Having touched off the grand and great expedition through aunts and uncles (I think the Wizard of Oz might have been "the Great and Grand"?), I'll toss in another element on the discussion of how friend might be linked to relation. It may not be that the word is merely "general purpose." In Norwegian (and I believe in Danish as well) the "frende" has the now archaic meaning of "kinsman, relative; (pl) kindred." Even today, to be "frendelaus" [friendless] is to be "without relatives." Both the Norse and the Danes packed quite a few words into English -- so the lingering flavor of relations, stronger in the past, likely has firm roots. Jack Fallin On Aug 21, 2008, at 12:24 PM, lower-delmarva-roots- request@rootsweb.com wrote: > > > LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS Administrivia > > For information about the Lower Delmarva Roots Mailing List, > including list guidelines and instructions for unsubscribing and > subscribing, see the LDRoots FAQ: > > http://www.tyaskin.com/handley/ldrfaq.htm > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Understanding Cousins: But what about aunts and uncles?? > (Johnlyon0@cs.com) > 2. what is a friend (David Kearney) > 3. Re: Understanding Cousins: But what about aunts and uncles?? > (Susan Wheary) > 4. Re: Understanding Cousins: But what about aunts and uncles?? > (Johnlyon0@cs.com) > 5. Friend and Next friend (E Johnson) > 6. Re: Understanding Cousins: But what about aunts and uncles?? > (Bruce L. Nicholson) > 7. Re: "Friends" as relatives (G j Coleman) > 8. Re: Friends Nicholson and Nicholson (David Kearney) > 9. Re: "Friends" as relatives (Clara Marie Thomas) > 10. Re: Understanding Cousins: But what about aunts and uncles?? > (joslake@sbcglobal.net) > 11. Re: "Friends" as relatives (joslake@sbcglobal.net) > 12. Re: "Friends" as relatives (Cindy Anderson) > 13. Re: Understanding Cousins: But what about aunts and uncles?? > (Johnlyon0@cs.com) > 14. Re: Understanding Cousins: But what about aunts and uncles?? > (Mike Hitch) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 03:47:35 -0400 > From: Johnlyon0@cs.com > Subject: Re: [LDR] Understanding Cousins: But what about aunts and > uncles?? > To: lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: <6F9D5313.4B614E38.025CBFE9@cs.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > <joslake@sbcglobal.net> wrote: > >> I have encountered the use of the word "friends" in a 1741 Sussex >> will, > <snip> it appears that one of the executors might be a brother, and > the wife of the other executor a sister of the subject of the will. > <snip> > Thus it may be reasonable to try to read some "special" meaning to > the usage in the will ??????? > > Well, I'd hazard this generalization: bequests may have been more > "formal" in addressing actual relationships than those clauses > relating to roles such as executors and overseers of children, > where "friend" tends to show up more often, even if there is an > actual kinship. The distinction might have been that executorships > and such were regarded as "favors", and the word "friend" may have > been chosen to indicate in some way the appreciation of the > decedent for the party accepting some discretionary responsibility. > > But this is probably best regarded as very much a highly > personalized matter in the wording of any specific will. I'd say > that you're best advised to imagine that "friend" does not exclude > relatives. > > On the general matter of relationships: note also that in "next-of- > kin" lists in estate rundowns, one sometimes sees such things as > sons-in-law (and not their wives, a daughter of the decedent) > named. One should not look at this as misdirection, but nice help > in problem-solving. > > Not an exact science. But mostly one can unravel the specifics > with the clues given, keeping a beaker of the sweat of one's brow > handy. > > John > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 09:18:27 -0400 > From: "David Kearney" <kearneyd@erols.com> > Subject: [LDR] what is a friend > To: <lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com>, <joslake@sbcglobal.net> > Message-ID: <67A96A745445452DA97DD511E7014453@Purdue2004> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > <joslake@sbcglobal.net> wrote: >>> I have encountered the use of > the word "friends" in a 1741 Sussex will, > <snip> it appears that one of the executors might be a brother, and > the wife of the other executor a sister of the subject of the will. > <snip> Thus it may be reasonable to try to read some "special" > meaning to the usage in the will ???????<<< > >>>> John Lyon wrote: >>> [T]his is probably best regarded as very >>>> much a highly personalized matter in the wording of any specific >>>> will. I'd say that you're best advised to imagine that "friend" >>>> does not exclude relatives. ... On the general matter of >>>> relationships: note also that in "next-of-kin" lists in estate >>>> rundowns, one sometimes sees such things as sons-in-law (and not >>>> their wives, a daughter of the decedent) named. One should not >>>> look at this as misdirection, but nice help in problem- >>>> solving. ... Not an exact science. But mostly one can unravel >>>> the specifics with the clues given, keeping a beaker of the >>>> sweat of one's brow handy. > ______________ > > Joe, I think John is "right on" on this (and he has the experience > with the documents to give his thoughts much credence). > > Just as it's a good idea to try to understand the differences in > written speech of different periods, it's also a good idea to keep > in mind that many elements of speech and human nature seem to > remain at least somewhat the same. A friend in 1741 in many ways > probably was not much different than a friend is in 2008, and a > friend presumably could be a relative (or spouse of a relative) in > either era. I suppose it's also possible, though, that use of the > word, "friend," in some colonial-era wills might have had some > perceived (but perhaps idiocynratic) legalistic purpose. > > Dave K > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 09:46:59 -0500 > From: "Susan Wheary" <susanwheary@emypeople.net> > Subject: Re: [LDR] Understanding Cousins: But what about aunts and > uncles?? > To: <lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <000401c9039c$c7f6edc0$6401a8c0@Scotty> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > I have seen the term "friends" used in literature to mean, more or > less, > all persons well-acquainted with and having a concern for the > individual > in question. Example: in Charlotte Bronte's classic, "Jane Eyre" , she > has someone speculate that Jane, upon appearing in desperate > plight, may > have had some disagreement with her friends. In this context it would > seem to indicate principally family members. Of course this is a > Victorian usage, but it may have stemmed from an earlier use of the > term. > > Susan in Missouri > > -----Original Message----- > > ================================================================= > > I have encountered the use of the word "friends" in a 1741 Sussex > will, > in which the > subject of the will used "friends" to chaaracterize his co-executors. > > Subsequent research has led to one of John's "introductory red > flags".....i.e. it > appears that one of the executors might be a brother, and the wife of > the other > executor a sister of the subject of the will. > > Is there precedent (or other evidence) of such usage of the word > "friends" in > Colonial times. > > If one merely accepts the current literal usage of friends, there > would > seem to be no > necessity of having used the word in the will at all (& the use did > not > appear to be > Colonial "flowery"....the entire will was brief and prosaic). Thus it > may be > reasonable to try to read some "special" meaning in to the usage in > the > will ??????? > > Comments??? > > Joe Lake > > > > > > *************************************** > QUESTIONS about POSTING GUIDELINES, SUBSCRIBING or UNSUBSCRIBING? > Visit The Lower DelMarVa Roots Mailing List FAQ: > http://www.tyaskin.com/handley/ldrfaq.htm > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 11:52:38 -0400 > From: Johnlyon0@cs.com > Subject: Re: [LDR] Understanding Cousins: But what about aunts and > uncles?? > To: lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: <6A7123D5.2481099B.025CBFE9@cs.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > "Susan Wheary" <susanwheary@emypeople.net> wrote: > >> I have seen the term "friends" used in literature to mean, more or >> less, >> all persons well-acquainted with and having a concern for the >> individual >> in question. > > Well, the Oxford English Dictionary begins its many definitions of > "friend" with a use from the year 1018 (in "Beowulf") under the > meaning of "one joined to another in mutual benevolence and > intimacy, not ordinarily applied to lovers or relatives". It goes > on to many other meanings, including "kinsman or near relation" and > "a mere acquaintance, or a stranger, as a mark of goodwill or > kindly condescension", or "a supporter, patron [etc.]". And then > we have the Quakers. It's also applied to God. > > It's just an all-purpose word for some positive relationship. > Reading a specific meaning into it is just foolhardy. > > John > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 12:34:10 -0400 > From: "E Johnson" <iris.gates@gmail.com> > Subject: [LDR] Friend and Next friend > To: lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: > <70541d1e0808210934s4f2290c5x3caf010f6ea06ff6@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Black's Law Dictionary defines "Friend" as "one favorably disposed" to > a person, "varying in degree from greatest intimacy to acquaintance > more or less casual." "Next friend" is "One acting for benifit of > infant, married woman, or other person non sui juris, without being > regularly appointed guardian." In court (in England), a 'next friend' > or 'prochien ami' is not a party to an action, but one admitted to the > court, appearing on behalf of the minor he represents. > > That is, 'friend' or 'next friend' can sometimes be a legal > representative, or an unofficial guardian. > > See examples of "Next friend" in legal actions in The Legal Observer, > Digest, and Journal of Jurisprudence, here: > http://books.google.com/books?id=8P8uAAAAIAAJ& > > In wills, sometimes an informally designated overseer --intended by > the testator to unofficially assist the heirs --is called a 'friend', > but not always. This friend could be any kind of relative, or not > related at all. When seeing a description of someone as 'friend' in a > will, we have to understand that the testators were usually not > lawyers, and not using legal terminology. > > But testators often called someone a friend in the will simply because > they were a friend to whom they wanted to leave some memento. Again, > this friend could be any kind of relative, or not related at all. > > Liz J > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 09:37:07 -0700 > From: "Bruce L. Nicholson" <brucen@maine.edu> > Subject: Re: [LDR] Understanding Cousins: But what about aunts and > uncles?? > To: lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com > Cc: Johnlyon0@cs.com > Message-ID: <200808211637.m7LGbNrg011155@mail.rootsweb.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed > > Hi John, > > I have been following this thread with great interest. > > My great X5 grandfather, William Nicholson, died in 1719 in Anne > Arundel County. His wife was already deceased and thus, he left 4 > young sons, still boys. In his Will, he named "friend" James > Nicholson as one of the executors and also for "friend" James > Nicholson to arrange for the sale of some of his properties from > which "friend" James Nicholson was to use the proceeds to send the > boys back to Berwick-upon-Tweed, England, to be raised by two aunts > and also to provide money for the support and education of the boys > in England. (Two of the boys, including my great X4 grandfather, > returned to Maryland to the plantations bequeathed to them, with my > great X4 grandfather settling in Chestertown). > > The reference to "friend" James Nicholson in William Nicholson's Will > has (had?) puzzled me because this is a potential clue in solving a > family "mystery". My William Nicholson came to South River, Anne > Arundel County, about 1699/1700 from Berwick-upon-Tweed, > England. His "friend" James Nicholson came to this same South River, > Anne Arundel County, from Loanend (a manor and manor house at the > time), England, which was (still is) located just a few miles from > Berwick-upon-Tweed. Several sources list William Nicholson (d. > 1690), "Gentleman of Berwick-upon-Tweed" (my great X6 grandfather and > the father of the William Nicholson who died in 1719 in Anne Arundel > County) as the son of George Nicholson of the Manor of > Loanend. However, I have not been able to find any definitive proof > of this relationship although it would appear likely that there was > some family connection since both Nicholsons came from places only a > few miles apart in Northumberland, England, and both came to the same > small settlement in South River, Anne Arundel County. > > If my William Nicholson (Sr.) (d. 1690 Berwick-upon-Tweed, England) > in fact was the son of George Nicholson of Loanend, then my William > Nicholson (d. 1719 AA Co.) and his "friend" James Nicholson of South > River, AA Co. MD would have been 1st cousins. > > But, as I said, the reference to "friend" James Nicholson had puzzled > me over the years. Now, I gather from this discussion that my > William Nicholson's "friend" James Nicholson indeed could have been > his "cousin" James Nicholson. Is this a correct interpretation of > this current discussion of the use of the term "friend" in colonial > times? > > Bruce > > >> Well, the Oxford English Dictionary begins its many definitions of >> "friend" with a use from the year 1018 (in "Beowulf") under the >> meaning of "one joined to another in mutual benevolence and >> intimacy, not ordinarily applied to lovers or relatives". It goes >> on to many other meanings, including "kinsman or near relation" and >> "a mere acquaintance, or a stranger, as a mark of goodwill or kindly >> condescension", or "a supporter, patron [etc.]". And then we have >> the Quakers. It's also applied to God. >> >> It's just an all-purpose word for some positive >> relationship. Reading a specific meaning into it is just foolhardy. >> >> John >> *************************************** >> QUESTIONS about POSTING GUIDELINES, SUBSCRIBING or UNSUBSCRIBING? >> Visit The Lower DelMarVa Roots Mailing List FAQ: >> http://www.tyaskin.com/handley/ldrfaq.htm >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word >> 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of >> the message > > Bruce L. Nicholson > > Professor Emeritus > Departmentof Biochemistry, Microbiology and Molecular Biology > Universityof Maine > Orono, Maine > > Retired and living in Gold Canyon, Arizona > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 11:52:39 -0500 > From: "G j Coleman" <gwenco@verizon.net> > Subject: Re: [LDR] "Friends" as relatives > To: <lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <D0CD487D1ACF453F8E69F34C48BD98F7@GwenPC> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-1; > reply-type=original > > I have done research on a person of Indian and French heritage who had > married three times one of these being an Indian marriage". Only two > children lived to adult hood one of them being a son of the Indian > marriage. > The other son preceded him in death and his will he referred to the > surviving son as "my friend". This man was very prominent and much > research > has been done on him and it is a proven fact that this was his son. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bruce L. Nicholson" <brucen@maine.edu> > To: <lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com> > Cc: <Johnlyon0@cs.com> > Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 11:37 AM > Subject: Re: [LDR] Understanding Cousins: But what about aunts and > uncles?? > > >> Hi John, >> >> I have been following this thread with great interest. >> >> My great X5 grandfather, William Nicholson, died in 1719 in Anne >> Arundel County. His wife was already deceased and thus, he left 4 >> young sons, still boys. In his Will, he named "friend" James >> Nicholson as one of the executors and also for "friend" James >> Nicholson to arrange for the sale of some of his properties from >> which "friend" James Nicholson was to use the proceeds to send the >> boys back to Berwick-upon-Tweed, England, to be raised by two aunts >> and also to provide money for the support and education of the boys >> in England. (Two of the boys, including my great X4 grandfather, >> returned to Maryland to the plantations bequeathed to them, with my >> great X4 grandfather settling in Chestertown). >> >> The reference to "friend" James Nicholson in William Nicholson's Will >> has (had?) puzzled me because this is a potential clue in solving a >> family "mystery". My William Nicholson came to South River, Anne >> Arundel County, about 1699/1700 from Berwick-upon-Tweed, >> England. His "friend" James Nicholson came to this same South River, >> Anne Arundel County, from Loanend (a manor and manor house at the >> time), England, which was (still is) located just a few miles from >> Berwick-upon-Tweed. Several sources list William Nicholson (d. >> 1690), "Gentleman of Berwick-upon-Tweed" (my great X6 grandfather and >> the father of the William Nicholson who died in 1719 in Anne Arundel >> County) as the son of George Nicholson of the Manor of >> Loanend. However, I have not been able to find any definitive proof >> of this relationship although it would appear likely that there was >> some family connection since both Nicholsons came from places only a >> few miles apart in Northumberland, England, and both came to the same >> small settlement in South River, Anne Arundel County. >> >> If my William Nicholson (Sr.) (d. 1690 Berwick-upon-Tweed, England) >> in fact was the son of George Nicholson of Loanend, then my William >> Nicholson (d. 1719 AA Co.) and his "friend" James Nicholson of South >> River, AA Co. MD would have been 1st cousins. >> >> But, as I said, the reference to "friend" James Nicholson had puzzled >> me over the years. Now, I gather from this discussion that my >> William Nicholson's "friend" James Nicholson indeed could have been >> his "cousin" James Nicholson. Is this a correct interpretation of >> this current discussion of the use of the term "friend" in >> colonial times? >> >> Bruce >> >> >>> Well, the Oxford English Dictionary begins its many definitions of >>> "friend" with a use from the year 1018 (in "Beowulf") under the >>> meaning of "one joined to another in mutual benevolence and >>> intimacy, not ordinarily applied to lovers or relatives". It goes >>> on to many other meanings, including "kinsman or near relation" and >>> "a mere acquaintance, or a stranger, as a mark of goodwill or kindly >>> condescension", or "a supporter, patron [etc.]". And then we have >>> the Quakers. It's also applied to God. >>> >>> It's just an all-purpose word for some positive >>> relationship. Reading a specific meaning into it is just foolhardy. >>> >>> John >>> *************************************** >>> QUESTIONS about POSTING GUIDELINES, SUBSCRIBING or UNSUBSCRIBING? >>> Visit The Lower DelMarVa Roots Mailing List FAQ: >>> http://www.tyaskin.com/handley/ldrfaq.htm >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word >>> 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the >>> message >> >> Bruce L. Nicholson >> >> Professor Emeritus >> Departmentof Biochemistry, Microbiology and Molecular Biology >> Universityof Maine >> Orono, Maine >> >> Retired and living in Gold Canyon, Arizona >> >> >> *************************************** >> QUESTIONS about POSTING GUIDELINES, SUBSCRIBING or UNSUBSCRIBING? >> Visit The Lower DelMarVa Roots Mailing List FAQ: >> http://www.tyaskin.com/handley/ldrfaq.htm >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >> without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 13:05:39 -0400 > From: "David Kearney" <kearneyd@erols.com> > Subject: Re: [LDR] Friends Nicholson and Nicholson > To: <lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com> > Cc: Johnlyon0@cs.com > Message-ID: <7ED81837D3684490A7146AAE84CD92BF@Purdue2004> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Bruce Nicholson wrote: >>> But, as I said, the reference to > "friend" James Nicholson had puzzled > me over the years. Now, I gather from this discussion that my > William Nicholson's "friend" James Nicholson indeed could have been > his "cousin" James Nicholson. Is this a correct interpretation of > this current discussion of the use of the term "friend" in colonial > times?<<< > ________________________ > > Bruce, > > As I've understood the discussion, use of the term "friend" to > refer to someone in a will during the colonial period would not > "disqualify" that person from being a "cousin" or other relative of > the writer, but you also probably shouldn't go too far in assuming > too much from use of the word, without other evidence. > > As John Lyon indicated in his recent post, "friend" is "just an all- > purpose word for some positive relationship. Reading a specific > meaning into it is just foolhardy." > > As an aside, I've been tormented by more than one instance (not yet > in Delmarva) of a family living just a few households away from one > of "my families," both with the same surname (including, in my > case, the surname "NICHOLS"), but without any conclusive material > found yet showing that they were related in a meaningful manner -- > yet, I assume that they probably (hopefully) were friends. > Aggravating, but fun. > > Dave K > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 9 > Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 17:08:16 +0000 > From: ahsenpink@comcast.net (Clara Marie Thomas) > Subject: Re: [LDR] "Friends" as relatives > To: lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: > > <082120081708.27668.48ADA10000015A6C00006C1422165662760502079F020A9C08 > 0E@comcast.net> > > > The Quakers referred to each other as friends even if they were > relatives. There are quite a few Quakers still in the Kent and > Queen Anne Counties of Maryland and Kent County Delaware. I wonder > if that might be possible in this case. > > Clara > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 10 > Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 10:13:48 -0700 > From: <joslake@sbcglobal.net> > Subject: Re: [LDR] Understanding Cousins: But what about aunts and > uncles?? > To: <lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <001001c903b1$4719fcf0$d746ed45@D9WXC981> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > > > Thanks Susan Wheary, G j Coleman, Dave Kearney & John Lyon for the > interesting > responses re the use of "friends" in a 1741 will. > > All considerably more erudite than my own conclusions. > > As far as any practical conclusion in terms of genealogical > "proof", it probably > boils down to John Lyons "final word" ....... > > "Reading a specific meaning into it is just foolhardy." > > Joe Lake > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 11 > Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 10:18:56 -0700 > From: <joslake@sbcglobal.net> > Subject: Re: [LDR] "Friends" as relatives > To: <lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <001701c903b1$fea30100$d746ed45@D9WXC981> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > > Clara Marie Thomas wrote: > > >> The Quakers referred to each other as friends even if they were >> relatives. There >> are quite a few Quakers still in the Kent and Queen Anne Counties >> of Maryland and >> Kent County Delaware. I wonder if that might be possible in this >> case. >> >> Clara > > In the 1741 will case I referenced, some of the parties in question > were proved > Presbyterians. Thus I had discounted the Quaker usage (altho my > knowledge of that > was limited) of the term "friends". > > Joe Lake > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 12 > Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 10:41:09 -0700 (PDT) > From: Cindy Anderson <dr_cindy_anderson@yahoo.com> > Subject: Re: [LDR] "Friends" as relatives > To: lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: <750265.41701.qm@web51809.mail.re2.yahoo.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Friend in French (ami) is very close to beloved (aime). They are > pronounced virtually the same also. > > > --- On Thu, 8/21/08, G j Coleman <gwenco@verizon.net> wrote: > >> From: G j Coleman <gwenco@verizon.net> >> Subject: Re: [LDR] "Friends" as relatives >> To: lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com >> Date: Thursday, August 21, 2008, 11:52 AM >> I have done research on a person of Indian and French >> heritage who had >> married three times one of these being an Indian >> marriage". Only two >> children lived to adult hood one of them being a son of the >> Indian marriage. >> The other son preceded him in death and his will he >> referred to the >> surviving son as "my friend". This man was very >> prominent and much research >> has been done on him and it is a proven fact that this was >> his son. >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Bruce L. Nicholson" >> <brucen@maine.edu> >> To: <lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com> >> Cc: <Johnlyon0@cs.com> >> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 11:37 AM >> Subject: Re: [LDR] Understanding Cousins: But what about >> aunts and uncles?? >> >> >>> Hi John, >>> >>> I have been following this thread with great interest. >>> >>> My great X5 grandfather, William Nicholson, died in >> 1719 in Anne >>> Arundel County. His wife was already deceased and >> thus, he left 4 >>> young sons, still boys. In his Will, he named >> "friend" James >>> Nicholson as one of the executors and also for >> "friend" James >>> Nicholson to arrange for the sale of some of his >> properties from >>> which "friend" James Nicholson was to use >> the proceeds to send the >>> boys back to Berwick-upon-Tweed, England, to be raised >> by two aunts >>> and also to provide money for the support and >> education of the boys >>> in England. (Two of the boys, including my great X4 >> grandfather, >>> returned to Maryland to the plantations bequeathed to >> them, with my >>> great X4 grandfather settling in Chestertown). >>> >>> The reference to "friend" James Nicholson in >> William Nicholson's Will >>> has (had?) puzzled me because this is a potential clue >> in solving a >>> family "mystery". My William Nicholson came >> to South River, Anne >>> Arundel County, about 1699/1700 from >> Berwick-upon-Tweed, >>> England. His "friend" James Nicholson came >> to this same South River, >>> Anne Arundel County, from Loanend (a manor and manor >> house at the >>> time), England, which was (still is) located just a >> few miles from >>> Berwick-upon-Tweed. Several sources list William >> Nicholson (d. >>> 1690), "Gentleman of Berwick-upon-Tweed" (my >> great X6 grandfather and >>> the father of the William Nicholson who died in 1719 >> in Anne Arundel >>> County) as the son of George Nicholson of the Manor of >>> Loanend. However, I have not been able to find any >> definitive proof >>> of this relationship although it would appear likely >> that there was >>> some family connection since both Nicholsons came from >> places only a >>> few miles apart in Northumberland, England, and both >> came to the same >>> small settlement in South River, Anne Arundel County. >>> >>> If my William Nicholson (Sr.) (d. 1690 >> Berwick-upon-Tweed, England) >>> in fact was the son of George Nicholson of Loanend, >> then my William >>> Nicholson (d. 1719 AA Co.) and his "friend" >> James Nicholson of South >>> River, AA Co. MD would have been 1st cousins. >>> >>> But, as I said, the reference to "friend" >> James Nicholson had puzzled >>> me over the years. Now, I gather from this discussion >> that my >>> William Nicholson's "friend" James >> Nicholson indeed could have been >>> his "cousin" James Nicholson. Is this a >> correct interpretation of >>> this current discussion of the use of the term >> "friend" in colonial times? >>> >>> Bruce >>> >>> >>>> Well, the Oxford English Dictionary begins its many >> definitions of >>>> "friend" with a use from the year 1018 >> (in "Beowulf") under the >>>> meaning of "one joined to another in mutual >> benevolence and >>>> intimacy, not ordinarily applied to lovers or >> relatives". It goes >>>> on to many other meanings, including "kinsman >> or near relation" and >>>> "a mere acquaintance, or a stranger, as a mark >> of goodwill or kindly >>>> condescension", or "a supporter, patron >> [etc.]". And then we have >>>> the Quakers. It's also applied to God. >>>> >>>> It's just an all-purpose word for some positive >>>> relationship. Reading a specific meaning into it >> is just foolhardy. >>>> >>>> John >>>> *************************************** >>>> QUESTIONS about POSTING GUIDELINES, SUBSCRIBING or >> UNSUBSCRIBING? >>>> Visit The Lower DelMarVa Roots Mailing List FAQ: >>>> http://www.tyaskin.com/handley/ldrfaq.htm >>>> ------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email >> to >>>> LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the >> word >>>> 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the >> subject and the body of the >>>> message >>> >>> Bruce L. Nicholson >>> >>> Professor Emeritus >>> Departmentof Biochemistry, Microbiology and Molecular >> Biology >>> Universityof Maine >>> Orono, Maine >>> >>> Retired and living in Gold Canyon, Arizona >>> >>> >>> *************************************** >>> QUESTIONS about POSTING GUIDELINES, SUBSCRIBING or >> UNSUBSCRIBING? >>> Visit The Lower DelMarVa Roots Mailing List FAQ: >>> http://www.tyaskin.com/handley/ldrfaq.htm >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the >> word 'unsubscribe' >>> without the quotes in the subject and the body of the >> message >>> >> >> *************************************** >> QUESTIONS about POSTING GUIDELINES, SUBSCRIBING or >> UNSUBSCRIBING? >> Visit The Lower DelMarVa Roots Mailing List FAQ: >> http://www.tyaskin.com/handley/ldrfaq.htm >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word >> 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and >> the body of the message > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 13 > Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 15:20:39 -0400 > From: Johnlyon0@cs.com > Subject: Re: [LDR] Understanding Cousins: But what about aunts and > uncles?? > To: lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: <285837EB.23AECE30.025CBFE9@cs.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > "Bruce L. Nicholson" <brucen@maine.edu> wrote: >> ?Now, I gather from this discussion that my William Nicholson's >> "friend" James Nicholson indeed could have been his "cousin" James >> Nicholson. ?Is this a correct interpretation of this current >> discussion of the use of the term "friend" in colonial times? > > Bruce, and other friends, Romans and countrymen (or, as one of our > incipient Presidential candidates says in about every other > sentence, "My friends"): I can only repeat that "friend" is a very > busy word, into which anyone can be stuffed, as needed. So the > answer to your question is "He could have been a cousin, yes. But > definitely? You need more data." > > As far as the Quaker possibility goes in the original inquiry, not > at all likely. The general sense from all records is that when the > term Friend, meaning Quaker, shows up, there's usually immediate > contextual evidence to validate it. > > I can add here, not to introduce new confusions, that the word > "cousin" actually once served a similar sort of general purpose, > beyond kinship. As the OED says, one of its meanings was "as a > friendly or familiar term of address or designation". It also > served legally once upon a time as equivalent to "next of kin", > when applied to anyone more distantly related than parents or > children. > > The more one knows, the less certain anything gets. > > John > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 14 > Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 15:24:50 -0400 > From: "Mike Hitch" <mikehitch@mikehitch.com> > Subject: Re: [LDR] Understanding Cousins: But what about aunts and > uncles?? > To: <lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <00e601c903c3$94da72a0$421e9a80@wff.nasa.gov> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > John L. sez: "The more one knows, the less certain anything gets." > Maybe > should be altered to state "The more one knows, the less one finds one > actually knows..." > > Best Regards, > Mike Hitch > "So oftentimes it happens that we live our lives in chains and we > never even > know we have the key." -Eagles > > > |-----Original Message----- > |From: lower-delmarva-roots-bounces@rootsweb.com > |[mailto:lower-delmarva-roots-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf > |Of Johnlyon0@cs.com > |Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 3:21 PM > |To: lower-delmarva-roots@rootsweb.com > |Subject: Re: [LDR] Understanding Cousins: But what about aunts > |and uncles?? > | > |"Bruce L. Nicholson" <brucen@maine.edu> wrote: > |>?Now, I gather from this discussion that my William > |Nicholson's "friend" James Nicholson indeed could have been > |his "cousin" James Nicholson. ?Is this a correct > |interpretation of this current discussion of the use of the > |term "friend" in colonial times? > | > |Bruce, and other friends, Romans and countrymen (or, as one of > |our incipient Presidential candidates says in about every > |other sentence, "My friends"): I can only repeat that "friend" > |is a very busy word, into which anyone can be stuffed, as > |needed. So the answer to your question is "He could have been > |a cousin, yes. But definitely? You need more data." > | > |As far as the Quaker possibility goes in the original inquiry, > |not at all likely. The general sense from all records is that > |when the term Friend, meaning Quaker, shows up, there's > |usually immediate contextual evidence to validate it. > | > |I can add here, not to introduce new confusions, that the word > |"cousin" actually once served a similar sort of general > |purpose, beyond kinship. As the OED says, one of its meanings > |was "as a friendly or familiar term of address or > |designation". It also served legally once upon a time as > |equivalent to "next of kin", when applied to anyone more > |distantly related than parents or children. > | > |The more one knows, the less certain anything gets. > | > |John > |*************************************** > |QUESTIONS about POSTING GUIDELINES, SUBSCRIBING or UNSUBSCRIBING? > |Visit The Lower DelMarVa Roots Mailing List FAQ: > |http://www.tyaskin.com/handley/ldrfaq.htm > |------------------------------- > |To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > |LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word > |'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body > |of the message > | > > > > > ------------------------------ > > To contact the LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS list administrator, send an > email to > LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS-admin@rootsweb.com. > > To post a message to the LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS mailing list, send an > email to LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS@rootsweb.com. > > __________________________________________________________ > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LOWER- > DELMARVA-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com > with the word "unsubscribe" without the quotes in the subject and > the body of the > email with no additional text. > > > End of LOWER-DELMARVA-ROOTS Digest, Vol 3, Issue 291 > ****************************************************