Captain Nathaniel Basse - Children of Nathaniel Basse - who really ???

“Traditional” list of children here, their survival is questioned.

http://freepages.rootsweb.com/~knighthistory/genealogy/VirginiaKnig...

I’ll interweave comments In CAPS I know so far.

—-

Nathaniel died 03 July 1654, in London, Middlesex, England. His wife Mary died in childbirth with their twelfth son, 17 Jan 1630. Nathaniel and Mary had the following 12 children:

l. Humphrey (b. 15 July 1615  d. 22 Mar 1622, at the Good Friday Indian Massacre at Basse s Choice).

TWINS

2. Samuel (b. 15 July 1615)

3. John (b. 7 Sep 1616, in London, Middlesex, England  m. 14 Aug 1638 (Keziah) Elizabeth, dau. of Great Petter, King of the Nansemond Indians ch. Nathaniel, Keziah, Elizabeth, Jordan, Samuel, William, Richard, John d. 2 Apr. 1699, Norfolk-Nansemond Co., VA.). John was rescued by friendly Nansemond Indians during the 1622 Indian Massacre. THIS IS THE DISPUTED/ FRAUD LINE

4. William (b. 25 Dec 1618, in London, Middlesex, England  m. 20 Sep 1641 Sarah Batton  d. Norfolk, VA). [????]

5. Anthony (b. 13 Mar 1620, London, Middlesex, England  was in Westmoreland Co., Va. 1654, sponsored by Giles Bren).

6. Edward (b. 8 May 1622, in London, Middlesex, England, m. about 1644 to Mary Tucker, Norfolk-Nansemond Co., VA, Mary was a Nansemond Indian  d. about 1696 Chowan Co., NC  Edward traded with Showanee Indians in Carolinas). "Edward Basse, sonne of Nathll and Mary Basse yt unregenerated by ye Spirit of God, took in marriage one virtuos Indian maydn by the Christian name of Mary Tucker and went to live amongst the Showanocs in Carolina in 1644 AD. "He went to Carolina in later years in persute of trade and not in 1644. Dyed in 1696 AD. (Family Bible Records). [FAMILY BIBLE RECORDS CONSIDERED FABRICATED]

7. Anne (b. 9 Oct 1624  married Thomas Burwell, Jr.). "Anne Basse ye daughter of Nathll and Mary his wife was born in ye yr of Xt. 1624, ye 9 day of 8ber. [ ??? ]

TWINS

8. Genevieve (b. 9 Oct 1624, 10 minutes after Anne London, Middlesex, England  m. 11 Jun 1640, Peter Knight). "Geneveve Basse ye daughter of Nathaniell Basse and Mary his wife was bornd on ye 9 day of 8ber in ye year of our blessed Lord God 1624, about ten minutes after Anne was born. "Blessed be God for His tender Mercies. Amen" (Family Bible Records) [DISPUTED BY KNIGHT GENEALOGY]

9. Richard (b. 27 Aug 1625 London, Middlesex, England).

10. Gregory (b. 10 Dec 1628 London, Middlesex, England  Came to Virginia 1642, sponsored by Wm. Prior)

TWINS

11. George (b. 11 Dec. 1628, several hours after Gregory, London, Middlesex, England  d. 1681 Norfolk  Nansemond, VA).

12. Son (b. 17 Jan 1629/30  stillborn (Mother Mary Jordan Basse dies). [DISPUTED THAT HE WAS STILLBORN]

However, Laura makes an interesting point here:

https://www.geni.com/discussions/181805?msg=1219212

—-

Aside from the badly worded document, we glean the information that Nathaniel Basse probably died in England (lately deceased) and his brother, Luke Basse, was in Virginia as late as 1654. The sisters were claiming the inheritance of a bachelor brother and were, in no way, claiming anything from Nathaniel Basse (which seems clear from the wording). Obviously, if Luke Basse was living right there in England, it would not have been necessary for this court case.

I don’t think it is too much of a stretch to think that Peter Knight, Merchant, may have been acquainted with Nathaniel Basse in England, nor would it be a great stretch to think that their children might have been acquainted in England. This brings us to the next record: Peter Knight’s acquisition of Basses Choice. The main question is: was this Peter Knight, Merchant, or Peter Knight later to be known as Capt. Peter?

Genevieve Basse Was she the wife of Capt. Peter Knight, of Northumberland

Was Genevieve Basse the wife of Humphrey Basse, Twin of Samuel

An embarrassing screen shot of a previous version of the Peter Knight tree on geni is here

https://laura-knight-jadczyk.com/genealogy/images/geni-1.jpg

With a caption: “words fail me”

https://laura-knight-jadczyk.com/genealogy/knight-intro.html

My apologies to Laura for not having read her wonderful blog until now. She gives a very clear explanation of the Genealogical Proof Standard, for instance:

(I’m hoping In advance she won’t mind my quoting her blog)

——
There is a handy little book entitled Genealogical Proof Standard (GPS) by genealogist Christine Rose (the Rose family is an old one of Virginia); if you are working on your family history, you really should read this book. She explains the five points of the GPS as follows:

Reasonably exhaustive research – emphasizing original records providing participants’ information – for all evidence that might answer a genealogist’s question about an identity, relationship, event, or situation.
Complete, accurate citations to the source or sources of each information item contributing – directly, indirectly, or negatively – to answers about that identity, relationship, event, or situation.
Tests – through processes of analysis and correlation – of all sources, information items, and evidence contributing to an answer to a genealogical question or problem.
Resolution of conflicts pertaining to the proposed answer.
A soundly reasoned, coherently written conclusion based on the strongest available evidence. (Rose 2014, p. 3)
Let me rant a moment about the incredible frustration I have felt when viewing the work of many online amateur genealogists who quite simply do not have the courtesy to provide clear, accurate citations for their material. Let me also add that ancestry.com doesn’t make it easy to add quoted material and citations; the process is so convoluted that I just gave up and that’s why I’m putting it all online here.

Now, what are sources? Rose tell us that there are three kinds: Original, Derivative, Authored.

ORIGINAL SOURCE is written, oral or visual and is not derived from a prior written, oral or visual source. It can include an original deed, an original video or tape recording, an original photgraph, an original tombstone, etc.
DERIVATIVE SOURCE is one that contributes information which was copied, transcribed, abstracted, summarized, or repeated from information in a previously existing source. An abstract is derivative because it contains only selected data from the original source.
AUTHORED SOURCE includes the writer’s opinions, observations and conclusions based on the writer’s examination of a variety of sources. A compiled family genealogy is an example, as are biographies, some research reports and other like works. …
[Authors] may have used only limited sources, misinterpreted some documents, or even misread them.

[I]mage copies, regardless of date or creation, hold more weight than other types of derivatives such as abstracts, transcriptions, and other “non-images” because the latter are subject to errors introduced by human interpretation.

[T]he “farther away” a derivative is from the original record, the more chance of error.

The information is primary if it was made orally or in writing (or even pictorially) by someone in a position to know firsthand (such as an eyewitness or a participant) and recorded in a timely manner while memory is fresh. The informant may have provided faulty information, but nonetheless the information is considered primary information. “Primary” does not ensure accuracy.

[A] 1700 birth entry in a Bible published in 1875 could not have been inscribed by someone with firsthand knowledge of the 1700 event… if the writer had the original birth record in front of them, and entered it from that source .. it would now be a derivative source, but still primary information. If evidence is primary information it remains primary even though it may be from a derivative source. (Rose 2014, p. 5-9 snips in order, emphases mine.)

The last item in bold is why it is so, so, so important for each and every bit of data to be accompanied by a source citation of sufficient exactness that anyone can go and find it. ....

Passing this to you as well:
https://chowanoke.webs.com/bassegenealogy.htm?fbclid=IwAR1uLQ2ChTW8...

"Nathaniel’s children are in the Bassett tree. Three sons stayed here. John 1616
Wm 1618 & Edward 1622"

Cynthia, thank you sooo much for that link. These folks are a cousin line to me but were direct ancestors of my Jamey, so all this has been a fascinating discussion and the link you provided gives so much information on some of Jamey's 10th great-grandparents Love Harris Bass and her husband John.

However, I'm confused about one thing. The link states that Love Harris was white and that's why there was a problem with them marrying but when I just visited her Geni page, the avatar there makes it seem she was a free African. I had to read that very closely to realize she's just mentioned in the avatar but it's not really about her own ethnicity, which is misleading:

Love Bass

Nothing in her About section is really about her either. I think her profile would benefit from an update to include the information specifically about her from the link you shared.

Debbie Gambrell I am just acting as go-between for Bass.
Look into the DNA group as they are very knowledgeable regarding documents and DNA. At one time, you probably know this, if someone was of African descent they were denied tribal membership. This is how fake documents came about and fake parent names even.
Ask a family historian but Bass has English/European, African and Native American haplos and many researchers do not use public collaborative trees for the very reason that you mention. DNA has gone a long way toward confirming what many of the Bass faily has said for years. I just know that Geni is a good place to work through relationships when the DNA is respected and not so much when it is based o n records.