Chenoweth families in the 1850 Census

7th Census: "the first modern Census"

The Families of John Chenoweth & Mary Calvert

(research by Peter Chenoweth & Jon Egge)

Alphabetic Listing

---

Quick Links

[Master Site Menu] [Main Page] [Census Research]
[1850 Census Commentary] [1850 Census Detail by location] [1850 Census Detail by line] [1850 missing families] 1860 Census: ordered by: [location] [Line] [alphabetic listing]

[a] [b] [c] [d] [e] [f] [g] [h] [I] [j] [k] [l] [m] [n] [o] [p] [r] [s] [t] [u] [v] [w] [y] [z]

note: The area of the future state of West Virginia has been broken out separately. The name of the third generation line is given in brackets. The color of this name represents which 2nd generation line it belongs to, so each entry is assigned to its third generation branch.

---

LEGEND: JOHN RICHARD HANNAH ARTHUR WILLIAM THOMAS RUTH UNKNOWN

---

This is my crude attempt at showing the family distribution in 1850 with the states colored with the various family branches settled in each. Descendants of John were in 13 states, Richard 7, Hannah 7, Arthur 14, William 6, Thomas 11 & Ruth 5.

Some 911 households and some 4,793 family members of the families of John Chenoweth and Mary Calvert found in the 1850 Census are depicted on this page. This is about 90% of what might be possible at this point from what is known. The page originally posted in the fall of 2004 was augmented by 85 plus families found using the new enhanced indexing found at ancestry.com. It also included 13 additional Chenoweth families we believe are part of the family but lack proper identification. The reader is urged to read a fuller discusssion of the 1850 Census as found on the site Census page.

Note: in 1850 Indiana was often marked on the Census as IA. This is now used for Iowa and a cause of confusion to Census readers. Caveat: The detail here is my transcription and subject to error and interpretation. Census records and the cursive used are often difficult to decipher. The quality of the transcript varies and can border on illegible. One should always examine the record itself to be sure.) The relationships given in each detail are my interpretation. Such relationships were not given in Census detail until 1880. Married daughters listed by married name.