Chat
|
Daily Search
|
My GenForum
|
Community Standards
|
Terms of Service
|
|
|
Dear Steve
I am very sorry if I offended you, or anyone else, that was not my intent. I have been researching the Cox/Cocks/Cockes lineage in Virginia and Maryland for almost 40 years. It has been a long haul with lots of frustration for many years.
I have documented and cited the data on my Cox/Cocks line of Charles City County, Prince George County and Surry County, Virginia, also Baltimore, Maryland. But, I have not as yet been able to positively link my line to the Cocks/Cockes lines of the same areas. I have some clues from the names, but can not as yet prove my ideas. The fact that the counties are burned counties has complicated matters greatly.
The errors I was refering to were shown in the lines describing Richard I and Richard II and their dates and spouses.
Please compare the data I posted.
I did indeed read your data posted on your website, and I assume it is the same as presented in the article. If it is, and these errors are included, that is why I said possible errors.
I am pleased that someone has finally found Richard Cockes Origins, and cited the research involved. It is interesting that you found the 1602 Richard as deceased & buried in England. Your data seems to be cited and supported. I did not mean to cast a shadow on everything, only the dates and the wives you had listed. I thought that was clear in my post.
For the titles that define Richards children, they come right from his will in 1665, the titles added refer to the land left to them and where they are known to have resided.
Sincerely,
Sharon Cox-Pulsipher
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: SteveRD1@aol.com
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 01:27:23 -0500
Subject: Your reference to "possible errors"
To: cassattfan@hotmail.com
Sharon:
I saw your postings (three of them) on Genforum (Nov. 14): CORRECTION!! Re:marriages Richard Cocke II 1639-1706 / Richard Cocke I 1602-1665.
In your postings, you referenced information from my research on the origins of Richard Cocke. Your exact wording was: "see new data --- by Steven Day --- on Richard Cocke Origins, posted in Cocke Genforum and published (possible errors) in Virginia Magazine of Genealogy August 2007 #3 issue".
I assume that you read my article. I would like to know what "possible errors" you are referring to. I was confused that you present much of my research as correcting past errors, but bring into question all of my work by not indicating why you say there are possible errors. Please elaborate. Are you indicating that you have found conflicting documents? Are you simply not convinced that my research is sound? I'm lost here.
I am also curious about the other information that you present. Where did you come up with the information or titles: William of "The Low Ground", John of "Old Man's Creek", and Richard of "Old Man's Creek"? I have not heard of these titles and would be interested in where the information comes from.
How long have you been researching the Cocke family?
Thanks for any informaiton that you can share.
Steve Day
Notify Administrator about this message?
Followups:
|
| http://genforum.genealogy.com/cocke/messages/930.html | ||
 |
Link to GenForum Add Forum |
|