Thanks for responding. I've thought for quite a while that the accent was originally on the second syllable--which tends to refute the Reevis I frequently get--phonetically!
My biggest problem has been to choose between two ancestral candidates in Yorkshire about 1750. One was definitely Rivis--at least for the generation in question, and the other was Riviss or Reviss, eventually Reviss, then Revis.
I'm not sure even the ones who could sign their own names were always consistent.
Notify Administrator about this message?
|Home | Help | About Us | Site Index | Jobs | PRIVACY | Affiliate|
|© 2007 The Generations Network|