Ludwig I. emigrated from Baden perhaps about the year 1725." Within Rupp's account we see a possible explanation for that date. Rupp states, "As early as 1723, some Germans from Scholarie, N. Y. settled on and along Tulpehocken and Quitapahilla, a tributary of the Swatara." Perhaps Rupp believed that the Zehrings came from New York. This is, of course, not an unreasonable assumption. Indeed, it is one that has to be considered in our efforts to resolve the Ludwig-Johannes controversy. There was a John Searing and a Conrad Searing in Dauphin County in 1790. Perhaps a family did come from New York and became confused with the family that came in through Philadelphia. Ruby Coleman explored this possibility and reported to me that Henry Jones, who has done extensive research on the Palatines in New York, stated that our Zehrungs "were not there and didn't go down to Pennsylvania with the Palatines." But there is another possibility. Searing families settled in Connecticut, New Jersey, and New York at a very early date, perhaps as early as 1647. They were Huguenots with no apparent connection to our people. John Searing is known to belong to this family. Perhaps Conrad Searing does too.

Rupp's next claim is that the immigrant obtained a land warrant for 130 acres for which he paid 20 pounds, 10 shillings, 11 pence. "See Patent Book AA, 14, p. 109 at Harrisburg." But Patent Book AA, Volume 14, page 109, does not record a patent to Ludwig Zehring or to Johannes Zehrung, but to Henry Zehring. On December 31, 1773, Thomas Penn and John Penn, Governors in Chief of Pennsylvania, patented to Henry Zehring 130 acres of land for 20 pounds, 2 shillings, 11 pence. This acreage was surveyed on November 20, 1772, by virtue of warrant #43, dated November 4, 1772. The land is referred to in the patent, as "Zehrung's Neglect." The survey shows that Henry's farm adjoining Stephen Winger, Henry Dupes, Christian Layman, Mathias Crow, and church land. It was located in what was then Bethel Township, Lancaster County, PA. This is now in Lebanon County and it is about two miles east of Jonestown.

Why was the land called "Zehrung's Neglect"? One possibility is that the land was so called because over a year lapsed from the time of the warrant to the time of the patent. Another possibility is that the Zehring family was on the land at a much earlier date. Indeed the Warrant issued November 4, 1772, suggests a date, for it states that Henry is to pay quit rent from March, 1750. This suggests that the family was in the country prior to Johannes's entry date of 1753. But an inquiry to Edward D. Price, Chief, Division of Land Records, Harrisburg, PA, produced the following interesting reply.

In reply to your October 11, 1982, inquiry, the date shown on warrant #43 of Henry Zehring for the commencement of Quit-rent payments apparently has no bearing whatsoever on Henry Zehring himself, or this specific transaction.

The majority of land warrants issued during this particular time period bear the exact same date and we do receive numerous inquiries concerning the reasons for it.

As near as can be determined, and this is strictly speculation on our part, the date must have been an arbitrary one set by the Penn heirs at that particular time in an effort to raise additional revenue. It could also have reflected a different policy of the General Assembly, such as a lands act, or the Supreme Executive Council itself.

Let me now give a brief account of the Ludwig Legend in other books. I will list them in their order of publication.

The History of Montgomery County, Ohio, Chicago, W. H. Beers & Co., 1882, p. 297, records the following.

In the year 1725, Ludwig Zehring and family emigrated from Baden, Germany, to the American colonies, and prior to 1732 located in what afterwards became Lebanon County, Penn., purchasing 130 acres from the Indians, for which he paid 20 pounds, 10 shilling, 11 pence, and with a few others of the faith erected near his farm the Swatara Reformed Church, located two miles east of Jonestown, which building has long since been replaced by a modern and commodious house of worship.

The first few lines of this account appear to be from Rupp but the claim that Ludwig and others built the Swatara Reformed Church is not, and indeed, it does not appear in any other published source known to me. Is it possible that "Ludwig" helped build the old Swatara Church? I think not. Let me explain.

As I have pointed out the land records at Harrisburg show that the ancestral Zehring farm adjoined church land. From Mr. A. Hunter Rineer, Director of the Massachusetts State Library, I learned that the church in question was the Swatara Church, and that in 1765 the congregation divided into St. John's Church of Christ in Jonestown and St. John's Church of Christ in Fredericksburg. From St. John's in Fredericksburg I obtained a history of their church. This history begins with the Swatara Church near Jonestown, but there is no mention of the Zehring family. With the knowledge that the church was the Swatara Church, I obtained from Herbert B. Anstaett, a copy of Two Dead and Lost Churches of the Swatara, which contains a history of the Swatara Church. Again the Zehring family is not mentioned. This would be unthinkable if Ludwig helped build the church. The birth records of the old Swatara Church were preserved in the Jonestown St. John's Church and are now in the Reformed Church Archives in Lancaster. This birth record begins in 1740, but the name "Zehring" does not appears until August 16, 1772, when Henry Zehring and Susanna had their daughter Catharine baptized.

The absence of the name "Zehring" from the early records of the Swatara Church suggests that the family simply was not living on the ancestral farm prior to its occupation by Henry about 1771. But the matter cannot be considered to be settled, until we know where the family was during the period 1755 to 1771.

William Henry Egle records the following in his History of the County of Lebanon in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Everts and Peck, 1883, p. 258.

Ludwig Zehring, the first emigrant, a native of Baden, came to America about 1725, and shortly after his arrival located on a tract of land two miles east of Jonestown, now Lebanon County. This tract of land originally contained - acres, and has been in continuous possession of the descendants of Ludwig Zehring. The ancestor was a man of strong force of character, well educated, and of considerable influence on the frontiers. For many years he acted as a kind of agent for his countrymen, and transacted business for them, not only in this but in the Fatherland. "He was faithful to every trust committed to his care." is the estimate of him which has come down to us. About the year 1773, accompanied by his son Matthias, he made a voyage to Europe, but taking ill, died at sea and there buried. He was thrice married.

Egle's account contains one quote from Rupp and summarizes other Rupp data. But Egle obviously had at least one other source. This is evident from the fact that Rupp says nothing of three marriages for Ludwig, nor does he claim that the ancestral farm remained continuously in the family.

In Egle's Notes and Queries, Fourth Series, Vol. I, p. 94, we read that

... Ludwig Zehring, (Zehrung) of Baden, Germany, came to American prior to the year 1725, and was one of the first German settlers in Lebanon county. Many years afterwards Ludwig-Zehring, in company with one of his sons, visited his native land, and while on his voyage took sick and died at sea, his body finding a grave in fathomless depths.

History of Bureau County, Henry C. Bradley, Editor, Chicago, World Publishing Company, 1885, p. 703, contains the following.

The complete genealogy of the Zearing family was published several years ago in the East. --- Ludwig I, the American progenitor of the Zearing family, emigrated from Baden about 1725.

The only "complete genealogy" published before 1885 that I know about is Rupp's Biographical Memorial.

American Ancestry, Vol. IX, 1894, p. 204:

Ludwig of Lancaster co., Pa., came from Baden, Germany, 1725.

The Biographical Record of Bureau, Marshall and Putnam Counties, Illinois, Chicago, The S. J. Clarke Publishing Company, 1896, p. 268:

The family is of German origin and was founded in America about 1725, - .
American Ancestry, Vol. XI, 1898, p. 82:

Ludwig of Jonestown Pa., b. in Baden Germany, about 1773, came to America before 1732, settled 2 miles east of Jonestown Pa. on a large tract of land adjoining the long ago decayed German Ref. Ch., crossed the Atlantic many times.

George B. Harrington, Past and Present of Bureau County, Illinois, Chicago, The Pioneer Publishing Company, 1906, p. 342:

The family is of German lineage and was founded in America about 1725.
Transactions of the Illinois Historical Society, Springfield, Phillips Brothers Printing, 1922, No. 28, p. 141:

- Ludwig Zearing, came to the United States before 1732 and purchased land from William Penn near Jonestown, Pa."

Since William Penn died in 1718 this claim cannot be taken too seriously.

The Official Roster of the Soldiers of the American Revolution Buried in Ohio, Columbus, F. J. Heer Printing Company, 1929, p. 414:

A descendant of Ludwig Zehring, (Zehrung) who came from Baden, Germany, to Pa. in 1725.

It is apparent that the author of each of these accounts either used Rupp as a source, or had a source in common with Rupp. In either case, it would appear that the origin of the Ludwig Legend is to be found in the origin of Rupp's material. For that, I return to Rupp's account.

For the material contained in his appendix, Rupp acknowledges his indebtedness to three people, Judge Zearing of Chicago, Jacob Zehring of Powell's Valley, and Rev. Jacob D. Zehring. But he does not credit anyone for the material that I have referred to as the Ludwig Legend. That would appear to leave us with four possibilities. Either Rupp himself is the source of the legend or one of the other three is the source. I think that there is a compelling reason to eliminate Rev. Zehring. I am indebted to William Zehring, who shared with me the following interesting discovery.

On September 8, 1874, the Reformed Church Messenger published an open letter from Rupp to Rev. Zehring entitled An Open Epistle to Rev. Jacob D. Zehring, German Reformed Minister, Cadorus, York County, Pa. This open letter was reprinted on August 11, 1949, in The Pennsylvania Dutchman. William shared his copy with me and I reproduce it here:

Whence the name Zaehring, Zehring, Zehrung, Zearing?

This name is derived, says Mintzel, from Zeyring, the name of a province in the upper part of Judenburg, Germany. The legendary origin of Zaehring is thus related in the Ancient Freiberger Chronicles. Their ancestor was a charcoal burner, who accidentally discovered some silver in the earth, with which he covered the smoldering wood, and gradually collected an immense treasure. An emperor, who had taken refuge on Kaiserstuhl mountain, in Breisgau, fell in great distress, and promised to bestow his daughter's hand on the person who would come to his aid. The charcoal burner laid his ponderous riches at his feet - wedded the princess, was created Duke, and built (A.D. 1113) the castle of Zaehring, and the city of Freiburg, Baden. (This from Mintzel, 245.)

Another Legend says: Because the charcoal burner had saved the emperor's life, he gave him his only daughter as his wife, with the province bearing the name Zehring, in the Grand Duchy of Baden. The emperor, having presented the charcoal burner with his only daughter as his wife, said: Zuehe, old German of Ziehe, take possession of the province, and take this Ringer, Ring, as a memento, and your name shall be Zuehringer.

Tradition has it, that the Zaehrings, Zehrings, Zehrung�€™s, Zearings of Pennsylvania, descended from the House of Zaehringen, of Baden. In Freiburg, there is still a hotel, called Zaehringer Hof. Zaehringen is the ancient capital of the Breisgau, situated on the outskirts of the Black Forest.

The first Zaehring who came to America, between 1732 and 1735 was Ludwig Zaehring, who settled previous to 1732 two miles east of Jonestown, Lebanon County, owned a large tract of land adjoining Church land, on which stood for years the long-ago decayed German Reformed Swatara Church, where Rev. Conrad Templeman baptized, 1740, Martin Kepler, son of Henry Kepler. In my Genealogical Family Register of the Lineal Descendants of John Jonas Rupp, one of whose daughters married Heinrich Zaehring, a grandson of Ludwig Zaehring the First, you may find many names of his descendants, among others your own, though you are not a lineal descendant of John Jonas Rupp.

LUDWIG ZAEHRING, the American Patriarch of a numerous progeny, had four sons; also several daughters.

I. HEINRICH ZAEHRING, born April 5, 1737, died April 5, 1818, buried at Jonestown; had sons: 1. Heinrich, who married Elizabeth, daughter of John James Rupp. Her lineal descendants, dead and living, number nearly four hundred. 2. Hans Jacob. 3. Hannes, or John. 4. Ludwig.

II. LUDWIG ZAEHRING, born 1739-41; who settled, after the Revolutionary War, near Pittsburgh.

III. MATHIAS ZAEHRING, born 1741-5, who settled, prior to 1785, at Woodstock, Virginia.

IV. CHRISTIAN ZAEHRING, born 1757, your Parental Grandfather, lived near Jonestown, removed to Miami Valley, Ohio, where he died (in Warren County), June 15 (5th), 1832. He had thirteen sons.

The Zaehrings, Zehrings, Zehrung�€™s, or Zearings, are a prolific family. If all could be ascertained, the name, in its varied orthography, would present no less than three thousand dead and living.

-Israel Daniel Rupp.

On September 23, 1874, the Reformed Church Messenger printed Rev. Zehring's reply.

A REPLY TO PROF. I. D. RUPP'S

" OPEN EPISTLE"
Dear Sir: - The open epistle addressed to me, through the columns of the Reformed Church Messenger of the 9th inst., took me not a little by surprise. Still, I am very thankful for the extensive and, at least to me, very valuable information given of my beloved ancestors; and I wish herewith to offer you my sincere thanks for the same.

In addition to what you give in the open epistle, I yet wish to state, that the same tract of land, which had been settled by Ludwig Zähring, the American Patriarch, previous to 1732, near Jonestown, Pa., has been ever since, and is still, owned and occupied by the name and family of Zähring, now spelled Zearing and Zehring, and bids fair to retain that name for a number of years to come.

The letter received by my now sainted father, upon the death of his father, in Warren Co., Ohio, I recollect well, read thus, "Unser Vater ist am 5 Juni gestorben" (1832). (Our Father died on the 5th of June.) I also have now in my possession a fac-simile of the inscription on the tombstone, which contains among other things, this language. "Christian Zaring - died June 5, 1832. Aged 76 years and eight months." Accordingly, the 15th of June, in your open epistle, must be in error.

Yours truly,

J.D. Zehring.

It seems apparent that Rupp, in his open letter, is writing to inform Rev. Zehring of his ancestry. Had Rupp received his information from Rev. Zehring the open letter would have been pointless. In his reply, Rev. Zehring gives us no reason to believe that he was previously aware of this history. Consequently, I contend that we can eliminate Rev. Zehring as the source of the Ludwig Legend. Did Rupp produce the legend? I think not. I think that there are reasons to believe that Judge William M. Zearing of Chicago was probably the source. I will pursue that point later.

There are some interesting points to be observed concerning Rupp's open letter. First of all Rupp gives a new misspelling of Menzel's name and he again gives the "Zeyring" spelling of the family name. Note Rupp's contradictory claim that Ludwig arrived between 1732 and 1735, and settled prior to 1732. Rupp's open letter is more "German" than the account recorded in his Appendix, in that he uses "Heinrich" instead of "Henry" and "Hans Jacob" instead of "Jacob."

The following account of the origin of the family and its name was shared with me by Leonora Morford. It was part of a large collection of mimeographed material that Leonora got from Blanche Zaring:

History of the Zehring (Zehrung) Family

The history of the Zehring family goes back to 500 A. D. In this year the Germans were being fought by the Roman Army. The Romans were victorious and sent a party of Roman lieutenants to find the king and make him prisoner. The king fled over the country until he came to the Kaiserstuhl mountains in Breisgau. There he found a coal mine and appealed to the foreman for protection. As a disguise he was given a miner's suit and sent to the back of a large mine. Soon the lieutenants came but were directed on so the king was safe. The man who secreted and saved him was name Zuke (the old German of Zieke). The name has also been reported as Zeh.

Subsequently after the king was able to rally his forces and achieve victory over the Romans, he felt so grateful and pleased to have been spared that he offered his only daughter to become the wife of the man who saved him. Also, he was to receive the Grand Duchy of Baden, and told his son-in-law to take possession of this province; also to "accept this Ringer (ring) as a memento, and your name shall be Zuringer". It is believed that all the Zehrings in the world are descendants of this man.

In the seventeen hundreds there were no descendants of Zehring except three brothers. One of them came from Baden, Germany to America. Here he married and had children. He made two visits back to Germany and had started on his third trip when he died and was buried at sea. The Zehrings in America are descended from this man.

The preceeding account is reported to have been dictated to Milton Green by Perry Zehring on Aug. 18, 1924. I have a second version, also reported to have been dictated to Milton Green by Perry Zehring on Aug. 18, 1924. This version was sent to me by Anna Ruth Zehring.

History of Zehring (Zehrung) Family

The origin of the Zehring (Zehrung) (Z family goes back to the year 500 A. D. In this year the Germans were being fought by the Roman Army. The Romans were victorious and sent a party of Roman lieutenants to find the king and make him prisoner. The king fled over the country until he came to a coal mine. He told the foreman of the mine he wished to work for him. The foreman's name was Zeh. He gave the king a miner's costume and put him to work in the back of a large mine. Soon the lieutenants came and Zeh directed them on so the king was safe.

The king was so much pleased with Zeh's work that he gave him his daughter in marriage. In the ceremony besides using the ring the king had "ring" attached to Zeh's name. This made his name Zehring.

The King died in a few years and Zehring, the king's nearest male relative became king. The "Castle Zehring," the residence of King Zehring, still stands in Germany. It is believed that all the Zehrings in the world are descendants of this man.

In the seventeen hundreds there were no descendants of Zehring except three brothers living. One of these three came from Baden, Germany, to America. Here he married and had children. He made two visits back to Germany and had started on his third trip when he died at sea. The Zehrings in America are descended from this man.

Attempting to unravel the Ludwig Legend has been a most fascinating, frustrating and fun hobby. As I have collected more and more information the accounts have become "curiouser and curiouser." Note that in the second version of the Perry to Milton dictation, our ancestor has been promoted to king. It is not possible for both of these accounts to have been dictated to Milton on Aug. 18, 1924. So which one was? The version supplied by Leonora was a mimeographed copy of typed material, but what Anna sent was a photocopy of a hand written document, and the writing is, in my opinion, clearly that of Milton. That leads me to believe that the second version is the actual dictated material and the first version is someone's edited version. I lost touch with Milt and when I finally made an effort to reach him to ask which of the two versions he recorded, I was disappointed and saddened to learn that he had died. An important opportunity had been lost.

These two accounts of the origin of the family are interesting for their obvious errors? The Roman Empire ended in 476 so there could not have been a Roman Army in Germany in 500. It is also unlikely that there were coal mines in Germany with uniformed miners and a foreman, at that early date. Wood was plentiful and was the main fuel until the forests of Europe were depleted sometime in the middle ages. One other item. The German word "Zeh" means "toe" and is unrelated to the word "Zehr" which means "nourishment." The name "Zehring" consists of the root "Zehr" plus the suffix "ing". Rendering it as "Zeh" plus "ring" is what is referred as folk etymology, which is a polite way of saying that it makes no sense. In German "Zehring" does not mean "toe ring."

In an effort to understand the Ludwig Legend I have 1) obtained photocopies of all of the land records at Harrisburg under the name "Zehring," 2) had land records at Philadelphia checked and found none under the name "Zehring," 3) hired a genealogist to search the courthouse records at Lancaster and Lebanon for Zehring records, and 4) personally searched the Archives of the Reformed Church, at Lancaster, the records of the Lancaster County Historical Society, and the records of the Lebanon County Historical Society. So far no record has been found of a Zehring in Pennsylvania prior to Johannes's arrival in 1753.

But even if the reader is convinced that Johannes Zehring and Ludwig Zehring are the same person, and convinced that he was not in this country prior to 1753, there are still questions that are unanswered. When did the Zehrings settle on the old farm near Jonestown? The earliest date that I can document was provided by Alice Beard. Recall that the survey for Henry Zehring's land near Jonestown stated that it was bordered by land of Christian Lehman. Alice pointed out that Christian Lehman, in his will of September 15, 1771, refers to Henry Zehring as an adjoining land owner. But family tradition claims an earlier date. By family tradition Christian was born on the ancestral farm in 1755. I very much doubt this claim.

The most important question that needs to be answered is how did our immigrant ancestor come to be know both as Johannes Zehrung and Ludwig Zehring. One possibility is that his name was "Johannes Ludwig" and he sometimes used one name and sometimes the other. My Uncle Charles thought this was the proper explanation, but, for reasons that I will now try to present, I do not. First of all the birth record in the Evangelical Church in Bad Marienberg only gives "Johannes".

It was my observation, based on a small sample, that German families frequently named their sons Johan or Johann followed by a middle name. Such children were always known my their middle name. Thus a child named Johann Ludwig would be known as Ludwig. Children named Johannes were never given a second name and were known as Johannes of John or Hans.
Daniel Bly confirmed and explained this naming custom. Daniel, who is knowledgeable about early German history and culture, tells me that for baptism purposes, churches required that children have a Biblical or Christian name. A child who was to bear a non-Christian name like "Ludwig" would have been given a prename that fulfilled the church requirement. For boys a common prename was "Johann" and for girls it was "Maria". For boys the prename might have been "Johan" or "Johann" but not "Johannes". Over the many years that I have searched old records, I have found only one exception, a child names Johannes Peter rather than Johan Peter. Furthermore these old records show that frequently the Christian name is hyphenated with the given name.

A child with the name "Johann Ludwig" might have been called �€œJohann Ludwig�€� or simply �€œLudwig�€�, but never �€œJohann�€�. He might have signed both names or he might have dropped the prename, but he would not have dropped his "middle" or prime name.

Even if we accept this as the naming custom of Johannes's day we cannot be sure that the Zehrung family followed the custom. Nevertheless, the church record gives our immigrant ancestor's name simply as "Johannes", and, in my opinion, that was the only name he had.

This custom of course led to lots of people with the same name. In the parish records of the Evangelical Church of Bad Marienberg I found at least four Johannes Zehrungs. To distinguish between two people with the same name, their village was added almost as part of their name: Johannes Zehrung of Pfuhl; Johannes Zehrung of Ritzhausen, our guy; Johannes Zehrung of Langenbach; and Johannes Zehrung of Eichentruth. If further separation was needed they used "the younger" and "the older".

If, as I have suggested, Johannes Zehrung and Ludwig Zehring are one and the same, how is it possible that this man whose birth record identifies him as �€œJohannes Zehrung�€�, who signed his name as �€œJohannes Zehrung�€�, whose deeds and estate records refer to him as �€œJohn�€� or �€œJohannes Zehrung�€� or �€œZehring�€�, came to be known as �€œLudwig Zehring�€�? It is a curious fact that no church or public record refers to him as �€œLudwig�€� and no published family record written prior to 1983, known to me, refers to him as �€œJohn�€� or �€œJohannes�€�.

For the past few years I have pondered the conjecture that the Ludwig Legend grew out of a confusion of Johannes Zehrung with his son Ludwig Zehring. At first thought, this is simply absurd. How could a son be confused with his father? Let me suggest some possibilities.

Uncle Charles argued against my suggestion. He pointed out that grandchildren of Johannes were living when Rupp's account was published in 1875. On October 18, 1878, a Zehring reunion was held in Miamisburg, OH. Two of Johannes Zehrung's granddaughters were present, Mary Zehring Mease and Susanna Zehring Crider. The report of this reunion contains the Ludwig Legend very much as reported by Rupp. Surely these grandchildren knew the name of their grandfather and would have corrected the record if it were wrong. That is a very good argument, but I know a man who does not know the name of his own grandfather. If Johannes's family was not close, then the name of the immigrant ancestor could have been unknown to even his own grandchildren. I think that there are reasons to believe that this was not a close family. Note that after the Revolution the eldest son remained on the ancestral farm, one son settled in western Pennsylvania, another in Virginia, two in Ohio, and another in Kentucky. The family in Kentucky retained no record of the other members of the family and the Rupp family history makes no mention of the Kentucky branch, of the youngest son, or of the daughter.

If it is true that the family was not close, then it is possible that Johannes's name might have been unknown to his own grandchildren and hence to later generations. But that does not explain how Ludwig, the son of Johannes, might have usurped his father's role. How could this be? If Ludwig were a prominent man, or had special political connections, or if he did anything unusual that was passed down through the family, then at a later time his exploits might have been assumed to be those of the family founder by people who wished to put the best face on the early family history. Ludwig's role in the Revolution was documented in the Pennsylvania Archives. Other of Ludwig's exploits are documented as we will explain later. But, Ludwig could not have been confused with the founder of the family unless those who compiled the history of the family were so unfamiliar with Ludwig that they did not know that the account was about him rather than his father. That this could be the case is suggested by the account that Rupp gives of Ludwig the son. Rupp knows only that Ludwig "took an active part in the Revolution -attended a military convention, held at Lancaster city, July 4, 1776, --- . On the close of the Revolution, he settled at or near Pittsburg." Rupp then lists information about the children of Ludwig, information that he received in August, 1869, from Rev. J. D. Zehring. But the children listed are not those of Ludwig Zehring, son of Johannes, rather they are the children of Ludwig Zehring, son of Henry Zehring, and grandson of Johannes. My point is that the information on Ludwig Zehring, the son of Johannes, contained errors that would have been recognized as wrong by anyone who knew Ludwig.

I contend that no one involved in preparing the Rupp account knew what was true about Ludwig and what was not. Consequently, it is quite possible that the account of Ludwig, the immigrant, was composed of material about Ludwig, the son. No one knew enough about Johannes and Ludwig to know that this confusion of the two had taken place.

Daniel Bly, in his discussion of family legends, made a point that I think may apply here. Daniel pointed out that in the days prior to the Civil War most people were struggling to feed themselves and their family and they were not concerned about their ancestry. They rarely knew their line beyond their grandfather. If they learned of an older member of their clan, particularly one of prominence, they assumed he was the father of the oldest ancestor they knew about. We know that Ludwig served in the Revolution in the Second Battalion and was chosen to represent them in the election of a general. That was a contribution that people would be proud of and want to identify with. According to Daniel it would be natural for these people to assume that Ludwig was in their direct line at the earliest point they could place him. I am suggesting that point was as our immigrant ancestor.

I freely admit that I am making this out of whole cloth and there is no solid evidence for anything that I have conjectured. But a few years ago two interesting facts turned up that renewed my interest in the conjecture.

From Dolores Baker and her daughter, Alice Beard, I learned that in 1764, Ludwig Zehring was arrested in Germany. That peaked my curiosity and so I looked up the reference provided by Alice. Dr. Adolf Gerber prepared an account whose title, in English translation, is The Nassau-Dillenberg Emigration to America in the 18th Century. Dr. Gerber, reporting on information that he found in German archives, records that Johs. Zehrung and family of six emigrated through the Beilstein Office in 1753. But then Dr. Gerber adds that Johannes's son Ludwig was arrested in the homeland in 1764.

At this point let us recall that in Rupp's account of the Ludwig Legend it is stated that Ludwig the father, made frequent trips to Germany on business. And we now have the fact that Ludwig the son was in Germany in 1764. But why was he arrested? Dr. Gerber's account does not make that clear, but he does point out that the policy of the government was to discourage emigration to America. Those who emigrated were forbidden to return and people who came to Germany to recruit emigrants were arrested. Perhaps Ludwig was there on business and was arrested for recruiting emigrants to America. Recall Jacob Fischer's statement (See page 10) that he came to America in 1773 with M. Zehring's help. Could this have been the same voyage on which "Ludwig," accompanied by Mathias, died at sea and was buried? And could it be the case that both Ludwig and Mathias were helping people to leave Germany for America? Westerwald to America contains an interesting relevant item about the Johannes Zehrung family.

One of his sons, Ludwig Zehrung, later reappeared in the village in 1764, and the records there indicate that he too was arrested! While he was in the town, he was listed as a sponsor for two children in the baptismal records at Bad Marienberg Ref. Church, and it was noted therein that he was "aus Amerika" in the old churchbook; later that year, the fathers of both of these children appear in the Pennsylvania ships' lists.

Let me attempt to put the historical situation into sharper focus. Again I refer to Gerber's account. There were emigrations from Germany to America at different times and for different reasons. In 1709 the devastation of war and a severe winter, produced hardships that prompted many to leave the Beilstein area. In order to emigrate, a person had to secure permission from the head of state. The poor were permitted to go and they received financial assistance from the British. But, as time went on, the rules for emigration were tightened in order to discourage people from leaving, and eventually emigration stopped. A new movement began about 1750, at which time the area was overpopulated and food was in short supply. Again the poor were permitted to go after selling everything, paying their debts, and paying a tax. This emigration movement waned until 1753, when Germans in America began writing to encourage others to come to America. Johannes Schmitt, a former emigrant, returned to the Beilstein area to bring his relatives to America. To pay his passage he agreed with a ship agent to recruit other emigrants. When the government learned of this, Schmitt was arrested and was released only after agreeing not to talk about America and to leave the country within three days. Perhaps both Ludwig and Mathias were helping people come to America, and if so, they were doing it at some personal risk.

From Frank Murray, I learned the very interesting fact, that Ludwig married Catherine-Gertrude von Feilgers. This is confirmed by Waldo Lincoln in his History of the Lincoln Family. I thought only people of high station were permitted to put a "von" in front of their name, but that is not entirely correct. However, if Ludwig married someone of social prominence, then Ludwig must have been a man of recognized accomplishments. If true, this would add a small degree of support to my conjecture that Johannes was confused with his son Ludwig.

Doing genealogy is a little like doing detective work, you just keep tracking down clues. I sometimes approach a problem by framing an hypothesis and them trying to prove or disprove it. In trying to resolve the Ludwig Legend and the claim of descent from the House of Zähringer, I have formulated two conjectures that I work on from time to time. I would like to share those conjectures with the reader. I will begin with the wildest, and least likely, of the two, namely that Ludwig�€™s wife was a descendant of the House of Zähringer.

The available evidence suggests that the claim of noble descent was conveyed to Rupp by Judge William M. Zearing of Chicago, who offered no proof. Surely Judge Zearing would have offered proof had he been able to do so. Did the claim originate with Judge Zearing? I do not know. But if one wishes to be of noble descent, then the similarities between the spelling of "Zehring" and "Zähringer" suggest a connection between these two families. Why, in the absence of evidence, was Berthold V selected as the probable forefather? My history of the Zähringer family states that Berthold II, son of Berthold I, was the first Duke of Zähringen. He was succeeded by three Bertholds, the third being Berthold V, the last Duke of Zähringer. He was the last because he died with no surviving male heirs. Berthold V died in 1218 and the title appears to have lapsed until 1852 when it was assumed in another blood line. No living person bearing the name "Zähinger" is a descendant of Berthold V. Berthold II had a brother, Herman I, who was Margrave of Zähinger. Herman II, son of Herman I, was the first Margrave of Baden. He was followed by four Hermans, the last of whom was Herman VI. Herman VI was succeeded by Frederick I, who was beheaded. He was succeeded by Rodolph I, from whom descended a line ending with Charles I, who was the last in this blood line to hold the title of Margrave of Baden. In 1738 the title was revived in a new blood line.

Does all of this mean that the claim of descent from the House of Zähringer is false? No, but it raises serious doubts about the matter. It has been claimed that no one bearing the name Zähringer is a descendant of the house of Zähringen. But descent through female lines is known and documented. This thought suggested the following possibility.

Ludwig Zehring married into the von Feilgers family. Suppose that Catherine-Gertrude von Feilgers was a descendant of the House of Zähringer. It would have been a simple male chauvinistic act to have transferred the claim of noble descendant from wife to husband. And who might have done such a thing? My nominee in Judge William M. Zearing of Chicago to whom Rupp dedicated his book. Let me stress that I have no evidence that Catherine-Gertrude von Feilgers was a descendant of the House of Zähringer. Nor do I have any evidence that Judge Zearing misrepresented Ludwig�€™s line of descent as that of his wife. This is the purest of speculations. However, it is a matter that I hope to pursue.

Again I point out that I have no evidence of Judge Zearing's wrongdoing. My conjecture is based more on my personal assessment of Judge Zearing and his writings than on any hard evidence. Let me list a few facts is support of my assessment. It is my contention that Judge Zearing delighted in his claim of noble descent. That is evident from the fact that he had the Zähringer coat of arms engraved on his calling card. Furthermore, I think that there is reason to question the Judge's truthfulness. In support of that contention, I point out that Judge Zearing claimed to have studied law at Dickinson College, Carlisle, PA, and at Harvard. I wrote to Dickerson College and they reported that they have no record of Judge Zearing being enrolled. I wrote to the Harvard Law School and they reported that they have no record of Judge Zearing being enrolled. Recall also that Prof. Lau rejected, as absurd, Judge Zearing's claim that he visited the Duke of Baden.

Let me make one final point concerning my thesis that Judge Zearing fabricated the Ludwig Legend. Claiming Ludwig Zehring to be a descendant of the House of Zähringer would establish Judge Zearing as a descendant of this House only if Ludwig was the founder of the American branch and the father of Henry Zehring. Thus the Judge would have had a motive for confusing Ludwig with his father. There is a counter argument that I will present below.

Hoping to shed some light on the origin of the Ludwig Legend, I began a search for Judge Zearing's papers, but with no success. His legal papers are in the Chicago Historical Society Archives. Among them are a few personal papers but little on the family history. Perhaps Rupp's papers would contain a clue. Rupp's papers were deposited in the Archives of the Evangelical and Reformed Historical Society which is housed in the Philip Shaff Library, Lancaster, PA. I wrote to my friend Herbert B. Anstaett to ask about the Rupp material and he informed me, in a letter dated April 9, 1984, that "Our manuscript box containing 35 items including newspapers clippings collected by Rupp and other material is missing from our collection. We found this out in 1981. I believe it was stolen."

Having reached two dead ends I decided to broaden my search. Perhaps Judge Zearing's family history papers passed to his brother, Dr. James Roberts Zearing. I wrote to the Archives of the Rush-Presbyterian-St. Luke's Medical Center in the hope that the Judge's papers were deposited there. They were not.

Having suggested that Judge Zearing, for personal reasons, fabricated the Ludwig Legend, I would like to present a scenario that is more plausible and which does not hold Judge Zearing culpable. Perhaps Judge Zearing hired a genealogist to research his family tree and this genealogist fabricated the Legend. If this genealogist traced Judge Zearing's line back to Lebanon County, he would have hit a dead end. No records in present day Lebanon County give evidence of the immigrant Zehring, no land records, no will, no church records. Nothing there gives a clue to the immigrant. Looking at the similarity in the spelling of "Zehring" and "Zähringer" it would be a simple matter to postulate a connection. At the very least, the absence of records would make it quite unlikely that anyone would prove the claim false and if the claim pleased people no one would even try to disprove it.

This is a more natural conjecture than the first, indeed it happened to many people. It happened to a great aunt of mine who hired someone to research her Coots line. She knew her Coots line back to about 1800 in Virginia. It was reported to her that she was a descendant of a very prominent Scottish family who spelled their name "Coutts." It was reported that the youngest son of this wealthy family did not inherit any of the family wealth, so he came to America, settled in Virginia, and changed his name to Coots. In 1946 I visited Great Aunt Lena, in California and was spellbound as she told me stories of our ancestor who was Lord Provost of Edinburgh. When I became interested in family history I decided to trace my Coots line and discovered that it came to a dead end about 1800 in Virginia. The youngest son of the Scottish Coutts family did come to America, on business, but he did not change his name to Coots, and he has no connection to our family.

What then remains to be done to unravel the mystery of the Ludwig Legend? There are several things that might help us resolve this matter. Let me review what they are and how they might help.

It is quite possible that Rupp's missing papers may turn up and shed some light on the problem. Why should we expect that these papers might help? John Blair Linn stated in his Annals of Buffalo Valley, Pennsylvania, that "among the settlers on Middle creek, then called Chrustunn, I.D. Rupp informed me, was John Zehring, a relative of the Rupp family, who was driven off by this massacre." Linn's Annals was published in 1877, just two years after Rupp published the Rupp family history. If Rupp knew that John Zehring was a relative he was either using the term loosely, or he knew that John Zehring was the founder of the Zehring family. If he knew that John was the founder of the Zehring family then he must have also known that in the Appendix to his Rupp history he had mistakenly referred to him as Ludwig. Somewhere in Rupp's papers there may then be an explanation of the Ludwig Legend. As we explained earlier, Rupp's papers where originally on file in the Archives of the Evangelical and Reformed Historical Society, located in the Philip Shaff Library, Lancaster, PA, but they are now missing.

The papers of Judge William M. Zearing of Chicago might tell us something. Judge Zearing fully embraced the Ludwig Legend, as is established by the fact that he had the Zähringer coat of arms on his calling card. Judge Zearing corresponded with Rupp and sent information to him. Perhaps he also received information. There are papers belonging to the Judge in the Chicago Historical Society Archives in Chicago, but they contain little of value for our purposes. Did Judge Zearing have other papers? Surely he preserved his correspondence with Rupp or retained some form of the family history account. If so, what happened to these things. Quite possibly they passed on to his devoted niece Luelja Zearing Gross. Judge Zearing died at his summer home on Mackinac Island. Luelja was with him when he died. Luelja was very much interested in the family history. Her father was Dr. James Roberts Zearing who was a distinguished surgeon in the Civil War. In the 1921 Transactions of the Illinois State Historical Society, Luelja published the wartime correspondence between her parents. As an introduction to these interesting letters Luelja compiled the history of her family in three articles. The first article, "The Zearings - Earliest Settlers of the Name in Illinois," details the migration of the family from Pennsylvania to Illinois. Since her father participated in this migration it is probably as accurate an account as we are likely to find. In "A Sketch of the Life of Major James Roberts Zearing," Luelja records details of her father's life and about his ancestry said; "Doctor Zearing is the lineal descendant of Ludwig Zearing, of Baden, Germany, who immigrated to this country prior to 1732 and settled in Johnstown Pa." The third article "Lucinda Helmer, Wife of James Roberts Zearing," is a brief tribute to Luelja's mother. Then follows "Letters Written by Dr. James R. Zearing to His Wife Lucinda Helmer Zearing During the Civil War, 1861-1865." At the end of these letters appears a note: "Mrs. Luelja Zearing Gross has deposited in the Illinois State Historical Library a large collection of material relating to the Zearing and allied families. The collection consists of land warrants, and patents, deeds, appointments, commissions, letters, newspaper clippings, pictures and other interesting material. It has been filed and will be carefully preserved." Several years ago I visited the Illinois State Historical Library, asked to see this material, and was told that it had been withdrawn. While writing this paragraph I decided to try to find out who withdrew Luelja's materials. I wrote to the Illinois State Historical Library and, in a letter dated February 1, 1991, received the following information from E. Cheryl Schnirring, Curator of Manuscripts. "A letter dated October 24, 1923, from Jessie Palmer Weber states that all loaned materials had been returned to Mrs. Gross at her request."

Luelja had no children to whom to leave her records. Since she withdrew the papers that she had deposited in the Illinois State Historical Library, perhaps she deposited them somewhere else. Luelja was Vice Regent of the Chicago Chapter of the NSDAR sometime around 1901. On November 1, 1989, I wrote to the Chicago Chapter to ask if they had a library or archive where Luelja might have deposited information on her family history. I received no reply. In 1989, I did not know that Luelja was the one who withdrew the Zearing material. Knowing that makes another event take on special significance.

Many years ago, I had the good fortune to meet Dorothy Peacock Colton. Dorothy was the widow of Kingsley Buel Colton, whose mother was Charlotte Zearing Colton, Luelja's sister. Dorothy was very much interested in family history, and encouraged me to pursue the Zearing family study. She shared with me all that she knew about the family and even entrusted to me, and to the mail, original documents that I was not comfortable with until they were safely back in her hands. My family was privileged to be invited to visit Dorothy in her summer home, Coltonberry, located near Springbrook, WI. Coltonberry was so called because Dorothy's husband developed a thriving cranberry business there. In addition to a home, a swimming pool, a tennis court, and guest houses, there was a very large barn on the estate. All the things at Coltenberry, except the barn, are of no relevance to the matter under discussion. I put that in only to make it clear why it was a privilege to visit Dorothy at Coltenberry.

There was no reason for me to give much thought to the barn until later when I visited Dorothy in her apartment in Chicago. She mentioned that there were barrels and boxes of things stored in the barn at Coltenberry that had been passed on to her from "Mother Colton," i.e., Kingsley's mother. When I suggested that somewhere in this material might be information on the Zearing family, Dorothy reacted with surprise and interest. She thought that was indeed a possibility and she would check when she next returned to Coltenberry. But she never spoke of it again, and I thought it impolite to ask. I lost contact with Dorothy but was intrigued by the thought that the solution to the Ludwig Legend might be in a barrel in the barn at Coltonberry. Unfortunately, it appeared that I no longer had a family contact through which I could pursue the matter.

I retired from the Department of Mathematics at the University of Illinois on May 20, 1991, and decided that I would now focus on preparing the family history for publication. Nevertheless, I hoped to resolve the problem of the Ludwig Legend before I got into print. Believing that the most likely source of information on this subject was in a barrel at Coltonberry, I decided to make an effort to contact Dorothy's family and so I addressed a letter collectively to her three daughters. I mailed this letter to the only address that I had, Coltonberry. But my letter was returned, marked no longer forwardable. By this time I had began a major project of rereading my correspondence files, about three file drawers full, in search of interesting information that might have been overlooked. In Dorothy's file I found an address for Josephine de Loys, Dorothy's daughter. I wrote to her, and several days later the phone rang. I was surprised and pleased to hear from Henri, Josephine's husband. Henri is a Zähringer descendant whose line of descent is well documented. He had shared that fact with me when we met earlier. Henri informed we that Dorothy had died several years ago and Coltonberry had been sold. Henri was interested in the family history and he assured me that if he found anything of interest on the Zearing family he would let me know. I took this opportunity to asked Henri for update information on the family and he sent it. He wanted Zearing information to pass on to his children and so I mailed him a copy of the versions of Chapters 1 and 2 of this material as they existed at that time. About two weeks later Henri called again. He had started through some things from Coltonberry that were stored at his house and he had found two old notebooks. Matching Dorothy's generosity and trust, Henri packaged and mailed these old notebooks to me.

The two notebooks appear to have been prepared by Luelja. They contained the usual things that one would expect, newspaper clippings of articles about the family, medical papers written by Luelja's father, family pictures, and family correspondence. But, among the family letters that Luelja had preserved was one of special interest. It is a letter from Judge Zearing to his sister Rebecca in which he discusses the family history.

Chicago, 27th Dec. 1895.

Sister Rebecca.

Your letter of date the recent Christmas with Christmas good wishes, duly reached me. Grandfather Henry Zearing, at the age of Sixteen years, began his services in the Revolutionary War, under and with General Washington at Brandywine. I ought while I.D. Rupp of Philadelphia was living got him to prepare a more full statement of Grandfather,- or I ought to have done so myself by examining state documents of Pennsylvania, at Harrisburg, Pa., and documents in New Jersey etc. Matthew Zearing' services, are in Virginia, and he was a Captain in the Revolution War. I may soon get time from throng of business to get up a full account of services etc. when east. It was Grandfather Henry Zearing who served in the Revolutionary War. Ludwig, first was Margrave of Germany, and from whom the stock in Pa. Va. and Ky. originated. Professor Rupp's Biography of Ludwig & Grandfather Henry Zearing, do not conflict - although it is confusing. The date 1737 however ought be 1734. Pertinent to trip of Sister Mary and self to Atlanta Exposition, you refer to,- After eight days at the Fair of the Cotton States, we went to the National Cemetery at Andersonville - thence to Charleston S.C. and took Ship (runs from New York to Florida) and went to Jacksonville (and up St. John's river) Fla. and then on cars twenty two miles to San Augustine, Florida, which has very magnificent Palatial hotels; and is unsurpassed for a delightful winter resort,- then on cars went through south half of Florida (The remainder of the page is damaged.)

This letter was the most interesting item concerning the Ludwig Legend to come to my attention in many years. Let me explain. It is the first statement that I have found in which the Judge refers to Ludwig and his noble lineage. But it is a curious statement. "Ludwig, first was Margrave of Germany --- ." Does "first" go with "Ludwig" or with "Margrave of Germany"? There is a comma that suggests where it goes, but let us explore all options. Is the Judge saying that the first Ludwig in America i.e. his great grandfather was Margrave of Germany? Is he saying that some Ludwig, first was Margrave of Germany and then was something else? Or, is he saying that there were several Ludwig's who were Margraves of Germany and he is talking about Ludwig I? I don't know. Let's look at the consequences of each interpretation.

First of all I claim that there is no such title as "Margrave of Germany." There was a Margrave of Baden, a Margrave of Zähringen, and from 1818 to 1830, Ludwig I, was Grand Duke of Baden. Perhaps Judge Zearing is simply speaking loosely about a title that he did not bother to make precise.

If Judge Zearing is saying that his great grandfather held the title Margrave, then we can pretty well dispose of that because no Margrave would abandon his title and wealth to settle in rural Pennsylvania. We could be more thorough and check all of the German Margraves who were around in the early 1700's when Judge Zearing contends his ancestor came to America. But that seems to be a pointless exercise in view of the evidence we have that traces our line back to about 1500. If Judge Zearing is saying that there was a Ludwig who was a Margrave and abandoned his title, we can reject that for the reason just given. Finally, if Judge Zearing is saying that we descend from a Ludwig who was a Margrave, we can also discount that for a variety of reasons. We know our line back to about 1500 and there is neither a Margrave nor a Ludwig. We also know the names of the nobles of Baden from the founding of the House of Zähringen about 1052 with Berthold I, to Christopher I who died in 1527, and none of them were named Ludwig.

But Judge Zearing's letter, contains other interesting items. For example, Judge Zearing says that "Professor Rupp's Biography of Ludwig and Grandfather Henry Zearing, do not conflict, although it is confusing. The date 1737 however ought to be 1734." What is it that is confusing? I can only guess. He is possibly referring to the account of Henry Zehring that appears in the text of Rupp's family history and the Zehring history that appears in the Appendix of the Rupp history. In the Appendix, Rupp says that Henry was born in 1737 and in the text Rupp says that he was born in 1734. The Judge is affirming that it ought to be 1734.

Judge Zearing's letter makes it clear that he is aware of relatives in Virginia and Kentucky. Why did he think that Mathias was a Captain in Revolutionary service? I know of no record of Revolutionary service for Mathias. And why did Judge Zearing think that in order to prepare details about his grandfather Henry he would need to check the records in New Jersey. The Searing family is from New Jersey. I have not studied the Searing family extensively, but at the present time I do not know of a Ludwig among them.

The tone of this letter interests me. It is the letter of a man who is dependent upon Rupp for information rather than the other way around. I must admit that flies in the face of my claim that the Judge invented the Ludwig Legend.

The Judge was clearly a serious student of his family history. In a letter to his sister Rebecca dated March 11, 1897, he wrote:

--- visited friends in Philadelphia and at Harrisburg, at the latter city I obtained 19 volumes containing all the published Archives of Pennsylvania. I have not had much time to review the volumes. Grandfather Henry Zearing and his brothers were in the Revolutionary war and at the battle of Germantown, PA.

Volume 13 of Pennsylvania Archives, page 262 relates that Ludwic Zearing (brother of Grandfather Henry Zearing) was a delegate of the Second Battalion of the Associated Battalions (53 Battalions in number) to choose two Brigadier Generals to command the Battalions and forces in the Colony of Pennsylvania, held July 4th 1776 in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. ---

I stopped a day, on my way west, at Mechanicsburg, Pa. to visit many of the relatives; and Uncle Lewis Zearing's family; he, who with Father served so faithfully in the War of 1812.

The next item of interest in Luelja's notebooks is a record in Judge Zearing's handwriting that begins.

The following was copied the 11th day of September 1897 from the Diary Record Book kept by Christian Decker Zearing, Esquire, a Justice of the Peace, conveyancer and Surveyor, residing in Jonestown, Lebanon Co. Pa. - and, is a brother of John Decker Zearing and of Anna Maria Zearing, who all reside in Jonestown, Lebanon Co. Pa. and a brother of Rev. Jacob Decker Zearing, - all of whom were children of John Zearing and Eva Barbara Zearing, - (latter was Eva Barbara Decker, daughter of John Jacob Decker (a Revolutionary Soldier) and the latter was first married to Barbara Zearing and after death of Barbara Zearing was married to Catharine Zearing (and the latter Barbara Zearing and Catharine Zearing were both daughters of Grandfather Henry Zearing and was a son of Great, great Grandfather Ludwig Zearing.

It is considered Ludwig Zearing was married after the death of his first wife to a second wife and after the death of his second wife to his third wife, and that we are all descendants from his first wife, except Christian Decker Zearing Esquire who descended from his third wife.

It is supposed Ludwig Zearing (the Patriarch who was buried at sea, bought the land (of acres) two miles east of Jonestown in about A.D. 1725? for $54 and his deed is likely on record at Harrisburg, Pa. - and, this farm then left to Henry 1st & he left it to John Jacob Zearing and he left it to his son John Zearing and John had three sons (& one died young) and he left the farm to his son William, - and the farm is now owned by John Krall and Clinton Zehring (son of John) is now a tenant on the farm and Clinton has a brother Harrison Zehring living in Jonestown, Pa.

There then follows a death record beginning with "Zehring Ludwig 1st" who died "about 1773," while a resident of what is "now Swatara Township, Lebanon, PA." He is buried "in the Atlantic Ocean" and his age at death was "unknown."

Let me now summarize what I think we learn from this new material, and let me put that summary in terms of the conjectures that I set forth earlier in this chapter.

Conjecture 1: Judge Zearing created the Ludwig Legend.

The question, concerning Christian Zehring's diary, is who knew what and when. Since Christian was a brother of Rev. Jacob Zehring I assume that Rev. Zehring knew about Christian's diary and its content, and Christian knew about Rupp's open letter to his brother, Rev. Zehring. Earlier I argued that Rupp did not receive the Ludwig Legend from Rev. Jacob Zehring but rather that Rupp passed that material along to Rev. Zehring in his open letter. By Judge Zearing's own statement he copied material from Christian's diary in 1897 about 24 years after Rupp's open letter. Why did Christian not incorporate the claim of noble descent into his record? Perhaps he didn't believe it. Perhaps he didn't know about it.

Where did Christian get his information? Clearly he did not get it from Judge Zearing for otherwise why would the Judge be copying it. Did he get it from Rupp. I think not. Rupp makes no mention of "Ludwig's" three marriages. Christian seems not to know where the deed to the land near Jonestown is but Rupp clearly stated where it could be found.

Christian was born in 1820 and died in 1901, when did he make the entry into his Diary about his ancestor Ludwig? We cannot ignore the possibility that his entry predated Rupp's published family history. For years I believed that Dolores Baker had Christian�€™s diary but in 2000, I reestablished contact with her, through her daughter Alice Beard, and learned that she did not have the diary nor did she know where it was.

In the summer of 2000 my cousin Guthrie Zaring made a trip to Jonestown, met Evelyn Isele and bought from her Christian Decker Zehring�€™s Centennial Diary, a volume covering the period 1876 to 1881. The history of the family is not recorded in this volume. Apparently Christian filled a volume about every five years. There may be other volumes floating around Pennsylvania.

If Christian's diary predates Rupp's 1875 published family history, that would mean that the tradition that we are descendants of someone named Ludwig, existed in Pennsylvania prior to Rupp's published family history and probably was independent of Judge Zearing. But note that the Diary says nothing of noble descent.

The greatest difficulty that I have had with my conjecture that Judge Zearing created the Ludwig Legend is the name "Ludwig". If Judge Zearing created the Ludwig Legend why did he pick the name "Ludwig". I even generated an additional conjecture trying to answer that question. As I have pointed out, the name "Ludwig" cannot be connected to the Zähringer line within the given time frame. So why did Judge Zearing seize upon a name that could not possibly serve his purpose? The answer, suggested by Christian's diary, is that the Judge did not seize upon that name. It is possible that Judge Zearing received the name "Ludwig" from a source in Pennsylvania and in order to establish noble descent he needed to find a "Ludwig" in the European record. So, at this point I am only prepared to modify my conjecture in the following way.

Conjecture 1': Judge Zearing originated the claim of noble descent from the House of Zähringer and tied that line of descent to a Ludwig Zearing whom he believed to be our immigrant ancestor.

Conjecture 2: The Ludwig Legend confuses Johannes Zehrung with his son Ludwig.

Christian's diary sheds no light on the second conjecture. One could argue that the Diary reaffirms the distinctness of two Ludwigs. But I think not. Note that Christian is writing about his great-great grandfather, who is four generations removed from himself. Note also that the Diary speaks of "Ludwig" in tentative terms, "It is considered Ludwig ---," and "It is supposed Ludwig ---." And why does the Diary record deaths and not births?

Conjecture 3: A genealogist, hired by Judge Zearing, created the Ludwig Legend.

I think we have reason to abandon this conjecture. Judge Zearing certainly makes no claim that he had someone research his family history. If he had, why would he be copying Christian's material. Note also his statement that he should have had Rupp prepare a report on his grandfather Henry Zearing or he should have done so himself. He does not say I will ask my genealogist to check on this.

I continued rereading correspondence files until I came to the file of Margaret Steele Fife in which I ran across a very interesting item that I had forgotten. In 1973, Margaret Steele wrote me a marvelous letter in which she included a hand written copy of a letter that her father, Allen Zaring had received in 1921 from Philip Alvin Zaring, of Brownstown, IN.

Dear Sir.

I suppose your grandfather's name was John Zaring. John & Philip strayed off from the Z. home in Penn. about 120 years ago. There were some Z. settled in N.Y. previous to that time. Some think the Penn. family came from N.Y. but possibly the N.Y. family went from Penn. Dr. Zaring of Greencastle, Indiana, has a tradition that his ancestors settled in N.Y. and afterward moved to Penn., again back to N.Y. & still later to Northern Indiana.

While in the Rocky Mountains about 33 yr. ago I met a German fresh from Baden, told me that the Grand Duke of Baden was named Zaring. He told me his given name but I have forgotten it. I thought it was Bunkum. About 7 yrs. ago I was in Fort Worth & met an octogenarian named Joseph Zaring & he said that a relative had traced the line back to Penn. & N.Y. & then to Baden, & found that all this was true. The Z. family was the Royal Family of Baden.

Philip's Rocky Mountain experience is interesting. Note that the report he received from the man from Germany was one that he did not take seriously until he met Joseph Zaring of Fort Worth. This Joseph Zaring is almost certainly Joseph Berg Zearing, who died in Fort Worth at the age of 83, and was the brother of Judge Zearing. Joseph surely was aware of his brother's views on the origin of the family and he surely relayed those views to Philip. Thus it appears that Philip's letter does not reveal an independent claim of noble descent but rather is a version that traces through Joseph Berg Zearing back to Judge Zearing and Rupp.

On August 6, 2002, a new mystery surfaced concerning the Ludwig Legend. It might be more accurate to say it resurfaced. I was cleaning out some files and ran across a folder of papers that had been shared with me by Morris and Martha Hacker several years ago. I don�€™t remember the date but it was about 1995. In this package of papers was a copy of three articles from Forms & Fantasies, published on March 1, May 1, and June 1, of 1899. One article contained two pages with a brief version of the Ludwig Legend. This account begins with Zähringer Castle and the House of Zähringer referred to as Zearing Castle and the House of Zearing. The remaining eleven pages contained photographs of the interior and exterior of the castle, but each print is carefully labeled Zearing Castle. This castle is reported to be on the outskirts of Baden-Baden, founded in 65 AD, destroyed by the Franks or Huns and restored by the House of Zearing. I have not seen the castle but I am told that it is located in Zähringen which is now a suburb of Freiburg.
This account of the Legend contains some new source references Like Bonn�€™s History of Germany, and McCullough Murray�€™s History of Travels. Not surprisingly the legend has grown. �€œLudwig Zearing, who came to Pennsylvania in 1725, obtained a grant of land near Philadelphia from William Penn�€� (William Penn died in 1718.) �€œThat magnificent patriarch of a numerous progeny in the United States was descendant in the direct and unbroken line from Bertholdi V.�€� (Berthold V was the last Duke of Zähringer because he died without surviving male heir.) �€œHe was the owner of numerous ships, crossed and recrossed the Atlantic repeatedly, and transacted a large business for rulers in Europe together with his own.�€�

I recall that went Morrie showed me these pages I took one look at the reference to Zearing Castle and concluded that this had to have been written by Luelja. But then I misplaced all of this material before I got around to seriously studying it. Having now done so I am of the opinion that Luelja did not write it nor did Judge Zearing. My reasons are the following. Nothing in the article connects the Zearing family of Chicago to the family and castle mentioned except the spelling of the name. The article mentions only one of Ludwig�€™s children and that reference is in connect with Ludwig�€™s death at sea. �€œHe began his last voyage in 1773, accompanied by his son Mathias, captain in the Revolutionary army.�€� I do not believe that Luelja, or Judge Zearing could have mentioned Mathias�€™ revolutionary service and failed to mention their ancestor Henry Zehring who they reported to have served with Washington.

If they did not write the article then who did? One clue is the initials J.H.Z., clearly hand written on several of the pictures that I received from Morrie. Who could this be but James Harvey Zearing, a nephew of Judge Zearing and a judge in Madison, IN. I thought the article surely had an author whose name appeared on the article, but no name appeared on any of the pages I had. I went to the University�€™s Architecture and Art Library to see the original and found a copy of the January through April issues. To my surprise, no author is listed nor is an editor named. This publication began in 1898 with a few pages of text at the beginning of each issue. Page 1 is in the first issue and the numbering of the text pages continues from there. In each issue following the numbered text pages are several unnumbered pages of photographs. Surely whoever edited the magazine wrote the text and selected the photographs to be included. So the next question is where did he get his information and the pictures of �€œZearing Castle�€�?

I know very little about James Harvey Zearing of Madson, IN. My next goal is to find out about him. Perhaps Luelja passed her material on to him.

PUBLISHED SOURCES

The Biographical Record of Bureau, Marshall and Putnam Counties, Illinois, Chicago, The S. J. Clarke Publishing Company, 1896, p. 268.

A Brief Biographical Memorial of Joh. Jonas Rupp and Complete Genealogical Family Register of his Lineal Descendants from 1756 to 1875, with an Appendix, Israel Daniel Rupp, W. Philadelphia, L. W. Robinson, 1875, Appendix A, pp. 252-256; Appendix C, pp. 274-285.

Daughters of the American Revolution Magazine, January 1969, pp. 32-34, 52, 58, February 1968, pp. 124-130.

Heads of Families at the First Census of the United States Taken in the Year 1790 - Pennsylvania, Washington, Government Printing Office, 1908, pp. 89, 94-95, 277.

History of Bureau County, Illinois, Henry C. Bradley, Editor, Chicago, World Publishing Company, 1885, p. 703.

History of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, Franklin Ellis and Samuel Evans, Everts & Peck, Philadelphia, 1883, pp. 28-33.

History of the County of Lebanon in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, William Henry Egle, Philadelphia, Everts and Peck, 1883, p. 258.

History of the Lincoln Family, Waldo Lincoln, Worchester, Massachusetts, Commonwealth Press, 1923, p. 217.

The History of Montgomery County, Ohio, Chicago, W. H. Beers and Company, 1882, p. 292.

Die Nassau-Dillenburger Auswanderung nach Amerika im 18.Jahrhundert, Dr. Adolf Gerber, Druck: Flensburger Nachrichten, Deutscher Verlag G. m. b. h., Flensburg, 1930.

Notes and Queries: Historical, Biographic and Genealogical, William Henry Egles, Genealogical Publishing Company, 1970 (Reprint)
Fourth Series
Vol. 1, p. 94

The Official Roster of the Soldiers of the American Revolution Buried in the State of Ohio, Columbus, F. J. Heer Printing Company, 1929, p. 414.

Past and Present of Bureau County, Illinois, George B. Harrington, Chicago, The Pioneer Publishing Company, 1906, p. 342.

Pennsylvania Archives, Harrisburg, PA.
Third Series, William Henry Egle, Editor, 1896-97.
Vol. 6, pp. 422, 424, 466, 467, 469, 470, 472, 473, 476, 562, 614, 615, 643.
Vol. 17, pp. 683, 684, 802, 841, 842, 879.
Vol. 24, pp. 568, 615, 789.

Fifth Series, Thomas Lynch Montgomery, Editor, 1906.
Vol. 5, p. 19.
Vol. 7, pp. 147, 151, 163, 164, 166, 171, 184, 185.

Sixth Series, Thomas Lynch Montgomery, Editor, 1907.
Vol. 3, pp. 368, 468.
Vol. 5, pp, 252, 290.

Pennsylvania German Pioneers, Ralph Beaver Strassburger, William John Hinke, Editor, Norristown, Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania German Society, 1934.
Volume I, pp. 568, 670, 672.
Volume II, pp. 667, 669.

Transactions of the Illinois Historical Society, Springfield, Phillips Brothers Printing, 1922, No. 28, p. 141.

Two Dead and Lost Churches of the Swatara, E. Grumbine, Annville, Penn. A. C. M. Hiester, Book and Job Printer, 1901.