SHAKING YOUR FAMILY TREE COLUMN AVAILABLE AT ROOTSWEB. RootsWeb.com is pleased to bring noted genealogist Myra Vanderpool Gormley's weekly newspaper column, "Shaking Your Family Tree" (SYFT), to the World Wide Web. The column, which has been syndicated by the Los Angeles Times Syndicate since 1985, covers dozens of genealogy-related topics and provides valuable insight and wisdom to help you in your search to find your ancestors. http://www.rootsweb.com/~rwguide/syft/ In this week's SYFT column "Colorful Family Trees Abound," Gormley writes: "Many of the surnames Americans use today had become hereditary ones by the end of the 14th century in England, a little earlier in France, a bit later in Germany and other parts of Europe, and in Ireland long before the Norman invasions. The nickname category provides some of the colorful surnames that may adorn your family tree." * * * Sandi :)

Good morning all! I am new to the MONCRIEF list. I recently learned of your list through Sandi, on another list I subscribe to. Thank you Sandi, for suggesting your list! I have a Caleb MONCRIEF listed as husband of Mary Ann OWEN, parents of (Nattie) Annie Flourance MONCRIEF b: 19 Jun 1868 in Lincoln Parish (Mindon), LA., d: 22 Nov 1921 in Union Parish (Bernice) LA. Annie (Nattie) married James Martin GREEN (son of Barzilla GREEN and Susan Elizabeth BOYT), who had Vera GREEN, my grandmother Vera married Lewis Watson THOMPSON (son of Franklin Elmore THOMPSON and Nancy Elizabeth ROGERS), parents of James Lewis THOMPSON, my father My MONCRIEF information is limited to the above information, taken from my GREEN family history book and my parents wedding album. The latter listed Caleb MONCRIEF and Mary Ann OWEN as Annie Flourance MONCRIEF's parents. I would love to find any information about my Caleb MONCRIEF and his ancestry. Most of my crew (paternal grandparents) came from the Claiborne / Union Parish area of LA. Thank you for your time and consideration. Respectfully, Lisa Anne (Thompson) McCratic

The following is copied from another site and I was wondering if anyone knew which Moncrief is mentioned here. "The tradition in our family is that Lewis Walker, a son of John Walker and Mary or Molly Riddle, married Mary Ann Cheadle, dau. of Thomas Fleming Cheadle and Elizabeth Kemp, and had two children, Tandy C. Walker and Martha America Walker. Mary Ann Cheadle was married two more times, to a Mr. Moncrief, and John Johnston, Sr., and had children by each marriage. Tandy C. Walker married, as his second wife, Mary Isabel Cochran, dau. of Robert L. Cochran and Delight or Delithe Brashear." It seems someone on this list had an ancestor by the name of Delithe Brashear. For about 15 years, I have been in touch with the one that is doing a series of books on the Brashears, but I do not remember us ever coming up with this name. Marlene

--part1_73.2f57832.264232cb_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --part1_73.2f57832.264232cb_boundary Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-path: <SandKatC@aol.com> From: SandKatC@aol.com Full-name: SandKatC Message-ID: <39.49531c9.264232a5@aol.com> Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 21:55:49 EDT Subject: Re: [MONCRIEF-L] ROLL CALL To: save@brashermotors.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL for Macintosh sub 28 John: Are you good, or what? But, are you ready with your wet suit to go back and look at the old gravestones now covered with water??????? Just teasing. But, Sylvia is ready to make that trip! LOL Best, Sandi :) --part1_73.2f57832.264232cb_boundary--

Nelda, Not too long ago, another ancestor of Caleb found he was a Rev. Soldier and gave that information to the DAR's. I will e-mail you privately soon on the information I have concerning Caleb. You share ancestors with one of the greatest researchers I have ever met. She is a great lady in every meaning of the word. I have never checked DAR records, but you might find a wealth of information on him there. Marlene

Hi, I'm Sylvia and am in the John and Mary line. John is my 7th great grandfather. I have enjoyed the discussion on the list and expanding my family tree. I want to trace more ascendancy. I am a librarian, an LDS volunteer and determined to find out who John's father is. (I have no illusions about doing it quickly either!) My mother had told me there were Indian relatives and I appreciate all the recent information. Genealogy gives one a sense of self. LDS teaches searchers to keep records of all peripheral information and it eventually joins. I am finding this true of Moncrief. Thanks to the internet and all of you it has been fun adding Moncrief families to my information. Sylvia Skipper __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/

Hi, I'm Sylvia and am in the John and Mary line. John is my 7th great grandfather. I have enjoyed the discussion on the list and expanding my family tree. I want to trace more ascendancy. I am a librarian, an LDS volunteer and determined to find out who John's father is. (I have no illusions about doing it quickly either!) My mother had told me there were Indian relatives and I appreciate all the recent information. Genealogy gives one a sense of self. LDS teaches searchers to keep records of all peripheral information and it eventually joins. I am finding this true of Moncrief. Thanks to the internet and all of you it has been fun adding Moncrief families to my information. Sylvia Skipper __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/

Sandi, I could not agree with you more about asking about an ancestor. Two weeks ago on another list, I decided to make one last try to find an ancestor that people had tried to find for about 40 years. My post was full of "it is thought", "may be", "might be" and "possibly" all in quotes as here. I cannot express how delighted I was when I got a private e-mail giving me the name of the ancestor and even his grandparents and all the grandparents children and their children - with proof. I would have been thrilled without the proof as it would have shown me which direction to go, but someone had found a book written in 1847 with all this great information in it. Marlene

In a message dated 5/3/00 2:41:17 PM, nelda.ngs@worldnet.att.net writes: << Supposedly this is how it goes, but please don't ask me to document it all because I don't have much yet. I have not done much work on this line. If you see any errors, I'd sure like to correct them. >> Hi Nelda: Thanks for being the first one to respond to roll call. I think I'd better clear up the documentation issue as I feel some might have misunderstood what I had to say about it. We all have information that we aren't able to document at this time and may never be able to due to lack of a lot of old records. What I was trying to say, is, it's great when we do have documentation. BUT, it's not polite to challenge someone else's information unless your information on the same person/people has documentation. And, any corrections to our information will be cheerfully accepted by all with documentation. Those without formal proof should still through in their information. That can help to sort things out, sometime. On another list I had only 7 siblings of an old relative and through posting what little I knew we are now up to 15 in all from people of the different families. That's a great find as information from people in a line might be a lot closer to correct than from someone who isn't in that line. So, folks, don't be shy and post what you know to be true and ask any questions you have. We have a lot of newbies and a lot of people who do have a lot of reliable information. Smiles to all, Sandi :)

Welcome, Nelda! John A. Moncrief, here... of Weimar, Texas. I'm working on trying to establish any and all American Moncrief ancestors within a timeline of familiar historical events. This project started as a means of helping my teenage sons better enjoy and feel connected to American History. So far, the boys are not one lick smarter, and I, it seems, am rapidly losing my own mind! I've been babbling for months, now, and just last week began to drool... You've started with JOHN MONCRIEF (he was a tailor, by the way), married to MARY GLASGOW. John is the first (currently) documentable Moncrief in America. There is a great deal of speculation (I am a notorious offender) as to who his parents were, but that's another subject altogether. Your post does, however, prompt me to be speculative on another matter. John's (second) wife Mary. I have seen her last name given as Glasgow plenty of times, but never with anything to support the notion. I have also saved notes that would indicate her date and place of birth are 1651 in Lower Norfolk County, Virginia and marrying John in 1668, also in Lower Norfolk. Again, I have yet to find anything which might substantiate these facts. However, John's will (proved Aug 14, 1713) is witnessed by Adam Pearry, Thomas Davis and DANIEL GLASCOE. Could Daniel be Mary's brother? Is this Daniel related at all to Mary? Hmmmm. Interesting! Anyone care to join in?

Hi all: As we have a few new members I think it would be a good idea for all to check in with a list of the surnames you are researching in your Moncrief families. Also, we have a new member to our family who hasn't posted yet, but she is researching one Caleb Moncrief. We'll look forward to hearing from her. Also, if any of you have information that can go on our GenBoard, please do post it. I've put the URLs below again for your convenience. Best to all, Sandi :) http://genconnect.rootsweb.com/genbbs.cgi/surnames/m/o/MONCRIEF/queries http://genconnect.rootsweb.com/genbbs.cgi/surnames/m/o/MONCRIEF/bible_records http://genconnect.rootsweb.com/genbbs.cgi/surnames/m/o/MONCRIEF/biographies http://genconnect.rootsweb.com/genbbs.cgi/surnames/m/o/MONCRIEF/deeds http://genconnect.rootsweb.com/genbbs.cgi/surnames/m/o/MONCRIEF/obituaries http://genconnect.rootsweb.com/genbbs.cgi/surnames/m/o/MONCRIEF/pensions http://genconnect.rootsweb.com/genbbs.cgi/surnames/m/o/MONCRIEF/wills

Supposedly this is how it goes, but please don't ask me to document it all because I don't have much yet. I have not done much work on this line. If you see any errors, I'd sure like to correct them. John MONCRIEF and Mary GLASGOW William MONCRIEF and Margaret ? William Alexander MONCRIEF and Elizabeth SIMMONS William Alexander MONCRIEF and Martha FEREBEE Caleb MONCRIEF and Sarah Ann SHORT Sarah MONCRIEF and John DANIEL Several pieces of MONCRIEF information are listed in records at GenealogyLibrary.com - Georgia Pioneers, vol. 5. John DANIEL is listed in 1850 Census for Clarke Co. with a wife named Sarah. Their marriage information was given to me by another researcher and I have not verified it personally. The marriage of Caleb MONCRIEF and Sarah Ann SHORT is also documented at GenealogyLibrary.com - Oglethorpe Co, GA MARRIAGES From 1794 to 1850. Nelda -----Original Message----- From: SandKatC@aol.com <SandKatC@aol.com> To: MONCRIEF-L@rootsweb.com <MONCRIEF-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Wednesday, May 03, 2000 4:06 PM Subject: [MONCRIEF-L] ROLL CALL >Hi all: > >As we have a few new members I think it would be a good idea for all to check >in with a list of the surnames you are researching in your Moncrief families. > >Also, we have a new member to our family who hasn't posted yet, but she is >researching one Caleb Moncrief. We'll look forward to hearing from her. > >Also, if any of you have information that can go on our GenBoard, please do >post it. I've put the URLs below again for your convenience. > >Best to all, Sandi :) > >http://genconnect.rootsweb.com/genbbs.cgi/surnames/m/o/MONCRIEF/queries > >http://genconnect.rootsweb.com/genbbs.cgi/surnames/m/o/MONCRIEF/bible_recor ds > >http://genconnect.rootsweb.com/genbbs.cgi/surnames/m/o/MONCRIEF/biographies > >http://genconnect.rootsweb.com/genbbs.cgi/surnames/m/o/MONCRIEF/deeds > >http://genconnect.rootsweb.com/genbbs.cgi/surnames/m/o/MONCRIEF/obituaries > >http://genconnect.rootsweb.com/genbbs.cgi/surnames/m/o/MONCRIEF/pensions > >http://genconnect.rootsweb.com/genbbs.cgi/surnames/m/o/MONCRIEF/wills > > >==== MONCRIEF Mailing List ==== >TO SUBSCRIBE OR UNSUBSCRIBE from any RootsWeb-hosted mailing list, send an e-mail message with only the word SUBSCRIBE >(or UNSUBSCRIBE) in the subject and the body of the message to >[name of list]-L-request@rootsweb.com. (for mail mode) or to >[name of list]-D-request@rootsweb.com (for digest mode). > >============================== >Free Web space. ANY amount. ANY subject. >RootsWeb's Freepages put you in touch with millions. >http://cgi.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/acctform.cgi >

Hi Marlene: Thanks for the trivia and since you mentioned my family it was interesting to note that my living Moncrief relatives weren't just whistling Dixie when they told me the name was spelled with an O and not a U, which was a spelling mistake with those buried at the Moncrief Cemetery outside of Ninnekah, Grady CO, OK. Sandi :)

Marlene, Just wondering if on the Dawes roll was there a Maxwell Moncrief mentioned? June Marlene Clark wrote: > Just a tidbit of trivia - > The first known Moncrief family in Indian Territory was William Moncrief and > his wife Margaret Hall Moncrief. Since both William and Margaret were both > part Choctaw Indian, their children made application to the Dawes Commission > for land in the Indian Territory (prior to the time OK became a state). I > have found only one that spelled his name "Muncrief" - the rest used > "Moncrief". Wm. was dead by this time, but even his wife, Margaret, used > the "o" and not the "u". On one of their son's (whose name was Wm. also) > there was a place where someone had put a "u" and it was corrected to an > "o". > > Like I said, just a tidbit of trivia. > > Marlene > > ==== MONCRIEF Mailing List ==== > Join the RootsWeb WorldConnect Project: > Linking the world, one GEDCOM at a time. > <http://worldconnect.genealogy.rootsweb.com/> > > ============================== > Free Web space. ANY amount. ANY subject. > RootsWeb's Freepages put you in touch with millions. > http://cgi.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/acctform.cgi

Just a tidbit of trivia - The first known Moncrief family in Indian Territory was William Moncrief and his wife Margaret Hall Moncrief. Since both William and Margaret were both part Choctaw Indian, their children made application to the Dawes Commission for land in the Indian Territory (prior to the time OK became a state). I have found only one that spelled his name "Muncrief" - the rest used "Moncrief". Wm. was dead by this time, but even his wife, Margaret, used the "o" and not the "u". On one of their son's (whose name was Wm. also) there was a place where someone had put a "u" and it was corrected to an "o". Like I said, just a tidbit of trivia. Marlene

>I received this from another list and thought everyone would be >interested as we all use these records to trace our families. > >The NARA proposal to revamp the system and fees for providing copies of Military Service Records, Bounty-Land Warrant Applications Files, and Pension Application Files has been published in the 25 April 2000 issue of the Federal Register. Public comment is invited and should be directed to >> >>NARA Regulation Comment Desk >>8601 Adelphi Road >>College Park, MD 20740-6001 >>Fax: 301 713-7270 >> >>The comment period closes on 26 June 2000. NARA prefers that you use either the postal address or fax number to submit our comments rather than e-mail. >>A complete copy of the Federal Register notice is available from the NARA Web site at http://www.nara.gov/nara/fees-pro.html. >> The proposed Reproduction Fee Schedule covers a number of items, but the Military Service Records, and the Pension and Bounty-Land Warrants are of the greatest concern to genealogists. NARA proposes three major changes: >> >>1. The NATF Form 80 would be discontinued, to be replaced by two newforms: NATF Form 85 to request both Bounty-Land Warrant application files and Pension files (more than 75 years old), and NATF From 86 to request Military Service Records (more than 75 years old). >> >>2. For all three types of files, NARA would no longer send a selection of pages, but would send the complete file. This would eliminate the two-step process currently used and should be beneficial to most genealogists. >> >>3. The fees for all three types of files would be raised. For Military Service Records the new fee would be $17.00, regardless of the number of pages included in the file. For Bounty-land Warrants the fee would be $17.25, again without regard to the number of pages. For Pension Files the fee would be $40.00, regardless of the number of pages. >> >>Finally, the proposal would go into effect on 1 September 2000, if approved. >> >>Many genealogists may consider the proposed fees to be excessive. NARA specifically invites comment on the proposed fee schedule. The FGS/NGS Records Preservation and Access Committee urges everyone who wants to comment to carefully read the full proposal before submitting comments. > The proposed fees are intended to cover the actual cost of locating, copying and mailing the records, plus 10% as authorized by law, and are based on the average size of the files. NARA states that the average for Military Service Records and Bounty-land Applications is somewhere under 20 pages, while the average for full Pension Files is 105 pages. >> >>The FGS/NGS Records Preservation and Access Committee will be looking at the NARA proposal carefully, and will submit comments as appropriate. Individuals who would like to provide input to the Committee's evaluation are welcome to do so but are also encouraged to comment direct to NARA at the address given above. Comments for Committee consideration should be e-mailed to fgs-access@fgs.org, or mailed to >>Federation of Genealogical Societies, Attention: RPAC, PO Box 200940, >>Austin, TX 78720-0940. In order for the Records Preservation and Access > >>Committee to adequately evaluate such input it must be received by 26 May 2000. The deadline for comment to NARA, however, is still 26 June 2000. >> >>Posting of this message to other mail lists is encouraged. A copy of this message will also be available on the Records Preservation and Access page of the FGS Web site ><http://www.fgs.org/fgs-recordsnews.htm and on the NGS Web site <http://www.ngsgenealogy.org> >END > > > > > >============================== >Personalized Mailing Lists: never miss a connection again. >http://pml.rootsweb.com/ >Brought to you by RootsWeb.com. > >

In a message dated 5/1/00 10:31:09 PM Central Daylight Time, MONCRIEF-D-request@rootsweb.com writes: << I monitor this list looking for a connection between my Creef lines and the Moncreef's of Currituck Co., NC. >> I have found one if my Moncrief's listed in a Census as Creef. I always check that spelling also when I am researching. Betty

Hi to you all who I consider as family: This is a good time to share the below with all. Please read it carefully. Best, Sandi :) MONCRIEF-L ======= MISCONCEPTIONS," by Michael John Neill This is a semi-serious look at some misconceptions that genealogists (and non-genealogists) have about family history. 1) WE ALL HAVE A FAMOUS ANCESTOR, SOMEWHERE. I've got the names of over three hundred of my ancestors and have yet to have any of them qualify as "famous." In some cases, you may want to reconsider being related to someone famous. Hard-working, law-abiding relatives are nothing to be ashamed of. Try and document your ancestors accurately, whether they were famous or not. 2) THERE ARE NO "EARLY" BABIES OR SHADY STORIES IN MY FAMILY TREE. Trace your ancestry completely for six generations and then we will talk. 3) THERE WERE THREE BROTHERS WITH THE LAST NAME OF [TAKEYOURPICK] WHO CAME TO AMERICA. WE DESCEND FROM THE YOUNGEST (OLDEST, MIDDLE, TALLEST, SMARTEST,ETC.) If this is true, then the number of families who had three sons is beyond statistical expectations. Check it out. 4) IMMIGRANTS WERE ALL POOR. There's no doubt that the vast majority of them were and came to America with only the clothes on their backs. Once in a while though, you'll find one who had a little bit of money and came to America hoping to make more. 5) LIFE BEFORE 1900 WAS ONE OF BUCOLIC PASTORAL BLISS, DOTTED BY BARN RAISINGS AND CHURCH SOCIALS. Life before 1900 was hard. No running water, no electricity, no law (in some areas), rudimentary medical care (if any), child labor, and few of life's creature comforts. This only scratches the surface. I'm not even so certain life was "simple". If I want a loaf of bread, I go to the store. Great-great-grandma likely did not. 6) EVERYONE LIKES TO HEAR THE TALES OF "NOTORIOUS" ANCESTORS. Not everyone will think the story of great-great-great-grandma's four husbands, two divorces, involvement in a murder, and the running of a tavern should be included in the family history. 7) CENSUS AGES ARE ALWAYS CORRECT. You must be kidding. 8) OFFICIAL RECORDS SHOULD NOT CONTAIN ERRORS. They do. The best way to deal with it is to try and research around it where possible. 9) GENEALOGISTS ARE ALL RETIRED. Not so. There are genealogists out there who have yet to hit forty or retirement. If you see one who has yet to hit puberty, tell them to interview their grandparents NOW. Most of all, encourage them, gently. 10) GENEALOGY IS NOT AN INTELLECTUAL HOBBY. Ever tried to read through (and understand) sixty pages of court records from the 1840s? I've taken calculus exams that made more sense. Same thing goes for platting property in metes and bounds. Talk about applied mathematics. 11) MY FAMILY HAS A CASTLE IN EUROPE. Some did, but don't believe it until you see it. Don't really believe it until you see the deed, title, etc. 12) MY ANCESTOR SERVED WITH WASHINGTON, LEE, GRANT, ETC. Choose your war, take your pick. There are lots of these stories. Check them out before believing them. Document your ancestor's service, accurately. 13) I GOT IT ON THE INTERNET, THEREFORE IT MUST BE TRUE. Nope. 14) I GOT IT ON THE INTERNET, THEREFORE IT MUST BE FALSE. Nope. 15) I CAN DO MY GENEALOGY ENTIRELY VIA THE INTERNET. Nope. 16) I CAN DO MY GENEALOGY WITHOUT THE INTERNET. Possibly, but it really saves time. 17) THE RECORDS IN STATE Y ARE CLOSING BECAUSE IT WAS POSTED TO THE GENEALOGY MAILING LIST FOR THAT STATE. Check out rumors before you spread them. Think before you forward or copy and paste this type of information to other people or lists. [Editor's Note: For more on this, see the FGS Suggested Steps for Action in the Feb. 9 Ancestry Daily News at: http://www.ancestry.com/learn/columns/dailyarchive/02-09-00.htm#4] 18) I CAN DO ALL MY RESEARCH ONLY USING VITAL RECORDS, OBITUARIES, AND CENSUS RECORDS. Goodness! There's a vast treasure trove of other sources out there that you can utilize. 19) MY SURNAME HAS ALWAYS BEEN SPELLED THE SAME WAY, WE NEVER CHANGED IT. Maybe, but then again, maybe not. 20) EVERYONE REPLIES TO E-MAIL IMMEDIATELY. Some genealogists have non-genealogy commitments, such as family and employment. Be patient and wait a few days before posting a follow-up e-mail. 21) I CAN TRACE MY ANCESTRY IN ONE AFTERNOON AT THE COMPUTER. Time for a reality check. 22) I CAN TRACE MY ANCESTORS IN AN AFTERNOON AT THE FAMILY HISTORY CENTER. (See number 21) 23) SOMEONE HAS ALREADY TRACED MY ENTIRE FAMILY TREE. I JUST HAVE TO FIND IT. That's the tricky part-finding it! Then comes the fun of documenting it. 24) DOCUMENTATION IS ONLY FOR GENEALOGICAL GEEKS WHO GET CHEAP THRILLS BY ASKING, "WHERE DID YOU FIND IT?" How will you ever compare three different birth dates for Grandpa if you don't know where you obtained each date? 25) GENEALOGISTS ARE NUTS. More likely they are truly focused on their research. However, one correspondent told me that working on genealogy "beats spending all my free time at a bar." 26) GENEALOGISTS ARE RUDE AT THE COURTHOUSE OR LIBRARY. Genealogists are people and a few are rude. Just make certain it's not you. No family historian wants to walk into the courthouse just after the most obnoxious genealogist on the planet has left the building. 27) GENEALOGY IS BORING. You must be kidding. I've learned a great deal about history, culture, and myself researching my own family. 28) YOU OUGHT TO BE DONE WITH THAT FAMILY HISTORY BY NOW. Well, I would except every time I find one ancestor I have two more parents to learn about. 29) THERE IS ONE BEST GENEALOGICAL SOFTWARE PACKAGE. Most have their pros and cons. Pick one that works for you, keep alert for new packages, but only change when you have good reason to. Time spent upgrading and upgrading and constantly learning new packages can be spent doing research. 30) YOU ARE COMPLETELY ADDICTED IF YOU SEARCH THE INGREDIENT LIST OF YOUR BREAKFAST CEREAL FOR YOUR ANCESTRAL SURNAMES. This is likely true, but I'm not admitting to this one in public! 31) GENEALOGY IS EXPENSIVE The documentation can be expensive. Many will share copies but some will not. Spread it out over time if you don't have immediate resources.

Hi Marlene, Dennis, and Group: I don't usually step in when "facts" are being discussed between two members on our list. But, this time around I feel I have to since Marlene has facts that can't be denied. And I don't want a flame war to start, of course! If so, anyone who starts it will hear from me! And, we should all be aware of old nicknames for people. Many had nothing to do with their real names. I'll have to find the web site that shows so many you wouldn't believe! Of course, we should know that Mollie/Molly was a favorite for those named Mary. Polly was another. We have to remember that families had nicknames for people that had nothing to do with their real names. What about Jence for Pearl? What about Bill for James? What about the other favorites of families like Junior, Frog, Skipper, and on and on. The important thing that I want to get across to you all is that documentation, if you have it, is the proof of the pudding. Another list owner only allows information put on her surname list if the person has REAL documentation. I'm not of that ilk. I feel that we all learn something from what has been posted, even if it's not totally true. However, if a person isn't able to produce REAL documentation, a person should not say that what they are posting is the truth. Another thing I'd like to bring up is the various spellings of MONCRIEF. Some spell it Muncrief along with other spellings. That doesn't mean that we aren't all connected somewhere back. Also, Creef if very acceptable. I don't want people to get into the spelling of the name they have as being the real one as we don't have time for that. I do know that my family who once owned the MONCRIEF Cemetery outside of Ninnekah, OK, spell the name MONCRIEF, even though gravestones show Muncrief. From their lips to my ears, the spelling should have been MONCRIEF. Who am I to argue with them, or, even want to. So, others with a different spelling of their MONCRIEF name need not get bent out of shape over the way MY family spells it. The Moncrief Cemetery will stay The Moncrief Cemetery in spelling on the net. So, I hope I haven't gone on too long about this as we do have some new members who might be reading and thinking "Is this another of those lists where people get out of control?" NO, IT ISN'T, yet. I'm not going to allow that! So, all, just take a deep breath and help keep this list active and interesting. Thank you. Sandi List owner

I have not been able to make a connection. I have two distinct Creef lines. One begins in this country with Joseph Creef who was born in England but in this country in late 1700's. He died before 17 Aug 1859. I descend through his son Valentine Creef. They lived in Tyrrell Co., NC. The other line is through Frances Creef my 2nd great grandmother born ca 1818 and died ca 1873. She was the daughter of Ballentine Creef, they too were probably in Tyrrell Co. The families from Tyrrell and Currituck were very closely related and moved back and forth between the two counties. A lot of my information comes from family bibles. Ballentine, of course, was a surname in the area. An obvious assumption is that this Christian name came from a marriage between the Creef and Ballentine families. I have Joseph Creef's line fairly well documented, but know virtually nothing about my 2nd great grandmother Frances Creef. She was the second wife of Amos Owens, his first wife was Zilliah Creef, daughter of A. O. Creef. I have nothing on them either. Does this ring any bells for anyone???? ---- Original Message ----- From: "Kay Rockett" <KayRockett@webtv.net> To: <MONCRIEF-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, May 01, 2000 10:17 PM Subject: [MONCRIEF-L] Re: William Creef > > --WebTV-Mail-24420-1134 > Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit > > Jean, are you aware that my MONCRIEF ancestors are Isaac and his father > William CREEF/MONCRIEF? I'm certainly looking for everything I can get > on him!! I've wondered if maybe land deeds might show a connection, so > that's what I've been scouting for. Do you go to William? > > ********************************* > Rockett's theory of relativity: If you go back far enough, we're all > related. > Please visit Rockett's Genealogy Web, a recommended website of The > History Channel: http://www.kayrockett.com > ******************************** > > > --WebTV-Mail-24420-1134 > Content-Disposition: Inline > Content-Type: Message/RFC822 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit > > Received: from mailsorter-101-11.iap.bryant.webtv.net (209.240.198.45) by > storefull-248.iap.bryant.webtv.net with WTV-SMTP; Mon, 1 May 2000 > 19:01:48 -0700 (PDT) > Return-Path: <MONCRIEF-L-request@rootsweb.com> > Received: from bl-14.rootsweb.com (bl-14.rootsweb.com [209.85.6.30]) by > mailsorter-101-11.iap.bryant.webtv.net (8.8.8-wtv-f/ms.dwm.v7+dul2) > with ESMTP id TAA06014 for <KayRockett@webtv.net>; Mon, 1 May 2000 > 19:01:47 -0700 (PDT) > Received: (from slist@localhost) by bl-14.rootsweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id > TAA00762; Mon, 1 May 2000 19:01:07 -0700 (PDT) > Resent-Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 19:01:07 -0700 (PDT) > X-Original-Sender: jeantom@accucomm.net Mon May 1 19:01:05 2000 > Message-ID: <003901bfb3da$840c3c20$89839bce@accucomm.net> > From: "Jean & Tom Schroeder" <jeantom@accucomm.net> > Old-To: <MONCRIEF-L@rootsweb.com> > Date: Mon, 1 May 2000 22:02:43 -0400 > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > X-Priority: 3 > X-MSMail-Priority: Normal > X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 > X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 > Subject: [MONCRIEF-L] William Creef > Resent-Message-ID: <CdjL7.A.wL.ibjD5@bl-14.rootsweb.com> > To: MONCRIEF-L@rootsweb.com > Resent-From: MONCRIEF-L@rootsweb.com > Reply-To: MONCRIEF-L@rootsweb.com > X-Mailing-List: <MONCRIEF-L@rootsweb.com> archive/latest/251 > X-Loop: MONCRIEF-L@rootsweb.com > Precedence: list > Resent-Sender: MONCRIEF-L-request@rootsweb.com > > I monitor this list looking for a connection between my Creef lines and the > Moncreef's of Currituck Co., NC. > > One of the reasons I expect a connection is the abstract in Gordon Jones > book of Currituck Co. Wills - Will Book 1, William Creef's will 16 March > 1791. Names wife: Susanner; sons: Samuel MonCreef, Isaac MonCreef. > Exrs: wife Susanner and Mr. James Brent: Wit by Joseph Poyner, James > Brent, Elizabeth Brent. > > Will Book 2. A William Creef also witnesses the will of Richard Brent, 23 > Dec 1793. > > This William Creef obviously dropped the "Mon", does anyone have anything on > him??? > > I was told by another researcher some time ago that the Moncrief's who > supported the revolution dropped the "Mon" during the War to distinguish > themselves from the Moncrief's who supported the crown. Has anyone come > across anything to support this theory. > > Jean > > > ==== MONCRIEF Mailing List ==== > RootsWeb forbids posting of copyrighted material without permission of the author. Read RootsWeb's Acceptable Use Policy at > <http://www.rootsweb.com/rootsweb/aup.html> > > ============================== > Free Web space. ANY amount. ANY subject. > RootsWeb's Freepages put you in touch with millions. > http://cgi.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/acctform.cgi > > > --WebTV-Mail-24420-1134-- > > > ==== MONCRIEF Mailing List ==== > Please don't post private information about living people without permission. All posts are archived. To search RootsWeb list archives: > <http://archiver.rootsweb.com/archives/search.html> > > ============================== > Search ALL of RootsWeb's mailing lists in real time. > RootsWeb's Personalized Mailing Lists: > http://pml.rootsweb.com/ > >