Starting Sept. 30, 2014, will be making a big change. GenForum message boards, Family Tree Maker homepages, and the most popular articles will be preserved in a read-only format, while several other features will no longer be available, including member subscriptions and the Shop.
Learn more

Chat | Daily Search | My GenForum | Community Standards | Terms of Service
Jump to Forum
Home: Surnames: Pendarvis Family Genealogy Forum

Post FollowupReturn to Message ListingsPrint Message

Re: James Pendarvis 1797
Posted by: Randy Floyd (ID *****2373) Date: April 30, 2002 at 19:27:14
In Reply to: Re: James Pendarvis 1797 by Randy Floyd of 638

oops, I wasn't finished.

The John Pendarvis mentioned in the previous post as a possible father for James Pendarvis presents an additional problem as his parentage is also unknown. Based on census records and the location of his lands I have temporarily placed him as the eldest son of Thomas Pendarvis (b1756) and thus brother and uncle (in my opinion) of the early Georgia/Florida Pendarvis settlers (Joseph, William, George, Richard L, James, and Mary Ann Pendarvis Burney). This Thomas Pendarvis (b1756) was the eldest son of Thomas Pendarvis and Hannah Hasfort and grandson of Joseph and Parthenia.

My second best guess for your James' father is the Thomas Pendarvis who was born around 1777-1780 and married twice. This Thomas was the father of Sarah Pendarvis Stokes (perhaps by Sarah Noble), and was the son of Joseph Pendarvis and Miss Strobel (probably Catherine). This Thomas' second wife was Elizabeth Rumph (who would have been James' mother if this Thomas is his father, marriage ca 1808). Joseph Pendarvis was the second son of Thomas Pendarvis and Hannah Hasfort and thus a grandson to Joseph and Parthenia. Elizabeth Rumph was the daughter of Jacob Rumph and Elizabeth Cooner, granddaughter of David Rumph and Mary Pendarvis, and great-granddaughter of Joseph and Parthenia Pendarvis.

Again, this is my best guess based on the available information. I've tried to place all Pendarvises, which eventually does lead to a reasonably sound process of elimination, etc. The process of elimination does not allow for illegitemacy or adoption, and is therefore not foolproof. Best of luck, Randy.

Notify Administrator about this message?

Post FollowupReturn to Message ListingsPrint Message
Search this forum:

Search all of GenForum:

Proximity matching
Add this forum to My GenForum Link to GenForum
Add Forum
Home |  Help |  About Us |  Site Index |  Jobs |  PRIVACY |  Affiliate
© 2007 The Generations Network