The genealogical search for the Mottice family effectively ends with Peter Mottice, 1772-1855. As I posted previously, we don't know the name of his father or any other details with any degree of certainty.
Peter Mottice, however, is a different story. We have his obituary, his will, historical records, church records, and family records that paint a fairly detailed portrait of Grant Mottice's great grandfather. He was an early pioneer in the area of Waynesburg when it was largely uninhabited and still subject to Indian attack. He was founder and elder of the Waynesburg Presbyterian Church in 1823. He was a Justice of the Peace for the county for many years, and we have his written records of at least a portion of this time.
Despite this wealth of information about a man born over 200 years ago, there are many question marks that remain. A number of the records we have for him are contradictory. For example, his will, written in 1852, identifies his "heirs, John Mottice, Abigail Creighton, Sarah Mottice, and James B. Mottice." These are all either sons or daughters. At least two others predeceased him. And James B. Mottice was son by his second wife, so his list of heirs seems comprehensive.
Yet his obituary, written after his death just 3 years later in 1855, mentions "leaving 4 sons to mourn his loss." Where did the other two sons come from? There are no other records, including census, death, or cemetery records that indicate 2 other sons.
Charles D. Mottice, a descendent of James B. Mottice has a family history which entices us with a little more information but adds further to the confusion. According to Charles D., Peter had 2 sons, but within just a few sentences attributes 4 sons to Peter. Moreover, he mentions a 5th son that was illegitimate. This intriguing story was that, between the death of his first wife Pheby and subsequent marriage to his second wife Elizabeth, he took a black mistress who bore him that additional son.
Charles D. Mottice also has a genealogy of James. B. Mottice, but here shows only 2 sons of Peter. I have to surmise, then, that his other reference to 4 (legitimate) sons was a mistake and he meant 4 children instead. And since he refers to only one illegitimate son, we are still left with a total of 3 sons, not 4.
That takes us back to the obituary and the possibility that perhaps the author of the obituary simply made a mistake. This seems unlikely since the author was probably one of his children. A more likely circumstance suggests that the error -- confusing "children" for "sons" -- could have come from the newspaper. (I have had to post several obituaries in newspapers, and none were error-free.)
Yet even if we assume that the newspaper made a mistake in 1855 and listed Peter with four sons when it meant four children, we are still faced with the distressing question of whether there are other errors in the obituary about Peter that lead us down rabbit trails.
But all this makes Peter Mottice a fascinating subject for exploration. Many of my posts will be focused on him, and a number will be speculative because there is simply not much definitive information available. I hope, however, that there will be those who read these postings who have information that I don't and share it on this website. We might be able to make some progress in filling in the blanks of Peter Mottice's life.