1775 New Year's Eve - Attack on Quebec City

250 Years ago, in the pre-dawn hours of New Year's Eve 1775, New Yorkers from the 13 United Colonies attacked Quebec City.  The attack failed.  The American General lay dead in the snow. 

Location in Quebec City of failed attack on New Year's Eve 1775.

One company of New Yorkers was led by John Nicholson.  He was familiar to Campbells living in Ulster County such as Joel Campbell (b ~1735). The records were not well kept, but there was one "Reuben Callam" in the ranks who could be Joel's brother of that name. There is no indication that Nicholson was successful in recruiting any other Campbells for this failed expedition.

Nicholson's home still stands.  It is only a few hundred yards from where Joel Campbell was enumerated in the 1790 census.

Nicholson home in what was Hanover, Ulster, New York in 1775.

Read my recent article on John Nicholson published in the Orange County Historical Society Journal!

July 1775 in the Precinct of Hanover, Ulster County, New York

This is the fourth installment of a monthly recollection of events of 250 years ago in Hanover, Ulster, New York.  The Precinct of Hanover was the approximate location of Joel Campbell at the time. This area is now part of the Town of Montgomery, Orange, New York.

Although the formal Declaration of Independence would not appear for another full year, the United Colonies were definitely in full rebellion in July of 1775.  News of the June 27th meeting of the Continental Congress reached Hanover in July.  They were to “… immediately take possession of St. John’s, Montreal, and any other parts of the country…,” of Canada!

Captain Nicholson was recruiting in Hanover.  His company's beat included the precinct of New Windsor and parts of Newburgh, Hanover, and Shawangunk.

His company included the following surnames who would appear in the 1779 Tax Assessment for Hanover:  Burns, Caldwell, Clarke, Douglas, Dunlap, Eager, Hannes(Haines), Herrald, Hunter, McBride, McEwan, Millar, Milspaugh, Moloy, Monterief, Morrisson, Nicholson, Parks, Patterson, Ray(Rea), Stitt, Taylor, Weeks, Welch, Wharry, Wood.

On July 13, Captain Nicholson wrote the Provincial Congress of New York:

“Agreeable to my warrant and instructions from the Provincial Congress, I have enlisted a company of seventy-two men to serve in the Continental Army, and now wait for further directions of the Congress." (Journal of the Provincial Congress of New York for July 19, 1775)

June 1775 in the Precinct of Hanover, Ulster County, New York

This is the third installment of a monthly recollection of events of 250 years ago in Hanover, Ulster, New York.  The precinct of Hanover was the approximate location of Joel Campbell at the time. This area is now part of the Town of Montgomery, Orange, New York.

The Provincial and Continental Congresses that began in May continued into June.  Of most lasting consequence was their formation of a military force. On June 15, one day after voting to create a continental army, George Washington was named General of all continental forces. (250th Birthday of the Army) 

On June 30th, the New York Provincial Congress named officers in the New York Regiments. One of the colonels hailed from the adjacent Precinct of New Windsor. Colonel James Clinton was well known to the inhabitants of Hanover. 

One of the companies in Clinton's regiment was led by Captain John Nicholson. He was also from New Windsor, but would be a Hanover resident before the war ended. Many of his men were from Hanover.

Nicholson's two lieutenants were also from New Windsor, David (James?) DuBois and James Gregg.

Gregg's service in the continental army would not end for another EIGHT years! His legendary hardships were described by his wife, Mary, in her application for a widow's pension: “James Greg was shot through the body, was tomahawked and scalped in the Revolutionary War and I believe said wounds was the means of shortening his days.”

May 1775 in the Precinct of Hanover, Ulster County, New York

April 19, 1775, is considered by most historians to mark the start of the Revolutionary War period. (See prior blog). Few would have guessed at the time that it would last eight years. Even fewer today have the patience to endure a 250th commemorative period lasting that long.  This my second month. Will I have the patience to commemorate for 8 years.... 96 months?

The shots fired at Lexington and Concord changed the tone of the rebellion from peaceful protests to military confrontation. The "Articles of Association" signed by the rebels in New York City on April 29th, 1775, had been quickly reproduced in Ulster County and signed by Joel Campbell's brother, Reuben, in New Paltz. The "Articles" were as much a declaration of independence as the document that was to publish July 4, 1776.  It stated that the signers would recognize the extra-legal congresses set up by the rebels. Signing was a treasonous act.

On May 5, 1775, residents of the Precinct of Hanover, Ulster County, appeared at the home of Captain Peter Hill (known as the Brick House on 17K) to sign the "Articles."

On about the same date, the Newburgh Committee of Safety and Observation posted the "Articles" at Weigand's Tavern for all to sign. Joel Campbell's signature (namesake of this blog) does not appear on any of the surviving "Articles."

On May 11, 1775, Ulster residents met again in New Paltz to select representatives to the First Provincial Congress (the April 1775 meeting had been called a "Provincial Convention"). They selected Col. Johannes Hardenbergh, Col. James Clinton, Egbert Dumond, Charles Clinton, Christopher Tappen, John Nicholson and Jacob Hoornbeek. Note that the participants were eager to include their military credentials in what was quickly becoming more than a battle of words.

Indeed, some residents had marched to Boston to support the standoff at the besieged city. 

The 1st Provincial Congress convened in New York City on May 23. For the next month it would conduct business in parallel with the ongoing Continental Congress in Philadelphia. Post riders galloped daily between the two cities, sharing and requesting information.

The settling of grievances with Britain was quickly turning into a military conflict.

The April 14, 1775 Petition of Cadwallader Colden Jr and Peter & Walter DuBois

I obtained a copy of the April 14, 1775 petition (see prior post) courtesy of Washington’s Headquarters State Historic Site Collections, New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation. It does not appear to be in the handwriting of Cadwallader Colden or Peter DuBois, but the document appears to be contemporary.

The writing is very much in the verbose, almost legalistic, style of Colden.

It starts with...

"Whereas a Number of Persons did on the 7th Day of April Instant meet at the Town of the Paltz in this County, and did then and there assume to themselves the Stile and Title of Committee elected by the Inhabitants of the several Precincts and Districts of this County with Authority when collectively assembled to ellect[sic] and appoint Deputies to meet in Provincial Convention at the City of New York for the Purpose of nominating electing and appointing Delegates to meet those from other Provinces on this Continent subject to the Dominion of his Britanic Majesty our liege Sovereign at the City of Philadephia on the 10th Day of May..."

The final lines are the exact opposite of the "Association" that will be signed by rebels in the next few weeks...

“We do therefore hereby publicly protest against … all Manner of Proceedings Acts and Deeds of any illegal Congress whatsoever and we do hereby declare that we will not pay any Obedience to any of their Resolutions or illegal Mandates …”

The letter is signed by Cadwallader, Walter, and Peter, but it is evident that the signatures are not in their handwriting. The signature below is from a personal note from Colden to Peter on New Year's Eve 1768, inviting him to dine.

April 1775 in the Precinct of Hanover, Ulster County, New York

April 2025 marks the start of "250th anniversary" celebrations in the United States.

For most people, the celebrations will start and end on July 4, 2026. But for students of the birth of the United States, the military struggle for independence began with the shots at Lexington and Concord, Massachusetts on April 19, 1775 and ended with evacuation of British troops from Manhattan on November 25, 1783. It was a long eight years. [see my 2023 article on the long centennial celebration from 1875 to 1883.]

Prior to April 19, 1775, frustrations over British rule had been expressed in the form of protests with limited violence.  The rebels created lists of grievances, vandalized tea imports, and burned a few royal appointees in effigy. That all changed with the skirmishes in Massachusetts.

In April 1775, the colony of New York decided to send representatives to the next Continental Congress which would commence in May. Those representatives would be selected by delegates sent from each of the counties. Ulster county residents (the county where the namesake of this blog resided) gathered in New Paltz and selected George Clinton, Levi Pawling, and Charles DeWitt as their delegates.

Clinton was a close neighbor of Joel Campbell, living in the hamlet of Little Britain. He would be elected the State's first governor in 1777. Levi Pawling may have been known to Joel. In 1776, many of the Hanover militia (of which Joel was a member) would be led by Pawling down to New York to fight in the Battle for New York.

Many Ulster residents were not pleased with this extra-legal election of representatives. They were led by Cadwallader Colden Jr. who authored a rebuke along with the Dubois brothers, Peter and Walter. [I have written much about these three in my blogs.]

The New York Provincial Convention convened on April 20th in New York City. George Clinton was among the group selected to represent the Province of New York at the Continental Congress.  They adjourned on the 22nd with no knowledge of what had happened on the 19th in Lexington.

On April 29th, the City of New York issued their "Articles of Association." The document, which was intended to be signed, committed the signer to acknowledge and abide by the decisions of the Continental Congress and the New York Provincial Convention. Other jurisdictions soon followed by circulating similar petitions. Reuben Campbell (brother of Joel) signed the New Paltz Articles. Joel's name is not found on any preserved copies of the Articles, but he also does not appear on lists of those who refused to sign.

May 1775 would bring more winds of war to the Hudson Valley.  Coming soon....

Is Watts/CdA a good predictor of Time-Trial Speed?

Is Watts/CdA a good predictor of Time-Trial Speed?

A recent Scientific Triathlon podcast argued that the best predictor of average bike-speed on a flat course is watts per CdA.  If your watts per CdA is higher than the rider next to you, you will beat that rider in a flat time-trial. [This is in contrast to watts/kg, which is the best predictor of climbing speed.  See my blog on the Tron Bike for a discussion on watts/kg.]

Most of us triathletes do power-based workouts on the bike.  We work on increasing our Functional Threshold Power (ftp) and have a good feel for the average wattage we can produce during a race. But do any of us have a handle on what our CdA is? And how do we reduce it?

What is CdA?  CdA is the coefficient of aerodynamic drag multiplied by a relevant area. Area(A) is usually taken to be the frontal area of the object, but in reality, Cd and A are rarely treated separately. CdA is a measure of resistance as a body moves through a fluid. It is a function of both the size and shape of the body and density and viscosity of the fluid. If you are a bigger person, your shape is bigger, so you may have a higher CdA than a smaller person.  On the other hand, if the larger volume of muscle generates more watts, it likely will overcompensate for the additional "area" of that muscle.

Back to the title question: Is Watts/CdA a good predictor of Time-Trial Speed? The answer is 'yes', but it is almost worthless in practice, because no one knows their CdA!! Even most CdAs of professional cyclists reported in the literature are not directly measured but are calculated from their speed and watts.  You can do the same. Go to the chart below and find your average moving speed for a recent time trial (or a flat bike leg of a triathlon). Find the watts/CdA that corresponds with that speed using the dashed curve. Divide your average watts for the time-trial by that number. That is your CdA x1000.

[Example: If your speed was 20 mph, then Watts/CdA x 1000 is 0.5. If your average watts for that event was 160, then 160 watts / (1000 x 0.5) = 0.32 m² for your CdA.]

The points [blue squares] on the chart above were gathered from the internet and from friends who shared their watts, speeds, rolling resistance data, and air density. [A slightly more sophisticated estimation of watts/CdA can be done with this additional data.] The pink line is the theoretical watts/CdA if one ignores everything but aerodynamic drag (no power losses from drivetrain, rolling resistance, elevation gain/loss, wind, etc.) Are you surprised at how irrelevant the other factors are in predicting race speeds on these flat courses?

Note especially that nowhere is rider weight or bike weight part of the equation! Weight only effects the speed when there are changes in elevation or accelerations. At constant speed on a flat course there is no penalty for a heavy bike! If the extra weight is due to aero features of the bike, a few additional kilos is an advantage on a flat course.

Now that you know your CdA, how do you reduce it? That will be covered in Part II.

Captain Jacob Conklin's Company in the Ulster 4th Regiment of Militia

In a prior post, I puzzled at the absence of Joel Campbell in the 1779 Tax Assessment for Hanover Precinct. Joel's presence in that area before and after that date is known through the 1767 Coldenham Store records, 1770 New Hurley Church records, the 1790 Montgomery Census, and the 1779 list of Exempts from Jacob Conklin's company of militia.  Perhaps if I could trace the whereabouts of Captain Conklin, I could make some guesses as to the whereabouts of Joel and his family during the war.

At the start of the Revolutionary War, Jacob Conklin was 34 years old and had 6 small children.  His house appears on a 1780 map drawn by Simeon DeWitt. It appears to be located at the north side of the intersection of Quaker St and Church St in what is now the Town of Plattekill.(41.604984, -74.093930).  That location is on the current border of Ulster and Orange Counties and on the borders of Plattekill and Newburgh towns.  Plattekill was created from the Town of Marlborough in 1800. His residence in 1779 might have been considered to be in Newburgh or Marlborough. It was about 4 miles NNE of Samuel Campbell’s original farm, where Levi and Nathan appear in the 1779 tax assessment of Hanover.

Conklin's militia was known as the "Western Newburgh Company" and was said to be "recruited in Wallkill." [see Article in New York Genealogical and Biographical Society Journal, Vol 59 Issue 4 p223.]  As I have discussed before, "Wallkill" had many geographical meanings. In this case I believe it meant the enlistees lived closer to the Wallkill River than to the Hudson River.  The use of the term "recruitment" suggests this was a special company, as militias were typically not recruited, but obligatory if you lived within the geographical boundaries. What it might be referring to is the company that Conklin led to New York in 1776. It was recruited out of other militia companies for this out-of-county duty. (Usually, militias were formed to protect their locality and had no obligation outside of the county).

Jacob was commissioned a Captain on October 11, 1775 in Colonel Jonathan Hasbrouck's regiment of the Ulster County Militia.  His wealth and education likely qualified him for such a commission as there is no evidence of prior military experience. 

In late 1775, New Yorkers led by General Montgomery invaded Canada. According to the pension deposition of Ephraim Oakes, Jacob Conklin was a fellow soldier in the company of Daniel Denton and Robert Johnson in the regiment of Colonel James Clinton. This service is not mentioned in other family records, but such experience may have qualified him to lead a company of 4-month Ulster levies to "New York" in the fall of 1776.

The siege of Boston ended in March of 1776 with the British evacuation.  One month later, in April 1776, the first surviving muster of Captain Conklin's militia company was created (see Fernow.)  Joel is not in this list. On August 9, 1776, Conklin marched a company of Ulster recruits to the "defence of New York" in anticipation of the invasion of New York City by the British. Indeed, the British landed in Brooklyn on August 27th. The surviving muster is shown below.  Conklin's company was in the regiment of Levi Pawling (spelled 'Paldens' on the muster). Pawling's (and Conklin's) role in the Battle for New York is not known, but it appears that Conklin's company was assigned to Fort Montgomery for this period and did not experience any action.  Josiah Terwilliger stated he was in Conklin's company on a 4-month enlistment, and that they were at Fort Montgomery from September until December 1776 and saw no action. Interestingly, Terwilleger does not appear on the muster, indicating that additional recruits may have been enlisted at a later date than August.

August 9, 1776 muster of Conklin company of levies in the regiment of Levi Pawling. Click here to view larger image.

With the fall of New York City in 1776, improvement of the Highland Forts (Constitution, Clinton, Montgomery) proceeded with urgency. Conklin's militia company was drafted for much of this work in the Spring and Fall of 1777.  On "last of April or first of May", Abraham Masten enlisted for four months as corporal under Captain Conklin and was "employed in erecting that fort [Montgomery]" under the command of Colonel Dubois [of the 5th New York] and Lt Col Jacobus Brown [Bruyn?] with Colonel James Clinton in command.  He thought his term expired "first of September." This agrees with the pension deposition of Harmanus Terwilliger who was at Fort Montgomery for 5 months in "Conklin's regt" then two at Fort Clinton with Captain Rose. Robert Aldrich (Aldredge), from Marlborough, was also at Fort Montgomery in Conklin's company for a two-week stint and then "drafted" for four months where he "worked hard at drawing stones, cutting sod, and facines."  He was drafted for another 3 months "but Ft Montgomery was taken and he did not go."

Conklin's whereabouts on the tragic loss of the Highland Forts on October 6, 1777 is presumed to have been with the bulk of Colonel Jonathan Hasbrouck's regiment deployed on Constitution Island. Constitution Island was not attacked on October 6th but was soon thereafter abandoned. [Only 11 of 277 prisoners of war from the battle were attributed to Hasbrouck's regiment. Two names match members of Conklin's company including 'John Snyder', who appeared in the May 4, 1778 muster and the April 1779 List of Exempts, and 'John Stephenson', who appeared in the August 1776 muster, but he was levied out of Smith's company.  Other surnames of prisoners from Hasbrouck's match common names in Conklin's regiment, but the given names do not match:  Ostrander, Lawrence, Terwilliger.]

Conklin's company was active in the recovery from the defeat of the Highland Forts, which included building structures at West Point and New Windsor (Nicoll's Point Redoubt near the Chevaux de Frise).  Private Andrew Willson stated in his pension deposition that he was on duty "between New Windsor and the highlands building forts" between November 1777 and January 1778. 

Conklin's officers were "certified" on March 9, 1778 "In the district or beat on the South east side of the Paltz [Wallkill] River."  They were enumerated as Jacob Conklin - Captain, Jacob Lawrence -1st Lieutenant, David Gue [Guion] - 2nd Lieutenant, and John Crowel - Ensign. These are the same officers named in a surviving muster of May 4th, 1778.  That muster includes Joshua Cammell, who is Joshua Campbell, Joel's son.

Members of Conklin's company served in 1778 "on the frontiers" protecting farms against marauding Indians. Joshua and Robert Aldredge (both enumerated in the May 1778 muster) served on the frontiers in 1778 under Captain William Cross. Typically, one third of a company would be required to march on one of these expeditions.  The captains in Hasbrouck's regiment would rotate leadership of these expeditions in a similar fashion.

In 1779, several of the members of Conklin's company served on the frontiers, sometimes under Conklin, sometimes under other regimental officers. Simon Terwilliger stated he was drafted for three months to serve on the frontiers under Captain Conklin. David Winfield stated that he served at "Peenpack near the Delaware River" in November 1779 as did Henry Crans (Croutz). Aaron Terwileger said he served "at Peenpack and other places served two or three months" in the fall of 1779. 1779 is also the year when Conklin included his own name on a List of Exempts in April.

1780 brought more service on the frontiers.  In March, a detachment was ordered to Mombaccus under command of Lt. Wygant that included members of Conklin's company.  Private Martin Wygant stated that he was also "on temporary duty" with another captain James Denton near Dewitts. David Winfield served at Shandaken in June.

The lore around Jacob Conklin was passed down through his family.  The stories below are from The Van Benochouten Family in America by William Henry Van Benochouten, State Library, Lansing, Michigan, p246 - 254, transcribed by Betty Kinzie.  Jacob was married to Catrina Van Benschoten

According to family lore, Jacob "... sat on many courts martials; and also served as Judge Advocate. He is said to have enjoyed the favor of Washington and to have dined with him on several occasions during the war."

One story is told that... "Once during the Revolutionary war when returning to his regiment after a short furlough his route led him through Newburgh. Reaching an inn on the outskirts of the village after dark he notice a number of horses tied to the fence surrounding it, and upon reconnoitering found that there was a gathering of Tories of that neighborhood within. Although alone he dashed into their midst with drawn sward, calling out to an imaginary squad, "Come on, come on, arrest these -------- Tories!" and had the satisfaction of seeing them all rush out at a rear door, and as he sheathed his sword heard the clatter of their horses' feet as they dashed away at breakneck speed. He then went to bed and enjoyed a good night's rest." 

It is family tradition that ... "one day when Capt. Conklin was out on a scout with his company, as they approached a bluff of land overlooking some stream on the western frontier, they suddenly came on a large force of Indians down below intent on torturing a white prisoner. They had stripped him naked, pierced him full of fat-pine splinter, and were in the act of leading him around a great fire preparing to burn him at the stake. The situation was critical, for the Indians outnumbered his force five to one; but the captain's spirit rose higher and higher as he gazed at the cruel sight. Finally, motioning his men to retire quietly, he ordered them to examine their priming with care, and on advancing to aim with exactness and fire at a sign from him. The Indians were startled, many wounded, some killed. To be brief, these tactics were followed for three volleys, withdrawing to load and advancing to the brink of the bluff to fire. Then the whites charged down upon the savages. It was thenceforth a terrific hand-to-hand encounter. It ended by the Indians breaking and fleeing. Conklin had torn off his lace and finery, thrown away his hat, tied a handkerchief about his head to as to conceal his rank, and came off unscathed. As soon as the Indians fled the captain ordered their canoes, which they had buried in the sand for concealment, dug up and launched that his party may might get away as early as possible. Waiting for three of his missing men took time, - precious time; finally they appeared, two supporting a wounded third. Instantly these were aboard they shoved off and made downstream, - and none too soon, for in a few moments Indians swarmed on the late battleground and vented their rage in yell after yell at the escape of the white men."

Sadly, there are no tales of Conklin's exploits in the Canada expedition of 1775, the Battle for New York of 1776, or the Battle of the Highlands in 1777.

Supposedly, the well-educated Captain moved to New York City after his wife died where he taught school. In 1805, he purchased two hundred acres of land at Sempronius, Cayuga County, where he died in 1813.

Happy 290th Birthday!

If we believe the majority of genealogies on the internet, then today is Joel Campbell's 290th birthday. According to most 'genealogists' he was born on January 22, 1735. (If you have read my book, you know that I am skeptical.)

There are no birth, death, or marriage certificates for Joel; no (contemporary) church records; no diary.  The date may be inaccurate, but evidence of his life in this period exists on one map, one deed, one militia muster, tax assessments, store ledgers, and census records. 

He was born a 3rd generation American in the City of New Ark, a community established in the British Colony of New Jersey by Congregationalists from Connecticut and Long Island. How Joel's grandfather joined this insular community without being related to its founding members is still a mystery.

In 2035, we will celebrate his 300th birthday.  Three hundred years does not seem like such a long time when one considers the age of the earth or the time since the last ice age. But it is enough time for just about everything to be forgotten. Did Joel have any desire to be remembered? I hope he is not offended that I am celebrating.

Did Joel think about the distant future?  Probably no more than we do.  Joel could not have envisioned a time when people traveled in steel machines and not on horses, where people wrote on screens and not on paper, where there were more salesmen than farmers, where people lived comfortably on small lots with no livestock.

Will anyone celebrate Joel's 500th birthday, two hundred years from now? It will be 2235. Will it be a time of unprecedented prosperity or a time of struggle for survival after a cataclysmic event? Will the human race predominate or will super-intelligent robots rule? Will history be more accessible or will there be a dark age after an electromagnetic pulse makes access to a totally digital history nearly impossible to retrieve? Perhaps mankind will have left for another planet where time is no longer measured in earth-years, making a 500th birthday a bit confusing to generations born on the new planet?

Today, I will celebrate the present.  I am lighting 290 candles for Joel.

Exempts in Conklin's Company of Ulster Militia in April 1779

On April 23, 1779, Captain Jacob Conklin published "A Exempt List" for his company. It contained 28 names including Joel Campbell.  This could have referred to the father who was 44 years old or his son, also Joel, who was about 24.

Photo of the original document by the author.  I believe the document resides at The George Washington Headquarters Museum in Newburgh.

There was a companion document at the GWHQ Museum that I believe is related to this one.  One side contains Captain Conklin's name and the amount of £104, the exact same total as on the List of Exempts.  On the reverse is a title transcribed as "Taken by of Cl[a?]ssors? for the Said Precenct", followed by seven names of prominent citizens, presumed to have collected the Exempt Fee from those on the Exempt List (see below).

Photo of Conklin receipt by the author.

Photo of reverse of Conklin receipt by the author.

The New York Militia   Throughout the entire Revolutionary War, all men between the

ages of sixteen and fifty were subject to compulsory militia service. Militia service usually was for short periods of time within the locality of the militiaman whereas "continental" service (George Washington's army) was generally for a longer period and could be anywhere in the colonies. Both Joel and his son, Joel, were subject to militia service.

"Classes" in the Militia  When it became necessary to engage the militia for periods of longer than a week at locations farther from their home, it became the practice to only require one third of each company to march. The remaining two thirds stayed behind to protect the community and run the farms and businesses that in many cases were feeding, clothing, or arming the continental forces. To facilitate this, "classes" of three persons were often formed, with one of the three marching and the other two remaining.  The person in the class who marched was normally compensated by the other two. It appears that officers also formed classes, resulting in expedition companies that were a mixture of militiamen from several different home companies. The second document indicates the payments made by the Exempts were connected with "Classes." Joel may have been part of a class where the payment was not to the serving soldier, but to the Precinct officials?

Exemption from Militia Service  Several militia laws were passed by New York during the Revolution. All of them fine-tuned the qualifications for "exemption." By the end of the War, the exemption qualification became so general that it included all those "engaged or employed in any Manufacture or Business, so that it would be for the Good of the Public..." and subject to approval of the Commander in Chief of the New York Militia (the Governor). Explicitly exempt (often with stipulations) were Quakers (religious), "Lieutenant Governor, the members of the State Senate and Assembly, their several clerks, the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, the Auditor General, the State Treasurer, judicial officers and their clerks as well as sheriffs and county clerks," sheriff's deputies, gaolers(jailers), coroners, ministers, doctors, ferrymen, millers, schoolmasters, essential war workers (makers of arms, powder, clothing ... including "Wood Cutters, Blacksmiths, Coopers, Colliers & Carpenters.") [see Alexander, Arthur J. “EXEMPTION FROM MILITIA SERVICE IN NEW YORK STATE DURING THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR.” New York History, vol. 27, no. 2, 1946, pp. 204–12.]  Exempted individuals were assessed a fee in lieu of service. For Quakers the fee was £10 in 1777. The list of exempted occupations would suggest Joel had a trade, but the 1793 deed describes him as a yeoman.

Summary  Included in the List of Exempts is Captain Conklin and all of his commissioned officers. This seems a bit odd to me unless the exemption is due to service in a recent expedition and not to some civic responsibility at home.  If the latter were the case, why were they ever selected as officers?  If the former is the case, could that also be the reason for exemption of others on the list, including Joel? No service records for Joel or Conklin's company in the winter of 1778-79 have been found.

Residence in 1779  The members of Conklin's company were generally from western Newburgh. Twelve of the 28 exempts were signers of the Newburgh Pledge of 1775. [See Ruttenber's HISTORY OF NEWBURGH]. One was a signer of the New Marlborough Pledge. [See Bond's HISTORY OF MARLBOROUGH]. Joel was living further east than his residence in the 1790 census of Montgomery.

Net Worth in 1779 Of the 28 Exempts, Joel and 4 others were assessed the lowest amount of £1 4. If the fee was assessed in proportion to net worth, then Joel was on the low end.  The highest assessed person was Henry W. Kipp at £20.

The 1779 Tax Assessment for Hanover Precinct, Ulster County, New York - Part II

In December 1779, two hundred and forty-five years ago, David Galatian, the Hanover Precinct supervisor, rode his horse down a dark, frozen dirt road in Ulster County, New York to the Rock Tavern.  He was retracing his steps past homes he had added to his assessment list earlier that day.  At the tavern he hoped to find drink and conversation.  Perhaps one of the men in the crowded room was Joel Campbell, eponym of this blog. (Also see Part I.)

The young country had been at war for over three years.  Washington’s continental army was wintering near Morristown, New Jersey. The soldiers were low on food and winter clothing.  Washington had pleaded to the Continental Congress for supplies, but even if purchases were granted, the Continental currency had lost much of its value and could buy little.  His troops foraged local farms. 

The weather was also turning cold.  The muddy ruts formed by rains and wagons earlier in the month had been turned to frozen corduroy by a persistent cold air mass.  As was common, about half of the continental army had returned to their homes for the winter.  Undoubtedly some of the men of Hanover were such soldiers, perhaps even a few drinking on this night at the Rock Tavern.

The states also maintained militias. In New York, the governor was commander in chief of the militia.  During this period of conflict, the governor’s military role dominated his attention.  The New York Assembly passed an Act in October allowing for the collection of a tax to support the military.  It authorized Galatian to create a list “for raising their [Hanover Precinct’s] quota of [the] two million five hundred thousand dollars by tax by an Act passed for that purpose October 25, 1779.”  He went on to write on the first page of the completed list, “The quota of Hanover is 16494 pounds which is raised in this list with a surplus of 170.”

1779 Tax Assessment Summary

Joel and his brothers were living is this approximate area in 1779, so they should be listed in the assessment.  (His sister, Mary Norris, was still in New Jersey and their father had died about 5 years prior.). His brothers with their guessed ages were Samuel (47), Daniel (46), Joel (44), Nathaniel (42), Jonathan (40), Reuben (36), Nathan (35), and Levi (26). 

Samuel had received from his father “the land I now live on” in the 1773 Will.  In the tax assessment of 1779 it is listed as 86 acres with a value of 144 pounds.  His personal wealth is listed as 56 pounds.  This is probably farm equipment and livestock.  His brother, Nathaniel, appears to be living on his land.

Samuel and Nathaniel in 1779 Tax Assessment

Also living in close proximity are several Munnels (also in the records as Monnel or Munnil), Hills, and Teunis Van Asdall.  They were known to live close to the intersection of what is now 208 and 17K, which gives us an idea of where Samuel’s farm was.

The Rev Andrew King, who appears three lines above Nathaniel and Samuel, was the pastor at the Goodwill Church that is still located on 208 just south of the intersection with 17K. He would perform the marriage of Joel's daughter, Jemima, and Joseph Tice in about 6 years. (There are 3 Tice/Tise entries in the assessment.)

The relationship of  Phinely Campbell, who appears on this page, is unknown.

Daniel had received the original Campbell farm in the will of 1773. But in the 1779 Tax Assessment he had no real property (the farm appears to have been sold to his brothers, Nathan and Levi. See below.) and his personal property was only 12 pounds. He is living close to the Crist's mill and perhaps is employed there.

Daniel in 1779 Tax Assessment

Nathan and Levi are farming next to John Perry, Benjamin Wood, and Benjamin Haines.  This fits the description of the original farm willed to Daniel.  The sum of 50 acres matches the amount described in the will.  These are very small farms for large families.  Their personal wealth is also very small compared to their neighbors.

Nathan and Levi in 1779 Tax Assessment

A farmhouse of a Benjamin Haines (there were several generations with this name) still exists on Coleman Road in what is now called Montgomery Township, Orange County, New York.

Gideon Pelton, who appears near the top of the list, eventually owned a large farm 2 or 3 miles to the south.  That farm and farmhouse still exist and are historic landmarks.

Jonathan is living in Shawangonk(sp) Precinct just to the north of Hanover Precinct.  He is the most prosperous of his siblings by far.  The value of his real property is 1000 pounds (500 to 1000 acres?) and has personal property of 1000 pounds.  It is likely that his wife, Mary Heines (Haines), inherited the farm of her father.

Jonathan in Shawangunk Precinct Tax Assessment

Missing are Reuben and Joel. Reuben may have already moved west into Mamakating Precinct where he was living in 1790.  That assessment has apparently not survived.

Joel's absence is more of a mystery.  We know he lived in this area in 1767 (Colden Store) and in 1790 (US Census for Montgomery (aka Hanover)).  A "Joel Campbell" is named in an April 23, 1779 list of “exempts” in the Company of Captain Jacob Conklin, in Jonathan Hasbrouck’s 4^th Ulster Regiment of Militia. [History of Orange County, Ruttenber, Edward M. Philadelphia, 1881, p 49.]  Conklin's was known as the "Western Newburgh Company" and was said to be "recruited in Wallkill." [see Article in New York Genealogical and Biographical Society Journal, Vol 59 Issue 4 p223.]  Hasbrouck's regiment was recruited out of the precincts of Newburgh, Marlborough, and Shawangunk.  Most of the surnames on the list can be traced to families in Newburgh or New Marlborough. The tax assessments for Newburgh and Marlborough have not survived.

The 1779 Tax Assessment for Hanover Precinct, Ulster County, New York - Part I

[Also see Part II of this Article.]

The 1779 tax assessment for Hanover Precinct, Ulster County, New York is the most complete list of residents I have found of the inhabitants of this area during the Revolutionary War.  It is the bridge between the US census of 1790 and the list of shoppers at the Colden Store of 1768.  

If you are new to researching this area, it was renamed to "Montgomery Precinct" in 1782, "Town of Montgomery" in 1788, and became part of an expanded Orange County in 1798. 

I believe I first saw the tax list on microfilm at the New-York Historical Society, but I later was given a pdf copy by a local historian who I sadly cannot remember. I referenced it so often that I transcribed it to a spreadsheet which I could sort and search. Finally, today I loaded the searchable 1779 Tax Assessment database to the OCHS website, so others can find and use. 

I wrote about this tax assessment in my biography of Joel Campbell, Yeoman of the Revolution.  I incorrectly suggested that John Blake prepared the census, but I have later discovered it was prepared by David Galatian. I wrote about the Galatian family.  David would create the 1798 map of Montgomery and would be its first supervisor upon creation in 1798.

Because I had a known relationship to all of the Campbells in this tax assessment (except for Phinely who was a tenant of Colden), I thought there was a good chance that a Campbell who joined the Hanover militia in 1776 was probably also related. This is the Andrew Campbell written about in prior blogs.  YDNA has shown that is not the case. More on that soon.

Reuben Campbell - from Newark, NJ to Ulster, NY to Ovid, NY

The rapid western expansion in the 1820s and 1830s often complicates genealogical research. A name disappears in New York, and now appears in Indiana, Ohio, Illinois, or Missouri.  Is it the same person?

One example of this is the families of Reuben and Simeon Campbell who are enumerated in the 1810 census for Ovid, Seneca, New York. 

How Reuben and Simeon are related is still unknown, but it is assumed they were cousins.  Both were born in New Jersey.  Reuben relocated with his father to the Wallkill area of New York (current Montgomery, Orange County) in about 1765.  He first appears in the records of the local store in 1768 purchasing sugar and molasses and picking up items for his brother, Jonathan, to whom he may have been apprenticed as a blacksmith. He is confirmed to be the son of Samuel Campbell in a will of 1773.

His name first appears with Simeon's in 1775 when they both sign the Articles of Association in New Paltz. We know Simeon to be born in 1754 from his enlistment in 1776. Reuben is guessed to be a bit older, perhaps born in 1745. Reuben moved again with many of his brothers to the western part of Ulster County.  His farm in Mamakating neighbored that of Simeon in the 1799 tax assessment roll. In 1802, Reuben and his son Thomas appear on the tax assessment roll for Ovid, Cayuga County. Simeon soon appears in Ovid in the 1810 census. 

Pages 19 and 20 of the 1810 census for Ovid contain many surnames that are interwoven with Reuben and Simeon Campbell: King, Leonard, Russell, Ludlow, Conklin, Garrett. 

The changes to this area of Ovid are apparent in the 1820 census. Reuben and Thomas are missing. Simeon's close neighbor, Benedict Russell has left a 26-44yo widow, Abigail. [Could this be his daughter?]. Simeon has gained a new neighbor, widow Lydia King (26-44) with small children. [Could this be another daughter?] His close neighbor, Silas Ludlow, has been replaced by his son, Samuel Ludlow, husband of Hannah Campbell (Simeon's daughter). There is no older member of the household, suggesting the death of Silas. Further down the page appears Jeremiah King, husband of another daughter of Simeon, Sarah.

It is not until the 1850 census that we pick up on the trail of Thomas, son of Reuben. We discover that between 1810 and 1820 he moved to Ohio with his wife, Hanna, and children, Phoebe, Reuben, and Elizabeth. They are enumerated in the 1820 census of Darke County, Ohio. In 1824, Ohio marriage records show Betsy (Elizabeth) married Marvin Chapman in Darke County.

Albert Nevius relocated at about the same time if not as a group with Thomas.  Albert's daughter, Eleanor, and Thomas' son, Reuben, marry in 1827 in Ohio.

The 1830 census for Montgomery, Indiana shows a Thomas Campbell with a household of six.  The ages for Thomas and Hanna agree with birthdates in later records.  They are living next to Reuben Campbell [presumably their son].

The 1840 census for Fountain, Indiana (a county bordering the west of Montgomery County and just east of Danville, IL) shows a Thomas household of two people.  The ages are correct for Thomas, now 63, and Hanna. Their neighbor is Cornelius Reeson (Ryerson) who is married to daughter, Phoebe. Another neighbor is Boyington Chatman (Chapman, Marvin's brother) Their daughter, Betsy Chapman, is living in the neighboring county of Montgomery, Indiana.

It is not until the 1850 census, when names of each individual in the household are enumerated along with exact ages and birthplaces, that we can put this all together. The 1850 census for Crawford, Missouri shows a 73 year-old T Campbell born in NY; living w 70 year-old H Campbell(F) born in NJ with 19 year-old R Rison [Believed to be Orilla Ryerson, their 19yo granddaughter(F) b in IN.]  They are living next to M(arvin) Chapman 53 born in PA [presumably their son-in-law]. Marvin is living with B(etsy) Chapman(F) 42 b NY [presumed to be Elizabeth their daughter] The birthplaces of the Chapman children suggest they were living in Ohio in 1828, IN from 1831 to 1840, IL in 1841, and MO from 1844.

What became of Reuben? In 1810 he is guessed to have been about 65yo living in the household of Thomas. He does not appear in the household of Thomas in 1820.  I suppose he could be in the household of an unknown daughter. One possibility is that he is the second male older than 45 living in the Simeon Campbell household in 1820?

This proof of a father-son relationship between Reuben and Thomas is not totally bulletproof.  Even the proof that this Reuben in Ovid is the same Reuben mentioned in Samuel Campbell's will of 1773 could be questioned. The knock-out punch was delivered by the YDNA of a living descendant of Reuben, son of Thomas. That YDNA matched that of descendants of other sons of Samuel who were also mentioned in the will of 1773.

Optimizing Bicycle Tire Pressure on Gravel - Part III (The Part where freshly-waxed chain break-in time is revealed.)

This is Part III describing studies to determine which tire pressure gives the least rolling resistance on gravel.  You should read Parts I & II first. Be aware that the results are unique to my weight, tire, and road surface conditions.

[For my genealogy research readers:   You are at the correct location.  As you know I get distracted at times.  More genealogy research results will come soon.  My most recent post on Y-DNA is here.]

In Part I, I found the surprising result (to me) that my drag at a tire pressure of 30 psi was less than my drag at 40 or 50 psi. I calculated the power savings to be about 10 watts. That is similar to the savings I obtained by getting into an aero position (all at about 15 mph).

In Part II, I made some improvements in the testing protocol, but I began to question the reproducibility of the data.

This study, Part III focused on reproducibilty of the protocol. The changes from Part II are:

1) Silca Pump used with advertised accuracy of 1%.
2) Wheel circumference was remeasured using new pump and a 10 revolution loaded-roll-out on smooth pavement. (Average of 5 roll-outs.  All pressures tested had measured circumferences with std dev of less than 0.03%.)
3) New test loop was in a traffic-free, wind-protected dip, with no paved sections.
4) 8 laps per test (vs 4 in Part II). Total distance per test was 2.21 miles vs. 2.09.
5) Freshly-waxed chain

The Test Variables

Only the tire pressure was varied.  All other variables were held constant.  Three pressures were tested: 20, 30, and 40.  The 30 psi test was repeated 4 times to test for reproducibility.

The results are shown in terms of Virtual Elevation (VE). (See Part I for short explanation of VE). The steeper the slope of a Test, the more power is being lost versus other Tests. [Note how much cleaner these data are than in Part I and II.  All of the laps are clearly visible. The VE of the dip is more consistent than Part II (due to lack of paved section?)]

Analysis of the data revealed that the break-in of the freshly-waxed chain overshadowed all of the other variables! The negative impact of using a freshly-waxed chain was about 14 watts during Test 1 versus Test 6. Even after 9 miles of riding there appears to be break-in losses. The abrupt change in slope in Test 3, when the pressure was lowered to 20 psi, suggests there could be some reductions in rolling resistance, making the break-in losses appear less severe.  When the pressure was increased to 40 psi in Test 4, the abrupt change in slope in the opposite direction indicates more loses versus the 20 psi Test.  The flattening of the slope at the end of Test 4 is a bit puzzling. The slope at the start of Test 5 could be viewed as a continuation of the curve begun back in Tests 1 and 2. The last 3.5 miles of riding appear consistent, indicating the break-in is complete.

Conclusion

The objective of showing reproducibility was not achieved in Part III. (Sorry...Part IV is coming.)

The freshly-waxed chain (SRAM 12 sp with SILCA Super Secret Hot Wax) was shown to take at least 10 miles or about 45 minutes of riding to reach a steady state. 

Also see 7:26 minutes into the Silca video: Chain Waxing? Avoid These 7 Common Failures! (youtube.com)

GCN beat me to it.  This Chain Waxing Mistake Makes You SLOW (youtube.com)

Optimizing Bicycle Tire Pressure on Gravel - Part II

This is Part II describing studies to determine which tire pressure gives the least rolling resistance on gravel.  You should read Part I first. Be aware that the results are unique to my weight, tire, and road surface conditions.

[For my genealogy research readers:   You are at the correct location.  As you know I get distracted at times.  More genealogy research results will come soon.  My most recent post on Y-DNA is here.]

In Part I, I found the surprising result (to me) that my drag at a tire pressure of 30 psi was less than my drag at 40 or 50 psi. I calculated the power savings to be about 10 watts. That is similar to the savings I obtained by getting into an aero position (all at about 15 mph).

There were some flaws with that study, which I tried to correct in Part II. The following changes were made to the study for Part II:

1) I used a two-sided power meter instead of one-sided.
2) I measured wheel circumferences at all tested pressures. (Lower pressures have smaller circumferences.  The circumference is a speed sensor setting.)
3) The new loop is at a dip in the road.  This allows for speed variations and easier identification of laps.
4) I started and ended tests at V=0 vs. in-motion starts and stops in Part I.
5) Test on a less windy day.

This study still had some flaws which I think I can address in Part III or IV. They are:

1) My pressure gauge is neither accurate nor precise.  (A new one is on order.)
2) There is a section of paved road at the bottom of the dip. This results in some noise in the data seen at the bottom of each data curve.
3) I only made 4 laps per test (vs. 6 in Part I), but the laps were twice as long as in Part I.

The Test Variables

Only the tire pressure was varied.  All other variables were held constant.  Three pressures were tested: 27, 32, and 37.  The 32 psi test was repeated at the beginning and end to test for reproducibility.

The data are reported as 'Virtual Elevation' (VE) versus distance. An increase in slope indicates more power was needed for that test condition versus the base case. Test 4 is the base case.

The data are a bit cleaner than the data from Part I, however the test is not reproducible from Test 1 to Test 4.  In my next study, I will do a duplicate at the beginning of the study (Test 1 and Test 2) and again at the end, to nail down the variability of this test.

If I use Test 4 as my baseline and choose CdA and Crr that will make Test 4 level, it can be compared to Test 2 and 3. In this case 37 psi is a 3 watt penalty and 27 psi is a 3 watt savings versus 32 psi.

I lack 100% confidence in these results.  However, I have changed my default riding pressure to 28 psi in front and 30 psi in rear, so I do have some confidence that what I am seeing is real.

Part III will be coming soon! 

Optimizing Gravel Tire Pressure using Chung Method - Part I

I am preparing for an upcoming gravel triathlon. What is the optimal tire pressure for me and my set-up on gravel? What if I find myself alone on the bike course with no one to draft behind? ...What is my optimal body position?

Generic "answers" to these questions can be found on the internet, but can I find the optimal conditions for me and my set-up?

I performed the seven tests below in under an hour.  Three of the tests were duplicates to verify that the tests were reproducible (1, 4, and 7).  The test conditions and results are shown below.  They are shown in terms of a "Virtual Elevation" (VE).  If the slope is upwards for a test, it means that extra power is needed for that test (like going uphill).  Conversely, if the slope is downwards for a test, it means less power is needed for those conditions.

In summary, it appears that a tire pressure as low as 30 psi is more efficient for me than 40 or 50 psi. As one would expect, getting into the drops is more aero (negative slope in VE) than being on the hoods.  Even greater savings is seen when I bring my hands in close on the bars (Test #6).

What amazed me was how quickly I was able to do these tests (under an hour) AND despite less than ideal conditions (it was windy, course was flat, and I did not alter speed very much) I had results that yielded valuable information.

Test Protocol

Each test was 6 laps on a quarter mile gravel loop.  The loop was flat.  (Better results are obtained on loops with a change in elevation.) I averaged about 14 mph for all laps. (Better results are obtained if the speeds are varied.) I used a calibrated Garmin Speed Sensor (more accurate than GPS).  I used a single-sided Quarq spindle power meter. (Better if two-sided.)  Tire pressure was measured using a Specialized floor pump with gradations every 5 psi....not that precise and probably not that accurate either. I captured T, RH, and P at the start and end of the test protocol using www.localconditions.com.  I weighed myself and loaded bike using a Tanita floor scale.  Each test was saved as a Garmin workout.  All seven workouts were exported from Garmin Connect as TCX files and imported into Golden Cheetah.  The seven workouts were combined and analyzed in the AeroLab Chart as shown above.

The Chung Method

Virtual Elevation is the output of the Chung Method.  The method solves the Power Balance equation for slope, using guesses for Crr and CdA. Slope multiplied by velocity gives the change in elevation which are strung together and plotted.  This elevation is referred to as "Virtual Elevation" as all of the unaccounted for "power" in the Power Balance, whether it is related to elevation gain or not, is converted to elevation. Chung has shown that this method is good at exposing even minor changes in Crr or CdA, even when the data is crappy...as mine are. You can read his paper here.  [Crr is the Coefficient of rolling resistance and CdA is the Coefficient of drag area.]

Data Analysis

Stringing all of the test data together allows a visual analysis.  I guessed a Crr and CdA which made the duplicate runs (1,4,7) as flat as possible. If the test is reproducible, 1,4, and 7 should all be the same. In fact, each of the 6 laps within a test should be the same.  If you look closely, you can count the 6 laps in each test. Test 1 had some anomalies on the first two laps. I did not do any practice laps. This was the absolute first time I had ever biked this loop. There was a conduit over the road which I rode over on the first 2 laps.  All subsequent laps, I biked around it.  It is interesting that this method is sensitive enough to show that. Test 4 had relatively good data. Test 7 appears OK for the first 3 laps, then trends up. The wind was gusting more, so that could be part of the cause. Considering how windy it was, I am surprised I got any meaningful data at all from these tests. With these differences in 1,4,7, I would want to do this test again on a calm day to confirm the results. 

A note on Test 3: On the fifth lap, a camper pulled out and I had to go onto the shoulder to go around him. On the sixth lap, he was still there. All of that is visible in the virtual elevation plot. Now I know to redo the test if that happens again.

Crr on Gravel

My testing qualitatively showed that my set-up at 30 psi had less rolling resistance than 40 psi or 50 psi.  My tires are tubeless Panaracer GravelKing SS TLC 40 (40-622) (700x38c) tires. I use Silca Sealant. My total weight (biker + bike) is 71.7 kg.

BicycleRollingResistance.com has tested these tires.  They show that the rolling resistance decreases as psi increases....the opposite of what I found in real life!! Of course, their testing is done on a drum that mimics a paved road at 18 mph and 94 lbs load and 70-73 °F. Their Crr are 0.00498 at 54 psi, 0.00528 @ 45 psi, 0.00576 @ 36 psi, and 0.00674 @ 27 psi. You would expect the Crrs to be much higher on a rough surface like gravel.

The Silca Tire Pressure Calculator suggests (for my weight and tire) about 43 psi for Category 1 gravel (well-packed), 40 psi for Category 2 Gravel (not packed), 35 psi for Category 3 gravel (very rough) and about 31 psi for Category 4 gravel (off-road). This is getting closer to the pressures suggested by my testing on what I would call Category 2 Gravel.

My data are not really good enough to quantify a value for Crr for my conditions, but we know it is greater than 0.005.

CdA on a Gravel Bike

The range of CdAs for cyclists vary from 0.2 m² (time-trialers) to over 0.7 m² (riding upright). 

The Chung Method may not always be able to quantify the value of CdA, but one can visually see a change in CdA from one set-up to another.  In Tests 4,5,6, all conditions remained the same except for body position as seen below.

I have also used AeroTune to measure CdA on a timetrial bike and find the Chung method not only easier to perform, but much easier to get a visual feel for the accuracy of the results.

Test 4 - On Hoods

Test 5 - In the drops

Test 6 - Tuck with hands on bar

Part II addresses some of the flaws in this study.

Andrew Campbell b1747 - YDNA

I have a special fascination with an "Andrew Campbell" who served in the Continental Army for all 8 years of the Revolutionary War.

I wrote an article about him for the Journal of the Clan Campbell Society of North America. 

I blogged about his military discharge at Snake Hill in New Windsor, New York.  

I even started an autosomal DNA project to find my improbable 7th cousins. 

I searched for Andrew's descendants and (more importantly) I searched for people doing the same.

It has been over 10 years since the CCSNA article. It has been a long slow journey, a journey that continues. This week marked a huge step in finding out ... Who is "Andrew Campbell?"

As recently as 2020, I believed that Andrew had no paternal descendants. However, another family researcher, Debi L., continued to uncover Andrew's children and their descendants. A few years ago, she found a living paternal descendant.  It took me another few years to make the contact and make arrangements for a YDNA test with Family Tree DNA.  The test is now "in the mail."  Results are expected in a few months.

Why is this so interesting to me and to other descendants of Joel and Andrew? Currently the parentage of Andrew is unknown. His geographical proximity to Joel in 1775 makes a relationship more than a remote possibility.  Joel was in the same local militia company in Hanover Precinct, Ulster County, NY. 

Andrew was in the minuteman company of Captain Peter Hill of Hanover. Joel is enumerated on the same page as Captain Peter Hill in the 1790 census. [The Campbells and the Hills had lived in the area since the 1760s.]  Peter was the son of Nathaniel Hill referred to in a prior blog.  His home still stands.

Andrew also served in the Continental company of Captain William Jackson of Hanover Precinct (as he testified for his pension application in 1818.) Nathan, Samuel, and Robert Campbell were also in a militia company commanded by Jackson the same year, prior to Jackson raising a company in the Continentals. Nathan and Samuel were brothers of Joel. 

Was Andrew a nephew? (son of an older sibling of Joel?) Or perhaps a 2nd cousin (a grandson of a brother of Joel's father.) Or possibly related to the Alexander Campbell family living in that area in the 1760s who were part of the Lachlan Campbell immigration party of 1739...and unrelated. YDNA will answer most of those questions.

Here is the genealogy from the father of the Tester to Andrew:

Arthur L Campbell 1911-1989
Richard James Campbell 1886-1946
Albert S Campbell 1842-1918
Richard Campbell 1798-1869
Andrew Campbell 1747-1833

Ship Wakes and the Kelvin Wedge

This is a continuation of a few "off-topic" discussions, with no more convenient home. My apologies if you are looking for "joelcampbell1735-research."  I will be back to that soon.

Waves

I have spent more time in recent years staring at waves.  I live on a 'coast' and almost daily walk the beach and watch the end of the wave lifecycle as they peak, topple, and crash into the shore.  Occasionally I sail on a tall ship and view the wash basin that is the normal sea.  Waves of all heights, directions, and wavelengths.  Sometimes waves appear organized...traveling in a group, all with the same direction and speed.

Wakes

One well known wave (or set of waves) is that which extends out from the bow of a ship and appears to travel at the speed of the ship.  A similar wake is seen behind a duck, a kayak, or a swimmer.  In fact, way back in August of 1887, William Thomson, announced that these wakes all had the same angle regardless of the speed or size of the moving object.  Thomson, also known as Lord Kelvin, a 63-year-old world-renowned scientist in Glasgow, delivered a lecture at the Conversazione in the Science and Art Museum in Edinburgh, giving the angle as one made by a line from the bow of a ship (x=0, y=0) to a point of x/y = 8^1/2. [If you remember your trigonometry, y/x would be the tangent of this angle, so the angle is....

 tan^-1(8^-1/2) = 19.47 degrees.]

Duck with Wake Waves
Daderot, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Getting to the Solution

How Lord Kelvin arrived at this elegant solution is not revealed in his 1887 address. [You can read the paper at Archive.org]   It has been solved on-line and in textbooks, sometimes with a bit too much fancy mathematics and hand-waving for this author. In my opinion, there is a hierarchy of learning needed to arrive at an understanding of the solution. To understand the wake angle, you need to understand "group velocity." But to understand group velocity, you must understand "gravity waves." But to understand gravity waves you need to understand the "Law of Squares."

The Law of Squares

In nature, many relationships are linear. For example, if you double the speed of an object, then you double the distance the object travels. Other relationships are related by the Law of Squares.  Gravity is one of those. As the distance between two objects increases the amount of mass needed to obtain the same gravitational force increases by its square.  It can be written

g   α   d² / m        

where g is some gravitational constant which is proportional to the square of the distance separating two bodies.

Gravity Waves

Surface waves on a body of water are governed by gravity and are termed 'gravity waves.'  It should come as no surprise that the Law of Squares is involved in the description of gravity waves.  In fact, the speed of a gravity wave is given as 

v = (gL/2π)^1/2  

where g the gravitational constant and L is the distance between wave crests.

You can see that water waves are much different than waves of light or sound.  The speed of light or sound through a media is fixed, whereas water waves travel at many speeds with their wavelengths increasing by the square root of 2 when the velocity doubles.

We can also write the above equation in terms of a wave number (k=2π/L) or

v = (g/k)^1/2

For all waves, frequency (F) is velocity multiplied by the wave number or

F = v k =  (g/k)^1/2k = (gk)^1/2    Sometimes called the frequency dispersion relationship for gravity waves.

Once again, the Law of Squares determines the relationship between the frequency of a gravity wave and its wave number. 

Group velocity

Group velocity is not an easy concept to digest. Fortunately, it can be readily observed. Just this weekend, I sat on my paddleboard and watched a 'group' of waves from a motorboat pass under me. When I focused on the lead wave in the group, I saw it disappear and a new wave appear at the rear of the group. The group had a slower velocity than an individual wave.  The excellent graphic below was borrowed from the Wiki page on Group Velocity, 

On my paddleboard, I was focusing on the red square. But the group is actually moving at the speed of the green dot. 

What causes this? It is the result of the interference of waves of similar wavelengths.

The group velocity (v_g) can be derived as the derivative of the frequency with respect to the wave number or

v_g =  dF / dk

From our equation above for gravity waves for F, the derivative is

v_g = dF / dk = ½ (g/k)^1/2   = ½ v

For gravity waves, the group velocity (the speed of the visible wave front) is one half the wave speed. It is a direct result of gravity waves having a Law of Squares relationship.

Wake  Angle

The wake waves that trail the bow of a ship appear stationary with respect to the ship. They differ from waves generated from a point source, such as a pebble dropped into a pool, from which ripples proceed out in concentric circles.

A moving ship, on the other hand, is continually creating waves, some of which the ship is keeping up with, or from the perspective of a person on the ship, is 'dragging along.' Observationally, there is no doubt that a ship produces waves that appear stationary with respect to the ship and are contained within a wedge bounded by a straight line.

From our earlier discussion, that a wave group moves at one half the speed of the wave phase velocity, one might think that there may be an analogy here to the wedge produced by a supersonic object traveling at twice the speed of sound. In the Figure below, the supersonic object has moved from x=8 to x=0, while the sound created at x=8 has only moved to x=4 (the BLUE circle). Similarly, the sound made when the object was at x=4 has only moved to x=2 (the RED circle). The wedge of sound waves, moving at one half the speed of the object, is bounded by a straight line defined by sin a = SpeedOfSound/SpeedOfObject = ½, or a = 30°.

Even though we have shown the group velocity is one half the phase velocity, the sonic shock wave is not analogous. The ship is generating waves of many speeds and directions that are constantly constructively and destructively interacting with each other. More importantly, the group wave that is stationary with respect to the ship, is the one whose phase velocity matches that of the visible wake, not the group wave that is moving at one half the speed of the ship in direction 90° - a.

Let's look at the problem from a pure trigonometric perspective. We know from observation that there are some wake waves that are stationary and are bounded in a wedge defined by a straight line. We know from our knowledge of gravity waves, that what we are observing are the group waves produced by waves whose phase velocity is twice that of the group. In the Figure below, a ship has proceeded from O to A. The BLACK lines are wave fronts of the waves creating the visible group waves. The group wave associated with this front has only moved to where the RED line appears. The PURPLE line is perpendicular to the phase and group wavefronts, and represents the wave velocity. 

Because waves at this particular (unknown) phase appear stationary, they must have a velocity of v_p = V sin a, where V is the speed of the ship and a is the angle of the phase wavefront with the ship. Hence the visible group wave has a group velocity of

v_g = ½ v_p = ½ V sin a

This is the stationary wave condition that differs from the shock wave situation with sound waves.

As suggested by the trigonometry, the group wavefront orientation and the visible wakefront are not parallel. This is clearly seen in the duck image above. The wake angle, b, is actually created by echelons of short group wave segments.

From this simple sketch of fronts and angles, what can we say about 'a' (the wave group angle) and 'b' (the visible wake angle)?

We can use the rule of trigonometry that the sine of any angle of a triangle divided by its opposite side is a constant. Take the triangle formed by OPA. Its angles are b, π/2 - a, and π - b -(π/2 - a) = π/2 - (b - a).

We can then write

sin(b)/OP = sin(π/2 - (b - a))/AO   Eq.1

where AO = Vt where V is the ship velocity and t is the time to move from O to A
and OP = v_gt = ½ v_pt = ½ Vt sin(a).

We can rewrite Eq.1 as

sin(b)/[½ Vt sin(a)] = sin(π/2 - (b - a))/Vt

Knowing that sin(π/2 - X) = cos (X)

we can write    2sin(b)/sin(a) = cos(b - a)

Interestingly, the relationship between these two angles is independent of the ship velocity, V, which is what we observe.

We can perform more trigonometry to solve this equation, which I will show. If this is of no interest, skip down to the result shown in Eq. 2.

Multiply both sides by sin(a)

2sin(b) = sin(a)cos(b - a)

But 2sinAcosB = sin(A+B) + sin(A-B)

So 2sin(b) = ½[sin(a+(b-a)) + sin(a-(b-a))]

4sin(b) = sin(b) + sin(2a-b)

3sin(b) = sin(2a-b)  Eq.2

The right side of Eq. 2 must be ≤ to 1. Therefore

sin(b) ≤ 1/3

b ≤ sin^-1(1/3)

b ≤ 19.47 °

So the visible wake angle must be 19.47 ° or less. This agrees with more robust derivations of the wake angle.

We can also solve for the angle of the group wave front, a. Once again, the right side of Eq. 2 must be ≤ to 1.

sin(2a - b) ≤ 1

then 2a-b ≤ π/2 or 90°

2a ≤ 90° + b

a ≤ (90° + b)/2

a ≤ 54.7°

Simple trigonometry has led to values for the Kelvin wake angle and the angle of the visible group waves. [Note that the Figure above is constructed to scale with a = 54.7° and b = 19.47°]

Wavelengths

One last simple observation can be made about the wake waves seen in the duck picture above. We know that the wavelength for gravity waves is given by v = (gL/2π)^1/2 or L = 2πv²/g. If the speed of the ship is driving the waves of most interest, then L = 2πV²/g. Because the still picture cannot tell us how fast the duck is moving, perhaps we can guess by measuring the distance between the echelons in the duck wake. It looks like there are about 2 wavelengths per length of the duck. If the duck is about 12 inches long, the wavelength is 6 inches, L/2π =  about 2.4 cm.

V = [9.8 m/s² x .024 m]^1/2

V = [3.1 x 0.16] m/s

V = 0.5 m/s or about 1 mph

My swim speed is about 2 mph, so the result seems reasonable.

The reader can find many derivations on the internet with much more scientific approaches to derive the wake waves and their patterns. But we have been able to confirm some of our observations of wakes with just a knowledge of gravity waves, group velocity, and trigonometry.