RHEA-L Archives

Archiver > RHEA > 2001-05 > 0990248686


From: Norma Lewis <>
Subject: [RHEA] Re: RHEA-D Digest V01 #66
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 22:04:46 -0700
In-Reply-To: <200105190427.f4J4RoQ03893@lists5.rootsweb.com>



>Ed: You have told me this before on the Augusta County List. I just keep
>forgetting. I have so many names in my head they are beating my brain! The
>story I typed from the Koiner History has never been proven, it is just
>data that is out there. Ed is right. If you keep furnishing errors they
>are apt to stick in somebody's research, but the Koiner story should be
>saved as folklore, not necessarily true data. Although most of the data is
>correct about Martin Luther Coyner and his sons. For this reason, I
>believe this data was furnished by a family member, a grandson I think,
>who was told these stories by other family members, and it is likely some
>of it was embellished. Has anyone ever tied the Binghamtons to NY?

Gee, I'm impressed you corresponded with the real Duke of Argyle. Is he a
genealogist? I've heard from many Scot families that every Scot would have
liked to be related to that family. Let us not forget Lord Baltimore who
was an "infant de amour" or a love child of one of the King Charles
mistresses, which is how he became a "Lord" and got all that land that
became Maryland. They don't flinch over bastards in Europe, it was a way of
life. Not to offend any sensitive readers, but this is true.

Norma

>Just to refresh everyone's records about the Matthew Rhea connection to the
>Campbells. I have corresponded with the current Duke of Argyle on this
>subject. Matthew Rhea is not a descendant of the Marquis of Argyle or the
>Dukes of Argyle as was reported earlier in writings in the 1900's. (Unless,
>as the secretary of the Duke noted, Matthew was an unrecorded bastard - lets
>assume not.) The name Matthew does not appear in this family of Campbells -
>but is however commonly used by Campbells of Skipness.
>
>ED FOLEY

This thread: