Thanks so much for all of your kind answers to my query. It seems that my GAUNTT/TEAGUE family may have 'split off' from the Bush River Quakers just bf/ 1800. Their descend- ants continued on South from Laurens & Newberry Co.,SC while it seems that many of your families went to Ohio, etc. Was there a big split in the Quaker fellowship @ Bush R. around that time ? Thanks, Martha -----Original Message----- From: quaker-roots-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:quaker-roots-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of quaker-roots-request@rootsweb.com Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 2:01 AM To: quaker-roots@rootsweb.com Subject: QUAKER-ROOTS Digest, Vol 7, Issue 16 Today's Topics: 1. Re: Friends? marriage witnesses in 1700?s American Colonies - did they ... (Linda Peacock) 2. Re: Friends? marriage witnesses in 1700?s American Colonies - did they ... (Linda Peacock) 3. Re: Friends? marriage witnesses in 1700?s American Colonies - did they have to be members? (Linda Peacock) 4. To all (Linda Peacock) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 17:28:18 +0100 From: "Linda Peacock" <lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk> Subject: Re: [Q-R] Friends? marriage witnesses in 1700?s American Colonies - did they ... To: <Dott114029@aol.com>, <QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com> Message-ID: <C128735D3B5A42698CBECB47B214D125@brugerPC> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Thank you Dottie. Yes, I would like information about Samuel Woolman. I descend from John Woolman and Elizabeth Borton. Linda ----- Original Message ----- From: Dott114029@aol.com To: lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk ; QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 9:49 PM Subject: Re: [Q-R] Friends? marriage witnesses in 1700?s American Colonies - did they ... In my research on the marriage documents of Quakers, there were three columns of lists of names. The first column was for male guests to sign. The middle column was for women guests to sign. The third column on the right was for the family to sign, the bride and groom usually being first, then the grooms parents, brides parents and son on down that column. I could be wrong and I'm sure you will get more information from more historians, but that's how I understood it to be. I have a little information on Samuel Woolman who died in 1750 if you want it. Dottie In a message dated 1/17/2012 11:54:11 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk writes: Sorry about the typo! Meant, "were the witnesses also required to be members?". Figure people get the jest anyway but the message was garbled. Linda ----- Original Message ----- From: "Linda Peacock" <lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk> To: <QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 7:41 PM Subject: [Q-R] Friends? marriage witnesses in 1700?s American Colonies - did they have to be members? I am sure someone here will know the answer to my question which is: Were the witnesses of Friends? marriages in the 1700?s in the American Colonies also have to be members of the faith? Realize that the couple had to be members, or join if not a prior member. But let?s say one of the partners converted to the Friends? faith. Could that person?s Father or Mother be a witness? Or could general members of the community be witnesses if it were? Am new at the list. My fault for not joining earlier. My "Quaker" roots are pretty well documented and guess that is why. I descend from Woolmans, Hunts, Coffins, Thornboroughs, Gardners, Sells and many others, via my paternal grandfather?s Peacock family (the Peacocks being later to join). My grandfather, Joseph Donald Peacock, was born a "Quaker" but became a Methodist, likely because my grandmother was a Methodist. Can share much more about the family if anyone is interested in that. Yours truly, Linda Peacock ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 17:30:31 +0100 From: "Linda Peacock" <lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk> Subject: Re: [Q-R] Friends? marriage witnesses in 1700?s American Colonies - did they ... To: "Thomas Hamm" <tomh@earlham.edu>, <Dott114029@aol.com> Cc: QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com Message-ID: <84203A3512FD445089B8562539B0B751@brugerPC> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" That is very interesting, Tom Thank you! Linda ----- Original Message ----- From: Thomas Hamm To: Dott114029@aol.com Cc: lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk ; QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 10:24 PM Subject: Re: [Q-R] Friends? marriage witnesses in 1700?s American Colonies - did they ... Stewart Baldwin, who occasionally contributes to this list, wrote an interesting article on this a few years back. He found that it was the practice in some Pennsylvania monthly meetings that relatives of the bride and groom signed in the column below the bride's and groom's signatures. But it was not uniform. For example, at New Garden, North Carolina, only the names of twelve witnesses to the marriage were recorded. I have seen some marriage certificates with only two columns of witness signatures. And I've seen a number with three columns with men and women intermixed. Anyone could attend a Friends meeting for worship. Normally weddings took place at the conclusion of a midweek meeting for worship. (Thus you can assume that your Quaker ancestor probably was married on a Wednesday or Thursday.) So witnesses did not have to be members. Tom Hamm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- From: Dott114029@aol.com To: lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk, QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 3:49:56 PM Subject: Re: [Q-R] Friends? marriage witnesses in 1700?s American Colonies - did they ... In my research on the marriage documents of Quakers, there were three columns of lists of names. The first column was for male guests to sign. The middle column was for women guests to sign. The third column on the right was for the family to sign, the bride and groom usually being first, then the grooms parents, brides parents and son on down that column. I could be wrong and I'm sure you will get more information from more historians, but that's how I understood it to be. I have a little information on Samuel Woolman who died in 1750 if you want it. Dottie In a message dated 1/17/2012 11:54:11 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk writes: Sorry about the typo! Meant, "were the witnesses also required to be members?". Figure people get the jest anyway but the message was garbled. Linda ----- Original Message ----- From: "Linda Peacock" <lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk> To: <QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 7:41 PM Subject: [Q-R] Friends? marriage witnesses in 1700?s American Colonies - did they have to be members? I am sure someone here will know the answer to my question which is: Were the witnesses of Friends? marriages in the 1700?s in the American Colonies also have to be members of the faith? Realize that the couple had to be members, or join if not a prior member. But let?s say one of the partners converted to the Friends? faith. Could that person?s Father or Mother be a witness? Or could general members of the community be witnesses if it were? Am new at the list. My fault for not joining earlier. My "Quaker" roots are pretty well documented and guess that is why. I descend from Woolmans, Hunts, Coffins, Thornboroughs, Gardners, Sells and many others, via my paternal grandfather?s Peacock family (the Peacocks being later to join). My grandfather, Joseph Donald Peacock, was born a "Quaker" but became a Methodist, likely because my grandmother was a Methodist. Can share much more about the family if anyone is interested in that. Yours truly, Linda Peacock ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 17:32:28 +0100 From: "Linda Peacock" <lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk> Subject: Re: [Q-R] Friends? marriage witnesses in 1700?s American Colonies - did they have to be members? To: "Forrest Plumstead" <fplum1@gmail.com> Cc: QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com Message-ID: <0CB6F87786A04557BCDB23AC44AFC7A4@brugerPC> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Excellent, Forrest Thank you! Linda ----- Original Message ----- From: Forrest Plumstead To: Linda Peacock Cc: QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 10:39 PM Subject: Re: [Q-R] Friends? marriage witnesses in 1700?s American Colonies - did they have to be members? Hi Linda welcome to the group! If genealogy is addicting then Quaker genealogy is an epidemic! To answer your question Gwen Bjorkman writes in the introduction to her book Quaker Marriage Certificates - Pasquotank, Perquimans, Piney Woods, and Suttons Creek Monthly Meetings, North Carolina, 1677-1800 "Not all of the subscribing witnesses were North Carolinians (many Virginians may be noted) nor were they all Quakers. The name of Paul Palmer, the first Baptist minister in North Carolina. appears in Perquimans along with Government officials (and Anglicans) Thomas Harvey, Thomas Harding, Henry Clayton, and Richard Everard (It can not be determined whether the last was Governor Everard or his son.) Attendance by such public figures may have been merely a neighborly act, but their presence may have imparted a sanction to Quaker marriages which were (until 1778) often regarded as irregular if not illicit." Hope this helps On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Linda Peacock <lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk> wrote: Sorry about the typo! Meant, "were the witnesses also required to be members?". Figure people get the jest anyway but the message was garbled. Linda ----- Original Message ----- From: "Linda Peacock" <lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk> To: <QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 7:41 PM Subject: [Q-R] Friends? marriage witnesses in 1700?s American Colonies - did they have to be members? I am sure someone here will know the answer to my question which is: Were the witnesses of Friends? marriages in the 1700?s in the American Colonies also have to be members of the faith? Realize that the couple had to be members, or join if not a prior member. But let?s say one of the partners converted to the Friends? faith. Could that person?s Father or Mother be a witness? Or could general members of the community be witnesses if it were? Am new at the list. My fault for not joining earlier. My "Quaker" roots are pretty well documented and guess that is why. I descend from Woolmans, Hunts, Coffins, Thornboroughs, Gardners, Sells and many others, via my paternal grandfather?s Peacock family (the Peacocks being later to join). My grandfather, Joseph Donald Peacock, was born a "Quaker" but became a Methodist, likely because my grandmother was a Methodist. Can share much more about the family if anyone is interested in that. Yours truly, Linda Peacock ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message -- 73 WB5HQO Forrest Ham Radio WB5HQO http://forrest.3h.com/main.html Plumstead and Associated Families: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~fplum/ NAQCC Member # 3678 FPQRP # 2642 SKCC Member # 6855 QRPadillo # 59 ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 18:30:53 +0100 From: "Linda Peacock" <lindapeacock@vip.cybercity.dk> Subject: [Q-R] To all To: <QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com> Message-ID: <FAAC706AA25F435D84A6C890D7C5FF27@brugerPC> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" To everyone Thank you so much for your responses. You have been very helpful. And yes, to Forrest, Quaker genealogy is addictive. Also, I have heard from many Cousins here today and that is nice. Looks like many of us are related. Linda ------------------------------ To contact the QUAKER-ROOTS list administrator, send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS-admin@rootsweb.com. To post a message to the QUAKER-ROOTS mailing list, send an email to QUAKER-ROOTS@rootsweb.com. __________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to QUAKER-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 QUAKER-ROOTS Digest, Vol 7, Issue 16 *******************************************