BINGO! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Lovelace" <greglovelace@comcast.net> To: <lovelace@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2010 7:07 AM Subject: [LL] Book with erroneous info > Maybe Larry was referring to "The Loveless-Lovelace and Allied > Families" by Florence Keeney Loveless Roberston. I remembver seeing > a copy that showed Flo on the cover wearing a huge hat. The book > was published in 1953 and connected the family of John Baptist > Lovelace to the John Lovelace of the 13th century. If I'm not > mistaken, it also showed a line of descent for some family from Adam.... > > Peace, > Part of the Tree, > Greg > > > At 11:58 PM 12/17/2010, you wrote: >>Marsha (Martha?) Lipscomb was the woman's name and her stuff has really >>caused us >>to have to do some sorting out. We started out talking about John of >>the two wives >>and 19 children because she had everyone lumped in the same family. >>Turns out that >>was really, really wrong. >>Lou Ann >> >>------------------------------- >>To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>LOVELACE-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without >>the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LOVELACE-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > __________ NOD32 5713 (20101218) Information __________ > > This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. > http://www.eset.com > >

Maybe Larry was referring to "The Loveless-Lovelace and Allied Families" by Florence Keeney Loveless Roberston. I remembver seeing a copy that showed Flo on the cover wearing a huge hat. The book was published in 1953 and connected the family of John Baptist Lovelace to the John Lovelace of the 13th century. If I'm not mistaken, it also showed a line of descent for some family from Adam.... Peace, Part of the Tree, Greg At 11:58 PM 12/17/2010, you wrote: >Marsha (Martha?) Lipscomb was the woman's name and her stuff has really >caused us >to have to do some sorting out. We started out talking about John of >the two wives >and 19 children because she had everyone lumped in the same family. >Turns out that >was really, really wrong. >Lou Ann > >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >LOVELACE-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without >the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi, folks And hello to Heather Lovelace <nobodyof2007@yahoo.com> Welcome to the group, Heather. When you get comfortable with us, let us know who you're researching, and we'll do our best to help you connect. In the meantime, feel free to dig in our archives, and be sure to visit our website at <http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~lovelace>http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~lovelace Our online library of Lovelxxx documents, narratives, and pictures is an ongoing project to which we add as time allows. You can access it right now by clicking on the "Documents" button on the left margin of the main page. And our y-chromosome DNA study has proven very successful in unravelling the confusion surrounding several of the colonial American Lovelace and Loveless families. The results are posted both on the FamilyTreeDNA website (<http://www.familytreedna.com/public/lovelace/>http://www.familytreedna.com/public/lovelace/) and on our own DNA website (<http://dna.satmel.com/results.html>http://dna.satmel.com/results.html) Take a look! We now also have a companion website on MyFamily.com. If you're not familiar with that organization, to go <http://www.myfamily.com>http://www.myfamily.com and read to find out a little more about it. If you'd like to be invited to join that site, please email me at < <mailto:greglovelace@comcast.net>greglovelace@comcast.net>. Glad to have with us :-) Peace, Part of the Tree, Greg

LOL. I saw something similar for my Day/Loveless line. Not sure where my late uncle found his 'sources,' but I've spent years either verifying info or tossing it out (obviously not the Adam and Eve stuff, but just the existence of real people / events going back a several hundred years). I didn't see a book, though, I think it was a manuscript that my uncle Movell wrote. I'll bet the book you're talking about must have been a source for his work. Supposedly he found a lot of data tracing the family to Adam in Europe somewhere. (Yeah, my Dad and I felt the same way about that then as I do now.) Tommi J Greg wrote: Maybe Larry was referring to "The Loveless-Lovelace and Allied Families" by Florence Keeney Loveless Roberston. I remembver seeing a copy that showed Flo on the cover wearing a huge hat. The book was published in 1953 and connected the family of John Baptist Lovelace to the John Lovelace of the 13th century. If I'm not mistaken, it also showed a line of descent for some family from Adam....

Marsha (Martha?) Lipscomb was the woman's name and her stuff has really caused us to have to do some sorting out. We started out talking about John of the two wives and 19 children because she had everyone lumped in the same family. Turns out that was really, really wrong. Lou Ann

In a message dated 12/17/10 9:50:39 PM, KFurBallKell@aol.com writes: > I was talking to Betty Lovelace today about her family (still working on  > getting someone to do a DNA test) and she told me they were told about 10 > years  ago that the Lovelace & Loveless names were split over in England > because of  some kind of trouble a Lovelace got into and they were told > "they had > three  choices, be tarred and feathered, leave the country or change their > name from  Lovelace to Loveless." Has anyone else heard this? I had no > idea > what to say  because she really believes this is true. The Lovelace > researcher she was  speaking to said his Lovelace family left the country > and > immigrated to Canada  at that point? > Well, she may be talking about the Martyrs. Or she could be talking about the line that did immigrate to Canada. But, there is similar lore over here too. In our line starting with our GA Barton born ca 1798, our spelling became Loveless. Long before I knew anything about our family, the lore was that two brothers had a falling out and one went west and changed the spelling of the name. Turns out that Barton's father was Samuel who left the Rutherford area where his brothers were. They kept the Lovelace spelling...so did Samuel and his brothers have a falling out? But, Barton has a brother William who went to TN and his line kept Lovelace. So, did Barton and William have a falling out? The lines of two other brothers Seaborn and James went to Loveless also. So, was there a falling out? Who knows? Like I said earlier, lore is unreliable, but there is often a grain of truth somewhere to be found in it. Lou Ann

In a message dated 12/17/10 9:34:06 PM, soupcan5@yadtel.net writes: > Isn't this the information in the Lovelace/Loveless papers published in > the > 1920's by the lady in the outrageous hat on the cover??? ( can't remember > the name and the booklet is no longer in the library) > Larry > Very probably. I can't remember her name right off, but she had a bunch of erroneous info that was accepted as fact for a lot of years. Lou Ann

I was talking to Betty Lovelace today about her family (still working on getting someone to do a DNA test) and she told me they were told about 10 years ago that the Lovelace & Loveless names were split over in England because of some kind of trouble a Lovelace got into and they were told "they had three choices, be tarred and feathered, leave the country or change their name from Lovelace to Loveless." Has anyone else heard this? I had no idea what to say because she really believes this is true. The Lovelace researcher she was speaking to said his Lovelace family left the country and immigrated to Canada at that point? Sheila Kell

Isn't this the information in the Lovelace/Loveless papers published in the 1920's by the lady in the outrageous hat on the cover??? ( can't remember the name and the booklet is no longer in the library) Larry ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Lovelace" <greglovelace@comcast.net> To: <lovelace@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 7:51 PM Subject: [LL] Need a little help > Hi, cuzzins. > > I need a little help here. I am trying to convince the wife of a > descendant of Asa Lovelace of Rutherford/Cleveland Co., NC through > his son Alvin, that she is in error in tracing the family back to > 13th century England. Here, in part, is the descent she gives > leading to Benjamin b. c1727 of Maryland, father of Barton: > > " Elizabeth Aucher married Sir William Lovelace IV (b. 1561) and had > a child William Lovelace V (b. 1584) > " William Lovelace V married Anne Barne(s) (b. 1590) and had a son > Thomas Lovelace (b. 1620) > " Thomas Lovelace married Mary Jane ___ and had a son Thomas Lovelace > (b. 1664 Maryland) > " Thomas Lovelace married Eleanor (d. 1765) and had a son John > Lovelace (b. 1698, Port Tobacco, MD) > " John Lovelace married Mary Jane Young (or Nancy Bohanian?) and had > a son Benjamin Lovelace (b. 1727, Rock Creek, MD) > > The family she traces back to the 1200s is the family of Elizabeth > Aucher. But I know she's in error taking Benjamin back to John, or > at least there is no supporting evidence for that relationship. Can > anyone provide me with a persuasive argument backed up by > documentation that this descent is wrong? Jack? David? Lou Ann? > Anybody? > > Thanks.... > > Peace, > Part of the Tree, > Greg > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LOVELACE-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > __________ NOD32 5707 (20101216) Information __________ > > This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. > http://www.eset.com > >

I hope what I just sent makes sense. I was also making popcorn for grandkids and helping them get presents wrapped and a bunch of other stuff, while I was doing it. (Yep, I multi-task all day long). Anyway, if you have questions or if something seems out of whack, jump right in and ask. Lou Ann

>    Thomas Lovelace married Eleanor (d. 1765) and had a son John > Lovelace (b. 1698, Port Tobacco, MD) > Okay, this Thomas (in my humble opinion, although I think some disagree with me) I believe was Thomas the Orphan. Deeds, etc show up late enough for a man born 1709. He did have a wife Eleanor. He did have a son John, but his John (again in my humble opinion though some may disagree) I believe was the one who did marry Jane Bohanan or Nancy Jane Young? I'm real confused on his wife although a 1763 deed names her as Jane. And I believe he was the one who went to Culpepper Co VA. I can't prove that yet, but everything points to him being gone after 1763 or at least after 1765. The John born 1698 was probably a brother to Thomas above. He married Anne and had JBL and Samuel, Luke and Phillip. Records prove this wife and children. I think both of these probably belong to John who was born ca 1670 and who is proven to be older than 1698 by a 1711 estate document. I THINK - key word here is THINK - that this John is probably the father of John and Thomas, probably a Samuel who is found in a 1745 document, maybe Abraham and Benjamin who are together on some records (even though it is family lore that Abraham was from Scotland). Family lore in my family said our line was from Wales. Family lore isn't very reliable. Of all the above, John, Thomas, and Abraham can be eliminated as the father of our Benjamin....which leaves the possibility of Benjamin who disappears from records after 1737 and Samuel who disappears from records after 1745. Lou Ann The above Thomas did not buy Batchelor's Forest until 1745. His son John and his wife Eleanor sold the land in 1763, indicating that Thomas had died by then. A Thomas with one white and six blacks was on a 1733 tax roll and that may or may not have been this one. If I'm right about who he is he would have been 25 at that time. At any rate, there is absolutely no evidence that he ever had a son Benjamin and in fact was probably a contemporary of Benjamin. Supposedly in 1698 there was a William Lovelace in MD whose estate was probated and a Thomas was named in the record. Brother or son, I'm not sure. When I was in MD I looked and looked for this estate record to no avail. I don't know where the info comes from. It's been repeated a lot, but with no source and nothing to back it up.

In a message dated 12/17/10 6:53:25 PM, greglovelace@comcast.net writes: > "   Thomas Lovelace married Mary Jane ___ and had a son Thomas Lovelace > (b. 1664 Maryland) > Okay, to start with this Thomas had no surviving heirs. See below: Although his wife’s name remains a mystery, Thomas Lovelace is known to have had at least one son, William Lovelace, who died at age eleven and was buried following an elaborate state funeral ceremony held at Fort James in 1671 (For a detailed description of this bizarre event, See: The American Historical Review, Vol. IX, (1904), pp. 522-525). Evidence that Thomas produced other children has remained elusive. Pleasants noted, however, that “there is no question that when Thomas Lovelace died…he was without issue surviving, and that “Lovelace Farme” passed to his niece Mary Duxbury.” However, Pleasants allowed for the possibility that Mary Duxbury might have been the daughter of Dudley Lovelace or his sister Katherine Hayne (Pleasants, “Francis Lovelace,” pg. 191).   Her next Thomas I'll cover in my next message. Lou Ann

Hi, cuzzins. I need a little help here. I am trying to convince the wife of a descendant of Asa Lovelace of Rutherford/Cleveland Co., NC through his son Alvin, that she is in error in tracing the family back to 13th century England. Here, in part, is the descent she gives leading to Benjamin b. c1727 of Maryland, father of Barton: " Elizabeth Aucher married Sir William Lovelace IV (b. 1561) and had a child William Lovelace V (b. 1584) " William Lovelace V married Anne Barne(s) (b. 1590) and had a son Thomas Lovelace (b. 1620) " Thomas Lovelace married Mary Jane ___ and had a son Thomas Lovelace (b. 1664 Maryland) " Thomas Lovelace married Eleanor (d. 1765) and had a son John Lovelace (b. 1698, Port Tobacco, MD) " John Lovelace married Mary Jane Young (or Nancy Bohanian?) and had a son Benjamin Lovelace (b. 1727, Rock Creek, MD) The family she traces back to the 1200s is the family of Elizabeth Aucher. But I know she's in error taking Benjamin back to John, or at least there is no supporting evidence for that relationship. Can anyone provide me with a persuasive argument backed up by documentation that this descent is wrong? Jack? David? Lou Ann? Anybody? Thanks.... Peace, Part of the Tree, Greg

REMINDERS FOR SUBSCRIBERS TO THE LOVELACE MAILING LIST ======================================================= CONTACT: List manager: Greg Lovelace < <mailto:greglovelace@comcast.net>greglovelace@comcast.net> Webmistress: Wendy Loveless Waldron < <mailto:info@1812hitchingpost.com>info@1812hitchingpost.com> ======================================================= LOVELACE/LOVELESS DNA If you're interested in the y-chromosome DNA study we've undertaken, check out the results page at <http://dna.satmel.com/index.html>http://dna.satmel.com/index.html To find out more about the tests, go to the website for the company which is doing our tests, Family Tree DNA. They have an excellent FAQ at <http://www.familytreedna.com/faq.html>http://www.familytreedna.com/faq.html ======================================================= HELP IS AVAILABLE Having problems using RootsWeb? Go to the RootsWeb HelpDesk at <http://helpdesk.rootsweb.com/help.cgi>http://helpdesk.rootsweb.com/help.cgi or the FAQ page at <http://helpdesk.rootsweb.com/>http://helpdesk.rootsweb.com/ ======================================================= SUBSCRIPTION INFO: To sub or unsub, send the word "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" (without the quotes) to <mailto:LOVELACE-request@rootsweb.com>LOVELACE-request@rootsweb.com (for regular mail) or <mailto:LOVELACE-D-request@rootsweb.com>LOVELACE-D-request@rootsweb.com (for digest) ======================================================= Want to search the whole of RootsWeb for Lovelace and/or Loveless? Now you can! Go to <http://resources.rootsweb.com/surnames/l/o/LOVELACE/>http://resources.rootsweb.com/surnames/l/o/LOVELACE/ or <http://resources.rootsweb.com/surnames/l/o/LOVELESS/>http://resources.rootsweb.com/surnames/l/o/LOVELESS/ and search away! ======================================================= ATTACHMENTS: Attachments are not allowed! Any message with an attachment WILL NOT go to the list. If you need to send a file or a pic, please send it by private email, and always ask your recipient first! And, if possible, please turn off any fancy formatting for your mailing program. Thanks! ======================================================= REPLYING TO MESSAGES: In the interest of brevity, if you use the "reply" option on your mailer, please PLEASE delete the parts of the original message that are unnecessary to your reply. Keep only that part to which you are replying. And be sure to edit the subject line of your reply, changing it when necessary. Sometimes the conversations end up in a toatlly different place than where they started, and folks who only scan the subject lines might miss an important post! Thanks! ======================================================= TWO-WAY CONVERSATIONS: Try to keep conversations between two parties off the list, unless y'all are trying to work out a genealogical problem. Remember, with about 250 subscribers, they are all reading your mail and eavesdropping on your conversation! ======================================================= ARCHIVED MESSAGES: Archives of messages to the list are available! There are several alternatives.... Go to our website at <http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~lovelace>http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~lovelace and look for a link to the search engine Go to <http://searches2.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=LOVELACE>http://searches2.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=LOVELACE Go to <http://searches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl>http://searches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl Type in "Lovelace" (without the quotes) and search away! For help formulating your search, go to <http://jrshelby.com/rfotw/rwsearch.htm>http://jrshelby.com/rfotw/rwsearch.htm or contact Greg Lovelace at < <mailto:greglovelace@comcast.net>greglovelace@comcast.net> An archive of threaded messages is currently in the works for RootsWeb lists. Ours is located at <http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index?list=lovelace>http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index?list=lovelace ======================================================= US GENWEB You can find lots of great stuff at USGenWeb. Point your browser to <http://www.usgenweb.org/>http://www.usgenweb.org/ and take a look. ======================================================= USGS GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES INFORMATION SYSTEM Need to find the location where an event took place for your ancestors? Go to the USGS Geographical Names Information System at <http://geonames.usgs.gov/pls/gnispublic/>http://geonames.usgs.gov/pls/gnispublic/ You can even get a map of the area! Kewl!!! ======================================================= Thanks to all of you for making this one of the best surname lists on the net! Keep pluggin' away......we'll find the answers yet! <grin> =======================================================

Barely mornin' Cuzzies, I haven't abandoned you! See that little dot crawling out from underall that paper pile? Well, that's me! Guaranteed every problem lookingfor a place to happen has found me. It's a blizzard! Gasoline be going up in the Houston town....from $3.65 for regular to,the filling station people tell me, $4 by the end of the month. In SmallTown, USA, it doesn't mean much, but in sprawled out, big Houston, it'sgonna get dicey. We have beautiful, 70-ish weather....while I understand the country isfreezing. If you are, find a way to have a good one! ( : Buckette

Hi, folks And hello to MB <orderit@suddenlink.net> Welcome to the group, MB. When you get comfortable with us, let us know who you're researching, and we'll do our best to help you connect. In the meantime, feel free to dig in our archives, and be sure to visit our website at <http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~lovelace>http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~lovelace Our online library of Lovelxxx documents, narratives, and pictures is an ongoing project to which we add as time allows. You can access it right now by clicking on the "Documents" button on the left margin of the main page. And our y-chromosome DNA study has proven very successful in unravelling the confusion surrounding several of the colonial American Lovelace and Loveless families. The results are posted both on the FamilyTreeDNA website (<http://www.familytreedna.com/public/lovelace/>http://www.familytreedna.com/public/lovelace/) and on our own DNA website (<http://dna.satmel.com/results.html>http://dna.satmel.com/results.html) Take a look! We now also have a companion website on MyFamily.com. If you're not familiar with that organization, to go <http://www.myfamily.com>http://www.myfamily.com and read to find out a little more about it. If you'd like to be invited to join that site, please email me at < <mailto:greglovelace@comcast.net>greglovelace@comcast.net>. Glad to have with us :-) Peace, Part of the Tree, Greg

Sorry for the miscue. I have a tendency to write Lovelace. Five off means that the connection is far back in history. william loveless wrote: > FYI...William Steven is a "Loveless",not Lovelace.Does 5 off mean not directly related? > Sorry for my lack of savvy in this. William Steven Loveless > > --- On Fri, 12/10/10, Jack D. Lovelace <lovelacejackd@verizon.net> wrote: > > From: Jack D. Lovelace <lovelacejackd@verizon.net> > Subject: Re: [LL] DNA testing > To: lovelace@rootsweb.com > Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 1:39 PM > > Kit No. 25740 for Robert W. Loveless and Kit No. 173703 for William > Steven Lovelace differ by five (5). > > Brondak@aol.com wrote: > >> In a message dated 12/9/10 7:43:11 PM, 1_twig@comcast.net writes: >> >> >> >> >>> Test #25740 Robert W. Loveless (the knife maker guy) is descended from >>> John >>> and Rachel Van Hook Loveless. He is in the MD group. >>> >>> This family did go to KY very early. These were the Loveless captured at >>> Martin's fort and taken to Canada during the Rev. War. Some stayed in >>> Ohio, >>> some did return to KY after their release. >>> >>> >>> >> How close is his test to William's desc. of "Good Tom"? >> Lou Ann >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LOVELACE-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> > > -- Jack D. Lovelace

Mornin' Cuzzies, Typical, strange winter weather in Texas today.....in the low 30's last night, upto the 60's today. Beautiful, sunshiny day! Gasoline prices inching up this month....about 30 cents worth. $3 a gal. insome places around town. They say it's because of low reserves with therefiners. Gubmit hasn't let us build new ones in decades. As long as gubmitis running everything, I wish they'd tend to their bidness and see that we hadenough refineries. Kitties still snoozing....how do they know it's so cold outside? They haven'tbeen out yet. o : Y'all have a good one! Buckette

can you explain the significance of a difference of 5 to a layman? --- On Fri, 12/10/10, Jack D. Lovelace <lovelacejackd@verizon.net> wrote: From: Jack D. Lovelace <lovelacejackd@verizon.net> Subject: Re: [LL] DNA testing To: lovelace@rootsweb.com Date: Friday, December 10, 2010, 1:39 PM Kit No. 25740 for Robert W. Loveless and Kit No. 173703 for William Steven Lovelace differ by five (5). Brondak@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 12/9/10 7:43:11 PM, 1_twig@comcast.net writes: > > >    >> Test #25740 Robert W. Loveless (the knife maker guy) is descended from >> John >> and Rachel Van Hook Loveless. He is in the MD group. >> >> This family did go to KY very early. These were the Loveless captured at >> Martin's fort and taken to Canada during the Rev. War. Some stayed in >> Ohio, >> some did return to KY after their release. >> >>      > > How close is his test to William's desc. of "Good Tom"? > Lou Ann >  > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LOVELACE-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >    -- Jack D. Lovelace ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LOVELACE-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Mornin' Cuzzies, It's a fresca <cool, fresh in Espanol> day here in Houston town....breezy,clear sky. Supposed to freeze tonight, but it won't get down that far in theburbs here. I haven't seen three hrs. of great TV in one wack in eons! Last night wasfabulous kicking off w/ the Heisman. I didn't see how Cam Newton couldlose it, but also I was pulling for neighborhood kid Oliver Luck from Stanford.Afterwards there was a great 2 hr. special abt. the rise and fall of SMU footballof which I was weaned on....w/ Craig James at the forefront, another neighborhood kid. CNN has these wonderful two hour specials on sports, 8 to 10 centralon Sat. nights. They are absolutely great! Lance McIlhenney was the SMUquarterback and the son of an old, good friend and classmate.....ah! Years agoin Texas we all knew each other! And, don't look now, but it looks like almost three years of co-habiting, Da Kidand Miss Humble Oil might tie the knot.....requiring Da Mutha <me> to go to SanAntonio to pick up the great grandmother's ring....which we might put on ourlittle pinky. My, oh my! Have a good one! Buckette