You're welcome Marsha.   I shared the Washington Post article as it shows the connection between John Marshall "of the forest" and Chief Justice John Marshall (i.e., this helps answer who "John Marshall of the forest" is). Keep in mind that the author of that article thought "of the forest" was a pejorative term.  I completely disagree with that opinion as it is clear "of the forest" was merely descriptive of the area where John Marshall "of the forest" actually lived.   Since there are so many space limitations on this List, it is impossible for me to delve into this with any specificity other than to refer you back to Mike Marshall's site (I shared that link in the previous message).   If you study Mike's carefully researched information, you will see that the area where John Marshall "of the forest" owned land was actually called "The Forest" at one time in the earlier records.    Overall, I wouldn't get too caught up with this term "of the forest."  It was descriptive and not pejorative at all.   The important take-away is that John Marshall "of the forest" was the son of Thomas Marshall and Martha Sherwood and that he was the grandfather of Chief Justice John Marshall.   Thanks. David ________________________________ From: marsha moses <mosesm@earthlink.net> To: DAVID BROWN <dbrown544@prodigy.net> Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2012 9:11 PM Subject: Re: [VA-NORTHERN-NECK] Marshall Thank you, David for taking the time to respond to my question. I am getting a much better understanding of this family....it was very helpful to explain that "of the forest" was descriptive of not being "of a more prosperous plantation".  Thank you for your help.  marsha moses On Nov 24, 2012, at 2:48 PM, DAVID BROWN <dbrown544@prodigy.net> wrote: > http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/longterm/books/chap1/johnmarshall.htm  John Marshall's parents were typical of many young couples in colonial America. His paternal ancestors were Welsh artisans who came to Virginia sometime in the late seventeenth or early eighteenth century. His father was the son of another John Marshall, a small planter who struggled to make a living on two hundred acres of low, marshy land cut from the wilderness along a minor tributary of the Potomac. That John Marshall was known to his prosperous neighbors as "John of the forest," a pejorative term used by tidewater aristocracy to describe someone less affluent who lived in the woods.(9) In In 1722 he married Elizabeth Markham, the younger daughter of a prosperous merchant from Alexandria, Virginia,(10) and together they had six children, Thomas being the eldest. Nothing definite is known about the parents of "John of the forest," and all efforts to chart the chief justice's paternal heritage beyond the second generation have ended in genealogical > quicksand. Marshall himself never traced his parentage beyond his grandfather.(11)

David and all, Posts go through automatically up to 25kb which is quite a lot of space to say something and say it well. If it goes over that, it comes to me for my attention for approval. If it is just over that limit, I'll send it on. If it way over that limit, I reject with the note to trim it down. This most happens when people are not deleting entire chains of messages that preceded it, or otherwise not deleting the irrelevant posts of the original message to which they are responding. I again remind people that the best thing to do is keep your messages to ONE topic and not jumble up your point by talking about umpteen different families or subjects all at one time. People's eyes will usually glaze over. I have the limit at 25kb for that reason (among others.) And while I'm at it (I may as well make this a monthly reminder): 1. If you change the subject, CHANGE THE SUBJECT LINE. If something started off as, say, JOHN SMITH OF LANCASTER, d 1700 and John Smith's daughter married TINY TIM, and you want to talk about the TIM family, but want to reply to the JOHN SMITH OF LANCASTER message, change the subject line to TINY TIM & MARY SMITH or whatever. 2. PLEASE, when reply to a message, cut out EVERYTHING that is NOT relevant to your particular reply. Those of our members who are on Digest mode end up having to wade through the same messages over and over and over. And there are MANY of our subscribers who are on Digest mode. (If you don't know what Digest mode is, that is when you only get an email every so often, instead of one at a time. Every message that was submitted since the last digest is the next one. 3. For those of you on Digest mode. If you hit reply from any of the messages you will end up sending the entire digest with it. Worse, your subject line will only read "Volume X, No. #" Just copy the particular message you want to reply to, start a NEW email to this list and give it a new NAME (or even type in Re: Name of Original Subject) and paste in the part of the message you want to reply to, and add your own comments at the top of it. There, done with monthly reminds on this topic. Craig On Nov 25, 2012, at 12:49 AM, DAVID BROWN wrote: > Since there are so many space limitations on this List, it is impossible for me to delve into this with any specificity other than to refer you back to Mike Marshall's site (I shared that link in the previous message).