Hello To All on this list; This list's email is one I look forward to receiving. Thank you all. Mr. Bullock, You are not alone.... I have found in my search for the Dixon family that it seems that they DO indeed name their offspring after themselves or the grandparent, etc. The Dixon family has Nicholas, Thomas and Henry continuing to repeat through the lineage a while. Also the name Mourning continues to surface. So I know how you feel. Maybe life was so hard they didn't have time to dwell on names for very long. I have also seen an instance where if a child dies very soon after birth, the child born a year or so later will have the same first and middle name but they are reversed. (BJ then JB) I am very interested in your reference to Thomas Dixon. He is one of my ancestors. But that is about all I know. You give reference to a will of his in 1746. Do you have and/or can you share a copy of this will? Or, will you tell me how to get a copy? You make reference to Wills and Administration of IOW: 1647-1800 by Chapman. Is this something on line or that someone can print from so that I may have a copy? Let me know if this is possible and if there is a fee, where to send it. For All: Also It seems that some Dixon came from England in the 1618-1623 aboard a ship Margaret and John? Does this sound conceivable? Don't know anything else nor how to search for the ship. It isn't listed on the Immigrant Ships list. I'd also like to know when they left IOW, VA., and if they went anywhere before they landed in Edgecombe Co, NC. all the way to Putnam Co, GA. Here a Dixon daughter, Francis, married my GGGrandfather, Allen W. Lee. He is my brick wall. No record of where he came from. It is a dead end. But this is for another list. Forgive me. Enough questions for now I suppose, but any help is greatly appreciated. I apologize for the length. Thank you all very much, Betsy Bryan-Tinsley alternate email is epl34@yahoo.com VAISLEOF-D-request@rootsweb.com wrote: > Subject: > > VAISLEOF-D Digest Volume 01 : Issue 40 > > Today's Topics: > #1 [VAISLEOF-L] Research Obstacles [RBul1865@aol.com] > > Administrivia: > To view all Isle of Wight County Resources on Rootsweb, visit http://resources.rootsweb.com/USA/VA/IsleofWight/ > > ***** > > To unsubscribe from VAISLEOF-D, send a message to > > VAISLEOF-D-request@rootsweb.com > > that contains in the body of the message the command > > unsubscribe > > and no other text. No subject line is necessary, but if your software > requires one, just use unsubscribe in the subject, too. > > ______________________________ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: [VAISLEOF-L] Research Obstacles > Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 02:48:16 EST > From: RBul1865@aol.com > To: VAISLEOF-L@rootsweb.com > > Greetings to the Isle of Wight List: > > Am I the only one who feels like their ancestors wanted to give > them a challenge in their research. Some of the ways in which > this can be done is to give most of the sons in the family the > same given name (Joseph, say) and make sure that they take > wives having the same given name (Penelope, say). Then, it helps > to move in next door to folks who have almost the same surname > as yours, making sure that they witness all of your legal papers. > > With that introduction, let me say that I am researching the Bullock > family in Isle of Wight Co, VA, and that I find records as follows: > > Thomas Dixon made his will in 1746 in which he named wife > Penelope and daughter Penelope, the wife of Joseph Bullock. His > will was witnessed by a couple of Bullard neighbors, Henry and > Florence, who had a son Joseph Bullard, as will be mentioned below. > > John Garner made his will in 1761 in which he named daughter > Penelope Bullock, and he used good judgment in not asking > any of the Bullards to witness his will. > > I wish that I could say the same for Thomas Pinner, who in 1764 > named daughter Penelope Bullock (who else?) and grandson Joseph > Bullock, but he had his will witnessed by Joseph Bullard and Thomas > Dixon. > > This Thomas Dixon was apparently the grandson of the Thomas who > made his will in 1746, naming wife Penelope and daughter Penelope > Bullock, but never fear for this Thomas Dixon also had a wife > named Penelope. > > OK, maybe we are not in too bad a shape here, we have three > Penelope's - Dixon, Garner, and Pinner - and all we need to do is > match these up with Bullock men having wives named Penelope. > > First, we had the will of Joseph Bullock in 1750, who named wife > Penelope. His will was witnessed by William Howell, so we need to > see to whom he might have been related. Well, William Howell > turns out to be the brother of John Howell, who made his will in > 1732 in which he named daughter Penelope, so this appears to > be a promising start. However, it is back to the drawing board, > because when we look at the three witnesses to the will of > John Howell we see Thomas Dixon, who had wife Penelope and > daughter Penelope Bullock, who was indeed married to a Joseph > Bullock. However, we also have Thomas Pinner, who likewise had > a daughter named Penelope Bullock and a grandson named Joseph > Bullock, which makes us think that Penelope Pinner might also > have been married to a Joseph Bullock. > > Then, as to the third witness, Joseph Bullock, he must certainly have > been married to one of the three Penelope's whom we have mentioned - > Dixon, Garner, or Pinner - right? Maybe not, what about Penelope > Howell, the daughter named by father John in 1732? She might have > been about the only Penelope still available in Isle of Wight at that > time, so we had these three men at her house to witness the will of > her father, all of whom were later known to have wives and/or > daughters named Penelope, so which Penelope went where? > > Second, we had the filing of the estate account of another Joseph > Bullock in 1762, signed by wife Penelope. Third, we have the will of > William Bullock in 1786 in which he named wife Penelope, but she was > probably not a first wife, because we have a deed of 1737 signed by > William Bullock and Eleanor Bullock. Also, William Bullock named a > granddaughter as Eleanor Goodson, who had earlier in 1777 been > named as the daughter of Joseph Bullock, along with another > Penelope Bullock, of course. While the last wife of Joseph Bullock > in 1777 was named Prudence, that name was not found among his > seven daughters, which makes one think that she might have come > along after first wife Penelope had died. > > Let me now sum up with a review. I have Penelope Dixon married to > a Joseph Bullock, but I have three men named Joseph Bullock, with > wills of 1750, 1762, and 1777, two of whom certainly had wives > named Penelope, and I am suspicious about the third because of > his daughter Penelope. Then, I have William Bullock of 1786 who > had a Penelope wife, so somehow I need to decide which of these > four men were married to: Penelope Dixon, Penelope Garner, > Penelope Pinner, and Penelope Howell. Then, too, I have to decide > if one of these might actually have been married to Joseph Bullard, > as the Dixon, Howell, and Pinner families also had close associations > with the Bullards and Bullocks. Sure hope that I will not need to drop > Penelope Pinner, though, because I am very fond of that name. > > I have written this note in a rather light-hearted fashion, but > please believe me when I say that I take this research seriously, > so any information that would help me match up all of these men > named Joseph Bullock with the right Penelope would be greatly > appreciated, as well as help in separating the Bullocks and the > Bullards in Isle of Wight. > > >From what I have written, one might think that early isle of Wight > was overrun with women named Penelope, but this would be far > from correct. In addition to those mentioned above, it is highly > surprising that the Wills & Administrations of IOW: 1647-1800 > by Chapman lists only eight, falling into three groups: First, > there was Penelope Brown (b. 1715 or before, the daughter of > Samuel Brown). She married William Lawrence, and they had > daughter Penelope Lawrence (b. 1739 or before). It is my > conclusion that Penelope Lawrence married Jesse Watkins, > and they had daughter Penelope Watkins (b. 1757 or before). > > Second, there was a pair of Penelope's from the Neville family, > who are very interesting to me. John Neville had a daughter > Penelope (b. 1726 or before), and so did John Neville, Jr, whose > will of 1740 was witnessed by Thomas Bullock. Third, there was > another associated group of three, I believe, consisting of: > Penelope Turner (b. 1740 or before), wife of a Whitley whom I > have not yet identified; Miss or Mrs. Penelope Pope (b. 1760 or > before), who in 1782 witnessed the will of Edward Pope, whose > daughter was Sarah Bullock; and Penelope Pitt (b. 1760 or before), > the wife of Henry Pitt. It takes a bit longer to sketch out their > supposed connections, but anyone having an interest could drop > me a note. > > I hope to get all of this right yet, but I started out this note thinking > that I needed to place Penelope's named Dixon, Garner, and Pinner. > Now, I have added Howell and Neville to the list, but potentially there > is a need for all five to go with Joseph Bullock (3 of them), William > Bullock, and Thomas Bullock. Before closing, might I ask anyone who > knows of a Penelope in Isle of Wight before 1800, whom I have not > mentioned, to please drop me a note giving that information. Thanks > to those, if there be any, who have read along to the end of this note, > which turned out to be considerably longer than intended. > My best regards, Ron Bullock