[Background: I am descended from Elizabeth Pace who married Wiley Etheredge and who was the daughter of William Pace (d. Clarke Co, AL, Jun 1826). My version of Occam’s Razor holds that, amongst a number of competing theories or explanations, the simplest one is most likely to be correct.] My family, along with other Pace descendents whose ancestors passed through Clarke Co, AL, from 1810 to 1830, has long believed that we descend from a Frederick Pace of Wales. This fits into the “family tradition” category, as I am not aware of any other supporting documentation. Bruce Howard, in his book which results from an impressive amount of excellent genealogical research, debunks the very existence of a Frederick Pace of Wales, largely because he was unable to prove the existence of such a person in any existing record. However, it is exceedingly difficult to prove a negative, and the lack of a paper trail certainly does not prove the non-existence of Frederick of Wales. It seems to me that Mr. Howard did an excellent bit of genealogical detective work in sorting through the many Paces of North Carolina. But some sons of John Pace and Sarah Burge of Surry Co, NC, seem to have disappeared from the Carolinas in the decades following the Revolution and Bruce was having trouble figuring out where they went. In the same time period, some folks appeared in Clarke Co, AL, that looked very similar to these missing sons of John and Sarah. A good genealogist like Mr. Howard abhors a bunch of unconnected dots on his chart, so Bruce made a number of assumptions that allowed him to draw lines through those dots. The principal assumption was that the Clarke Co Paces made up the story of Frederick of Wales in order to hide the fact that their ancestor John was a Tory who died while fighting on the wrong side in the Revolution. Now, back to Occam’s Razor and the two competing theories: 1. Those Clarke Co Paces were telling the truth as well as they knew it. 2. They made up the story to hide an unpleasant part of their ancestry. The problem with option 2 is that it requires a number of assumptions – it assumes that they were ashamed of their ancestry, that they were willing to lie about it, that they got away with the lie, etc, along with a number of more complex genealogical assumptions involving their moves from the Carolinas to Alabama and their interrelationships, etc. This explanation involves a goodly number of assumptions, any of which might be untrue, and it is a couple of orders of magnitude more complex than explanation 1. So, if I follow the teachings of that old Franciscan friar, William of Ockham, then I have to conclude that my ancestors were probably telling the truth and I am most likely descended from a Frederick Pace of Wales. The Frederick of Wales story has a small measure of support from the Y chromosome evidence. We have three data points from Mississippi Paces who show no DNA relationship to other Paces. But, as Roy Johnson has pointed out, these three Paces are closely related (son, father, and uncle) and represent only one line, so we need DNA samples from other Clarke County lines to have a reasonable degree of confidence in the non-relationship between them and other Pace lines. I don’t mean to run down Bruce Howard here. I feel that he is an excellent genealogist and his book is a valuable addition to my library. But when he departs from reporting fact and engages in assumption and speculation, then I think that his reader should feel free to agree or to disagree with his conclusions. Joe Anderson

Joe, or others Excellent letter Joe. I would be interested in learning anything you or others know of the 1923 Carrie Pace letter (who she was, where she got her info, who the letter was written to, her relationship to other Paces etc.) and also the opinion of her letter and the relevance of the letter to the family of Frederick of Wales. John Pace ----- Original Message ----- From: "Janders 45" <janders45@hotmail.com> To: <PACE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2005 10:12 AM Subject: [PACE-L] Frederick Pace of Wales and Occams Razor > [Background: I am descended from Elizabeth Pace who married Wiley > Etheredge and who was the daughter of William Pace (d. Clarke Co, AL, Jun > 1826). My version of Occam's Razor holds that, amongst a number of > competing theories or explanations, the simplest one is most likely to be > correct.] > > My family, along with other Pace descendents whose ancestors passed > through Clarke Co, AL, from 1810 to 1830, has long believed that we > descend from a Frederick Pace of Wales. This fits into the "family > tradition" category, as I am not aware of any other supporting > documentation. Bruce Howard, in his book which results from an impressive > amount of excellent genealogical research, debunks the very existence of a > Frederick Pace of Wales, largely because he was unable to prove the > existence of such a person in any existing record. However, it is > exceedingly difficult to prove a negative, and the lack of a paper trail > certainly does not prove the non-existence of Frederick of Wales. > > It seems to me that Mr. Howard did an excellent bit of genealogical > detective work in sorting through the many Paces of North Carolina. But > some sons of John Pace and Sarah Burge of Surry Co, NC, seem to have > disappeared from the Carolinas in the decades following the Revolution and > Bruce was having trouble figuring out where they went. In the same time > period, some folks appeared in Clarke Co, AL, that looked very similar to > these missing sons of John and Sarah. A good genealogist like Mr. Howard > abhors a bunch of unconnected dots on his chart, so Bruce made a number of > assumptions that allowed him to draw lines through those dots. The > principal assumption was that the Clarke Co Paces made up the story of > Frederick of Wales in order to hide the fact that their ancestor John was > a Tory who died while fighting on the wrong side in the Revolution. > > Now, back to Occam's Razor and the two competing theories: > 1. Those Clarke Co Paces were telling the truth as well as they knew it. > 2. They made up the story to hide an unpleasant part of their ancestry. > > The problem with option 2 is that it requires a number of assumptions - it > assumes that they were ashamed of their ancestry, that they were willing > to lie about it, that they got away with the lie, etc, along with a number > of more complex genealogical assumptions involving their moves from the > Carolinas to Alabama and their interrelationships, etc. This explanation > involves a goodly number of assumptions, any of which might be untrue, and > it is a couple of orders of magnitude more complex than explanation 1. > So, if I follow the teachings of that old Franciscan friar, William of > Ockham, then I have to conclude that my ancestors were probably telling > the truth and I am most likely descended from a Frederick Pace of Wales. > > The Frederick of Wales story has a small measure of support from the Y > chromosome evidence. We have three data points from Mississippi Paces who > show no DNA relationship to other Paces. But, as Roy Johnson has pointed > out, these three Paces are closely related (son, father, and uncle) and > represent only one line, so we need DNA samples from other Clarke County > lines to have a reasonable degree of confidence in the non-relationship > between them and other Pace lines. > > I don't mean to run down Bruce Howard here. I feel that he is an > excellent genealogist and his book is a valuable addition to my library. > But when he departs from reporting fact and engages in assumption and > speculation, then I think that his reader should feel free to agree or to > disagree with his conclusions. > > Joe Anderson > > > > ==== PACE Mailing List ==== > To subscribe or unsubscribe send email to PACE-L-request@rootsweb.com with > the one word message: subscribe OR unsubscribe > For digest mode, use PACE-D-request@rootsweb.com > >

John, I too would like to have answers to the questions that you raise. I would also like to know the provenance of the letter starting with who holds the original today? Not that I doubt the authenticity, but knowing where the information came from can sometimes help you to understand it. The descent from an Irish "Rose" with a name change to Pace is an interesting tradition that I hadn't heard before. I think that we have to assign a high value to the Carrie Pace letter since she was about 100 years closer to the fact than we are today. But we also need to keep in mind that, if we are confused today, she also might have been confused a bit back in 1923. After all, her old family records had been lost and she was trying to reconstruct them, much as we are trying to do today. What she says about two of the Clarke Co Paces rings true. John's family apparently did move over to Mississippi following his death. In the 1830 census, I believe that all of the Paces who are left in Clarke Co are Dempsey and his children and the descendents of William Pace. I don't see any left that appear to belong to John. I find it a bit strange that she did not mention William Pace at all. After all, he and his descendents were living right there in the same neighborhood as John and Dempsey. If she knew of those two, one thinks that she would also have known of William, IF they were all as closely related as many believe them to be today. This raises the intriguing possibility that perhaps we don't have these relationships quite right. It seems to be universally accepted that Dempsey (b. 1775 - the early immigrant to Clarke Co) was the oldest son of William Pace. I think that this belief results from the fact that Dempsy (sic) was listed as one of the legatees of William Pace in the estate papers. But if you examine all of the estate papers closely and then you look at the 1850 Clarke Co census, then you might conclude that two Dempsey Paces were present at the burial of William Pace. I believe that Dempsey the younger (Dempsy or Demsy in the estate papers) who was born in GA in 1810 was the son of William and Drucilla. And Dempsey the elder (b. 1775 SC) was not. So, who was Dempsey the elder, if not the son of William? One possibility is that he was the brother of John and the son of Frederick Pace of Wales, just as the story goes. But we have to reconcile all of this with the Carrie Pace letter, don't we? I could really use some help in figuring all of this out. Joe Anderson ----Original Message Follows---- From: "Mr John Pace" <pjohndeb@verizon.net> To: PACE-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [PACE-L] Frederick Pace of Wales and Occams Razor Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 12:12:37 -0500 Joe, or others Excellent letter Joe. I would be interested in learning anything you or others know of the 1923 Carrie Pace letter (who she was, where she got her info, who the letter was written to, her relationship to other Paces etc.) and also the opinion of her letter and the relevance of the letter to the family of Frederick of Wales. John Pace ----- Original Message ----- From: "Janders 45" <janders45@hotmail.com> To: <PACE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2005 10:12 AM Subject: [PACE-L] Frederick Pace of Wales and Occams Razor >[Background: I am descended from Elizabeth Pace who married Wiley >Etheredge and who was the daughter of William Pace (d. Clarke Co, AL, Jun >1826). My version of Occam's Razor holds that, amongst a number of >competing theories or explanations, the simplest one is most likely to be >correct.] > >My family, along with other Pace descendents whose ancestors passed through >Clarke Co, AL, from 1810 to 1830, has long believed that we descend from a >Frederick Pace of Wales. This fits into the "family tradition" category, >as I am not aware of any other supporting documentation. Bruce Howard, in >his book which results from an impressive amount of excellent genealogical >research, debunks the very existence of a Frederick Pace of Wales, largely >because he was unable to prove the existence of such a person in any >existing record. However, it is exceedingly difficult to prove a negative, >and the lack of a paper trail certainly does not prove the non-existence of >Frederick of Wales. > >It seems to me that Mr. Howard did an excellent bit of genealogical >detective work in sorting through the many Paces of North Carolina. But >some sons of John Pace and Sarah Burge of Surry Co, NC, seem to have >disappeared from the Carolinas in the decades following the Revolution and >Bruce was having trouble figuring out where they went. In the same time >period, some folks appeared in Clarke Co, AL, that looked very similar to >these missing sons of John and Sarah. A good genealogist like Mr. Howard >abhors a bunch of unconnected dots on his chart, so Bruce made a number of >assumptions that allowed him to draw lines through those dots. The >principal assumption was that the Clarke Co Paces made up the story of >Frederick of Wales in order to hide the fact that their ancestor John was a >Tory who died while fighting on the wrong side in the Revolution. > >Now, back to Occam's Razor and the two competing theories: >1. Those Clarke Co Paces were telling the truth as well as they knew it. >2. They made up the story to hide an unpleasant part of their ancestry. > >The problem with option 2 is that it requires a number of assumptions - it >assumes that they were ashamed of their ancestry, that they were willing to >lie about it, that they got away with the lie, etc, along with a number of >more complex genealogical assumptions involving their moves from the >Carolinas to Alabama and their interrelationships, etc. This explanation >involves a goodly number of assumptions, any of which might be untrue, and >it is a couple of orders of magnitude more complex than explanation 1. So, >if I follow the teachings of that old Franciscan friar, William of Ockham, >then I have to conclude that my ancestors were probably telling the truth >and I am most likely descended from a Frederick Pace of Wales. > >The Frederick of Wales story has a small measure of support from the Y >chromosome evidence. We have three data points from Mississippi Paces who >show no DNA relationship to other Paces. But, as Roy Johnson has pointed >out, these three Paces are closely related (son, father, and uncle) and >represent only one line, so we need DNA samples from other Clarke County >lines to have a reasonable degree of confidence in the non-relationship >between them and other Pace lines. > >I don't mean to run down Bruce Howard here. I feel that he is an excellent >genealogist and his book is a valuable addition to my library. But when he >departs from reporting fact and engages in assumption and speculation, then >I think that his reader should feel free to agree or to disagree with his >conclusions. > >Joe Anderson

I did a study on the Pace name in Wales. Can't recall all sources but I found that : (1) Pace is not a Welsh name; it is English. The Welsh were Gaelic and tended to resist English things. (2) There are Paces living in Wales but they are few in number and appear to be of pretty recent origin. This doesn't prove anyting one way or another, but all facts should be brought in. Roy Johnson -----Original Message----- From: Janders 45 [mailto:janders45@hotmail.com] Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2005 9:12 AM To: PACE-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [PACE-L] Frederick Pace of Wales and Occams Razor [Background: I am descended from Elizabeth Pace who married Wiley Etheredge and who was the daughter of William Pace (d. Clarke Co, AL, Jun 1826). My version of Occam's Razor holds that, amongst a number of competing theories or explanations, the simplest one is most likely to be correct.] My family, along with other Pace descendents whose ancestors passed through Clarke Co, AL, from 1810 to 1830, has long believed that we descend from a Frederick Pace of Wales. This fits into the "family tradition" category, as I am not aware of any other supporting documentation. Bruce Howard, in his book which results from an impressive amount of excellent genealogical research, debunks the very existence of a Frederick Pace of Wales, largely because he was unable to prove the existence of such a person in any existing record. However, it is exceedingly difficult to prove a negative, and the lack of a paper trail certainly does not prove the non-existence of Frederick of Wales. It seems to me that Mr. Howard did an excellent bit of genealogical detective work in sorting through the many Paces of North Carolina. But some sons of John Pace and Sarah Burge of Surry Co, NC, seem to have disappeared from the Carolinas in the decades following the Revolution and Bruce was having trouble figuring out where they went. In the same time period, some folks appeared in Clarke Co, AL, that looked very similar to these missing sons of John and Sarah. A good genealogist like Mr. Howard abhors a bunch of unconnected dots on his chart, so Bruce made a number of assumptions that allowed him to draw lines through those dots. The principal assumption was that the Clarke Co Paces made up the story of Frederick of Wales in order to hide the fact that their ancestor John was a Tory who died while fighting on the wrong side in the Revolution. Now, back to Occam's Razor and the two competing theories: 1. Those Clarke Co Paces were telling the truth as well as they knew it. 2. They made up the story to hide an unpleasant part of their ancestry. The problem with option 2 is that it requires a number of assumptions - it assumes that they were ashamed of their ancestry, that they were willing to lie about it, that they got away with the lie, etc, along with a number of more complex genealogical assumptions involving their moves from the Carolinas to Alabama and their interrelationships, etc. This explanation involves a goodly number of assumptions, any of which might be untrue, and it is a couple of orders of magnitude more complex than explanation 1. So, if I follow the teachings of that old Franciscan friar, William of Ockham, then I have to conclude that my ancestors were probably telling the truth and I am most likely descended from a Frederick Pace of Wales. The Frederick of Wales story has a small measure of support from the Y chromosome evidence. We have three data points from Mississippi Paces who show no DNA relationship to other Paces. But, as Roy Johnson has pointed out, these three Paces are closely related (son, father, and uncle) and represent only one line, so we need DNA samples from other Clarke County lines to have a reasonable degree of confidence in the non-relationship between them and other Pace lines. I don't mean to run down Bruce Howard here. I feel that he is an excellent genealogist and his book is a valuable addition to my library. But when he departs from reporting fact and engages in assumption and speculation, then I think that his reader should feel free to agree or to disagree with his conclusions. Joe Anderson ==== PACE Mailing List ==== To subscribe or unsubscribe send email to PACE-L-request@rootsweb.com with the one word message: subscribe OR unsubscribe For digest mode, use PACE-D-request@rootsweb.com