Though his father often went by the name Adam Miller Hendrix, the son was only ever Adam Hendrix Jr., no middle name. And, of course, after his father died, just Adam Hendrix. There were a few land records executed in the name Adam Hendrix when both men were alive and it is not always clear whether it was Adam or Adam Miller who was being referred to.

I have said elsewhere that just because two people were referred to by the same name, one Sr., the other Jr., it cannot be assumed they were father and son. Sometimes it was uncle and nephew and the Sr. and Jr. in that case really used only to differentiate older from younger.

So, despite the many deeds whereby land was conveyed by Adam Sr. to Adam Jr., there is not a one that I have seen where it clearly says Jr. was his son. Nor is there any other single document from which that relationship can be proven. But I think it is the totality of the amount of land patented or taken up by Adam Miller Hendrix later owned by Adam Jr. from which we can deduce the father-son relationship. Adam Miller also had a son Isaac, who administered his estate and who did end up with some of the land. But Adam Jr. became the true land baron. He had to be the son of Adam Miller.

And I think additional evidence of the connection of several generations is the similarity of the tombstones of Adam Hendrix, Rachel Hendrix and Ruth Koller and that the tombstone of Adam Miller Hendrix which came later, was made to appear reasonably similar in shape and size to the others.

1790. Adam Hendrix lives in Shrewsbury, York County. A neighbor is George Hampshire. I believe another neighbor is John Koller (whose name appears to be spelled Hollear).

1800. Adam Hendrix lives in Shrewsbury. The household includes 3 females under 10, one of whom must be Ruth.

1810. Adam Hendrix lives in Shrewsbury. Ruth can be acounted for. Neighbors include Michael Gerberich (Jr. I assume), Abraham Yost and Joseph Hendrix.

1820. Adam Hendrix lives in Shrewsbury. The household includes females spanning all ages up to 45 -- which doesn't account for Rachel who is 64.

1830. Adam Hendrix lives in Schrewsberry. The household includes a male and female 70-80 (Adam is 73, Rachael is 74).

His will proves that Adam Hendrix died in 1836 and not 1830 as some who have transcribed his tombstone have said.

Adam Hendrix (of Shrewsbury, York County) wrote his will 3 Sep 1834, it was proved 10 Mar 1836. He mentioned wife Rachel and children: Julia Ann deceased wife of Peter Fraser, Dorcas, Joseph, Rachel Green and Isaac. His daughter Ruth had died but her children Isaac and Eliza Koller were mentioned.

His land holdings were impressive. Wife Rachel got the dwelling house where they were living. Dorcas got the plantation where she was living plus his house and lot in the City of Baltimore plus his house and lot in the Borough of Shrewsbury. Joseph got the 200 acres of land where he was living and also Adam’s share of a tavern house now occupied by Joshua Stewart (?) situated in Baltimore County. Rachel, wife of Joshua Green, got the plantation where she was living. Eliza and Isaac Koller jointly got Buck’s Outlet, his plantation of 107 acres and tanyard lying in Baltimore County. He bequeathed things to the six children of deceased daughter Julia, including they got his plantation in Baltimore County of 150 acres -- except 18.5 acres he had sold to Jacob Yost. His 40 acres in Hopewell Township were to be sold.

Of most interest to me, son Isaac was bequeathed the tavern house and plantation where he (Isaac) then lived known by the name of Blue Ball. Adam also wrote a codicil that said if Isaac were to die before Adam, Isaac’s wife Barbara to enjoy the brick tavern house and 100 acres of land.

His estate was mainly probated in York County but a separate probate in Baltimore County occurred with Kean Curry as administrator. Kean filed Adam’s inventory (that portion in Baltimore County, consisting of a town lot and stock in Baltimore and York Turnpike Company) 15 Feb 1837.

William H Curry says that Adam fought in the Revolutionary War. He also represented York County in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives in 1812-1813.

Rachel was mentioned in her father’s will.

1790-1830. Rachel can be accounted for in her husband’s household in each of these Census listings except for 1820, which is probably a result of a Census taker error.

1840. The Widow Hendrix age 80-90 lives in Shrewsbury.

Here are some notes covering random sources not listed elsewhere that assist in documenting (or further confusing) the puzzle of Rachel and Regina and Jorg Philip and John Philip Klingeman. The aim is to attempt to shed light on two issues: whether Regina and Rachel Klingemann are one and the same or two different people, and the related question of whether Johann Philip Klingemann and Philip (or Jorg Philip) Klingemann are one and the same or also two different people.

15 Apr 1749. Elisabetha Klingemann was born, daughter of Jorg Philip & Elisabeth Klingemann. Source: Lutheran New Hanover Church, Montgomery County, PA.

5 Aug 1754 to 3 Aug 1756. Rachel Klingemann was born. The date range is computed from the tombstone of Rachel Hendrix, which says she died 4 Aug 1842 in her 87th year. Now at first glance you’d think she was 87 and she may well have been, but I could argue that she was actually 86 (thus in her 87th year, but not yet 87). So, taking account of all possibilities, I think she was at least 86 years and 1 day old (3 Aug 1756) and no more than 87 years 364 days old (5 Aug 1754).

13 Jul 1773. Regina Klingemann, daughter of Johann Philip, married Johann Nicolaus Jost per the marriage citation of Rev. John Waldschmidt. (If this is really Rachel, she is at least 16 years and 11.5 months old and no older than 18 years, 11.5 months.)

2 May 1779. Johannes Yost was baptized in Berks County. He was the son of Nicholaus Jost Jr. and wife Regina per the baptismal citation of Rev. John Waldschmidt. He was born 18 April 1779. Johannes Klingeman was a sponsor. Rachel, we know from Philip’s will, had a brother named John.

18 Nov 1779. A deed is recorded wherein Nicholas Yost Jr. bought 183 acres of land in York County for £2100. There are several very important details in the transaction record for this purchase. Nicholas, last seen in Berks County married to Regina, is now in York County and interestingly there is no mention of a wife.

19 Nov 1779. Nicholas Yost Jr. and wife Rachel sold the same land in York County to George Weinhold of Berks County for £2700.

21 Feb 1785. Elizabeth Yost was baptized. She was the daughter of Abraham Yost and a witness was Magdalen Klingeman, daughter of John Philip Klingemann. Note that the record does not indicate that John Philip was deceased; that proves nothing, of course, but is a curiosity if it was in fact referring to Philip who died 11 years earlier. Source: Records of Friedensaal Church, York County.

24 Dec 1793. Elizabeth Yost married Jesse Low. She will later name a daughter Rachel. The theory is that Elizabeth is the daughter of Nicholaus Yost Jr. -- born not long after he and Regina were married, so naming her daughter Rachel gives credence to the theory that they are one and the same.

24 Aug 1796. Adam Hendrix and his wife Rachel file an administrative account for the estate of Nicholaus Yost.

10 May 1798. Abraham Yost turned 14.

4 Aug 1842. Rachel Hendrix died in her 87th year.

Elenora Green says: “Johannes, son of Nicholas Jost Jr & Regina was born 18 April 1779.  He married Catherine Weiser. The name Rachel was used on civil documents while the name Regina was used in church records.”

I first learned of this woman from Becky Curry who, in her genealogy, identified the wife of Adam Hendrix as Rachel Klingemann Yost. I assumed therefore (erroneously) that Rachel’s father was named Yost and I also guessed that Klingemann might prove to be her mother’s maiden name.

So I set out to research the Yost family to determine Rachel’s forbears and that led me to become part of an email consortium devoted to discussing the Yost family. In the course of that research, many documents and several previously written family histories were discussed to try to sort out the truth of this family. (As has happened in my own research, you start out with what you believe is a well researched narrative of a family’s history but then you find a document which seems to contradict a certain key conclusion of the published work and you have to find a way to reconcile things -- or else revise/debunk the accepted narrative.)

It was during these discussions that it became apparent that it could only be that Rachel’s maiden name really was Klingemann, that she married first Nicholas Yost Jr., was widowed young and then married second Adam Hendrix. Nonetheless, the documents were quite confusing because at times the wife of Nicholas was said to be Regina and at other times Rachel. Nicholas, in his will, referred to his wife Rachel -- but added to the problem by seeming to give her the option of raising his young children -- thus making it sound like they might have been his children by a previous wife.

Then there is the apparent documentary evidence that suggests that a man named Philip Klingemann had a daughter Rachel while a man named Johan Philip Klingemann had a daughter named Regina. So, were Philip and Johan Philip the same person? Were Rachel and Regina the same person, or perhaps sisters? Or do we, in fact, have four unique persons here?

I have concluded, after some work, that Rachel and Regina were the same person and that she was the daughter of Johan Philip Klingemann. I convinced myself that Rachel was sometimes called Regina. Nicholas married Regina in 1773, he sold land with Rachel in 1779, he had son Abraham with Regina in 1784 and he named his wife Rachel in his 1785 will. Later I did more research on the family and realized that we know from their father’s will, that Rachel had a brother John and that John at times associated, like a brother, with Regina.

Rachel Hendrix wrote a very funny will 13 Apr 1839 and it proved 9 Aug 1842. Adam’s will had basically spelled out how everything he left her was to be disposed of upon her death, so she acknowledged that was the case, but did claim some possessions separate from those left her by Adam and these she left to her granddaughter Rachel Sumwalt. She differentiated the possessions itemized by Adam from those she owned in her own right by saying hers were “not dead, worn out or broke”.