> believing it was something other than REAVIS/REVIS..to begin > with..so that we should not look for his family by that name in > England. > > What I have found follows. Up til now, was convinced that his > theory was myth, but now not so sure, in light of the fact that > the ones by that name, I have been able to trace back to him; > exception of the early Revis in Va...and most of them seem to > really be of the Ryves/Rives line (Wm Ryves chn'g sp to Rives > by act of parliament), and the Reeves/Reaves of Va., thus not > connected to Edward-1 (and I have traced most of them as well) > > 1721 Henrico Co Va name appears RIVIS and REVIS > > 1747 Northampton Co NC name appears Reaves & Reavis > his will written by another lists his name as RAVIS in > the body; is signed either Revis or Reavis..due to tear, > hard to verify > his son William signed his will REAVIS > Wm's son Isaac and Samuel appear top have signed their wills > REAVIS > James-2 1803 s/deed REAVIS > Joseph s/o James-2 spelled REAVIS on Will > David s/o James-2 sp Reavis on Will > James s/o James-2 signed Reavis on Will > John-2 name appears to be REAVIS on Will > Will of Isham-3 s/ REAVIS..yet Revis used as well > Allen s/Reavis yet many of his fam to date use REVIS > > Many others frm lines of all sons, I think, without exception > use both names. > > Estate rec for Jesse (s/o John-2) Reavis/Revis ..no signature > Estate rec for his wife MaryCain REVIS > Elizabeth w/o James-2 listed as Elizabeth REAVES in her > father's will 1776 > There are others frm the REAVIS lines that changed spelling to > Revis or it just became that over the years, that of Isham-3, > some of John-2 family became Revis, on and on > > Seems all we have to base name on is documents where we > have actual signatures, and various county and court, and > census records where the name is spelled many ways. > > George-3 is listed as both Reavis and Revis..have no s/document > > Some documents in the book by David Reese, spellings are: > Inventory of est of Henry Roberts 1803 s/George REAVIS > Deed Book 5 Pg 323-324 James B. REVIS > Probate Proceedings Est of Thomas REAVIS 1852 > Madison Co NC > Inventory est of Thos REVIS > George REVIS > Wm REVIS > George F. REVIS > Robt REVIS > HenryREVIS > Benjamin REVIS > > Yet census rec in Bunc and Mad co list them as REVES, REAVIS, > REVIS, REVISE, REVICE, REVISS > > Harris and Henry REAVIS Rev War pens applications by MARK > > Of the family that were in Rutherford Co: James-2 & 3 died; > Isham and most of others went to Kentucky, William stayed, no > chn., and George-3..likely his land fell into Buncombe Co when > the co was created..and he and his family stayed there, many > there to this day..some of course went to SC, Ga and Al. Just > hard to say John E. does not belong to this family, he is in Bun- > combe Co by 1810 census..his father is supposed to be James, > s/o George-3, no documentation, only family history. > > We all started this research with notes of family history by Fenton > Goss Reavis, then his grandson Elmo Reavis began to gather data, > and finally the research and book by Marie Reavis; all of this in- > volved input by many family members. In addition now we have > the technology that is revealing daily more information. > > It would certainly be nice to have more data on the family of > George-3. I have just completed the research on his daughter > Mary and her husband John Johnson; we still lack data on > James, George, Jr (although I believe that is him in Buncombe > co aft 1806), and John who married Elizabeth Fowler (have been > unable to find anything on them, but they like Mary and Johnson > could have left the area. If John E was s/o James-4, perhaps > his father died by 1810 when we first have rec of John E, and that > is where John E obtained his land. Much research to be done yet > on John E.. > > I don't have any more answers, I don't know what Ed-2 surname > was before he changed it, if he did. The only answers for the > various spellings, is likely do to record keeping, phonetically; > but do know that of all the Revis and Reavis I have in my data- > base are connected to Edward-1; excluding the possibility that > John E. "may not be" but have seen nothing to discourage the > fact that he is g'son of George-3. But yet to be proved either > way. *Barb >