Bless my absent mind; a question from Patti caused me to realize that I had failed to mention the location of the cemetery. The site is in Virginia, far eastern edge of Mecklenburg County, town of Blackridge. Best regards, Lyn P. Baird [email protected] On Mon, 18 Mar 2002 14:16:53 -0500 <[email protected]> writes: In my welcome message to Theresa Willis, I remarked, "Oh, yes, the new grave markers are now up for your great-grandparents and your twice-great-grandparents. I can send you pictures if interested." Some of you interpreted I was referring to Lewis Poythress. Actually, no, I was referring to his son and grandson. However, that did prompt some speculation in response, which I share with all below. As most of you know, we cannot send attachments to the list. So if others of you would like these pictures, just let me know individually. On Mon, 18 Mar 2002 14:06:31 -0500 <[email protected]> writes: Patti and Judy, this is in response to your requests for pictures of the Lewis Poythress gravesite. In short, we do not know for sure where he is buried. However, attached are photographs of a cemetery where he might be buried. This Poythress family cemetery contains the grave of Thomas M. Poythress, son of Lewis. It is located just a few steps from the site of the house (now demolished) in which Thomas M. Poythress resided. As you may know, Lewis Poythress gave his homestead to his two youngest sons, Thomas M. and Lewis Y. Lewis Y. soon left the area. Thomas M. remained. Although I have not done a complete study, circumstantial evidence indicates the farm on which this cemetery is located is the Lewis Poythress tract. I would conclude that is it very likely that Lewis was buried somewhere on this property and as likely in this cemetery as anywhere. As I recall, three rows, each containing four graves, are recognizable, marked with the characteristic small field stones and no inscriptions. There is one exception, the relatively late grave of Thomas A. Tanner has a monument with inscription. Through family memory, my mother and I were able to confirm the identities of six other people interred, including Thomas M. Poythress and his wife, Lucy Thomas. From other research we were able to draw conclusions on two others - sons Benjamin and Bennett. In 2000 we provided a monument for these nine - six adults, three infant children. Of course, that leaves at least three burials unidentified. For your interest, I have included a photograph of the house also. This was taken ca. 1980 after decades of neglect and use as a farm stable. A back wing is concealed. Perhaps portions of this structure dated to Lewis. Notice the double front doors. There was another pair of doors on the opposite side. In summer these four would be flung open to let the breezes through the central hallway. Sometimes people of this culture would abandon an "old place" on one part of the farm to build a new dwelling in another section, perhaps in response to changes in roads or tillage. Usually in such cases, the cemetery at the "old place" would be maintained and "patronized" long after the former dwelling was in ruins. The closeness of the cemetery to this house might hint that this house was itself the "old place" and therefore connected to Lewis. Put another way, the presence of a cemetery in the yard may indicate this is a significantly old house site. ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

Curtis, I think I have a thread for us to pull on. Any "chart" that I would have sent to anybody is almost certainly the R. Bolling Batte chart of "Early Poythress family in Virginia." If I haven't already sent you a copy of that I'd be pleased to do so. The chart is also on the Poythress web site (http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~poythress/poythressmaster.htm) Go to the Poythress site above and click on sub-heading "Studies and Charts". The last two entries under the R. Bolling Batte title are the chart itself (it's in Acrobat so you'll need to download Acrobat but it's free anyway and so much is done in Acrobat I'd be surprised if you don't already have it). Magnify down the chart from Francis (the immigrant m. Mary ______ and first on the chart), Francis's son John m. Christian Peebles, their son William m. Sarah Epes, their son William m. 1) Mary Eppes and 2)________. Their daughter Mary (# 252 3) is shown as unmarried. NOW, go back to the top of those 4 Batte "entries" and the top two are "text". The first one is a tanscription of Mr. Batte's text which supposedly matches the chart. BINGO: "Mary Poythress (252 3) m. Francis Muir of Dinwiddie County." Mr. Batte, the rascal, put it in his text but left it off the chart. The second Batte entry is a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet put together by Lyn Baird who is a member of our group. Lyn was obviously and correctly working off the "text" of Mr. Batte rather than the chart because Lyn also accounted for Mary's marriage to Francis Muir. Since "Mary" was the name of William's first wife Mary Epes, I would also speculate that this newly found Mary is probably the daughter of first wife Mary Epes Poythress. As for the "slash" on Martha's chart, I can only say that is Martha's "style" when she comes to an issue that has a couple of options.....I seldom use that convention so I'd say that part came from Martha. But in this case, there now are no alternatives, we have the lady identified, at least according to Batte and typically he is solid gold. At this point I am somewhat lost because I never had a handle on the Muir name until now. Would you be so kind as to sketch out where that Francis and Mary P. Muir line goes (or where you THINK it goes) from here? I would very much appreciate it. Maybe we now have the opportunity to put this line together. Best, Maynard

Maynard, thanks so much for sharing this article by Patricia Law Hatcher. I really like that concept & plan to begin using it, too. BPN

I had three copies of the Screven County map left over, asked the listowner for permission to post a "commercial" and she was most helpful, realizing that a bunch of people have been trying to locate this map for a long, long time. I think the Archives is quietly keeping it under wraps because they don't have a 36" x 42" copier and have to go to a blueprint shop, get big mailing tubes, etc. just like I did. Anyway, I put it on the Screven Board that I had 3 left and within literally 10 minutes they were spoken for. With that kind of demand for what is apparently viewed, in some sense, as a "rarity" I told the board I'd do it again. I'm backing up orders 15 or so thus far. Will go downtown and make another run on 4/1 and do the mailing 4/2 or 4/3. Just in case anyone has changed their minds and wants a copy they will be available for one more shot with a check before 4/1 at which time I plan to exit a business I never intended to get into in the first place. <g> Best, Maynard

Excellent article from today's edition of Ancestry.com newsletter is below. I really like the "STB" concept as opposed to just a "?" which could be questioning a fact itself or merely a spelling. I think I'll plan to use this convention to at least in part eliminate some of this confusion unless somebody has a better idea. Best, Maynard Ancestry Daily News Patricia Law Hatcher, CG, FASG – 3/19/2002 STB—Three Letters to Avoid a Genealogical Pitfall Several years ago I corresponded with one of those distant genealogical cousins we find via mail (and now the Internet). He had heard that I told another genealogical cousin there was no justification for naming our ancestor's wife as Margaret Smith [I've changed the names]. William was certainly married to a Margaret, and I believed she was probably the mother of all of his children, but I had several reasons for thinking that she most certainly was not a Smith. This new cousin told me he believed he had "pretty good documentation." Hopeful that we would finally be able to resolve this, I asked what the documentation was. Eventually I received a charmingly frank letter from him. It was headed "Recipes for Crow." The genealogical cousin had researched his notes to discover it was a case of "he said, she said, all say, all think, all hope." He was, as he said, "back to square one." It's an easy trap to fall into, especially when the information comes from a source from which we've gotten reliable information before, whether a published genealogy or a correspondent. As good genealogists, we follow the dictum to "document your sources." Unfortunately, once we've entered the "source" into our word-processing file or database, the fact that our information was secondary or tertiary, rather than primary, is no longer prominently displayed, but is neatly tucked away in tiny print or some hidden portion of our software. I could empathize with my genealogical cousin. I'd done the same thing myself. Fortunately, I had come up with a solution. I place the letters STB (Said To Be) in front of every piece of information for which I don't have what I consider an adequate source. (I type the letters STB as part of the name or date field in a database.) For example, I might describe the wife of Stephen Stone as any of the following: Mary STB Jones Mary Jones [license], STB daughter of William Jones Mary Jones, daughter of William Jones, possibly by wife Phebe [will], STB Phebe Brown Mary, born 1821 in Kentucky [1850 census], STB 1 March 1821 in Barren County, Kentucky Notice that this notation is flexible and allows me to mix information from primary records with STB information from secondary records so that I don't lose it as a clue. At the same time, it never lets me forget that I haven't really established it as fact. Why Not Use A Question Mark? There are two reasons that I do not use question marks to identify said-to-be information. I generally reserve question marks for something questionable found in an original source. For example, suppose a county marriage book says that John Jones married Tabitha Tingle, but Tingle is not easy to read and could quite possibly be Fengle or something else. I would mark Tingle with a question mark. Or suppose the marriage book clearly says the wife is Ursula Umphrat, but I've searched high and low and there is not an Umphrat family in that county or in any adjoining county. Since young single women rarely moved to the frontier alone, I would add a question mark to the surname. The second reason I use STB instead of a question mark is that it clearly telegraphs important information to me. The name or date or place has been claimed by someone —I just don't have a primary document to support it. In other words, I need to go look for the proof. That isn't at all the same as questioning a piece of data. Using STB As A Research Strategy Let me reiterate what I said in the previous paragraph—I need to go look for the proof. Sounds like a research plan to me! On one of my families, for example, I wrote a narrative and genealogical summary, carefully flagging all STB information. For good measure, I marked STB in bold. I took the printout with me when I made a research trip to the Family History Library in Salt Lake City. My research plan? To turn each STB into a documented statement. This is not the same as simply doing research. STB tells me that SOMEone has seen SOMEthing that suggests this is a true statement. Furthermore, it provides specific data to focus and direct the research. For example, let's say the STB is a marriage date for a couple. First, I will recheck the marriage book, searching chronologically. I may have missed it for one of several reasons; perhaps the record wasn't indexed or maybe the published abstracts were only for the loose bonds. If I still don't find the record, I will search all adjoining counties (remember, someone saw that date) and any churches in the area. I will also search for Bible records, including those for surnames of sons-in-law. What if I don't find a document to clear the STB? I turn it into a statement that says so (often in a footnote). "The marriage date is said to be 1 March 1838 [source], but no marriage record was located in Green or any surrounding county, nor in other records searched [list of items searched]." Did I clear all the STBs on my trip to Salt Lake City? No. In following up on the clues offered by a couple of the STBs, I solved an interesting puzzle that begged to be turned into an article. In other words, I got sidetracked! I still have STBs to research. These three little letters, STB, can be very powerful in helping us avoid pitfalls–and they can help us improve our research focus. Patricia Law Hatcher, CG, FASG, is a technical writer, instructor, and professional genealogist. She has written, edited, and produced numerous publications and has written articles for The American Genealogist, The Maine Genealogist, the New Hampshire Genealogical Record, The Virginia Genealogist, and Ancestry Magazine. She is the author of <A HREF="http://www.ancestry.com/rd/prodredir.asp?sourceid=831&key=P1024">Producing a Quality Family History</A>. <A HREF="http://www.ancestry.com/legal/terms.htm">Terms & Conditions</A> | <A HREF="http://www.ancestry.com/legal/privacy.htm">Privacy Statement </A>| <A HREF="http://www.myfamilyinc.com/"> About Us</A> | <A HREF="http://www.ancestry.com/home/partner/main.htm">Partner with Us</A> | >Contact Us</A> Copyright 2000, MyFamily.com. This article may be reproduced in whole or in part for non-commercial purposes provided that proper attribution (including author name) and copyright notices are included.

Lyn, Thank you so much for sharing your well-thought-out info on this. BPN

After a cursory glance, that Binns project is going to be dynamite for us. They have not yet gotten to Lunenburg (we're not sure we're there anyway) and Mecklenburg but they sure have nailed the rest: Charles City, Prince George, Isle of Wight, Amelia, Brunswick, etc. They have a ton of hits listed on that site so obviously a lot of people appreciate the work they are doing and I am certainly one of them. The gist of your e-mail sort of implied that you knew them and if so please tell them they have rung the bell for yet another family. Best, Maynard (http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~ysbinns/vataxlists/index.htm)

In this month's Georgia Genealogical Journal, Bob Davis' Q&A column: Q: can you recommend a website for finding cemeteries? A: there are several but one just brought to my attention is Cemetery Junction at www.daddezio.com/cemetery I went there. The thing simply boggles the mind. Couple of downsides: 1) obviously they don't have them all but who does? My poking about would suggest that it's hard to believe anyone has any MORE. 2) easy to search "by cemetery" but no provision that I saw to search AN AREA by name. I would say cut this corner by bringing up the cemetery and then putting "Poythress" (or whatever) in the "find" block under the "Edit" feature of MS Word. This one is a dandy but doesn't look like it's going to be the easiest to work with. Maynard

In my welcome message to Theresa Willis, I remarked, "Oh, yes, the new grave markers are now up for your great-grandparents and your twice-great-grandparents. I can send you pictures if interested." Some of you interpreted I was referring to Lewis Poythress. Actually, no, I was referring to his son and grandson. However, that did prompt some speculation in response, which I share with all below. As most of you know, we cannot send attachments to the list. So if others of you would like these pictures, just let me know individually. Best regards, Lyn P. Baird [email protected] On Mon, 18 Mar 2002 14:06:31 -0500 <[email protected]> writes: > Patti and Judy, this is in response to your requests for pictures of > the Lewis Poythress gravesite. In short, we do not know for sure > where he is buried. However, attached are photographs of a cemetery > where he might be buried. This Poythress family cemetery contains > the grave of Thomas M. Poythress, son of Lewis. It is located just > a few steps from the site of the house (now demolished) in which > Thomas M. Poythress resided. As you may know, Lewis Poythress gave > his homestead to his two youngest sons, Thomas M. and Lewis Y. > Lewis Y. soon left the area. Thomas M. remained. Although I have > not done a complete study, circumstantial evidence indicates the > farm on which this cemetery is located is the Lewis Poythress tract. > I would conclude that is it very likely that Lewis was buried > somewhere on this property and as likely in this cemetery as > anywhere. > > As I recall, three rows, each containing four graves, are > recognizable, marked with the characteristic small field stones and > no inscriptions. There is one exception, the relatively late grave > of Thomas A. Tanner has a monument with inscription. Through family > memory, my mother and I were able to confirm the identities of six > other people interred, including Thomas M. Poythress and his wife, > Lucy Thomas. From other research we were able to draw conclusions > on two others - sons Benjamin and Bennett. In 2000 we provided a > monument for these nine - six adults, three infant children. Of > course, that leaves at least three burials unidentified. > > For your interest, I have included a photograph of the house also. > This was taken ca. 1980 after decades of neglect and use as a farm > stable. A back wing is concealed. Perhaps portions of this > structure dated to Lewis. Notice the double front doors. There was > another pair of doors on the opposite side. In summer these four > would be flung open to let the breezes through the central hallway. > > Sometimes people of this culture would abandon an "old place" on one > part of the farm to build a new dwelling in another section, perhaps > in response to changes in roads or tillage. Usually in such cases, > the cemetery at the "old place" would be maintained and "patronized" > long after the former dwelling was in ruins. The closeness of the > cemetery to this house might hint that this house was itself the > "old place" and therefore connected to Lewis. Put another way, the > presence of a cemetery in the yard may indicate this is a > significantly old house site. > ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

Hello, Teresa. Welcome back. Yes, I am still on the list, but very quiet. We've been less active of late. Regarding Lewis, no progress that I have noted. Lewis is still your "progenitor" (and mine). Maybe you can bust the code for us. :-) If you have some time to spend in Richmond at Library of Virginia, I think we would all appreciate some work with the chancery court records that have just become indexed and available on microfilm in the past two years. Lots of references to Poythresses and allied families in Mecklenburg, Brunswick and Lunenburg and we on the list have only scratched the surface of research on this database. Oh, yes, the new grave markers are now up for your great-grandparents and your twice-great-grandparents. I can send you pictures if interested. Best regards, Lyn P. Baird [email protected] ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

You have a new e-mail address? [email protected] is coming up blank. Maynard

Hi Royce, I'm John Poythress' father John Maynard Poythress. Glad to hear he made contact with you.. I guess peddling boxes may be in the genes. I did the crime in south Georgia 68-70, was sales mgr. in Dallas 70-72 and general mgr. at Inland's Louisville plant from 72 to 97 when I retired. Figured I'd been about as far west and as far north as I ever had a notion to go so I just camped here in Louisville, did I guess an average job raising my kids and otherwise tried to enjoy myself. For several years a number of us have worked the Poythress genealogy but I can't say with any NC sucess to amount to anything despite the fact that all the demographics say there are more of us in NC than any other state with VA and GA 2nd and 3rd or the other way around, I can't ever remember which. Anyway, there are some 90+ of us on a reasonably active list-server although only about 20 or 25 of us ever seem to go on the air, the rest being welcome "lurkers". If you'd care to visit the site and just poke about I think you'd enjoy it. We need Carolinians as there are only 3 or 4 on the list that I ever hear from. The address is: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~poythress/poythressmaster.htm .....I think you'll find it interesting and if you decide you want to join the list-server discussion group, even if only to lurk, the instructions are on the webpage. There is seldom more than one message a day so it doesn't exactly spam your mailbox. Again, nice making touch with you and hope we'll see you join the group. Best regards, Maynard Poythress

Robert Ragan's recent genealogy newsletter provides an interesting website and a suggestion on finding and using obituaries to gain family history information. This is the site: http://www.gebbieinc.com/dailyint.htm I also like http://newslink.org/ Both provide a list of newspapers with internet versions. Choose a state of interest to you, then a newspaper in the town you may think has relatives; then obituaries, then archives. You can find the reference on an explorer page with Control-F, once the page has loaded. However, in my test case, Hopewell, VA, the Poythress was a street name. Ragan's own site is http://amberskyline.com/treasuremaps/fhhindex.html. His emails come with a lot of hype and promotion, but still most have suggestions worth considering. This installment suggests how to read an obituary, but I leave that part up to him. I know many of you already subscribe. Diana

There are 2 ways to search the Poythress-List archives: (1) Archives for ALL messages: http://searches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl (note, this site ends in the letter "L" not the number one) (2)Threaded list archives - giving responses along with the original messages they pertained to: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/

Hi Teresa, Welcome back to the List. As far as I know, yes, Lyn is still on the List though he only catches up reading messages periodically (like every several weeks, it seems). If you'll look on the Poythress website, which is: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~poythress/ and scroll down the left side to "17th Century Records" and then when the window on the right side of your screen gets to all those 17th Century records, scroll down, and in 1637 and 1639 you'll find mention of Laurence Evans, merchant, there. I think the notation you found in the book should've said "Francis" rather than "Thomas" (Possibly a typo or transcription error). Anyway, you'll find info about it all there. As to whether or not anyone is on the Batte chart, you can now easily check it out yourself, thanks to wonderful work by Diana Diamond. See the below copy of a message from Diana & see the Poythress-List Archives for other recent messages on this subject. I believe the correct site is: http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?db=poythressp1 Welcome Back Teresa, Barbara (BPN) = = = = = From: "Diana Diamond" <[email protected]> Old-To: "Poythress List" <[email protected]> Subject: More on The (P-1) Poythress Family Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 20:19:21 -0500 To: [email protected] If the email I sent earlier doesn't engender some questions, then I haven't done my job well. But to anticipate some questions, I would like to list some highlights of my database at <http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?db=poythressp1> Features: - Fairly complete picture the Poythress family and descendants--nearly all descendants, including Jane's--from 1609 through 1800, and for many of them, through 1900. - Fairly complete references to the Batte's index cards for each person in the database in the target group. I provided a link to the RBB cards in what is called "My Home Page." I encourage you to check my work. - Fairly complete background of the spouses of the Poythress descendants, for a few generations in many cases. - I converted all the Eppes to Epes to make the alphabetical features of computers work better. I used R. Bolling Batte's cards rather than Mr. Dorman's book, "The Descendants of Francis Epes". I did this to keep the work consistent. In a few cases, I made note of The Dorman book. - Good linkage of families when cousins marry, which they do often. - Less information about the individuals' occupations etc. Something I hope to work on in the future. In my own FTM database, (which the produced the gedcom, that rootsweb uses) I have the card images in my scrapbook to refer to again and again. So if you have specific questions about individuals, I hope to answer them easily. - A serviceable system of identifying where there are problems and questions. - By having each card image handy to check and double check in my personal FTM database, and by using Mr. Batte's own letter-ordering system, I have a high degree of confidence I got the marriages and children entered correctly. I expect some typos in the date sections, by the nature of how they were entered. I am continuing to recheck these. Some of our people have strange given names. - At the moment, a fair amount of redundancy in identifying people, using Mr. Batte's letter system. Perhaps in the future I will reduce this. It was necessary to insure I had the right person when so many people have the same names. A few times R. Bolling Batte had trouble keeping them straight. - Inclusion of information on Mary Poythress's second family with Col. Wynne. - I am happy to add written notes to individuals you have researched and give you credit. Diana

I am discontinuing my association with AOL. SO .... Will all concerned please change my email address from AOL to: <<< [email protected] >>>>

fast-spreading e-mail worm, possibly from Japan, is encircling the globe and flooding e-mail servers with excessive messages. Fbound ([email protected], also known as Zircon.C, DotJayPee, Fbound.b) is 12,288 bytes in length, and, unlike other recent worms, does not install itself on the infected machine but instead runs from memory. Mac and Linux users are not affected. Fbound is capable of sending large amounts of e-mail but does not damage or delete files on the infected computer. Because of the increasing reports of this worm around the world, Fbound currently ranks a 6 on the ZDNet Virus Meter. How it works Fbound arrives by e-mail with the subject line "Important." If the recipient's computer language is set to Japanese or if the recipient's e-mail address ends with .jp, the subject line is chosen from 16 Japanese-language subject lines contained within the worm. There is no body text associated with this worm. The attached file is named patch.exe. If the attached file is opened, Fbound locates the infected user's SMTP server and e-mail address. Then the virus loads itself into memory and sends copies of itself to addresses found in the Windows Address Book. Unlike many worms, Fbound doesn't install itself on an infected computer, nor does it add or change any registry files. Once the worm has been run, it will not run again. Because Fbound encodes all of its code into one line and does not comply with SMTP encoding, it may sometimes bounce e-mails it sends or arrive as a noninfectious e-mail. Code within Fbound contains the following message: "I-Worm.Japanize." Prevention Users of Microsoft Outlook 2002 and users of Outlook 2000 who have installed the Security Update should be safe from the attached EXE file in Fbound. Users who have not upgraded to Outlook 2002 or who have not installed the Security Update for Outlook 2000 should do so. In general, do not open e-mail attachments without first saving them to hard disk and scanning them with updated antivirus software. Contact your antivirus vendor to obtain the most current antivirus signature files that include Fbound. Removal Almost all of the antivirus software companies have updated their signature files to include this worm. This will stop the infection upon contact and in some cases will remove an active infection from your system. For more information, see Central Command, Computer Associates, F-Secure, Kaspersky (known here as Ziron.c),McAfee, Norman, Panda, Sophos, Symantec (known as Dotjaypee), and Trend Micro (known here as Fbound.b).

Diana, Yes, I'd love to get a copy of your upcoming printed document on the Descendants of Francis and Mary Poythress (based on R. Bolling Batte), when you complete it in a few more weeks/months. Of course I'd be glad to send you whatever amt for covering your reproduction and mailing. Thank you so much for all this wonderful work you are doing that does so much to help so many of us understand the big picture of Poythresses. BPN

I offer to you on request my all-inclusive, multi-task Poythress chart. I put together a chart to help me when working my database of the descendants of Francis and Mary Poythress (http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?db=poythressp1), which may be of interest to some of you. It uses the so-called Batte Section A chart (which I have altered from what's on the website), and included the Batte lettering system overlaid in red and added a couple of new Poythresses. I have tucked in a little aid to understanding Jane Poythress Rolfe's relationship to Pocahontas and John Bolling (B-2) A. I have also tucked in a slightly revised "B" chart, which is based on my interpretation of Batte's index cards. I have listed along the bottom, an alphabetical list of the Poythress family members in the R. Bolling Batte universe and given them each letters as a kind of index. I can print it on a very big piece of a paper (11X17) and mail it to you, or send you an email copy. Just need an address, email or snail mail if you want one. No charge, but limited time only. Also let me know if there would be any interest in a printed document of the Descendants of Francis and Mary Poythress (based on R. Bolling Batte), when I have completed my work in a few more weeks/months. At the present, it runs about 150 pages, and there would have to be a small charge for reproduction and mailing. I would not be looking to make money, just break even. Diana

"Lancashire: Hundreds and Other Things," by Sherry Irvine, BA, CGRS, FSA(Scot) Of the four Lancashire CDs in the English Parish Records (EPR) series, three contain the term 'hundreds' in the title. Other EPR titles stick to county names, three mention dioceses, and Yorkshire has its 'ridings' -- North, East and West. (Riding is derived from an Old English word meaning third part, which explains why there never has been a 'south' riding.) So what are 'hundreds?' Are there one hundred in a county? Do all counties have them? The best way to begin is with a definition. Hundreds were sub-divisions of shires and counties, each with its own court. They were judicial, military, and taxation units that emerged before William the Conqueror. Domesday Book is arranged by counties and hundreds. Size varied, but the basis for drawing up the hundreds of a county was pretty much the same everywhere. It was an area that comprised one hundred families, or one hundred 'hides.' A hide (also known as a carucate) was a measure of land--the amount required by one free family and its dependents. This amount of land was defined in turn as that which could be tilled by one plough and a team of oxen in one year. The hundred was a practical division of local administration for a very long time. Genealogists encounter hundreds in directories; they are listed in the county sections within Samuel Lewis' Topographical Dictionary of England; they appear on maps. Among the records arranged this way are hearth taxes in the late 1600s and militia records of the 1700s. This ancient division is not found in every county. The four extreme northern counties of Cumberland, Westmorland, Durham, and Northumberland, were broken up into wards. On the eastern side of England, the equivalent of a hundred is the wapentake, a term which the Danes brought with them. Wapentakes are found in Derbyshire, Leicestershire, Lincolnshire, Nottinghamshire, Rutland, and Yorkshire. In several counties the hundred (or the wapentake) is a sub-division of a unit that falls between it and the county. Yorkshire has its ridings, Lincolnshire has three divisions (Lindsey, Kestevan, Holland); in the southeast, Kent has 62 hundreds within five 'lathes' and Sussex has 66 hundreds within six 'rapes.' Lancashire had six hundreds. There is something from all six of them among these CDs and the pairings make geographic sense (there are two hundreds on each of three CDs, and the fourth covers general sources and part of Neighboring Westmorland). Salford (contains Manchester) and West Derby (contains Liverpool) are the southern two, Blackburn and Leyland are in the middle, Amounderness and Lonsdale, the northern pair including the part of Lancashire across Morecambe Bay (now part of Cumbria). For comparison, Cornwall had nine hundreds, Essex had twenty, and Norfolk had thirty-three. The smaller divisions reflect the larger number of people per square mile and the greater fertility of the land. You cannot be a genealogist without an interest in and an affection for maps of all sorts. Sooner or later, you will need to know in which hundred a particular parish is located, or which hundreds need to be searched to collect all entries of one surname in one type of record.