Robert Gamble
Privacy Level: Open (White)

Robert Gamble (abt. 1755 - 1832)

Robert Gamble
Born about in County Londonderry, Irelandmap [uncertain]
Son of [father unknown] and [mother unknown]
[sibling(s) unknown]
Husband of — married [date unknown] [location unknown]
Descendants descendants
Died at about age 77 in Shelby, Alabama, United Statesmap
Problems/Questions Profile manager: Clyde Wetteland private message [send private message]
Profile last modified | Created 9 Feb 2011
This page has been accessed 756 times.

Contents

Biography

Robert was born about 1755.

Arrived in South Carolina about 1768. He acquired his first land PLAT 10 Mar 1771; land Grant 23 May 1771; land Memorial 5 Jul 1771 on acres situated on the South Fork of the Black River, west of Pudding Swamp.

Robert served in the military from 1774 to 1783 and was captured by the British during the siege of Charles Town in 1780. He was held prisoner until late 1781.


Robert passed away before 1837.

Future Use

[1]


Research Notes

The following argument has been made:

In the will of his likely son Robert R. Gamble Jr. [2] he refers to land that he obtained from Robert Gamble. It is near certain that this Robert Gamble is his father of Robert Gamble Jr. of the attached will and the Robert Gamble Jr. who witnessed a land sale in 1806 from Robert Gamble (Sr.) to John Frierson. [3]

However, the supposition that our subject Robert Gamble left an oldest son Robert R. Gamble in Sumter Co., S.C., is in conflict with the careful language of his 1832 last will.

Robert Gamble's 1832 Shelby Co., Ala., will actually specifically names William T. Gamble his "oldest son," so it is almost certain that, given Robert R. Gamble of Sumter Co., S.C., was still living until 1837, he was not an oldest son of our Robert Gamble.

As well, the argument that a one-ninth part of Robert Gamble's division of his estate into nine parts is unaccounted for and indicates a part was already given to an unstated son can likewise not be supported since, in fact, all nine parts are accounted for as follows (and with the 1832 will's specific numbering of the decedent's children):

1. "my eldest daughter Eliza Scrivner"

2. "my eldest son William T. Gamble"

3. "my second son James Gamble"

4. "my third son Aaron F. Gamble"

5. "my fourth son John R. Gamble"

6. "my second daughter Margaret M. Rogers"

7. "my third daughter Jane R. Walker"

8. "my fifth daughter Mary F. Rogers"

9. "my two grandsons Robert G. Billingslea and William G. Billingslea" [sons of his deceased fourth daughter Esther Billingsley]

As all nine one-ninth parts are accounted for, the argument that an additional one-ninth part was left to a son Robert cannot be supported.

It is possible that the Robert Gamble which Robert R. Gamble makes reference to in his 1837 will in South Carolina was this Robert Gamble, however, the 1832 decedent makes clear he did not have a son Robert.

Sources

  1. https://www.genealogy.com/forum/surnames/topics/gamble/881/
  2. Will of his son Robert Gamble Jr. (attached).
  3. Land sale to John Frierson witnessed by Robert Gamble Junior.




Is Robert your ancestor? Please don't go away!
 star icon Login to collaborate or comment, or
 star icon contact private message the profile manager, or
 star icon ask our community of genealogists a question.
Sponsored Search by Ancestry.com

DNA
No known carriers of Robert's DNA have taken a DNA test.

Have you taken a DNA test? If so, login to add it. If not, see our friends at Ancestry DNA.



Comments: 5

Leave a message for others who see this profile.
There are no comments yet.
Login to post a comment.
Frank L Felcman

I am a biological descendant of Aaron F Gamble, son of Robert Gamble, Sr. My Greatt grandfather, Solomon A Fuller married Louisa Payne, daughter of Mary Blair Gamble and Buelah Payne.

I have Ancestry DNA matches to several descendants of Aaron F Gamble, 2 matches to descendants of John Rufus Gamble, 1 to W T Gamble, ! to James A Gamble and 1 to Robert Gamble, Jr. All are sons of Robert Gamble ,Sr.

I am a 5th cousin, 1 removed to Steven N Coker a descendant of Rebecca Caroline Gamble(Gibbons), daughter of Robert Gamble, Jr and Mary Sweatman. This confirms that Robert Gamble, Jr is the birth son of Robert Gamble, Sr.

posted by Frank Felcman
The DNA analysis cited does not strongly indicate a linkage as described between Robert R. Gamble (d. 1837) and Robert Gamble (d. 1832). While it would seem to support the descendant of Aaron F. Gamble's kinship with descendants of John Rufus Gamble, William T. Gamble, and James A. Gamble, a yDNA test (rather than an autosomal DNA tested kinship) would better serve to indicate whether there might be a genetic relationship between Robert R. Gamble (d. 1837) and the other men's father Robert Gamble (d. 1832). Beyond that, a regionally focused study of potentially related Gamble families might well be advised in order to determine the distance of the Gamble kinship if one were found to exist.

As well, and to be clear, there are not any records that call these men either Robert Gamble Sr. or Robert Gamble Jr. which terms should not be used for them in the absence of any record that does so.

posted by CC Lee
Exactly right. The summary above about the nine-way division of Robert Gamble 1832's estate unambiguously states each child in the birth order and does not include a son named Robert at all at a time when Robert 1837 was still living. With zero records found that point to that relationship, it should definitely not be considered even likely.

Autosomal DNA pointing to a fifth cousin once removed is, first, a very distant kinship for any reliability in the specific relationship, and, second, in this example, lacks any critical analysis of the descendants' other ancestors. Having one set of ancestors greater than 4x great grandparents in common in a rural area like the SC upcountry certainly weighs in favor of having more than one!

posted by Brian Winslow
CCL, your point about a regional Gamble and related study is also a good one! Just like the top analysis above states, the two Robert Gambles referenced in the 1837 man's deed could be these two, but they are more likely to be some relationship other than father and son given the content of the will and listing of heirs in 1832.
posted by Brian Winslow
edited by Brian Winslow
I suggest removing Robert R. Gamble as a child of this Robert Gamble. While the two men may be related, they were evidently not father and son (nor is the argument that Robert R. Gamble was an oldest son left in South Carolina see any support in the records). See this Robert Gamble's careful enumeration of his children (including their birth order), which do not include a Robert as of the writing of his will, and his specific designation of an "oldest son" William T. Gamble.
posted by CC Lee

G  >  Gamble  >  Robert Gamble