I have presented the thought that maps of original patents should be taken as guide lines but not as the gospel truth. Few patents have preserved their essential outlines. In some cases, it is possible to point to a tract of land and to be confident that the original boundaries can be identified. More typically, it is possible to describe the general area of the land. For example, the final John Huffman grant of more than 3,000 acres is not clearly defined in its exact outline but the area is about 90% certain.
With the passage of time and the removal of physical features, it becomes more difficult to exactly define the tracts. The original Blankenbaker tracts were defined by hedge rows and fences until about ten years ago but they have been removed as the individual tracts have been combined into one.
The well-known Carpenter map of 1940 has some errors in it. He reversed two of the tracts, one belonging to Scheible and an adjacent one. However, even so the general locations are correct. He also made some placement errors around Garr’s Mountain, but the general drift of the tract locations was correct.
Why are there these uncertainties? The surveys were hastily done, and with approximations. I have seen a line defined as bearing 60 degrees in one patent and said to be with the line of a neighbor. In the neighbor’s patent, the same line is said to be 50 degrees. There were many errors in recording the patents. North and south were reversed. In the Spotswood patent for the Spotsylvania tract, one long line omitted 1,000 rods in the recording. Then the handwriting in the patent description is sometimes very hard to read.
Some of these errors are corrected in resurvey. That is why it is important to use them as they tend to clarify the earlier patents. But since the boundaries are often different, there is still an element of uncertainty. The large John Huffman patent mentioned earlier is difficult to read. In " Cavaliers and Pioneers " one of the waterways was misread, just to show how even experienced readers can go astray.
What is needed is an extension of the land records beyond the original tracts to see who owned and sold what. The tracts are often redefined in these records. It also permits the owners of a tract of land to be determined. This is a very major job.
I have wondered if the satellite photos would be helpful. It is possible to identify a few of the original tracts but whether they would be generally useful is unknown.
(16 Feb 06)
We gratefully acknowledge the work of John Blankenbaker who published over 2,500 Germanna History Notes via the Germanna-L@rootsweb.com email list from 1997 to 2008. We are equally thankful to George Durman (Sgt. George) for hosting the list and republishing the notes via rootsweb.com.