COMMENT:  The birthdate of 1707 is a guess on my own part.  There was
no information to support that and that was bad genealogy, so I have
removed it.  As well, the location of Theobald's birth/origination (in
the `Upper Rhineland/Swabia') was an assumption that my grandfather made
in his (rather narrative) written genealogy, THE STERNERS.  It is no
more than a guess as far as I know.  We have no actual facts to support
it either way.  Further, where'd he get the name of `Theobald' for our
top-of-the-line individual?  I don't know.  However, the way I think my
grandfather PROBABLY came upon the name of `Theobald' as a possibility
was from family legend.  Probably from his Uncle Henry Sterner.  Else, he
simply looked for the first occurance of the family name STERNER among
the earliest passenger lists he could find.  At any rate, he must have
found it in the passenger list of the ship NANCY, out of Rotterdam, and
berthed in the port of Philadelphia on Sept. 20, 1738 -- and where a
`Theobald Sterner' had signed a couple Oaths in applying for admission to
the country.  Grandpa also states that he could find no details on
Theobald's background, nor could he trace his life's steps AFTER arriving
in Philadelphia.  He did find the name `Theobald,' married and with three
sons - John, Casper, and Nicholas - later in Northampton County near
Allentown in 1743, five years later.  But the wife's name was not known,
nor whether there were other children, or when he died.  But does this
find support a `natural' assumption that this `Theobald' suddenly
appearing in Northampton Co. must be the same one off of the NANCY?
Perhaps for some; but not for this genealogist.  Not good genealogy to do
that.  I think where Grandpa probably got the latter information about
Theobald and his three sons was from the written genealogy, HISTORY OF
LEHIGH COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, Charles Rhoads Roberts et al, 1914, pp.
1284-86.  (No offense to Grandpa.  Still appreciate and am grateful for
his immense efforts.)  Does this make the whole genealogy from Theobald
down a wasted work?  Not necessarily.  Just means that, for now, we are
not sure of who is definitely above, say, Paul -- at least that I would
trust with any amount of certainty.  This is what the family should
realize, to be on the safe side. Grandpa did us a pretty great favor, I
think, in painting what he could.  He saved us a lot of time by recording
what family legends he knew of, and recording what he DID know for certain
about the family.  However, the confusion stems from the point where he
broke the Rule of Evidence and included the speculation and rumor, as
well.  And that isn't Primary OR Secondary evidence of anything.  -Todd