Spinster No More: 52 Ancestors 2024 Prompt “Love and Marriage”

 

May-December Romance? Or Fortune Hunter and Prey? Mary Langstaff Marries a Man Forty Years Younger

Mary Langstaff: 1650-Approx. 1716 (Maternal Ninth-Great-Grandaunt)
Eleazer Coleman: 1685/90-17-- (Husband of Ninth-Great Grandaunt and First Cousin 9x Removed)
Anna Nutter: 1682-17-- (Maternal First Cousin 9x Removed)

 

After 55 years living in her family’s home and caring for her aging father Henry Langstaff (see previous blog post), Mary Langstaff was suddenly independent and alone following Henry’s death. Her father tried to repay her for her long devotion and her lost chances of marriage and motherhood by leaving a large portion of his land and possessions to her; only her brother Henry received a larger bequest. Henry stated that he gave the properties:

“…to my daughter Mary Langster [for] natural love, goodwill, affection, etc., and her carefulness in taking pains to wait and attend upon me upon all occasions in this my great age.”

Henry’s 1705 death left Mary an heiress of sorts, the owner of fifty acres of land in Dover, New Hampshire, land in the “little bay” area of Dover, and half of Henry’s lands and marsh in Greenland, plus half of all his household goods, except for three cows and ten sheep which were to go to her married sister.

There are no records to indicate how Mary dealt with her new properties and responsibilities. Did she employ laborers to work in the fields? Did she rely on her brother Henry or her brother-in-law Anthony Nutter for assistance? Did she work the fields and tend to the livestock on her own? And how did the community react to her newfound status? After all, in the 1600s, women rarely held property independently. Was she suddenly an attractive marriage prospect to every land-hungry widower in town?

All we can prove is that eight years after Henry’s death, Mary gave up spinsterhood at last, marrying Eleazer Coleman. But this marriage was probably even more shocking to her neighbors than Mary being a female landowner: the bride was sixty-three and the groom either twenty-three or twenty-eight years old (records vary). Eleazer was young enough to be Mary’s son—perhaps even young enough to be her grandson.

Why did they marry? How did they know one another? Was it a purely practical, economic arrangement? Was Eleazer an employee on her land? Was there affection between them? Did Mary feel motherly toward Eleazer and wanted to provide for him, and marriage was the only way their culture would accommodate that? Did she have physical conditions that necessitated in-home care, and Eleazer could only provide such personal care if he was her husband? Were there any romantic feelings between them? Was Eleazer just a fortune hunter?

The only indications we have about their relationship come from records cited in the book Landmarks in Ancient Dover (see citation below, pg. 240), where the author references “a curious bit of family history, well worth copying form the County records” regarding the transfer of some parcels of land:

“Mary Langstar of Bloody Point, June 20, 1713, well knowing that a marriage by God’s grace is intended and shortly to be had and solemnized between Eleazar Coleman of said place to the [aforesaid] Mary Langstar, and considering that [said] Mary, being about ye age of 63 years, and the said Eleazar about 28 years, and she may the better be taken care of in case she lives to any great age, and for divers other good and just causes, conveys to him fifty acres of upland called Steven’s Point, otherwise by ye name of Stephen Jether’s point, a little above Bloody Point, right east by Broad Cove. Also land on Little Bay, beginning by a creek in Broad Cove, and Running up ye Little bay as far as Dumplin cove.”

This sounds more like a business arrangement. Mary is trading her land for the promise that Eleazer will care for her as she grows old. Did the “divers other good and just causes” include some sort of affection and friendship if not romance or desire? One hopes so for both their sakes.

A footnote at the bottom of the page in the Landmarks book relates a bit of gossip about the couple:

“There is a story, which the writer is unwilling to believe, that Eleazar Coleman, having been asked if he loved his elderly but well-endowed bride, replied significantly that he loved the very ground she walked on.”

I’m sure the land was certainly the primary inducement for a young man to give up potential opportunities to start a family of his own. Mary could have, after all, been as long-lived as her father, who was well into his nineties when he died. Eleazer risked spending decades tied to a very old woman.

Property records confirm that the marriage took place, for on March 6, 1714, Eleazer Coleman and “Mary his wife” sold the fifty-acre Stephen’s Point property and the Little Bay property to Richard Downing and Thomas Coleman. Thomas Coleman was Eleazer’s older brother.

Plan of Coleman's Farm in Newington, 13 acres. 1853 plan. Were these Colemans descendants of Eleazer or his family?

Luckily for Eleazer, he didn’t have long to wait before he became a widower. Mary died in 1716, just three years after their marriage. His path to inheriting her property wasn’t entirely smooth, however. Apparently, Mary’s brother John and his family had never approved of her marriage. After her death, they filed court claims against the land she had inherited from her father, referring to her in the court documents by her maiden name as if they didn’t recognize Eleazer as her husband. John’s son Henry, a lawyer, finally resigned all claims to lands given to Eleazer by “Mary Langstar, deceased” on November 26, 1716. (Note: this proves Mary died no later than 1716.)

Eleazer married Mary’s great-niece just a few months later, on March 1, 1717. Anna Nutter was the granddaughter of Mary’s sister Sarah Langstaff Nutter and her husband Anthony Nutter. Anna’s father, John Nutter, was Sarah and Anthony’s eldest son. Anna Nutter was born in 1682, so once again Eleazer married an older woman. However, at least this time she was only three to eight years older: Anna was 34 and he was either 26 or 31 years old when they married. Did they meet through her relationship to Eleazer’s first wife, or did they already know one another? Perhaps Mary’s siblings could take comfort in the fact that Mary’s lands were staying in the family so to speak, since now Eleazer’s inheritance was being used to support another Langstaff descendant.

Birth record for Anna and Eleazer's son, Eleazer

This second marriage seems to have been a success. Anna and Eleazer had eight children between 1718 and 1731. They lived in the Greenland/Newington area of Rockingham County, New Hampshire and presumably died there. Their death dates are unconfirmed.

Aerial view of Newington, NH

Love and marriage. They don’t necessarily need to go together. While we can surmise that Eleazer Coleman’s first marriage was more of a business arrangement than a love match, perhaps he chose to marry for love the second time.

 

Sources:

Thompson, Mary P. (Mary Pickering), 1825-1894, "Landmarks in Ancient Dover, New Hampshire. Complete edition." (1892). Local History & Genealogy (Town Histories). 68. Pg. 240.

The Great Migration Begins: Immigrants to New England, 1620-1633. Robert Charles Anderson. New England Historic Genealogical Society. Boston. 1995. Henry Langstaff entry: pgs 1156-1160. Accessed through NEHGS/American Ancestors. Pg. 1157 and 1158.

New Hampshire: Miscellaneous Censuses and Substitutes, 1640-1890 (Online database. AmericanAncestors.org. New England Historic Genealogical Society, 2013. From records supplied by Ancestry.com) https://www.americanancestors.org/DB507/rd/13679/3512/242289998

New Hampshire: Births, Deaths and Marriages, 1654-1969. (From microfilmed records. Online database: AmericanAncestors.org, New England Historic Genealogical Society, 2014.) https://www.americanancestors.org/DB516/i/13797/28514/246070949

Vital Records from the New England Historical and Genealogical Register. Online database. AmericanAncestors.org. New England Historic Genealogical Society, 2014. (Compiled from articles originally published in The New England Historical and Genealogical Register.)

Dame, Timothy, Jr. "Plan of Coleman's Farm in Newington containing 13 acres - 125 rods." Map. Portsmouth, N.H., 1853. Norman B. Leventhal Map & Education Center, https://collections.leventhalmap.org/search/commonwealth:8k71r164v (accessed January 21, 2024).

 

First Branch of My Tree In New Hampshire: 52 Ancestors 2024 Prompt “Origins”

Seventy-Five Years in New Hampshire: Henry Langstaff’s Origins in America

Henry Langstaff: 1610-1705 (Maternal Tenth Great-Grandfather)

 

Nearly every year that I have worked on my family tree, I have discovered a new ancestor who arrived in the American colonies barely a decade after the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth Rock in 1620. Henry Langstaff, one of my many tenth great-grandfathers (everyone has over 1000 10^th great-grandfathers by the way…) is this year’s discovery, arriving in 1630 or 1631. He appears to be the earliest of my ancestors to settle in New Hampshire, where he was among the early settlers of Dover, New Hampshire. He was also one of my longest-lived ancestors.

I discovered Henry by chance. I had been tidying up my ninth-great-grandfather Anthony Nutter’s records in my tree, and was finally able to verify the maiden name of Anthony’s wife: Langstaff. Further research led me to her father, Henry Langstaff. A quick search for Henry on American Ancestors led me to his profile in The Great Migration Begins (see citation below), which provided me with fascinating information and plenty of record citations.

Not much is known about Henry Langstaff’s origins in England. His parentage and birthplace cannot yet be confirmed. He seems to have arrived in New England around in either 1630 or 1631, appearing in a document entitled “The Names of Stewards and Servants sent by John Mason, Esq, into this Province of New Hampshire”.

John Mason was a professional soldier who, along with Ferdinando Gorges and other soldiers, formed an investment company determined to exploit whatever riches could be found in the New World. Mason and Gorges received a huge grant of land that seems to have comprised most of the northeastern United States. They divided the grant, with Mason receiving all the land between the Pascataqua and Merrimac Rivers in what is now New Hampshire. Mason formed the Laconia Company and sent out the barque Warwick to the Portsmouth area in 1630, loaded with his stewards—probably about a dozen military men—and about forty servants or contract workers, along with some of those colonists’ wives. Since Mason’s immigrants were adults, Langstaff is believed to have been around twenty years of age when he left England, which would mean he was likely born around 1610.

Henry Langstaff was not an educated man; all documents he executed bear his mark only—he couldn’t write his own name. We can assume he was one of the servants aboard the Warwick rather than a steward. His lack of education may be a reason for the variations in the spelling of his name in various over his lifetime, from Langstaff or Longstaff to Langster, Lankster and even Lancaster.

Mason’s great dreams of a profitable investment didn’t work out. He died in 1635, and his heirs chose to cut their losses and stop funding the Laconia Company. Some of Mason’s colonists returned to England, others relocated in New England, and some, like Henry Langstaff, remained in New Hampshire in the Portsmouth, Dover and Bloody Point areas.

17th Century map of the New Hampshire Colony

In May 1699, Henry was deposed in a lawsuit and testified as follows:

“Henry Langstaff of Bloody Point, of Dover in this province, aged ninety years or thereabouts, testifieth and saith, that about the year one thousand six hundred and thirty five, he arrived at the port of Piscataqua River, in the service of Captain Jno. Mason, that he lived two years in the service of said Mason , with Mr. Walter Neal, one of the agents of said Mason at Little Harbor, then called Randevous.” (NHPP 2:529)

While Henry misstated his arrival year, his testimony supports the premise that he sailed on the Warwick in 1631 as one of the servants Mason recruited. It also supports 1610 as his likely year of birth.

Henry married at some point, probably around 1639 or 1640, as his son John Langstaff is believed to have been born in 1640. Henry’s wife’s name and parentage is unknown. Some researchers surmise she was part of the Sheafe family as one record refers to a Samson Sheafe as Henry’s kinsman, but there is no way to verify the hypothesis.

In addition to son John, Henry had two daughters, Sarah Langstaff Nutter, my ninth great-grandmother, born in 1643, and Mary Langstaff Coleman, born around 1650, and one additional son, Henry Langstaff, born around 1647.

Despite Henry’s humble beginnings as a servant, he acquired several properties and became a valued member of his community. He seems to have been granted his first property in 1648, a six-acre plot in the Cocheco marsh. In 1652, Henry, along with three partners, were granted permission to build and operate a sawmill at Fresh Creek near Dover. In 1658, he was granted another 200 acres in Dover, along with a lot where another colonist’s home was located. In 1668, he purchased John Hale’s lands, livestock, and house with its contents in Bloody Point. In 1669 he, along with two partners, purchased land and buildings in the town of Greenland from a man named Chapernown. The Greenland property turned out to be a problem for Henry and his partners, leading to at least two lawsuits regarding their rights to timber and the use of the buildings.

The map above shows the areas where Henry Langstaff owned land. They are quite a distance apart. Given that he needed to travel by horse over rugged land, it is impressive that he managed to acquire and use all these properties.

Henry also held office in his community. He appears on a 1658 list of Dover freemen, and he served as a selectman and on the grand jury. He signed several colonial petitions to the British government asking for more favorable taxation rates. Apparently, the New Hampshire colonists were a litigious lot, as Henry’s remaining appearances in colonial records were as a party in various lawsuits over land boundaries and use.  

As Henry entered his nineties, he began planning for the distribution of his estate, which comprised extensive land holdings and livestock. His wife was apparently long dead, and his eldest son John appears to have moved out of state. In 1702, he transferred land:

“…to my daughter Mary Langster [for] natural love, goodwill, affection, etc., and her carefulness in taking pains to wait and attend upon me upon all occasions in this my great age.” (See NHPLR 7:143 below.)

We can gather from this bequest that Mary was his caregiver, and that she may have given up her own chances for marriage to care for her father. Henry provided for Mary further in 1704, deeding over more land in Dover and half his lands in Greenland.

He also provided for his son Henry, deeding him the “homestead at Bloody Point”, his remaining Dover property, and the other half of the Greenland property.

Mary and Henry Jr. also each received half of their father’s household goods “excepting three cows and ten sheep which I give to my daughter Sarah Nutter.” (See NHPLR 9:472 and 7:141) Sarah was already provided for as Anthony Nutter’s wife, so her bequest was significantly smaller.  

Henry’s preparations were prescient, for he died July 18, 1705. The journal of Rev. John Pike of Dover stated:

“Mr. Henry Langstar of Bloody-point deceased after ten days sickness, occasioned by a fall into his leanto, four stairs high, whereby being grievously bruised, it brought an inflammation upon him. He was about 100 years old, hale strong, hearty man, & might have lived many years longer, if &c.”

Transcription of Rev. Pike's journal on Henry's death

Rev. Pike may have slightly off in judging Henry a centenarian, but Henry likely was about ninety-five years old in 1705. It sounds as if he was in amazing shape for his age. He must have been quite a tough old gentleman. I have trouble imagining a lean-to building with a four-step staircase—I wonder what the structure looked like.

Henry lived in New Hampshire for nearly 75 years. From his humble origins as a servant, he transformed himself into a respected citizen and landowner, one of the original colonists to settle in the Dover, New Hampshire area. He is to be admired for his strength and determination. He was long-lived but his life seems to have been well-lived as well.

 

Sources:

The Great Migration Begins: Immigrants to New England, 1620-1633. Robert Charles Anderson. New England Historic Genealogical Society. Boston. 1995. Henry Langstaff entry: pgs 1156-1160. Accessed through NEHGS/American Ancestors.

NHPP: Provincial Papers, Documents and Records Relating to the Province of New Hampshire from 1686 to 1722, 40 vols., Nathaniel Boulton, ed. (Manchester, NH, 1867-1943)

NHPLR: Provincial Papers, Documents and Records Relating to the Province of New Hampshire from 1686 to 1722, 40 volumes, ed. Nathaniel Boulton (Manchester, N.H., 1867-1943).

NHGR: New Hampshire Genealogical Record, Volume 1 through present (1903-1920, 1900-present).

Pike, John, 1653-1710. [from old catalog], and Alonzo H. (Alonzo Hall) Quint. Journal of the Rev. John Pike, of Dover, N. H. Cambridge [Mass.]: Press of J. Wilson and son, 1876. Pg. 28. Accessed through the Library of Congress.

A Wedding in the 1880s: 52 Ancestors 2024 Prompt “Favorite Photo”

A Formal Photo for a Formal Occasion: A Typical 1880s Wedding Photo

Elizabeth “Minnie” Hoffman: 1869-1945 (Maternal Great-Grandaunt)
Frank L Graham: 1863-1939 (Maternal Great-Granduncle by Marriage)

 

My grandmother, Nora Hoffman Macbeth, passed down a number of family photos, including wedding photos for most of her numerous aunts and uncles. My brother has the originals; I scanned them for my records. One of these family treasures is this 1888 wedding photo, featuring my grandmother’s Aunt Elizabeth Hoffman and her new husband Frank Graham. I was charmed by the details and the facial expressions in the photo, and by what the image can tell us about weddings in the 1880s.

So who were Elizabeth Hoffman and Frank Graham? Elizabeth was born January 3, 1869 to parents Johannes Heinrich Wilhelm Hoffman and Sophia Maria Christiane Streu. Johannes and Sophia had immigrated from Germany in the 1850s and married around 1860 in the Milwaukee area. Elizabeth was the fifth of their eventual eleven children.

The family moved to Blue Earth County, Minnesota around 1870, so Elizabeth grew up on their farm near Mankato.

Frank Graham grew up on a farm in Martin County in Tenhassen Township, nearly 65 miles away, appearing on the 1880 federal census and the 1885 Minnesota State Census living with his parents.  I am not sure how the two young people met. Perhaps Frank moved to the Mankato area at some point after the 1885 census and they met there.

They married July 1, 1888 in Decoria Township, Blue Earth County, Minnesota. Frank was 24 years old, and Elizabeth was just 19 years old.

What can we gather and surmise from this photo?

First, the bride is not wearing white. It was quite common in the 1880s for brides to simply wear their best dresses for their weddings. White wedding dresses were becoming more popular thanks to Queen Victoria wearing one for her 1840s wedding, but many women could not afford a special dress, especially  in such an impractical color.

Elizabeth’s dress was fairly elaborate, featuring a jacket with dark velvet sleeves, collar and pockets. It is impossible to tell what color it was, but it was obviously quite dark, perhaps a dark green or blue, or even black. Even though Frank and Elizabeth were married in midsummer on July 1, Elizabeth’s skirt and jacket appear to be made of heavy fabrics—possibly a winter-weight wool. Elizabeth wore a blouse beneath her jacket—you can see the shirt sleeves peeping out from the velvet sleeves, and the dark shirt rises above the jacket’s velvet collar. The shirt collar rises high along her throat, edged with light colored piping. Elizabeth wore a bar-shaped broach to pin the shirt collar closed. Given how warm this outfit was, I suspect she may have worn the outfit only for the formal photo with her husband, and wore a lighter weight gown for the actual wedding ceremony.

Elizabeth was also wearing a corset, giving her that wasp-waisted shape that was so desirable in the Victorian era. The jacket hugs her corseted waist, with a double row of buttons holding the jacket closed. The skirt is rather plain in design compared to the jacket, but appears to be well tailored.

Elizabeth also took pains with her hair, which was elaborately curled and pinned.

As for Frank, he has also taken pains with his appearance. He is wearing a handsome suit and vest. Beneath the suit he wore a fancy shirt with a pattern of stripes or checks. The shirt also seems to have a sort of built-in tie or ascot that he has tacked down with a square tie pin. He has a watch chain and fob artfully draped across his chest. His boots look clean and cared for, and he appears to have visited the barber—his hair is neatly cut, and his chin and neck clean-shaven. I found his blond mustache—a contrast to his darker hair—charming.

Frank has a slight smile on his face, while Elizabeth looks very young and very solemn. Of course, due to the long photo exposures of the period, sitters were told not to smile so their image wouldn’t be blurred by movement.

The final thing to note about the photo is that neither the bride nor groom are wearing wedding rings. Was the photo taken before the ceremony, or did the couple not use wedding rings?

So what happened to Elizabeth and Frank after this photo was taken? The couple had only one child, Laura Jane, who was born seven years after their marriage. I suspect Elizabeth may have had some miscarriages or fertility problems.

After her birth, Frank volunteered to serve in the Minnesota Infantry in the Spanish American War. I have been unable to find details about his service, other than that he was a private in the 13^th  Minnesota Infantry, Company D. The Minnesota 13^th was sent to Manila in 1898 to put down an insurrection there. They returned to the United States in 1899. Did he volunteer to earn extra money? Out of patriotism? At 32, he was older than most of his fellow soldiers. It must have been hard on Elizabeth to be left at home to care for their young daughter alone.

By the time of the 1905 state census, Frank was back in Minnesota. He was working as a mason and the couple and their daughter were living in Fairmont, Minnesota. They continued to live in Fairmont at 1000 North Elm Street until their deaths. Frank died March 22, 1939 at age 75. Elizabeth died March 5, 1945 at age 76. Their daughter married and had two children.

1000 N. Elm, Fairmont, MN today, from Google Street View

I love Elizabeth and Frank’s wedding photo. It may not be the most elegant or beautiful photo, but it captures that moment in their lives so vividly, and gives us a window into the world of hard-working immigrant families in 1880s Minnesota. Let’s raise a toast to the bride and groom!

Lost Burial Plot: 52 Ancestors 2024 Prompt “Family Lore”

 

Where was Peder Buried?

Peder Peterson Joramo: 1815-Before 1880 (Paternal great-grandfather)

 

There has always been some family lore about the location of my great-grandfather Peder Peterson’s grave. A recent article in my hometown’s newspaper may offer a clue about the true location—and the location isn’t where family stories claimed it lay.

My great-grandfather was born in the Lesja, Oppland region of Norway around 1815. He decided to emigrate with his wife and five children in 1870. They settled in Lake Hanska Township in Brown County, Minnesota. Peder’s two daughters quickly married, and his eldest son, Peder, seems to have died. That left Peder, his wife Anna Gulbrandsdatter, and his two youngest sons, Jacob and Paul, to farm on their Brown County homestead.

At some point prior to 1880, tragedy struck (I can’t confirm the year, but by the time of the 1880 census, Anna was a widow). One of Peder’s work horses slammed him into an outbuilding or a fence. He was pinned between the horse and the solid object, and sustained crush injuries. According to the family lore, his desperate wife and sons took him to a neighbor’s dugout home. The neighbor’s wife had some nursing skills, and she did what she could, but he succumbed to internal injuries.

My father believed Peder was buried at that neighbor’s farm not far from their well. Peder had died before any official cemeteries had been established in the area, so it seems logical that he might have been buried where he died. My father believed the grave was located on land that was eventually farmed by my father’s cousin Sidney. My father was Peder’s grandson (Paul’s son) and Sidney was Peder’s great-grandson (Jacob’s grandson). Their two farms included some of the land Peder had originally homesteaded. The supposed location of the grave was a bit north and east of the property that eventually became Lake Hanska Church Cemetery. My brother eventually acquired Sidney’s land, and now he farms the possible grave location.

My newest piece of information came from an article written by Joel Botten, a genealogist and historian of the Hanska area, which was published in the November 2, 2023 edition of the Hanska Herald newspaper. Botten was recounting early pioneer Christian Ahlness’ immigration story. The article included a photo of an oil painting of Ahlness’dugout home in Lake Hanska Township. The photo caption reads:

“This is a painting by Christian’s daughter Marie Ahlness of the home they established on the present site of the Lake Hanska Cemetery. The first cemetery site, south of the present site, proved to be too wet, Christian offed his higher land which had contained his first dugout for a permanent cemetery. His dugout site became his family plot.”

This was the first time either my brother or I had heard of an earlier cemetery site. Was Peder buried there? If so, the family lore had the location off by a half mile or so. As you can see on the map below, the present cemetery is on the north side of the gravel road. If the original cemetery was to the south, it would have been on the south side of the present road. Our family lore thought Peder was buried north of the present cemetery.

Numbers refer to the following: 1 is location of present cemetery. 2 is the general area where family lore claimed Peder was buried, 3 is the general area where the first cemetery was located, and 4 is my family's farm.

We knew that once the cemetery had been established, some of the local families chose to move the graves of family members who had been buried earlier. Those graves were dug up and the bodies reinterred in the cemetery. However, our family did not believe that Peder’s body had been moved to the new cemetery.

I found a Lake Hanska church record that suggests either Peder or his son Peder’s body was reburied in the new cemetery. The record shows burials by year, and seems to show a mass reburial of eight people on August 28, 1878. All eight had varied death dates that were months and even years earlier than the burial date.

One entry is for a “Peder Joramo”. Joramo was Peder’s Norwegian “farm” surname, and his children used Peterson/Pederson and Joramo fairly interchangeably as surnames. The entry also indicates that this Peder Joramo was born in Lesja. Both Peder the father and Peder the son were born in Lesja. Each entry on the record also provides the age of individual at death. The age provided for the re-buried Peder appears to read “17”, which would suggest it was Peder’s son, but the age has been amended with a fountain pen to the point where it is difficult to read. The death date for this Peder Joramo was June 14, 1878. Peder the father would have been 63 in 1878 if the birth year 1815 is correct. Even if the number doesn’t actually read “17”, it does not appear to be a number in the fifties or sixties which would have been more likely to refer to Peder the father. 

So it seems that Peder’s burial spot and date of death remain a mystery. Did he die in 1878, or did his son die then? Was he buried on a neighbor’s farm north of the new cemetery? Was he buried at the first, slightly swampy cemetery south of the current burial ground? Was his body ever moved to the newer cemetery? I think we will never know for sure.

Sources:

Lake Hanska Lutheran Church records, U.S. Evangelical Lutheran Church Records 1781-1969. https://www.ancestry.com/imageviewer/collections/60722/images/41742_314248-00259?pId=776153

Hanska Herald. November 2, 2023 edition.