Re: rowlette-worsham search
-
In reply to:
Re: rowlette-worsham search
Vicki Kutz Ivey 9/16/01
Hi Vicki,
So good to hear from you. I'm not sure I will be much help on your question but will tell what I know.
There is a lot of thought that the John Rowlett, born about 1705/1709 was married to a Goode. Many say her name was Mary and as many or more say it was Elizabeth.
It is for sure that there were some close connections and some marriages between Rowletts and Goodes. Peter Rowlett, the brother of John, had a granddaughter that married Samuel Goode. John named a son Mackness. Mackness is a name that is almost positively derived from Mackerness who was the wife of an earlier Goode.
At this time, I don't believe there has been found any record of a marriage of John Rowlett to a Goode. I also don't believe there has been any record of a direct connection of John to a Goode. I believe the rumor of his wife being a Goode is based on the name Mackness and also that the families lived near each other.
Now, please don't misunderstand me. I am not by any means saying John's wife was not a Goode. I don't know. I do know that this has been stated as being a fact for so long that it has been readily accepted.
To me, this creates problems. An example is a book that was printed in the 30s or 40s. In this book, the author combined the families of two Wm. Rowletts, who were third cousins, into one family. The two Wms. left Va. and took two different routes to end up in or near Memphis, Tn.
My Wm. went to Owen Co., Ky. and later died in Memphis. His Wm. went through southern Tn. into Ms. and died there. Some children from each family were combined into one family. This has caused much confusion over the years.
Again, please don't misunderstand me. I am not, by any means, running down the work of the gentleman who wrote the book. To the contrary, I applaud his work. When he did his work, travel and communication was not as easy as it is today. Lots of his work was done through writing letters with other Rowletts. At that time, his deductions looked obviously true. Names were the same, ages fit, locations were in the same area. His work, as the work of many others, has made it easier for others later on to make corrections and add to.
Now, back to the Rowlett/Goode connections. At this point, I am more inclined to think the Goode connection may be with the Peter Rowlett who was the brother of John.He named a son Phillip which was a Goode/Jones name. This name was used several times in this family. And, his granddaughter married Samuel Goode. Peter's wife was named Elizabeth, maiden name unknown. I think there is also a good chance that Wm. Rowlett and Frances Worsham had other children, not known, and this could be where the Goode connection is.
At this time, I believe I know who John's wife was and that is why I don't believe she was a Goode. I think also that I may be the only one to think this way. Hopefully, someone will come up with definite proof some day.
I think the marriage date that you have may be based on the probable age of John and probable ages of his children. I haven't heard anything about speculation of a death date before what you wrote.
I know this is not much help, but I do hope it doesn't make it more confusing. I wish I could answer with more facts because I have a lot of questions myself. Most of the answers are out there but lots haven't been dug up yet.
If I can be of futher help, please don't hesitate to let me know.
Tom
More Replies:
-
Re: Rowlette / Owen Co., KY.
Frederick Lager 12/30/01
-
Re: Rowlette / Owen Co., KY.
Tom Rowlett 12/30/01
-
Re: Rowlette / Owen Co., KY.
-
Re: rowlette-worsham search
Vicki Kutz Ivey 9/17/01
-
Re: rowlette-worsham search, attn Tom Rowlett
Vicki Kutz Ivey 11/10/01
-
Re: rowlette-worsham search, attn Tom Rowlett