Page 124. They were of the Presbyterian Faith in Pa.; however our branch of the family became members of the Baptist Church in N. C.

The part about our Brysons becoming Baptists is true. Our early Brysons may have been Presbyterian as many of this name were.

Here is a big problem. Mrs. Updike mixed up some people here. There was indeed a person named Elizabeth Countryman born 14 Oct 1716. She existed. (I am not a Countryman researcher myself, but some who are have shared information with me.) Elizabeth Countryman (1716) was a child of Andrew Countryman (c1696) and Sibylla Scharmann who married 1715 in New York. Mrs. Updike was correct about this person's name, birth date and parents. However, I have seen no data on who this Elizabeth Countryman married. Was it a William Bryson? Perhaps, but it seems unlikely for she was never in the same county with the Brysons, at least not at the right time, or so it seems to me.

Even if it turns out that this Elizabeth Countryman (1716) did marry a William Bryson, she is not the same person whom Mrs. Updike describes as living to 118 and being on the sled going across the mountains. That story applies to an entirely different person.

Elizabeth Countryman (1716) had a half brother Andrew Countryman (c1732-1773) who with his wife Elizabeth, were the parents of Sarah Countryman, proven wife of James Holmes Bryson (1740/50).  You can see where the confusion arises. Two women named "Elizabeth Countryman" in the same family. They were sister-in-laws. Elizabeth, wife of Andrew, was the one who lived to be over 100, and she was indeed the grandmother of Daniel G. Bryson, as told in the story. (Mrs. Allen says grandmother, Mrs. Updike says Great Grandmother, which is wrong.)

Somehow Mrs. Updike confused these two in an effort to work in her Countryman ancestry somewhere. Tradition or something told her that she had a Countryman in her tree, so she tried to put that family into the wrong place. She didn't know that it was James Holmes Bryson's wife who was a Countryman. It appears that she rearranged Mrs. Allen's research to make it fit her way of thinking. (At least I believe this is how the mix-up happened, it is possible someone else provided her the information, already mixed up, it is difficult to know exactly what happened.)

Mrs. Updike placed her ancestor Isabella Bryson (wife of John Armstrong) among the children of William Bryson and Isabella Holmes. This is one generation too old. Mrs. Allen had Isabella in the right place, as a child of James H. Bryson and Ms. Countryman. Either Mrs. Updike didn't see this, or didn't believe it to be correct.  Mrs. Allen also clearly said that James was married to a Countryman. Problem solved right? Should have been, but apparently it wasn't enough.

There is a deed in York Co., SC (1797) wherein Elizabeth Countryman deeded property to her daughter (so stated) Sarah Bryson, wife of James Bryson. This proves it quite well, James Holmes Bryson was married to Sarah Countryman. When this family moved into western NC, they took grandmother Elizabeth (---) Countryman with her. That is the source of the "sled across the mountain" story, for she was quite elderly then.

Mrs. Allen's history and the 1797 deed prove that James Holmes Bryson was married to Sarah Countryman daughter of Elizabeth (---) Countryman. Other researchers show that this Elizabeth was a widow of Andrew Countryman. Her maiden name isn't known. This is beyond debate now, the evidence is quite solid. Mrs. Updike was simply mistaken about where the Countryman connection came in.

It seems more likely that the family moved to NC in the early 1760's rather than the 1750's, but this a nitpick, not a real error.

Who were the seven sons? In her report section she listed: William, John, Hugh, Daniel, Samuel, Elisha and James Bryson.  More on them below.

She appears to be mixing up generations here, referring to those who settled near Cowpens, etc. are actually part of the next generation, sons of William Bryson and Isabella Holmes. She mentions a story of Elizabeth Countryman Bryson carrying water to the men at Kings Mountain and Cowpens. This story probably refers to Mrs. Elizabeth (---) Countryman, or perhaps even to Sarah Countryman Bryson instead. I don't know, for it could be either one.

Mrs. Updike puts these seven together as siblings, son of William & Elizabeth. Where did she get this list? What ties them together?

William Bryson (married Isabella Holmes) and Hugh Bryson may be brothers, but I've seen no compelling evidence of that. Hugh settled in Mecklenburg Co, NC. John Bryson (c1734) is unknown. She states this is probably the John of Surry County, but he is not a brother to our William (married Isabella Holmes).

I have no data on Daniel, Samuel or Elisha Bryson.  There was a Daniel in Lancaster Co, PA in the 1750's and 1760's.

James Bryson of Surry is a proven son of John of Surry, so clearly not a brother to our William (md Isabella Holmes). I can understand why she tried to tie William, John, James and Hugh together though, for many (myself included) still believe there is some sort of connection between them (though not the John of Surry, but another John Bryson instead) .

This is a logical conclusion, but it is wrong. There is ample evidence (mentioned earlier) that James Holmes Bryson was married to Sarah Countryman. This is proven by a 1797 deed and by the Telitha Bryson Allen Family History. (She knew both James and Sarah personally!) There may be some sort of Byers connection to the family, but the name does not appear in the family until the early 1820's, and in different branches (not just James Holmes Bryson's descendants). It was a common enough name, so there is no need for a relationship to the Byers to explain the name.

This statement by Mrs. Updike about the possible Byers connection caused myself and some others to theorize that perhaps there was a Byers ancestor in the tree somewhere. We knew it wasn't here at this generation, so perhaps it was William's wife Elizabeth instead, the one incorrectly identified by Mrs. Updike as a Countryman. I put this theory on my website, and now many swear it is correct, based only on the fact that it is in print, so it must be correct! (Back to that again!)