Do you have ancestors with the last name of
Back, or Bach, who came from southeastern Kentucky?
Then you have probably heard of
"The Back-Bach Genealogical Society."
Their name comes from the fact that some members
of the family spell their last name as "Back,"
while others spell it as "Bach."
Yet, not one member of their club was a genealogist,
or knew anything about proper genealogical research.
Members, and supporters, of that bizarre little club
later became known as, "Back-Bach people."
The genealogy that they published, back in 1994,
was fraudulent. What's even worse is the fact that
they knew it was fraudulent, when they published it.
They claimed that their Back (Bach) family from southeastern Kentucky descends from Harman Back, who immigrated from Freudenberg, Germany, and settled in Little Fork, Virginia.
However, they had absolutely no proof of that,
because there was no proof, because it wasn't true.
So, why did they do it?
They thought that they would get rich by doing so.
Sadly, there are still some "Back-Bach people"
around today, telling the same lie.
One of them even claims she has DNA proof
that the Back (Bach) family from southeastern
Kentucky descends from Harman Back.
But she rigged her DNA Project.
It's just another scam, just another fraud.
The "Back-Bach people" truly are psycho.
How the fraudulent genealogy started: Despite the name of the club, not one member of The Back-Bach Genealogical Society was a genealogist. In fact, most of them never even graduated from high school. The only reason they formed their little club was to create a fraudulent genealogy book about their own family, and then sell it, to make money. It's so strange...yet, it's true.
But before they published their fraudulent genealogy book, they decided that they had to destroy as much proof of the actual genealogy of their own family that they could find, such as old family artifacts, books, and even historical documents. They wanted to make sure that, after they published their book, nobody could question their fraudulent genealogy, by bringing up proof of the actual genealogy.
They started their destruction program by cutting out a handwritten statement, made in 1762, from a page of their own family's historical Bible. That old Family Bible had been in their family for hundreds of years. The handwritten statement said that their family had originally come from Thuringia, Germany, which was true. They cut out that statement, because, later on, their fraudulent genealogy would claim that their family came from Freudenberg, Germany.
Then they damaged the research of Dr. Wilgus Bach, who had documented and proven the family's actual genealogy, in the early 1900s, by conducting interviews with scores of elderly people, and locating numerous historical documents. They got hold of his original manuscript (the only copy), and they nearly destroyed it. They crossed out the names of the actual ancestors of their own family, and then they wrote in the names of people that they would later use, in their fraudulent genealogy book. They also used some "white-out," to simply eliminate many of the names, and some of the information. They even removed a large number of pages and just threw them away. And brazenly, they actually inserted a piece of paper into his manuscript that described their fraudulent genealogy; it even had their name and address at the bottom of it!
Then they went into countless libraries and historical societies, and they either removed books and documents that proved the family's actual genealogy, or they used an ink pen to cross out the actual genealogy in those books and documents, and then they wrote in their fraudulent genealogy. The most common thing they did was cross out the name "Joseph Back" (the man who actually founded their family in southeastern Kentucky), and then they wrote in the name "Henry Back" (whose widow they falsely claim founded their family in southeastern Kentucky). That vandalism was so rampant, throughout the Kentucky Library System, that some librarians still talk about it, to this day.
But, probably the worst thing they did was in The Maggard Cemetery, in Partridge, Kentucky. There, in the fall of 1988, they actually pulled up the old gravestone of their own great, great, grandmother, Elizabeth Hoffman-Maggard Back (1755-1826), from the ground, and then threw it over the hill. Then they replaced it with a fake gravestone that they had made, which described her sister-in-law, Elizabeth Hoffman Back, the widow of Henry Back (1740-1809), who was the brother of her husband Joseph Back (1745-1819). They actually placed their new, fake gravestone on top of the remains of their own great, great grandmother. It was beyond belief. In fact, they actually admitted that they were going to do it, in an article that one of them wrote, in The Filson Club History Quarterly (Vol. 62, No. 4, Oct. 1988, p. 467-473), as if they were proud of it. They later claimed that their new, fake gravestone was "proof" that their fraudulent genealogy was correct! (Sadly, that fake gravestone is still there, on top of the remains of Elizabeth Hoffman-Maggard Back.)
Unfortunately, there is no way to know what other precious family artifacts, books, or documents they destroyed. But clearly, they eliminated a significant amount of their own family's actual genealogy, because there is not much left of it today. They did all of that, just so that nothing would stand in their way of selling their fraudulent genealogy book, later on. It was incredibly evil.
In 1994, they published their fraudulent genealogy in a big orange book, which they sold for $85. Their book was titled, A Back Family History: The Story of a Major Branch of the Back/Bach Family. Their book falsely claimed that their family from southeastern Kentucky descends from a man named Harman Back (aka Hermann Bach), who was born in 1708, in Freudenberg, Germany; he came to America in 1738, and he settled in Little Fork, Virginia, in 1739.
Their book also falsely claimed that Harman had four sons: Harman Back Jr. (1737-1798); John Back (1738-1794); Henry Back (1740-1809); and Joseph Back (1756-1832), although they altered some of those dates of birth and death. However, Harman Back actually only had one son, which was Harman Back Jr. (1737-1798).
Their book falsely claimed that Harman's alleged son Henry Back (1740-1809) had two sons: John Back (1774-1853) and Henry Back (1785-1871). Their book further falsely claimed that, after the death of Henry Back (1740-1809), in Virginia, his frail, 63-year-old widow, Elizabeth Hoffman Back, suddenly moved 500 miles away, to the remote and dangerous wilderness of southeastern Kentucky, for no apparent reason, with her children, including her two alleged sons (John and Henry), and founded their Back (Bach) family there. But all of that was a blatant lie, and they knew it was a blatant lie.
There was not one piece of evidence in their book to prove any of their false claims about Harman Back, including that he had a son named Henry Back (1740-1809), or that Henry had two sons named John Back (1774-1853) and Henry Back (1785-1871). They just made it all up. Why anyone believed their outrageous claims is a mystery. They had no proof of any of it. No proof at all. (Because it wasn't true!)
They even had the nerve to include a list of people on the Acknowledgements Page of their book, implying that all of those people on that list supported their fraudulent genealogy. However, most of those people wanted nothing to do with them, and had never supported their fraudulent genealogy. Some of them were even dead by then (so they couldn't protest their name being used like that), including Dr. Wilgus Bach, whose manuscript they had nearly destroyed! They even had the audacity to claim that their fraudulent genealogy was the same genealogy that Dr. Wilgus Bach had written about! But that was a blatant lie as well. Dr. Bach had never even mentioned anyone named Harman Back, in his manuscript!
Dr. Wilgus Bach had proven that the Back (Bach) family in southeastern Kentucky was founded by Joseph Back (1745-1819), in 1791, and that Joseph Back was the father of John Back (1774-1853) and Henry Back (1785-1871). Dr. Bach had also proven that Joseph Back (1745-1819) was the son of John Henry Back (1709-1789), who had immigrated from Thuringia, Germany, and was related to the famous musical composer, Johann Sebastian Bach. That is the actual genealogy of the Back (Bach) family from southeastern Kentucky, which has been passed down, through the family, for hundreds of years. That genealogy is supported by the information written into the old Back (Bach) Family Bible, facts from numerous historical documents, and solid evidence from many well-documented family history books. That genealogy is also supported by the in-depth research done by several Board-Certified genealogists and respected historians, as well as the genealogy experts at DAR.
The Back-Bach Genealogical Society also included the name of Dr. B.C. Holtzclaw, on that list of people on the Acknowledgements Page, because he was also dead by then, and so he could not object to them using his name either. Dr. Holtzclaw had included information about their fraudulent genealogy, in a 1964 book that he had written, but he also wrote in that book that there was no proof of it, and he most certainly did not support it. But yet, they implied that he did support it. It was simply another blatant lie.
Shockingly, the members of The Back-Bach Genealogical Society knew full well that their fraudulent genealogy was a blatant lie. In fact, they had known the actual genealogy of their own family, for a long time, because it had been passed down, from generation to generation, for hundreds of years. It had also been openly discussed at the annual family reunions, which the members of The Back-Bach Genealogical Society had actually attended (as proven by numerous newspaper articles). Those annual reunions had been held every fall, since 1933, on Miles Back's farm, in Quicksand, Kentucky, which was a small community in Breathitt County, where the family had first settled, back in 1791. Nearly 1,000 people attended those reunions every year. People brought a "basket lunch," and they sat out on the lawn, talking and laughing with each other, and sharing stories and pictures. They also passed around the old Family Bible, which included the family's genealogy. Everyone loved going to those reunions, because they were so much fun. The reunions were reported in the newspapers, and a summary of the family's genealogy was included in most of the articles, noting their connection to the famous musical composer Johann Sebastian Bach.
Yet, the members of The Back-Bach Genealogical Society thought that they could make a great deal of money, by creating and selling a fraudulent genealogy book about their family, which connected their family to Harman Back. They were completely driven by greed, to do this. It was truly appalling.
They knew that Harman Back was one of a small group of immigrants who were being researched by The Germanna Foundation, which is a genealogical organization in Virginia that brings in a tremendous amount of money by selling genealogy. So they thought that, if they could somehow connect their family to Harman Back, in a fraudulent genealogy book, they could make a tremendous amount of money as well, by selling that book.
The Germanna Foundation: This organization had been established, back in 1956, in order to research the ancestors, and the descendants, of a small group of German immigrants (including Harman Back) who had settled into northern Virginia, along the Rappahannock River, in the early 1700s. Those immigrants had lived in two small settlements: Germanna and Little Fork.
Back in the 1950s, in order to join The Germanna Foundation, a person had to descend from one of those German immigrants. But starting in the 1980s, The Germanna Foundation began taking money from anyone. That was also when they started to transition, from being a respected genealogical organization, into an aggressive money-making machine that turned the fun hobby of genealogy, into an obnoxious display of greed. Their primary focus was to bring in as much money as possible, for the people who were running it. That continues to be their primary focus today.
So, The Back-Bach Genealogical Society created a fraudulent genealogy that connected their Back (Bach) family in southeastern Kentucky, to Harman Back, simply to take advantage of The Germanna Foundation's extraordinary ability to make money from selling genealogy. They hoped to make a great deal of money as well. It was as simple as that.
In 1994: When The Back-Bach Genealogical Society published their fraudulent genealogy book, in 1994, they came up with a devious plan to sell it. They knew that the people who lived in southeastern Kentucky would never buy the book, because they already knew about the actual genealogy of their own family.
So, The Back-Bach Genealogical Society started holding annual "secret family meetings," way up in Lexington, Kentucky, 90 miles away, to which they only invited members of the Back (Bach) family who had been born and raised, outside of southeastern Kentucky. They figured that those people probably would not have already heard about the actual genealogy of their family, and so they would buy their book.
The Back-Bach Genealogical Society held those annual "secret family meetings" for four years, from the fall of 1994, through the fall of 1997. They sold all 500 copies of their fraudulent genealogy book at those meetings, simply because the attendees didn't know the actual genealogy of their family.
They also sold a large number of memberships in their little club: $20 for a 1-year membership, and $100 for a lifetime membership. (A lifetime membership? Yes, that's right!)
They even collected money from anyone who wanted to join The Germanna Foundation, which they referred to as being their "sister organization." (How obvious is that!)
In 1998: In the spring of 1998, The Back-Bach Genealogical Society sent out "newsletters" to members of their family who lived in southeastern Kentucky, announcing that they were suddenly going to "be in charge of" the family reunions. They said that they were moving the reunions, from Miles Back's farm, in Quicksand (where they had been held for nearly 70 years), all the way down to the Pine Mountain Grill restaurant, in Whitesburg, 60 miles away. They also said they were charging people $25 to attend the reunion, and $20 to join The Back-Bach Genealogical Society. When family members in southeastern Kentucky received the "newsletters," they were outraged. And it's no wonder that they were.
Nobody had ever paid any money to go to their own family reunion before, and there was no reason to join any club! So, nobody from southeastern Kentucky went to that "new reunion" in Whitesburg that year, or to any of the subsequent "new reunions" in Whitesburg. The few people who went were from out-of-state.
New reunions: The attendees had to sit quietly, and listen, for well over two hours, while Reedus Back (the unscrupulous "president" of The Back-Bach Genealogical Society) loomed over them, from up at the podium, looking down at them, and lecturing them about Harman Back. He also continually solicited them for money, and he even had some of his friends come in and solicit them for money as well. And if anyone dared to ask about the actual genealogy of the family, Reedus and his cohorts mocked them, and laughed at them.
About fifty people attended that first "new reunion," but less and less people went, each year after that. By 2008, nobody showed up, and so the "new reunions" abruptly ended.
The Back-Bach Genealogical Society destroyed
their own family's reunions,
which had been going on for nearly 70 years.
The real damage: But it was that big, orange, fraudulent genealogy book that caused the really serious damage to the family. It pitted the people who had bought the book, and somehow believed what was in it (even though there was absolutely no proof in the book for any of the claims that it made); against the people who already knew the actual genealogy of their own family, and those who had figured out that the fraudulent genealogy was fraudulent.
The Back-Bach Genealogical Society tore their own family apart, with their big, orange, fraudulent genealogy book. Most people just walked away from it all, because they were so disgusted by what The Back-Bach Genealogical Society had done. But there are still a few people around today, who blindly support that fraudulent genealogy; they are still known as the "Back-Bach people," which is definitely not a compliment.
The "Back-Bach people" still continue to cling to the fraudulent genealogy, because, either (1) they refuse to admit that they were duped, and they are too lazy to research the facts for themselves; (2) they are simply not very smart; or (3) they pretend they descend from Harman Back, or his alleged son Henry Back (1740-1809), so that they can be a member of DAR (The Daughters of the American Revolution). Harman Back apparently "rendered aid" (provided supplies or ammunition) to the soldiers who fought in the Revolutionary War; and the name of Henry Back (1740-1809) was seen on a list of soldiers. That means that both men are considered to be "Patriots," in DAR, which means that the actual descendants of these men qualify for membership in DAR.
The Daughters of the American Revolution (DAR): While The Back-Bach Genealogical Society was preparing their fraudulent genealogy book, they started looking for credible organizations that they could "use," to promote it. They decided that they would send copies of their book to The Library of Congress, and to the Family History Library in Salt Lake City; and then later, they would claim that, because their book was in those two locations, that meant that the genealogy it contained was accurate! Of course, that was ludicrous, because all they did was mail the book to those places, but that was the manipulative manner in which they always operated.
Another prestigious organization that they decided to "use," to promote their fraudulent genealogy, was The Daughters of the American Revolution (DAR).
This was because they had discovered that Harman Back, and Henry Back (1740-1809), were already listed as "Patriots" in DAR. And so, they simply submitted information to DAR, claiming that: (1) Henry Back (1740-1809) was a son of Harman Back; and (2) Henry Back (1740-1809) had sons named John Back (1774-1853) and Henry Back (1785-1871). Of course, both of those claims were false, and they had no evidence to support them, because they were false, however, DAR accepted their claims as being valid anyway.
That's because, back then (in the 1980s), DAR was not very strict about what information they accepted; they basically accepted whatever was submitted to them. However, nowadays, DAR requires a substantial amount of documented proof, when new information is submitted. Their standards are very strict now.
The Back-Bach Genealogical Society claimed that John Back (1774-1853) and his brother Henry Back (1785-1871) were sons of Henry Back (1740-1809), both in their fraudulent genealogy book, and in the information they submitted to DAR, because those two brothers were well-documented as living in southeastern Kentucky, and so they were the "key" to connecting Harman Back, to their Back (Bach) family, down in southeastern Kentucky.
John Back (1774-1853) had married Catherine Robertson, and they mainly lived in Breathitt County; and Henry Back (1785-1871) had married Susannah Maggard, and they mainly lived in Letcher County. Those two men were the "final links in the chain," of the fraudulent genealogy that was created by The Back-Bach Genealogical Society, in order to falsely connect Harman Back, who lived way up in Little Fork, Virginia, down to the Back (Bach) family in southeastern Kentucky.
For many years, that inaccurate information about Harman Back's alleged son Henry Back (1740-1809), and Henry's two alleged sons, John Back (1774-1853) and Henry Back (1785-1871), remained in DAR's database and was presented as being accurate. As a result, many people who actually descend from John Back (1774-1853) and Henry Back (1785-1871) were able to obtain membership in DAR, based upon that inaccurate information.
However, starting around 2003, when the accurate genealogy of the Back (Bach) family from southeastern Kentucky began to emerge again, through the publication of several well-researched books, written by very credible and educated people, who actually utilized The Genealogical Proof Standard (see the "Genealogy Books" section, at the bottom of this webpage), some of the "Back-Bach people" responded in anger, especially those who had obtained their DAR membership through either John Back (1774-1853) or his brother Henry Back (1785-1871). A few of the "Back-Bach people" even went berserk, because they realized that, either their DAR membership might be in jeopardy, or they might not be able to join DAR.
The "DNA Project": One of the "Back-Bach people" who went berserk was an extremely strange woman who decided to "fight back" against the accurate genealogy! She set up a "DNA Project," on the "FamilyTreeDNA" website, with just one goal in mind...she was absolutely determined to make it appear as if the Back (Bach) family in southeastern Kentucky (her own family) descends from Harman Back.
As a matter of fact, she had known that her Back (Bach) family in southeastern Kentucky didn't descend from Harman Back, long before she had even applied for her DAR membership. Several years before she had applied, she had been posting comments on GenForum.com (a genealogy website), in which she had stated that she fully supported the work of Tilden Bach, who had written several books documenting the actual genealogy of the Back (Bach) family in southeastern Kentucky. His research also effectively exposed the lies of The Back-Bach Genealogical Society, and their fraudulent genealogy. In her comments on GenForum, this strange woman said that she had bought one of Tilden's books, she praised Tilden for his research, and she even referred to him as being "a gentleman." Of course, when she later joined DAR, by pretending that Patriot Harman Back was her ancestor, she had all those comments removed from GenForum (which you could do, back then, by emailing the webmaster).
And then, after she had set up her "DNA Project," she went back onto GenForum, and she started posting a different type of comment. She literally begged people to take a DNA test, and be part of her "DNA Project." It was truly bizarre. She kept posting that her "DNA Project" is "up and running." She often announced that there was a "sale" going on for the DNA tests, but "you only have until tomorrow to get one!" She posted dozens of comments on GenForum, begging people, pressuring people, and harassing people, to take a DNA test for her, over and over. It was incredibly obnoxious. Her bizarre obsession with DNA tests certainly raised a lot of eyebrows. Nobody had ever seen anyone so completely obsessed with pressuring people to take a DNA test before. Then she went onto Ancestry.com and did the same thing. She was determined to accomplish her sick and selfish goal of "proving" that the Back (Bach) family from southeastern Kentucky descends from Harman Back.
It took awhile before anyone submitted a DNA sample (done through a "Kit") to her "DNA Project." But, just as soon as she got her first few Kits, she started claiming that her "DNA Project" definitely "proves" that the Back (Bach) family from southeastern Kentucky descends from Harman Back. She now even claims that she has "perfect matches" to "prove" it!
However, the Back (Bach) family from southeastern Kentucky does not descend from Harman Back! That is a proven fact, and it has been repeatedly proven by a massive amount of well-documented research.
Furthermore, her "DNA Project" doesn't prove anything at all...that's because it was staged.
It was staged: When this strange woman set up her "DNA Project," she automatically became the Administrator of it. The staff at "FamilyTreeDNA" has confirmed that she, as the Administrator, decides which Kits to include in her "DNA Project," and how to describe each DNA participant (on the "About us/Results" page). They have also confirmed that she, as the Administrator, has the ability to write in whatever names she wants, in the "Paternal Ancestor" column, for each of the DNA participants (on the "DNA Results" page), and she most definitely has done that. That is how she has staged her "DNA Project."
She was the one who wrote in the name of Harman Back, or his alleged son Henry Back (1740-1809), in the "Paternal Ancestor" column, for every one of the DNA participants! So, by claiming that she has DNA samples from both the descendants of Harman Back, and the descendants of the Back (Bach) family from southeastern Kentucky, and then, by her simply writing in the name of Harman Back as being the paternal ancestor for every one of the participants, she has effectively staged her "DNA Project," to make it appear as if all of the participants, including those from the Back (Bach) family in southeastern Kentucky, descend from Harman Back.
However, the Back (Bach) family from southeastern Kentucky does not descend from Harman Back! She just wrote in Harman Back's name as being their ancestor!
It gets worse: Not only has this strange woman falsified the names of the paternal ancestors, in her "DNA Project," she lies about what the results of her "DNA Project" actually mean.
You see, when the DNA samples from a group of participants are very similar, like the ones in this "DNA Project" appear to be, the only conclusion that can be made is that the participants shared a common ancestor, about 15 generations ago. That's it! Sometimes, that number of of generations can be "projected" to be somewhat less, but the conclusion remains the same...the participants simply shared a common ancestor.
This means that, about 15 generations ago, which was way back in the 1400s or the 1500s, back in Germany, all of the participants in this "DNA Project" apparently shared a common ancestor. So what! Obviously, that's not a big surprise, considering that the ancestors from both the Harman Back family, and the Back (Bach) family from southeastern Kentucky, probably all originally came from Germany. But that is the only conclusion that can be made.
Her "DNA Project" only shows that the participants shared a common ancestor, way back in time, hundreds and hundreds of years ago.
It does not "prove" that the Back (Bach) family from southeastern Kentucky descends from Harman Back!
Her "DNA Project" is staged. The results are meaningless. It's just another scam. What she is doing is so wrong.
Her "DNA Project" is staged.
The results are meaningless.
It's just another scam.
What she is doing is so wrong.
Here are some additional facts about her "DNA Project":
Fact #1: The DNA sample in Kit #195252 is actually from this strange woman's own brother! She doesn't admit that, of course, but on the "About Us/Results" page, on her "DNA Project" website, she reveals that his father was born in 1908, in Stevenson, Kentucky, and that his grandparents were Joseph Lee Back and Mary Jane McIntosh. That lineage perfectly describes her own father, and her own grandparents, who she writes about, on her bizarre "family website." This proves that Kit #195252 is her own brother! That fact alone destroys all objectivity of her "DNA Project," because she doesn't disclose that close, personal relationship, which is an obvious ethics violation.
Fact #2: The staff at "FamilyTreeDNA" has also confirmed that the Administrator can set up as many "sections" as they want, on their "DNA Results" page, name the sections whatever they want, and then place the DNA participants into whichever section they want. On this strange woman's "DNA Results" page, she has created five sections, and she has named them as follows: (1) Germany to Virginia to Eastern Kentucky; (2) Germany to Illinois; (3) Baugh; (4) Culpeper Co VA to Wayne Co KY; and (5) Ungrouped. This is extremely odd.
The 1st section is where she has placed the DNA participants that she is focusing on. However, the name of that section makes no sense. The descendants of Harman Back migrated to central Kentucky, and the descendants of John Henry Back (1709-1789), who was the actual immigrant of the Back (Bach) family in southeastern Kentucky (her own family), migrated to southeastern Kentucky. Nobody migrated to eastern Kentucky.
With regard to the 2nd section, she has just one DNA participant in there. In the "Paternal Ancestor" column for him, she wrote in that his ancestor was Johann Heinrich Bach. It looks like she is just trying to play some childish game, because John Henry Back's name, back in Thuringia, Germany, was Johann Heinrich Bach. John Henry Back (1709-1789) was the father of Joseph Back (1745-1819), who was the actual father of John Back (1774-1853) and his brother Henry Back (1785-1871). That is the actual lineage of the Back (Bach) family in southeastern Kentucky (her own family). So, it looks like she put a DNA participant, who she identified as being a descendant of Johann Heinrich Bach, into a different section, simply to imply that someone with the name of Johann Heinrich Bach (John Henry Back) was not part of her family, in the 1st section. (Why else would this person even be included? Plus, he lived in Illinois, but her "DNA Project" is supposed to be about people who lived in Kentucky.)
With regard to the 3rd section, she also has just one DNA participant in there, but he has the last name of Baugh. Why is that person even included? He's not even a Back (Bach)!
With regard to the 4th section, the names in the "Paternal Ancestor" column seem to be people who descend from John William Back, who was the brother of John Henry Back (1709-1789). She apparently made up those "Paternal Ancestor" names as well, for the same reason that she made up the "Paternal Ancestor" name in the 2nd section. (The participants in the 5th section are categorized as "Ungrouped.")
Fact #3: It is really strange that the DNA test results, for three of the participants in the 1st section, are 100% identical. Those participants are Kits #852765, #B281410, and #450919. It is next to impossible for three people to have the exact, same, identical DNA. Did she have one man submit three DNA tests, and then simply claim that two of those tests came from members of the Back (Bach) family from southeastern Kentucky, and one test came from a member of the Harman Back family? It sure looks that way. She must have done that, to make her scam seem more believable.
Fact #4: This is extremely important. As the Administrator, she is the person who describes who each of the DNA participants are, on the "About Us/Results" page, on her "DNA Project" website. However, she only provides extremely vague descriptions of the participants in the 1st section. (She offers no descriptions for any of the participants, in any of the other sections.)
She vaguely describes some of the DNA participants in the 1st section as being descendants of the Back (Bach) family from southeastern Kentucky, and some of them as being descendants of Harman Back. But she purposefully fails to provide the exact lineage, or the correct lineage, for any of the participants.
And since she is operating on the falsified premise that all of the participants descend from Harman Back, and that Harman Back had three sons that he didn't have, her vague descriptions of the DNA participants on the "About Us/Results" page are even more peculiar. It is impossible to know who any of the participants were (except for her own brother), which makes her "DNA Project" even more absurd, and even more meaningless.
ADDITIONAL PROOF OF HER DECEPTION: In September of 2022, a comparison was made, between the current "DNA Results page," on her DNA website, to some saved screen-shots of that same webpage, from a few years ago. The results were absolutely shocking; they provide further proof that she is the one who writes in the names in the "Paternal Ancestor" column.
Back on March 2, 2017, there were three participants, in the 1st section, including her own brother, but none of them were shown to have Harman Back, or his alleged son Henry Back (1740-1809), as an ancestor, in the "Paternal Ancestor" column. You can verify this on the "Internet Wayback Machine." Click here for the direct link.
By May 23, 2018, there were four participants, in the 1st section, including one new participant. But, all three of the participants from 2017 had their ancestors changed! One of them suddenly had Harman Back as their ancestor, and two of them suddenly had Harman's alleged son Henry Back (1740-1809) as their ancestor, including her own brother! You can also verify this on the "Internet Wayback Machine." Click here for the direct link.
By May 24, 2022, there were seven participants, in the 1st section, including three new participants. Once again, all three of the participants from 2017, who had their ancestors changed in 2018, including her own brother, had their ancestors changed once more, by 2022! You can verify this on the "Internet Wayback Machine" as well. Click here for the direct link.
So, it is quite obvious that, by the spring of 2018, she had figured out how to rig her "DNA Project," to get the "results" that she wanted, by simply making every participant in the 1st section be shown to descend from Harman Back, or his alleged son Henry Back (1740-1809). She simply staged it to look that way. She was the one who wrote in "Harman Back," or his alleged son "Henry Back (1740-1809)," in the "Paternal Ancestor" column, as being the ancestor for every one of the participants.
The fact that the ancestors for the participants from 2017, including her own brother, have changed, two times, in five years, is even more proof that she changed them, that her "DNA Project" is a fraud, and that she is purposefully manipulating the data, and purposefully deceiving people.
By the way, shouldn't the participants be telling HER who their ancestors were, instead of HER assigning them ancestors?
What is wrong with that strange woman?: She keeps trying to claim that the Back (Bach) family from southeastern Kentucky (her own family) descends from Harman Back, even though it's not true, and she knows it's not true.
Many people have tried to show her the actual genealogy of her family, and have tried to help her. She has even been shown proof that the genealogy experts at DAR have conclusively determined that the Back (Bach) family from southeastern Kentucky does not descend from Harman Back (see the next section of this webpage). But she doesn't care! Whenever she is presented with the truth, she just "doubles down" on her lies, and creates even more lies on the internet.
Apparently, the actual genealogy of her own family is not important to her. All she really cares about is her DAR membership and "saving face" with all her DAR girlfriends. In fact, she is even an "Officer" at a local DAR Chapter! To her, her membership in DAR; attending DAR meetings and events; socializing with all her DAR girlfriends and having pictures taken of herself; wearing her DAR sash, pins, ribbons, and other trinkets; pretending to be important; and, of course, virtue-signaling that she is supposedly so honorable by simply being in DAR, is more important than being truthful about her own family's ancestors. How hypocritical can you get!
But here is the odd thing...besides Patriot Harman Back, she claims to have twelve other Revolutionary War Patriots in her lineage, so she really doesn't even need Patriot Harman Back, in order to be a member of DAR! That is how deranged she is.
She is simply using Patriot Harman Back for her own sick and selfish reasons, just like members of The Back-Bach Genealogical Society did, years ago.
She has no shame: She obviously has absolutely no shame, and no guilt, about deliberately lying about her own ancestors, and deliberately lying to members of her own family as to who their actual ancestors are. Instead, she is very proud of herself, and what she has done with her "DNA Project." She now presents herself as a DNA expert, and a genealogy expert, which is absolutely outrageous. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
She thinks she is much smarter than The Back-Bach Genealogical Society was. Instead of publishing a book that has no proof in it, and so it can be relatively easy to prove that it's contents are a monstrous lie, she has used the credible concept of DNA to create a monstrous lie about Harman Back. After all, everyone trusts DNA, right?
When people see her "DNA Project" on the "FamilyTreeDNA" website, it sure looks like the Back (Bach) family from southeastern Kentucky descends from Harman Back! People don't know that she just wrote in Harman Back's name herself, as being the paternal ancestor of every one of those DNA participants. And people simply don't realize that the only thing her "DNA Project" shows is that, hundreds of years ago, way back in Germany, those DNA participants simply shared the same ancestor.
Most people don't understand the complexities of DNA, and so they don't understand that her "DNA Project" does not, in any way, "prove" that the Back (Bach) family in southeastern Kentucky descends from Harman Back.
BUT THEY DO NOW!
IT 'S ALL OVER!
HER LIES HAVE FINALLY BEEN EXPOSED!
Her sick lies have finally been exposed...not only on her "DNA Project" website, also but on her family tree on Ancestry.com, on her memorials on FindAGrave.com, and on her "family website," which truly is a joke (see below). If she has any shred of decency left, she will remove all of the Harman Back nonsense from those websites.
Her "family website": She has loaded up her "family website" with lots of documents, just to make it appear to be credible, however, her "family website" most certainly is not credible. For many of the documents, she either fails to understand what they are, or else she incorrectly names who is featured in them. For example, she calls a basic property tax list a "supply list" (which was used during the Revolutionary War). She thinks a 1785 property tax list shows Harman Back (Sr.) and his son Harman Back Jr., but it doesn't. It shows Harman Back Jr. and his son Harman Back. (If Harman Back Sr. was still alive, in 1785, he would have been too old to have been counted as a tithable, and so he would never have even been on a tax list! But she knows nothing about tithables, even though it is a very basic genealogical term.)
She fails to realize that all of the property tax lists for John Back (1738-1794) and his brother Henry Back (1740-1809) were prepared, way down in the far southern part of Culpeper County, 25 miles away from Little Fork, in the part of the county that became Madison County in 1792. Those tax lists were prepared by men who were different than the men who prepared the tax lists way up in Little Fork, because those were two entirely different taxing districts. John and his brother Henry lived on land that their wives had inherited from their father, John Hoffman; that land was along the Robinson River, and practically next door to John Henry Back's land, along Crooked Creek (which flowed into the Robinson River), who was the father of John and Henry. But yet, she claims that those two brothers were the sons of Harman Back, who lived 25 miles away, way up in Little Fork. (Is she really that stupid?)
She also purposefully omits pertinent information, by not showing the entire document, like her presentation of the 1789 land deed. That document clearly states that Harman Back Jr. inherited that land from his father, and that it was the same land that his father had bought from Jacob Holtzclaw, when it was still in Orange County, in 1741. But she pretends that information is not in the deed, by just not showing that part of the deed.
She also repeatedly mixes up people who had the same name. She actually claims that it was Joseph Back (1756-1832), who bought that Treasury Warrant in 1782, for land in Kentucky, when it was really Joseph Back (1745-1819), the actual father of her own ancestor, John Back (1774-1853).
She even pretends that Elizabeth Pennington (daughter of Abel Pennington) did not exist. Instead, she uses Elizabeth Pennington's land records, and claims that they feature Elizabeth Hoffman Back, the widow of Henry Back (1740-1809), in her continuous, sick attempt to claim that Elizabeth Hoffman Back migrated to southeastern Kentucky and founded the Back (Bach) family there. Here are the facts. In 1809, Elizabeth Pennington had an affair with Andrew Cope, who was married. When she gave birth to his daughter, Andrew and his wife moved to Tennessee, but he allowed Elizabeth to live on 100 acres of land that he owned. On 6-22-1812, Elizabeth Pennington married Lewis Back (1787-1865), the only son of Henry Back (1740-1809) and Elizabeth Hoffman Back who ended up living in southeastern Kentucky. (Lewis had first migrated to southwestern Virginia and lived with his cousin John Back; when John and his wife Catherine Robertson moved to Kentucky, in 1810, Lewis went with them.) Elizabeth Pennington Back paid taxes on that 100 acres in 1815; that tax list showed that Andrew Cope owned the land. Andrew later returned to Kentucky and deeded that land to her, on 8-9-1823, probably as his way of saying that he was sorry for what had happened. Elizabeth Pennington Back later deeded that land to her husband Lewis Back, on 12-10-1831. In the fall of 1850, Lewis and Elizabeth migrated to the Ozark Mountains. But this strange woman claims that Elizabeth Pennington Back did not exist, and that it was Elizabeth Hoffman Back, the widow of Henry Back (1740-1809), in all of those land records! It's preposterous. Click here for more facts about Elizabeth Pennington Back.
She claims that Harman Back Jr. never had a twin sister named Anna Ella, even though their German birth records exist, showing they had the exact same date of birth, and the exact same parents. Instead, she presents what she claims is Anna Ella's christening record, and because her twin brother Harman Jr. was apparently not christened on the very same day, she claimed that meant that he was not her twin.
She doesn't even understand the significance of the 1787 entry into the old Back (Bach) Family Bible, which was owned by John Henry Back, in which the name of Elizabeth Hoffman, and her date of birth (July 13, 1746), was written. It proved that she, the daughter of John Hoffman and Maria Sabina Folg, and the wife of Henry Back (1740-1809), married into the family of John Henry Back, not into the family of Harman Back. She even thinks that John Henry Back's signature in that old Family Bible, as "Henry Back," was Henry Back (1740-1809)! She doesn't know that the old German custom dictated that, when a man had two first names, like John Henry Back did, he used his first first name (John) in public, and his second first name (Henry) with his family and friends. (If she is going to claim to be a genealogy expert, she had better start learning about genealogy!)
But clearly, her recent assertion that Harman Back had a daughter named Mary Boch, who married Moses Tapp, is the most laughable part of her "family website." Mary's marriage record shows that she was born in 1779. But Harman was born in 1708, and so he would have been 71 years old, when Mary was born! Even more absurd is the fact that Mary's marriage record also shows that she was born in Germany, in 1779. But Harman had left Germany, in 1738! So, how could she possibly have been Harman's daughter? Well, in order to "prove" that she was, this strange woman actually drew a crude map, on which she showed that Moses' father, Vincent Tapp, had supposedly lived right next door to Harman Back! It's hilarious! (The Tapp family actually lived way over by Red Oak Mountain, 15 miles west of Little Fork, and nowhere near where Harman Back lived.)
These are just a few of the dozens of examples of her astonishing stupidity, and her complete lack of genealogical knowledge. It's truly extraordinary. She has no idea what she's doing. She presents herself as being a genealogy expert (and strangely, she calls herself a "sponge"). However, she clearly knows nothing about The Genealogical Proof Standard. She doesn't even have a basic understanding of how to perform simple, proper genealogical research! Her "family website" is so full of incorrect information, deliberately falsified information, and downright lies, that it would take another website just to go through it all. And yes, it truly is a joke.
She also says that Dr. Wilgus Bach's research is not to be trusted because someone wrote all over it. (No, some of what he wrote is still visible, and so, of course, that information is valid.) She even warns people not to believe documented and proven evidence that they may find, especially in a book! According to her, only her phony "DNA Project," and her disastrous "family website," are to be trusted! Her stupidity is truly frightening.
What she has done: This strange woman has caused so much anger, so much pain, and so much bitterness, within her own family, with all of her lies. She has pitted family members against family members, and many of those relationships have been damaged beyond repair, all because of her.
She is also destroying the credibility, and the integrity, of DAR, by making a farce of their standards and their research. As an "Officer" in DAR, she should not be claiming descent from a Patriot, using lineage that DAR has proven to be completely invalid.
She has no right to hurt and deceive people like this, especially members of her own family. It has to stop. What she is doing is downright evil. Some people say that what she is doing is grounds for litigation. It probably is.
Important announcements: In early 2022, The Daughters of the American Revolution (DAR) issued some very important announcements about Harman Back, after their own genealogy experts conducted extensive and in-depth genealogical research about him.
DAR confirmed that Patriot Harman Back never had a son named Henry Back (or a son named John Back), and that the only son Patriot Harman Back had was Harman Back Jr. DAR also confirmed that Harman Back Jr. never had a son named Henry Back (or a son named John Back) either, and that Joseph Back (1756-1832) was the son of Harman Back Jr., not Harman Back.
DAR further confirmed that Harman Back died, sometime before September 15, 1789, in Culpeper County, Virginia, which was when his only son Harman Back Jr. sold the land that he had inherited from him. (In other words, Harman Back never migrated to central Kentucky, and so he was not the author of the 1794 will, in Garrard County, as The Back-Bach Genealogical Society, and the "Back-Bach people," claim. His only son Harman Back Jr. migrated to central Kentucky, and he had that will written for him, because he could not write.)
DAR also confirmed that Patriot Henry Back (1740-1809) was not the father of John Back (1774-1853), who married Catherine Robertson, and he was not the father of Henry Back (1785-1871), who married Susannah Maggard.
Patriot Henry Back (1740-1809) did have sons named John and Henry, but they were different men. His actual son John was born in 1776 (not 1774), and he migrated to North Carolina; he never went to Kentucky. Click here for more information about him. His actual son Henry was born in 1783 (not 1785), and he died in Virginia, around 1805; he never went to Kentucky either. Click here for more information about him.
These important announcements resulted in DAR placing "Error in Lineage" notices on all the DAR memberships of the people who had claimed to be descendants of Patriot Harman Back, or Patriot Henry Back (1740-1809), through John Back (1774-1853) and Henry Back (1785-1871), including the membership of that strange woman who is lying about the DNA tests. The DAR finally put an end to the fraudulent genealogy peddled by The Back-Bach Genealogical Society, and the "Back-Bach people."
Now the only remaining question is...when will that strange DNA woman finally stop lying about her own family, and finally show some respect for her actual ancestors, and members of her own family?
Please visit the DAR website, to verify all of this information yourself (just click the button below). Or, you can access the DAR website directly: Go to DAR.org. Select "Genealogy" at the top. Then scroll down and select "Ancestor Search." Then enter Harman Back's name. After viewing his information, go back to "Ancestor Search," and then enter Henry Back's name, to view his information.
The DAR finally put an end
to the fraudulent genealogy peddled by
The Back-Bach Genealogical Society,
and the "Back-Bach people."
Several books have been written that have documented and proven the actual genealogy of the Back (Bach) family in southeastern Kentucky. They were all written, according to the strict rules of The Genealogical Proof Standard, and so the genealogy that they contain is most definitely accurate. Those books include the following: Our "Bach" Family Ancestral Heritage, by Tilden Bach; We Came from Thuringia: Genealogy of the Bach Family in Breathitt County, Kentucky, by T. Bach; and Genealogy of the Bach (Back) Family from Southeastern Kentucky and Southwestern Virginia, by Dr. William H. Bach.
However, each of these books were viciously attacked by the "Back-Bach people," and others, because they presented the truth about the family. Two of the books were even illegally given away for free, on the internet, in a flagrant violation of U.S. copyright infringement laws, simply to devastate the lives of the authors. That level of hatred is truly frightening. None of these books are in print any longer.
Harman Back (1708-1789) and John Henry Back (1709-1789) were two very different men, from two very different families, from two very different parts of Germany, who settled into two very different parts of Virginia. The only son of Harman Back, which was Harman Back Jr. (1737-1798), migrated to central Kentucky, in 1789; and one of the sons of John Henry Back, which was Joseph Back (1745-1819), migrated to southeastern Kentucky, in 1791. Harman Back's descendants never migrated to southeastern Kentucky.
Harman Back was born as Hermann Bach, and John Henry Back was born as Johann Heinrich Bach. They both changed the spelling of their names, after they immigrated to America, to a simpler spelling, so that other colonists could more easily spell it and pronounce it. This was actually a very common practice among immigrants, back then.
Although both men originally spelled their last names as "Bach," back in Germany, that did not mean that they were from the same family. The surname of "Bach" was quite popular in Germany, hundreds of years ago. (It still is today.) The word "Bach" means stream or brook, in German. Hundreds of years ago, people were often given their surnames, according to the geographical features that existed, near where they lived. And since many people lived by a stream or by a brook, many people were named "Bach." It did not mean that any of them were actually related to each other, although these two men may have shared a common ancestor, hundreds of years earlier.
Harman Back (Hermann Bach) had been born in Freudenberg, Germany; and the family of John Henry Back (Johann Heinrich Bach) was from Thuringia, Germany, which is about 155 miles away. These two men obviously lived far apart from each other, and so it is highly doubtful that they ever even knew each other, in Germany.
The family of John Henry Back (Johann Heinrich Bach) included many musicians, including the highly celebrated composer and musician, Johann Sebastian Bach (1685-1750). In fact, John Henry Back's grandfather, Johann Christoph Bach (1642-1703), was also a well-known composer and musician; he was considered to be the "best" musician in the family, until Johann Sebastian Bach came along. Johann Sebastian even studied under Johann Christoph, and he called him "a profound composer," in his genealogy of the family. Johann Sebastian's genealogy also included a Family Tree, which clearly showed that John Henry Back (Johann Heinrich Bach) was the grandson of Johann Christoph Bach. That means that John Henry Back was the second cousin (once removed) of Johann Sebastian Bach.
After Harman Back and John Henry Back immigrated to America, they each settled into very different parts of Virginia. Harman Back settled in Little Fork, which was a little community in what later became the far northern part of Culpeper County, near the Rappahannock River. John Henry Back settled 25 miles away, down in what later became the far southern part of Culpeper County; where he lived became Madison County, in 1792. John Henry Back lived along Crooked Creek (also known as Meander Run), near where it flows into the Robinson River. It is highly doubtful that these two men ever even knew each other, in Virginia, either. Not only did they live 25 miles apart, they were in different social and economic classes.
Harman Back was a poor farmer who only owned 100 acres of land. In contrast, John Henry Back owned 786 acres of land, and he was a prosperous and highly respected millwright. He built, operated, repaired, and sold, gristmills. In colonial America, gristmills were an integral part of every community, because they were needed to grind up the grains (after they had been harvested) into flour, so that bread could be made. Dr. Wilgus Bach, who wrote a genealogy of the Back (Bach) family in southeastern Kentucky, in the early 1900s, confirmed that John Henry Back had built gristmills, and that he had sold them for $300 apiece, which was a considerable amount of money, back then. In addition, John Henry Back was related to the famous musician, Johann Sebastian Bach, which his friends and neighbors certainly knew about. Those aspects of John Henry Back's life put him into a different social and economic class than Harman Back.
John Henry Back (1709-1789): He and his wife had four children: John Back (1738-1794); Henry Back (1740-1809); Joseph Back (1745-1819); and a daughter whose name was probably Anna Back (1755-1804).
In 1762, John Henry Back wanted to purchase a Family Bible, because owning a Family Bible, and then passing it down to the youngest son, had long been a German tradition. He knew that his cousin, Johann Christian Bach, who was a son of Johann Sebastian Bach, had a large collection of old Bibles, many of which he had inherited from his father. Johann Christian Bach still lived in Europe, and so John Henry Back wrote him a letter, asking him if he could buy one of his old Bibles. His cousin said yes, and the price would be "100 pounds, 7 shillings, and 7 pence." John Henry agreed, and one of his friends, who often traveled back and forth, between America and Europe, took the money over there, and then he brought the old book back. (The old book was actually a Catechism, which is very similar to a Bible.) When the old book arrived at John Henry's cabin, he wrote on the flyleaf, "We came from Thuringia." He obviously wanted future generations to know where their family had originally come from. And then he wrote down the year, and the price that he had paid for the book, into the old book as well. (That handwritten statement, "We came from Thuringia," was seen by many people, including Dr. B.C. Holtzclaw and Dr. Wilgus Bach, who had confirmed that they had actually seen it, in their historical books. That was also the statement that was later cut out of the old Family Bible, in the late 1960s/early 1970s, by Troy Lee Back, who was a member of The Back-Bach Genealogical Society.)
Several years later, around 1775, two of John Henry Back's sons, John Back (1738-1794) and Henry Back (1740-1809), married two sisters. John married Margaret Hoffman (1748-1831), and Henry married Elizabeth Hoffman (1746-1815). They were the daughters of John Hoffman and Maria Sabina Folg, who lived along the Robinson River, practically next door to John Henry Back. John Hoffman owned 3,525 acres along that river, and he was a very prominent and influential man. Neither John Hoffman, nor his wife Maria, would ever have allowed their daughters to marry the sons of a poor farmer, who were outside of their social and economic class, and also, who lived way up in Little Fork. (How would they have even met them, anyway?) People usually didn't marry outside of their social and economic class, back then. But John and Maria would have been very supportive of their daughters marrying the sons of a respected and prosperous millwright who lived nearby, who owned a very large farm, and who was related to Johann Sebastian Bach.
John Back (1738-1794) and his wife Margaret Hoffman had five children, all daughters: Elizabeth (born about 1777), who married John Embry; Anna (born about 1779), who never married; Sarah (born about 1783), who never married; Frances (born about 1786), who married Henry Floyd; and Susannah (born about 1790), who married Henry Floyd, after her sister Frances had died. John Back and his family lived on 150 acres of land, in what later became Madison County, Virginia, which was the land that his wife had inherited from her father.
Henry Back (1740-1809) and his wife Elizabeth Hoffman had eight children: John (born 1776); Benjamin (born 1781); Joseph (born 1782); Henry Jr. (born 1783); Aaron (born June 18, 1786); Lewis (born October 14, 1787); and at least two daughters whose names are not known. Henry Back and his family lived on 150 acres of land, in what later became Madison County, Virginia, which was the land that his wife had also inherited from her father.
About thirteen years after John Back (1738-1794) died, his widow Margaret Hoffman Back moved over to Rockingham County, Virginia, with her two unmarried daughters; they lived on 100 acres of land along Wolf Run, east of Elkton, which was owned by Margaret's daughter Elizabeth and her husband John Embry. And then, after Henry Back (1740-1809) died, his widow Elizabeth Hoffman Back also moved to Rockingham County, Virginia; she moved next door to her sister Margaret. Elizabeth's son Aaron, and two of her daughters, went with her. In fact, on April 10, 1809, Elizabeth's son Aaron, and her sister Margaret Hoffman Back, bought that 100 acres of land in Rockingham County for the two sisters to live on (each sister got 50 acres). The proof of that land purchase was included on the August 19, 1816 deed, in which Aaron sold his mother's 50 acres to his wife's brother. (Aaron had married Margaret Elizabeth Luger Hammer, back on March 9, 1811; she was the daughter of their next door neighbor, Henry Hammer, who is clearly seen living next door to them, in the 1810 Census Report.)
Elizabeth Hoffman Back was seen living in Rockingham County, Virginia, with her son Aaron, and her two daughters, in the 1810 Census Report. She was also listed in the Rockingham County Tax Lists, from 1810 through 1815, paying taxes on that land along Wolf Run. Elizabeth Hoffman Back, the wife of Henry Back (1740-1809), died in Rockingham County, Virginia, either in late 1815 or early 1816. (Her son Aaron sold her 50 acres of land, on August 19, 1816, to his wife's brother, and then he and his wife moved to Ohio. That 1816 deed revealed that Aaron, and his aunt, Margaret Hoffman Back, had bought that land, back on April 10, 1809.) Elizabeth may have been buried in The Elk Run Cemetery, in Elkton. She never went to Kentucky, as The Back-Bach Genealogical Society and the "Back-Bach people" claim. That fake gravestone, which they erected for her, in 1988, in The Maggard Cemetery, means absolutely nothing; she never went to Kentucky and she wasn't buried there. Furthermore, her date of death on that fake gravestone is wrong; it says she died "after December 12, 1831." That date seems to correlate with the date on a deed in Harlan County, Kentucky, in which Elizabeth Pennington Back signed over 100 acres to her husband Lewis Back. (The Back-Bach Genealogical Society and the "Back-Bach people" falsely claim that all the land deeds that were signed by Elizabeth Pennington Back, were signed by Elizabeth Hoffman Back, as part of their fraudulent genealogy, in which they claim that Elizabeth Hoffman Back moved to southeastern Kentucky.)
Margaret Hoffman Back was seen living in Rockingham County, Virginia, with her two daughters, in the 1820 and 1830 Census Reports. She was also listed in the Rockingham County Tax Lists, from 1811 through 1830, paying taxes on that land along Wolf Run. Margaret Hoffman Back, the wife of John Back (1738-1794), died in Rockingham County, Virginia, around 1831. Margaret may also have been buried in The Elk Run Cemetery, in Elkton.
John Henry Back's son Joseph Back (1745-1819) married Elizabeth Hoffman-Maggard (1755-1826), around 1773. (She was not related to her two sisters-in-laws.) Her parents were Nicholaus Hoffman and Barbara Elisabetha Koestnerin; they had died when Elizabeth was a young girl, and so she was adopted and raised by Samuel Maggard and his wife Catherine, who were their neighbors. In recent years, Elizabeth's maiden name has been hyphenated like that, by modern-day researchers, in order to differentiate her from her sister in law, Elizabeth Hoffman, who married her husband Joseph's brother, Henry. Joseph Back (1745-1819) and his wife Elizabeth Hoffman-Maggard (1755-1826) had four children: Joseph Back Jr. (1773-1802); John Back (1774-1853); Mary Back (1777-1807); and Henry Back (1785-1871).
Joseph Back (1745-1819) had always dreamed of moving to Kentucky, like so many young men did, back then. In 1782, he bought a Treasury Warrant, authorizing him to buy 791 acres in Kentucky. In the late fall of 1787, Joseph, his wife Elizabeth, and their oldest son Joseph Jr. (who was then 14), went to Kentucky, in order to check on some land that Joseph had asked to be surveyed, which he had bought using that Treasury Warrant. Joseph and his wife Elizabeth left their three youngest children (John, Mary, and Henry) with Joseph's father, John Henry, while they were gone. One day, around Christmas, John Henry's daughter-in-law, Elizabeth Hoffman Back, who had married his son Henry, came to visit him; she brought her newborn son Lewis (born October 14, 1787) with her. John Henry then pulled out his Family Bible, and he wrote down the names, and dates of birth, of the people who were at his cabin that day: Elizabeth Hoffman Back (born July 13, 1746); John Back (born November 19, 1774); Mary Back (born November 1, 1777); Henry Back (born February 6, 1785); and Lewis Back (born October 14, 1787). This entry into the Family Bible that was owned by John Henry Back turned out to be extremely significant. It proved that Elizabeth Hoffman Back (born July 13, 1746), the wife of Henry Back (1740-1809), and the daughter of John Hoffman and Maria Sabina Folg, had married into the family of John Henry Back, and not into the family of Harman Back. This is because Elizabeth's name, and her exact date of birth (July 13, 1746), had also been written into her father's Family Bible. PLEASE REFER TO THE TWO PICTURES BELOW.
It should be noted that this 1787 entry into the Family Bible that was owned by John Henry Back also proved that John Back (born November 19, 1774), and Henry Back (born February 6, 1785), were in John Henry Back's family, and not in Harman Back's family.
John Henry Back died around 1789, and he was probably buried on his farm along Crooked Creek. His son Joseph and his family then decided it was time to move to Kentucky. Joseph's son John had a best friend named Samuel Maggard (1774-1855), who wanted to go to Kentucky with them. Samuel was actually the grandson of Samuel Maggard, who had adopted and raised Joseph's wife Elizabeth, after her parents had died. When Joseph loaded up the family's wagon, he packed the old Family Bible, his wife's spinning wheel, and the survey chains that he had used, to mark off the land that he had wanted to buy in Kentucky. That old Back (Bach) Family Bible is now on display at the Breathitt County Library; and Elizabeth's spinning wheel, and Joseph's survey chains, are now on display at the Breathitt County Museum.
Joseph Back (1745-1819), his wife Elizabeth Hoffman-Maggard (1755-1826), all of their children, and Samuel Maggard, arrived in southeastern Kentucky, in the early spring of 1791. On April 23, 1791, Joseph and Elizabeth witnessed and signed a marriage record there, along the Cumberland River, for James Robeson and Sarah Murfit, proving that Joseph and Elizabeth were in Kentucky by then. Joseph, his sons, and Samuel, built a flatboat, and then they all went down the North Fork of the Kentucky River, until they got to Quicksand Creek. They settled on some land along Quicksand Creek, because it was near the land along Slate Creek that Joseph had tried to buy with his Treasury Warrant. Joseph, his sons, and Samuel, built a cabin there, in a place that was later known as the "Round Bottom." This is a place where the creek nearly encircles a large parcel of land. They were the first settlers in what later became Breathitt County. They truly lived out in the wilderness; it was so remote that there was nobody else around, for miles. Samuel Maggard lived with Joseph Back and his family, for a few years.
In 1794, Joseph got word that his uncle, John William Back (his father's brother), had died, over in Russell County, Virginia. So he sent his two oldest sons, Joseph Jr. and John, over there, to help the widow settle the estate. John's best friend, Samuel Maggard, went with them. While those three men were over in southwestern Virginia, they each got married, in 1795. John married Catherine Robertson; and Samuel married Catherine's sister, Rebecca Robertson; but the name of Joseph Jr.'s wife is not known. (Joseph Jr. was later murdered, in 1802). John and Catherine decided to remain in Russell County for awhile. John bought John William Back's farm, because it was already set-up, and John William Back's sons had moved away, years before. John and Catherine ended up living there, until 1810, when they moved to Kentucky. (They raised a large family, of at least seven children: Mary, who married John R. Roark; Joseph, who married Permelia Hogg; Susannah, who married John Henry Holbrook; Lewis, who married Margaret "Peggy" Roberts; John Jr., who married Elizabeth Cope; Solomon, who married Jane "Jincy" Fields; and Isaac, who married Rachel Combs and Nancy Coldiron.)
Samuel Maggard and his wife Rebecca decided to live on her parent's farm, until 1805, when they moved to Kentucky. (They also raised a large family, of at least twelve children: John, who married Sarah Adams; Susannah, who married Henry Back (son of Joseph Back and Elizabeth Hoffman-Maggard); Rudolph, who married Anna Roberts and Mary Elizabeth Boggs; Henry, who married Elizabeth Rebecca Parker; David, known as "Long David," who married Susannah Harrison; Margaret, who married Jesse Adams; Sarah, who married Samuel Caudill; Samuel Jr., who married Rachel Sturgill; James, known as "Panther Jim," who married Abigail Boggs; Moses, who married Charlotte Creech; Rebecca, who married Silas "Able" Boggs and Dr. John S. Combs; and Elizabeth, who married Gilbert Creech).
Back in Kentucky, around 1797, Joseph Back (1745-1819), his wife Elizabeth Hoffman-Maggard (1755-1826), and their two youngest children (Mary and Henry), left their cabin along Quicksand Creek, and they moved down to the Poor Fork of the Cumberland River. They did that, so that Mary and Henry would have a better chance of meeting a potential spouse, because there were quite a few people living along that river, and there was also a trading post there. Joseph then built a cabin along Collier's Creek. He died there, in 1819; he was probably buried beside his cabin. Joseph's wife, Elizabeth Hoffman-Maggard Back, died in 1826, and she was buried beside a tree along the river. Shortly after that, The Maggard Cemetery was created, around her grave. The cemetery was given that name because of her close connection with the Maggard family. (The Maggard family had adopted her and raised her; they had also adopted and raised her younger sister Mary; Elizabeth's son John had been best friends with Samuel Maggard, for most of his life, and Samuel was the grandson of the man who had adopted and raised Elizabeth; and Elizabeth's son Henry had married Susannah Maggard, who was the daughter of Samuel Maggard, her son John's best friend.)
In 1836, John Back (1774-1853), who had returned to southeastern Kentucky, from Russell County, Virginia, back in 1810, and his son Joseph (1802-1850), bought 2,500 acres of land along Quicksand Creek, for $2,000 in gold. The purchase included the land that is now in the little community of Quicksand, where Quicksand Creek flows into the North Fork of the Kentucky River, and then it extended up Quicksand Creek, on both sides of the creek, for about eight miles, including the "Round Bottom." John Back and his family then moved back into the old cabin, which he had helped his father build, back in 1791.
John Back died on February 13, 1853 (or 1854), of pneumonia, and he was buried in the Roark Cemetery near his cabin. His wife Catherine died on September 1, 1858, of "the fever," and she was buried on top of him. Their sons then built a stone sarcophagus over their graves. They didn't bother to inscribe the stone with their names, because everyone around there knew that John and Catherine were buried underneath. That was actually a rather common practice, back then, for people who were well-known and highly respected, as John and Catherine were. (In 1952, some of John and Catherine's descendants built a traditional gravestone next to the sarcophagus, but they misspelled Catherine's maiden name as "Robinson," and they misspelled John's last name as "Bach.")
Meanwhile, back in 1806, Joseph Back and Elizabeth Hoffman-Maggard's daughter Mary Back (1777-1807) had an affair with a man named John Colyer, who she had met, along the Poor Fork of the Cumberland River. He was a stranger to the people who lived around there; he had probably gone there to either buy supplies, or sell something, at the trading post. Nobody, including Mary, knew that he was already married. One day, he suddenly disappeared, because he had simply gone home to his wife and children. Nine months later, Mary gave birth to his son, on December 27, 1806. She named him Alfred Back (1806-1889). Mary died, a few weeks later, from childbirth complications. It is not known where she was buried. A few years after that, Joseph Back and Elizabeth Hoffman-Maggard's son Henry (1785-1871) married Susannah Maggard, in 1814. She was the daughter of Samuel Maggard and Rebecca Robertson. Henry and Susannah later moved to the part of Perry County that became Letcher County, in 1842. (They also raised a large family, of eleven children: Johnny, who married Sallie Caudill; Samuel David, who married Mary Caudill and Rhoda Day; Elizabeth, who married Isom Henry Caudill; Henry, who married Frances Blair; Rebecca, who married David Day; Mary, who married Jesse Caudill; Susannah, who married Henry Caudill; Lewis, who married Winnie Sumner; David who married Rachel Caudill and Nancy Dixon; Sarah, who married James Sumner and Felix Combs; and James, who married Nancy Hampton and Rachel Cornett.) Susannah died in 1865, and Henry died in 1871; they were buried in The Rich Whitaker Cemetery, in Letcher County.
Starting around 1900, some of the descendants of Joseph Back (1745-1819) and Elizabeth Hoffman-Maggard Back (1755-1826) went back to using the original spelling of their family's surname, of "Bach." Therefore, all people with the last name of Back, or Bach, who come from southeastern Kentucky, descend from John Henry Back (1709-1789), through his son Joseph Back (1745-1819) and his wife Elizabeth Hoffman-Maggard (1755-1826). They do not descend from Harman Back, through his alleged son Henry Back (1740-1809) and his wife Elizabeth Hoffman (1746-1815, not 1746-1831).
Curiously, it is not believed that any descendants of Harman Back ever went back to using the original spelling of their family's surname, of "Bach."
Harman Back and his descendants are not related to the Back (Bach) family in southeastern Kentucky, in any way whatsoever. You should research these facts for yourself. Don't get fooled by falsified DNA tests, a fake gravestone, or a fraudulent genealogy book.
NOTE: Here are a couple of interesting facts to consider...If John Back (1774-1853) was the son of Henry Back (1740-1809) and his wife Elizabeth Hoffman, how could he have gotten married to Catherine Robertson, in 1795, in southwestern Virginia, if he was supposedly still living up in Madison County, Virginia with his parents, in 1795? Remember...The Back-Bach Genealogical Society claims that Henry Back's widow Elizabeth moved to southeastern Kentucky, after Henry died, in 1809, with her children, including her son John Back (1774-1853)...so how could John be already living in southwestern Virginia, in 1795? In addition, John and Catherine's first four children have been well-documented as being born in southwestern Virginia: Mary (born 1798); Joseph (born 1802); Susannah (born 1804); and Lewis (born 1807). How could that be, if John and his alleged widowed mother Elizabeth had supposedly not even left Madison County until 1809? Think about it!
Also...consider this...if Mary Back (1777-1807) was the daughter of Henry Back (1740-1809) and his wife Elizabeth Hoffman, how could she have died in 1807, in Harlan County, Kentucky, a few weeks after giving birth to her son Alfred, if she was supposedly still living up in Madison County, Virginia with her parents, in 1807? Think about it!
For more detailed information about John Henry Back (Johann Heinrich Bach), including his ancestors and his descendants, please visit his webpage on FindAGrave.com. Just click the link below:
For more detailed information about Harman Back (Hermann Bach), including his actual descendants, please visit his webpage on FindAGrave.com. Just click the link below:
This is a copy of the actual page from his Family Bible
Around Christmas of 1787, John Henry Back wrote down in his Family Bible the names, and dates of birth, of the people who were at his cabin that day: Elizabeth Hoffman Back was born the 13 day of July...1746; John Back was born the 19 of November...1774; Mary Back was born the 1 of November 1777; Henry Back was born the 6 of February 1785; and Lewis Back was born the 14 of October...1787.
Forty-one years earlier, Elizabeth's father, John Hoffman, wrote her name and her exact date of birth into his Family Bible (see the other picture). This proves that Elizabeth Hoffman, the daughter of John Hoffman and Maria Sabina Folg, married into the family of John Henry Back, not into the family of Harman Back.
His Family Bible was published in The Virginia Magazine
John Hoffman wrote down in his Family Bible the names, and dates of birth, of each of his children, including his daughter Elizabeth, who was born on "1746, July 13th." She later married Henry Back (1740-1809), the son of John Henry Back.
Elizabeth's sister Anna Margaretha, who was known as Margaret, was born, two years later, and so she was listed right below her.
Margaret was born on "1748, November 27th," and she married John Back (1738-1794), who was a brother of Henry Back (1740-1809).
John and Henry's brother, Joseph Back (1745-1819), was the member of the Back (Bach) family who migrated to southeastern Kentucky in 1791, and he founded the Back (Bach) family there. Elizabeth Hoffman Back died in 1815, in Rockingham County, Virginia; she never went to Kentucky. (Her sister Margaret also died in Rockingham County.)
Forty-one years later, Elizabeth's father-in-law, John Henry Back, wrote her name and her exact date of birth into his Family Bible (see the other picture). This proves that Elizabeth Hoffman, the daughter of John Hoffman and Maria Sabina Folg, married into the family of John Henry Back, not into the family of Harman Back.
To learn even more about Harman Back and his life,
including his voyage to America in 1738,
please visit the very informative and well-documented website about him. You can either Google, "the ship Oliver,"
or click the link below.