Slaves would, by law, not have been allowed to own land....neither would a slave, in many cases, have had a surname. So, this woman wasn't a slave. Another point is only as an unmarried woman or a widow could own land....when a woman married, her possessions automatically belonged to her husband.....and, anything she inherited while married also went to her husband. This is why many widows chose not to remarry - in this way they became the owner of what they inherited from their husband, or anything from any other inheritance....and, could make their own decisions. By leaving things to this woman, unless she married, he ensured that a husband didn't marry her and take the land and anything else he left her. So, she had the choice of owning land and remaining unmarried, or marrying and loose the land.... S. One interesting and unexplained bequest was to an Elizabeth Nichols who received "use of land" conditioned on her remaining unmarried, and her daughter Cilla Nichols who received livestock and household goods. Although there was Nichols/Nicholas families around in that era, I don't believe anyone has determined WHO Elizabeth and da. Cilla are. My guess..... would be SLAVE and her .....ah.... his daughter? Maybe Elizabeth was the House Servant.... maybe he got her pregnant." -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.2/373 - Release Date: 6/22/2006