SISCO-L Archives

Archiver > SISCO > 2003-09 > 1063836513

From: Eugene_Louis Siscoe <>
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 18:08:37 -0400

I dismissed the "standardization" explanation for the spelling
variations of the [sisco] sounding-name for several reasons. The
single most important reason is that the "standardization"
explanation assumes single [sisco] sounding-name gene pool.
According to the "standardization" explanation, anybody and
everybody who has a surname that sounds like [sisco] belongs to
the SISCO surnamed genetic family.
Assuming that everyone who has or who had a [sisco]
sounding-name is related to one another has produced some
questionable family histories. Eleazer-1730 SISCHO and
William-1748 SISCHO are known to be brothers. The Charlestown,
NH (1766) historical records shows Eleazer and his brother
William being warned to leave Charleston. Eleazer's wife was
Phebe and his son was Samuel-1756 SISCHO.
We also have records from Goshen/Wendell/Saville, NH that relate
to the military service of Eleazer-1730, William-1748, and
Samuel-1756 in 1777. The point that I am making is that, in
spite of the various names assigned to Samuel-1756 SISCHO, when
he made application for his soldier's pension, he signed the
name Samuel SISCHO. He signed that name to the documents that he
submitted to the court when he sued for his pension. He took the
name Samuel SISCHO to the grave.
William-1748 SISCHO left the Goshen/Wendel/Saville, NH area
almost immediately after his return from the revolutionary war.
He moved his family to Vermont. At the time of the move, Vermont
was still an open frontier territory. At that time, Vermont had
not become a state. After Vermont became a state, William-1748
SISCHO cum SISCO moved to Franklin, Vermont just inside the
US-Canadian border. William-1748 SISCHO cum SISCO took the name
SISCO to the grave.
How does standardization explain why an uncle, William-1748
SISCHO, became William SISCO and a nephew, Samuel-1756 SISCHO,
bore his birthname to the grave? William's migration away from
the rest of the family suggests that may have been other reasons
for the name change.
Samuel-1756 SISCHO begat Stephen-1798 SISCHO who begat
Sylvester-1819 SISCHO and Reuben-1822 SISCHO. After the death of
his wife Dorcas-1800 CUTTS about 1824, Stephen moved his family
to northeast Ohio (1835±) and thence to northwest Ohio (1845).
When Stephen-1798 moved his family to Farmer, Defiance, Ohio,
the family surnames changed. Stephen-1798 SISCHO became Stephen
SISCOE. Sylvester-1819 SISCHO became Sylvester SISCOE.
Reuben-1822 SISCHO moved in 1880 to Augusta, Bulter, Kansas and
lived the remainder of his life as Reuben SISCO.
Once again, standardization does not explain the name changes.
Why would one line standardize on SISCO while another
standardized on SISCOE? Why did Stephen-1798 SISCHO and all his
sons drop the SISCHO surname? Why did they change their names
after the move to northwestern OHIO instead of after their move
to northeastern OHIO?
The SISCHO surname evolved into the SISCOE surname and devolved
into the SISCO surname. Regardless of those name changes, we are
all part of the same SISCHO genetic family. But, were are not
part of the SISCO genetic family.

Gene Siscoe

This thread: