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

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 > >

Greg Lovelace wrote: > 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, the son of William Lovelace and Anne Barne, was the brother of Francis Lovelace, the governor of New York. Thomas Lovelace resided in New York, along with his brothers Francis and Dudley. I have Thomas with five sons, none of whom survived Thomas, who died in 1689. There is no record that Thomas was ever in Maryland. > " Thomas Lovelace married Mary Jane ___ and had a son Thomas Lovelace > (b. 1664 Maryland) > I do not have a Thomas Lovelace who married a Mary Jane LNU and who resided in Maryland. I do have a Thomas W. Loveless who was born c1664 in Maryland. He was named as the executor of the will of William A. Loveless, the transportee, in Talbot County. I do not have any descendents for Thomas. > " Thomas Lovelace married Eleanor (d. 1765) and had a son John > Lovelace (b. 1698, Port Tobacco, MD) > Thomas Lovelace (b: c1685; d: c1750) did marry Eleanor LNU in c1709. Thomas bought 125 acres of land in Batchellor's Forrest on 13 Dec 1745. Thomas and Eleanor did have a son named John who was born in c1710. John b: c1710 married Jane LNU in 1741 and they had sons Ignatious (b:1742) and John (b: 1745). The parents of John (b: 1698) are not known. John had property in Zachariah Manor and sons Philip (b: 1725), Samuel (b: 1732), and Luke (b: 1736). The male descendents of Samuel are found in the main Maryland haplotype. > " John Lovelace married Mary Jane Young (or Nancy Bohanian?) and had > a son Benjamin Lovelace (b. 1727, Rock Creek, MD) > I have not found any documentation in the archives that has a John Lovelace marrying a "Mary Jane Young". The information provided by Maria Lipscomb lumped together the information from six or seven different Johns. One of these Johns was the John Lovelace who married Nancy Bohanan. (Since this is Maria's line, I tend to think that she got this John right). John who married Nancy Bohanan resided in Culpeper County, Virginia. All of the other Johns resided in Maryland (mostly Charles County). The male descendents of John and Nancy Bohanan Lovelace are found in the Maryland DYS 439 (12) haplotype. The male descendents of Benjamin Lovelace (b: 1727) are found in the Maryland DYS 456 (16) haplotype. So Benjamin is not a son of John and Nancy Bohanan Lovelace. If there is any relationship between John and Benjamin, which I doubt, they are brothers or cousins. > 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 > > -- Jack D. Lovelace