no image
Privacy Level: Open (White)

William Holloway (abt. 1675 - bef. 1746)

William Holloway
Born about in Virginiamap [uncertain]
Son of and [mother unknown]
Brother of
Husband of — married about 1700 in King and Queen County, Virginiamap [uncertain]
Descendants descendants
Died before before about age 71 in Spotsylvania County, Virginiamap
Profile last modified | Created 27 Jan 2017
This page has been accessed 2,144 times.
US Southern Colonies.
William Holloway resided in the Southern Colonies in North America before 1776.
Join: US Southern Colonies Project
Discuss: southern_colonies

Contents

Project Protected Profile Status

This profile has been given 'protected' status primarily due to historical confusion between this William Holloway and a man with a similar surname - William Holladay. See below for additional details.

Biography

William Holloway was born about 1675 in Virginia. His parents remain unproven.

We know that William was a landowner by 1704 in King and Queen County, Virginia. But we also have several other records showing he owned land in King William Co. before finally settling in Spotsylvania Co. It is entirely possible that county boundary changes over the years suggest more movement than actually took place. But when he died, William was living in the the SE part of Spotsylvania Co., just south of today's Fredericksburg. He owned at least 900 acres there and still held some land in King William Co. when he died.

Heavy record losses (fires, wars, etc.) have affected the material available for research.

William's will and subsequent probate records tell us that his wife was Ann. But her maiden name remains unknown. Their six children, shown here, were all named in his will. There could have been others.

William wrote his will in December 1744 and it was accepted for probate on 3 June 1746.

Will of William Holloway

Spotsylvania County, Virginia Will Book A, pp. 431-433, FHL Film #7645804, Images 391-392
4 December 1744
In the name of God Amen, I William Holloway of the Parish of St. George and County of Spotsylvania in the Colony of Virginia being of perfect sense & memory Do make this my last will and testament in manner following.
Imprimis I give and bequeath to my beloved wife Ann Holloway three negroes named Jack/ a man/ and Nann and Jonny/ woman to her and her heirs forever also one negro girl named Milly to her and her heirs forever.
Item I give to my son John two negro men named Tony and Will to him and his heirs forever.
Item I give to my son Charles two negroes one named Robin a man and the other named Moll a girl to him and his heirs forever.
I give to my son George a negro man called Harry and a negro boy called Toboy to him and his heirs forever.
Item I give to my son Robert a negro man named Sam to him and his heirs forever also a negro girl named Bette to him and his heirs forever also a negro woman named Sarah to him and his heirs forever.
Item I give to my daughter Elizabeth the wife of Thomas Dillard a negro girl named Judey to her and her heirs forever.
Item I give to my grandson John Robinson a negro man named Peter to him and his heirs forever.
Item I give unto my grandson William Holloway the son of Robert Holloway all my land in King William County to him and his heirs forever.
Item I give the one half of my land in Spotsylvania County unto my loving wife for and during her natural life including the plantation and after her decease I give the same land unto my grandson John Robinson to him and his heirs forever.
Item I give the remainder of my land in Spotsylvania County unto my grandson William Holloway the son of John Holloway to him and his heirs forever.
Item I give unto my daughter Ann the wife of John Robinson a cow and calf to her and her heirs forever.
Item I give all the rest of my estate be it of what nature or quality soever to be equally divided amongst my wife and all my children. And of this my last will and testament I do constitute and appoint my sons Charles and Robert whole and sole executors, confirming this to be my last will and revoking all other wills by me made in testimony of which I have hereunto set my hand and seal this fourth day of December 1744. [Signed] William X his mark Holloway

Sealed, published, and declared in the presence of us Wm Waller, Matthew Gayle, Henry Rogers.
At a Court held for Spotsylvania County on Tuesday May (??) the Sixth 1746, This will was proved in Court by the oaths of Matthew Gayle & Henry Rogers two of the Witnesses to the said Will and Charles Holloway one of the Executors appeared in Court and refused the Executorship of the same. [Signed] Edmund Waller.
At a Court held for Spotsylvania County on Tuesday June the Third 1746 This Will was sworn to in Court by Charles and Robert Holloway Executors therein named and was further proved by the Oath of William Waller, Gent. & ordered to be recorded. [Signed] Edmund Waller.

Confusion with William Holladay

On 22 September 2021, this profile was merged with the profile of William Holladay (Holladay-399). In the meantime, a relatively significant error has been uncovered in the genealogical records for William Holloway/Holladay of Spotsylvania Co. An abstract of William’s will, published in 1978, mistakenly used the surname Holladay instead of Holloway (William Armstrong Crozier, Virginia County Records: Spotsylvania County, 1721 – 1800. Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing, 1978, p. 8). A link to Crozier's abstract is provided below.

William’s original will (transcribed above) very clearly uses the surname Holloway throughout the text. A nearly identical transcription of the will, using Holloway as the surname, was published in 1993 in the book "Back to old Virginia" referenced below (not thought to be available on-line). All of the subsequent probate records (and there are several) use the surname Holloway. All of William’s children used the surname Holloway. While the apparent error by Mr. Crozier is mystifying, his abstract has become a source of confusion between these two distinctly different families for the past 40+ years. There are thousands of on-line websites and public trees constructed around Crozier's obvious error.

As further confirmation, consider the following:
William Holloway and William Holladay were both residents of the same parish, in the same county, in 1743. On 2 August 1743, William Holladay, with wife Judey, sold 200 acres of land in Spotsylvania Co., formerly part of a patent to Thomas Sertain which was conveyed to John Holloday, father of William Holladay, 6 November 1739 (Spotsylvania County, Virginia Deed Book D, p. 75). The 1742 will of John Holladay devised the same identical land, formerly Thomas Certain's, to his son, William (Spotsylvania County, Virginia Will Book A, p. 346). Therefore, we have conclusive evidence that the two men, one married to Ann and the other to Judey, were in the same place at the same time but were obviously not the same men.

Holloway DNA Project

There is a Holloway DNA Project at Family Tree DNA.

Sources

  • Virginia Land Office Patents No. 11, p. 24; 17 August 1720, land patent to Elias Downs of St. John's Parish in King William Co., 400 acres in St. Mary's Parish of Essex Co., adjoining William Holloway and John Holloway, beginning at 2 corner hickories, corner to William Holliway and thence S71E 160 poles to 3 hickory saplins, thence S19W 400 poles crossing 2 branches of Nussaponock Swamp between a red and white oak in the head of a valley, thence N71W 160 poles to 2 white oaks corner to John Holliway, thence N19E 400 poles crossing at a fork of a branch of Nussaponax Swamp and with both of the Holliway lines to the beginning.
  • Virginia Land Office Patents No. 12, p. 489; 30 June 1726, Spotsylvania Co. land patent for William Holliway of St. Stephen's Parish in King and Queen Co., 650 acres in St. George's Parish in Spotsylvania Co. , on south side of Nussaponnock Swamp, beginning at 2 hickories standing on the upper side of a branch of said swamp, thence N75W 160 poles to 2 red oaks, thence N15E 200 poles to white oak, thence S75E 320 poles crossing a branch of said swamp to 2 water oaks, S15W 450 poles crossing a branch of Nussaponnock to 2 white oaks, thence N71W 160 poles to white oak and black oak, thence N19E 250 poles to beginning.
  • Virginia Land Office Patents No. 13, p. 191; 13 October 1727, Spotsylvania Co. land patent for Ambrose Grayson, 1000 acres corner to William Holloway and adjoining a patent to Warner, beginning at 3 red oaks corner to William Holloway thence N60W 240 poles to hickory and red oak thence S60W 110 poles to spanish oak and white oak and red oak in a line of the patent granted to Warner, thence with his line S58E 72 poles to his corner red oak and hickory thence SEXS 640 poles to 3 white oaks in Warner's line, thence N10E 502 poles to hickory and red oak in Holloway's line and with his line N75W 200 poles to beginning.
  • Virginia Land Office Patents No. 13, p. 168; 13 October 1727, Spotsylvania Co. land patent for Richard Cheek of St. George's Parish, 1000 acres beginning at hickory corner of Chicheley Corbin Thacker and Catesby Cocke, thence with Cocke's line SEXS 222 poles to 2 white oaks by a branch of Nussaponnock Run, thence S48W 47 poles to red oak corner to William Holliway thence with his line N75W 200 poles to white oak, thence N15W 160 poles to 3 red oaks, thence N60W 540 poles to 4 black oaks, thence N30E 220 poles to 2 red oaks in John Quarles line, thence with his line S60E 210 poles to red oak corner to Mr. Thacker & Quarles, thence with Mr. Thacker's several lines to beginning.
  • Virginia Land Office Patents No. 13, p. 305; 28 September 1728, Spotsylvania Co. land patent for William Johnson, 850 acres on north side of Lewis River in St. George's Parish, beginning at 3 small corner red oak saplins and gum at John Martin's standing in Lewis' line in Low grounds on SW side of a Run, thence along said Lewis' line NWXW 140 poles to 2 corner white oaks and hickory of said Lewis on a hill thence along another line of Lewis NW 320 poles to corner hickory and white oak of said Lewis on a Levell, thence keeping on a Leavell thence N36E 244 poles to black oak and white oak in William Holloway's line thence along Holloway's line S70E 164 poles to a small white oak by a valley a corner of Elias Downs thence along his line N25E 160 poles to 2 white oak, 2 red oaks and hickory in Downs' line on a hill thence S16E 500 poles to stake in John Martin's upper line then along his line S66W 132 to beginning.
  • Pawlett, Nathaniel Mason. 2005. Spotsylvania County Virginia road orders, 1722-1734. Westminster, Md: Willow Bend; 7 August 1728, On petition of Mr. Richard Cheek for a road to Capt. Larkin Chew's mill by Lewis Bridge &c. is granted and ordered that William Hansford Gent. and John Snell do view the said road and see if it is necessary and if so then to lay out the same the most convenient way and make their report at the next court. On Sept. 4, 1728, William Hansford and John Snell reported that they find the way is necessary and accordingly have marked and laid it out. Therefore ordered that Richard Cheek be overseer and that all male labouring titheables that belong to Elias Downs, William Holloway, quarter, John Turner, Samuell Collins, Thomas Collins, Stephen Bickham, William Bickham and William Moore to help him clear the same.
  • Ruth and Sam Sparacio, Spotsylvania County, Virginia Order Books 1724 – 1730, Part IV, p. 28, 37, 56, 67, 83, 84, 85, 88; 3 December 1729 to 7 October 1730, Order Books contain several references to a trespass case between William Holloway and Edward Price. Several other cases also recorded between James Holloway and Edward Price, also for trespass.
  • Spotsylvania County, Virginia Deed Book B, p. 6-9, 10 December 1729, Ambrose Grayson of St. George's Parish to Henry Rogers, 100 acres being part of a patent to Grayson in 1727, beginning at 3 red oaks corner to William Hollaway, thence N60W 50 poles to white and red oak in Grayson's line, thence S50W 73 poles to hickory, thence S20E 120 poles to white oak and 2 red oaks thence N67E 200 poles to 2 hickories and white oak in Hollaway's line and with Holloway's line to beginning.
  • Virginia Land Office Patents No. 14, p. 521; 28 September 1732, Spotsylvania Co. land patent for William Hollaway of King and Queen Co., for the importation of five persons: Johannes Martin, Margaret Halsnow, Henry Halsnow, John Halsnow, Maria Katherina Martin, 250 acres in St. George's Parish on south side of Nassoponax on the head branch thereof, beginning at 2 hickories and red oak thence N71W 160 poles to 2 hickories on a stony hill side thence S19W 250 poles to 2 white oak and black oak thence S71E 160 poles to 2 white oaks thence N19E 250 poles to beginning.
  • Ruth and Sam Sparacio, Spotsylvania County, Virginia Order Book, 1735 – 1737, p. 77; OB p. 507, 2 Aug. 1737, - Peter, a Negro boy belonging to William Holloway, was this day adjudged to nine years of age towards payment, of levys.
  • Ruth and Sam Sparacio, Spotsylvania County, Virginia Order Book, 1740 – 1742, p. 21, OB p. 116, 3 Mar. 1740/41, On the Petition of Henry Rogers and others to have Liberty to clear a Road the way the Path now leads into the Main Road from the first branch on this side Matthew Gayles's on the Land of William Holloway thro his said land & others to the Main Road, it is Ordered that Ambrose Grayson Gent., and Matthew Gayle do view and lay out the most convenientest way and make return of their proceedings therein to the next Court.
  • Ruth and Sam Sparacio, Spotsylvania County, Virginia Order Book, 1740 – 1742, p. 26, OB p. 120; 7 Apr. 1741, Henry Rogers and several others having petitioned for a Road to be cleared from the first Branch on this side Matthew Gayle's on the Land of William Holloway thro his said Land and others to the Main Road, the Veiwers appointed the last Court to veiw the same made return as follows, In Obedience to the within order wee find that the way the Path now leads to be the levelest and best way; Ambrose Grayson. Matthew Gayle, It is therefore ordered that they have Liberty to clear the same as the Viewers have reported it.
  • Dillard, Carlton M. 1993. Back to old Virginia with Dillard, Daniel, and kin: showing relationship with Bruce, Cunningham, Ellington, Ewing, Slaton, Thomson, and Wright families. Baltimore: Gateway Press, p. 34; includes an accurate transcription of William's will.
  • Spotsylvania County, Virginia Order Books, 1738-1754, FHL Film 8153251; OB 1738-1749, p. 379, Image 225; 3 June 1746, Ann Holloway widow of William Holloway Deced Came into Court and renounced all her right to the Legacies bequeathed her in her husband's will and insists on her Thirds allowed her by Law and it is ordered that William McWilliams, John Parrish, Matthew Gayle and Philip Vincent Vass or any three of them when they have appraised the said Deced Estate do Set Apart her Thirds from the Other Estate.
  • Caroline County, Virginia Court Orders, FHL Film 7644356, Order Book 1746-1754, p. 158-159, Image 164-165; 9 June 1749, George Holloway &c vs. Charles Holloway &c; Chancery; And Now at this Day being the day Appointed for hearing this Suit, the Substance of the Bill and the Defts Answer being opened by Counsel learned in ye Law on both sides and the Matter thereof Solemnly debated on hearing what could be alleged by each party, it is ye Opinion of the Court that the Legatees prejudiced by ye Widow's renunciation ought to be recompensed out of ye residuary Estate and also that ye two Negroes, Jack and Nan, are ye residuary Estate, and ye Negro girl Milly was ye Estate of Robt. Holloway decd, and it is referred to James Taylor John Baylor and Archibald McPherson, or any two of them, to take on ye account of the Values of ye Several Slaves respectively and that they also state & Settle an Account of the Admn, of ye Estate of ye Testator and report all Matters Special to ye Court in Order for a final decree.
  • Spotsylvania County, Virginia Order Books, 1738-1754, FHL Film 8153251; OB 1738-1749, p. 356, Image 214; 4 February 1745, The Last will and Testament of William Holloway, Deced, being produced in Court it is Ordered that John Holloway the heir at Law be summoned to the next Court according to Law.
  • Spotsylvania County, Virginia Order Books, 1738-1754, FHL Film 8153251; OB 1738-1749, p. 374, Image 223; 6 May 1746, The Last will and Testament of William Holloway, Deced, being produced in Court, John Holloway the heir at Law appeared & saith he has no objection to offer against the proving of the said will in relation to the Lands Devised in the said Will, then the same was proved by the Oaths of Matthew Gayle & Henry Rogers two of the Witnesses thereto and ordered to be recorded, and Charles Holloway one of the Executors to the said Will appeared & refused the Executorship thereof and it is ordered that Robert Holloway the other Executor be Summoned to Answer the next Court whether he will accept of the Executorship &c.
  • Spotsylvania County, Virginia Order Books, 1738-1754, FHL Film 8153251; OB 1738-1749, p. 378, Image 225; 3 June 1746, Charles and Robert Holloway Executors of the Last will and testament of William Holloway, Deced, Came into Court & Accepted the Executorship of the said Will and took the Oath as the Law Directs and Entered into bond with Archibald McPherson & Edward Herndon their Securities & acknowledged the same in Court, Certificate thereupon in due form of Law is Granted them for obtaining Letters of Probate and it is Ordered that William McWilliams, John Parrish, Matthew Gayle and Philip Vincent Vass or any three of them being first sworn before some Magistrate of this County do Appraise all the Estate of the said Deced as shall be Shown them by the said Executors and return their Proceedings therein to the next Court.
  • Spotsylvania County, Virginia Order Books, 1738-1754, FHL Film 8153251; OB 1738-1749, p. 379, Image 225; 3 June 1746, Ann Holloway widow of William Holloway Deced Came into Court and renounced all her right to the Legacies bequeathed her in her husband's will and insists on her Thirds allowed her by Law and it is ordered that William McWilliams, John Parrish, Matthew Gayle and Philip Vincent Vass or any three of them when they have appraised the said Deced Estate do Set Apart her Thirds from the Other Estate.
  • Caroline County, Virginia Court Orders, FHL Film 7644356, Order Book 1746-1754, p. 158-159, Image 164-165; 9 June 1749, George Holloway &c vs. Charles Holloway &c; Chancery; And Now at this Day being the day Appointed for hearing this Suit, the Substance of the Bill and the Defts Answer being opened by Counsel learned in ye Law on both sides and the Matter thereof Solemnly debated on hearing what could be alleged by each party, it is ye Opinion of the Court that the Legatees prejudiced by ye Widow's renunciation ought to be recompensed out of ye residuary Estate and also that ye two Negroes, Jack and Nan, are ye residuary Estate, and ye Negro girl Milly was ye Estate of Robt. Holloway decd, and it is referred to James Taylor John Baylor and Archibald McPherson, or any two of them, to take on ye account of the Values of ye Several Slaves respectively and that they also state & Settle an Account of the Admn, of ye Estate of ye Testator and report all Matters Special to ye Court in Order for a final decree.
  • Spotsylvania County Order Book, 1746 – 1748, p. 393; 7 Oct. 1746, - On Petition of William Holloway, Son of John Holloway, to have liberty to chuse him Guardian, he being of Lawfull age, the same is granted and he having chused his said Father his Guardian who came into Court and gave Bond and secrity according to Law.
  • Caroline County, Virginia Order Book, 1750 - 1752, p. 252; 10 May 1751, Ann Holloway's bond to John Holloway was proved by Saml. Piccard, Henry Newton and William Holloway. (Note: Ann Holloway was John Holloway's mother. Because John was guardian of his son William and his inheritance, Ann had issued a bond to John securing young William's inheritance from his grandfather. The proving of this bond in court signifies that William the heir had come of age and was taking direct ownership of his inheritance, namely, half of his grandfather's plantation in Spotsylvania County. This court action of 10 May 1751 implies that William the heir was born before 10 May 1730.)
  • Dorman, Caroline County, Virginia Order Book 1746 – 1754, Part Three, 1750 – 1752, p, 92, OB p. 243; 21 Sep. 1752, An account of the estate of William Holloway returned.
  • Felder, Paula S. 1983. Forgotten companions: the first settlers of Spotsylvania County and Fredericksburgh town (with notes on early land use). Fredericksburg, Va: Historic Publications of Fredericksburg. Nussaponnack Run is now called Massaponax Creek. It is in the vicinity of today's Routes 208 (Courthouse Road) and 639 (Leavells Road or Mine Road) near Fredericksburg, VA.




Sponsored Search by Ancestry.com

DNA Connections
It may be possible to confirm family relationships with William by comparing test results with other carriers of his Y-chromosome or his mother's mitochondrial DNA. Y-chromosome DNA test-takers in his direct paternal line on WikiTree: It is likely that these autosomal DNA test-takers will share some percentage of DNA with William:

Have you taken a DNA test? If so, login to add it. If not, see our friends at Ancestry DNA.



Comments: 35

Leave a message for others who see this profile.
There are no comments yet.
Login to post a comment.
All, over the past several days efforts have been underway to create/improve the profiles for William's children. Some work has also been done to the profile for William, himself. But there are two significant changes needed and I want to give all a chance to comment before I initiate those.

1. William's profile was merged with the profile of William Holladay previously. That was most likely done based on a will abstract published by William Armstrong Crozier in 1978, in which he inexplicably used the surname Holladay instead of Holloway. Examination of the original will (in Spotsylvania County Will Book A, p. 431-433) confirms the error - that record and subsequent probate records use the surname Holloway. Holladay and Holloway were two distinctly different families living in Spotsylvania Co. at the same time. So we need to clean this up.

2. William was definitely married to Ann/Anne but there is no evidence provided, in the profiles for William or Ann, or elsewhere for that matter, that Ann, the wife of WIliam Holloway, was born a Waller. I think she (Ann Waller) entered the picture when the Holladay/Holloway merge transpired. Unless someone can provide evidence that Ann Waller was William's wife, I propose that she be disconnected from William and replaced with a new profile for "Ann/Anne (Unknown) Holloway".

I would appreciate any comments, pro or con, on these two major changes.

Thank you, Jim

posted by Jim McGuire Jr.
Yesterday, Scott McClain graciously added me to the Trusted List for this profile. I think several changes are needed. Starting with the first:

Existing text already references some of William's children, yet no profiles either exist or are connected: Robert, Charles and George. I would like to create profiles for those 3 sons and remove their text from William's profile. I don't think those changes are too controversial but apparently being on the Trusted List does not allow me to make the changes???

What do I need to do to make these changes?

Thank you. Jim McGuire

posted by Jim McGuire Jr.
I have added you as a profile manager - you should be able to make the changes now.
posted by Scott McClain
I forgot to mention something. I'm not just poking fingers here. I'm willing to help improve the profile. My addition to the Trusted List, or as a profile manager, would greatly facilitate that.
posted by Jim McGuire Jr.
As a protected profile, it seems a little more effort needs to be applied to its content. A few examples:

No DOB is provided, although he reportedly married in 1680. Text indicates he was born c1675/80 in one place and 1672 in another. Then the profile appears to conflate William Holloway and William Holloday, whose DOB is reported as mid-1650's. Something's not right here.

If Crozier made an error in conflating Holloway and Holloday, as is implied in the profile, maybe the previous merge with Holloday needs to be re-considered.

One version of the will has Walton as a witness; the other version says it was William Waller. Which was it? If it was Walton, there is more evidence that Holloday should not be conflated with Holloway.

I might also point out that William's daughter, Ann Holloway Robinson, was reportedly born c1675, potentially the same approximate date as her father?? And she appears to have married a man some 30-40 years older than her father. Most likely her profile has incorrectly linked her with the wrong John Robinson (there were MANY men with that name at the time).

posted by Jim McGuire Jr.
Holloway-2922 and Holladay-399 appear to represent the same person because: they appear to be duplicates. Do NOT reject this merge again without first discussing in the comments section. If you don't believe they are duplicates, post your reasoning and sources so a determination can be made. Thank you.
posted on Holladay-399 (merged) by Darlene (Athey) Athey-Hill
It's been a while since I first looked into these profiles.

Ian - I think you're the most "up" on them at this point... Your notes on Thomas's profile don't mention a son William (Thomas being attached as father of the Holladay profile).

And following through the Unknown Holloway attached as father of Holloway-2922 to the grandfather Charles Holloway-1958... his profile lists children, none of whom is Thomas.

So.... I think perhaps rejecting the merge was the right thing to do.

One of my comments was that there are separate Holladay and Holloway families in the area, and now I can't find what prompted me to say that. (If I don't post to a profile, it seems I can never find my notes again!)

I'll post a note on the other profile to discuss here.

Cheers, Liz

posted on Holladay-399 (merged) by Liz (Noland) Shifflett
edited by Liz (Noland) Shifflett
Holladay-399 and Holloway-2922 do not represent the same person because: Let's keep it with the correct name: Holloway
posted by Mark Royston
Hi Mark, so just clarify, would it be acceptable to you if we merge the two profiles and keep the last name as "Holloway"?

When the merge is completed, we get to choose which last name to use and, based on the sources cited in this profile, "Holloway" appears to be a better choice than "Holladay".

Ian

posted by I. Speed
Since Holloway has PPP, the duplicates can only be merged into Holloway without asking me (or another leader) to remove the PPP. Is there a reason that Holladay and Holloway shouldn't be merged, i.e. are they NOT duplicates? If they aren't duplicates, then please don't reject the merge again. And please don't reject it again without first discussing it so that project members can have input.
Holladay-399 and Holloway-2922 appear to represent the same person because: appear to be duplicates.
Hi Profile Manager,

Is it OK if I complete the approved merge for Holloway-2922 and Holladay-162 with (1) "Holloway" as his Last Name at Birth, (2) Unknown Holloway (Holloway-2946) as his father, and (3) no mother connected to his profile? Thanks!

Ian

posted on Holladay-162 (merged) by I. Speed
Hi Profile Managers,

Is it OK if I complete the approved merge for Holloway-2922 and Holladay-162 with (1) "Holloway" as his Last Name at Birth, (2) Unknown Holloway (Holloway-2946) as his father, and (3) no mother connected to his profile? Thanks!

Ian

posted by I. Speed
Thanks for asking! When I locked the profile, I added a comment that it was to preserve the Holloway spelling, so that's a yes for (1). I don't remember whether or not I researched his parents:
posted by Liz (Noland) Shifflett
looking closer, (2) is a yes also. The merge with Holladay-399 was rejected (and that profile's attached to Thomas & Mary). The Research Notes for this profile say that there are Holladay and Holloway families in the area. Since this profile is Holloway, not Holladay, then keep the Unknown Holloway father/no mother in the merge.
posted by Liz (Noland) Shifflett
Ian - Looking at the merges again... I think maybe the Holloway-2922 & Holladay-162 merge needs to be rejected and a Holladay-162 and Holladay-399 merge proposed, since they're both attached to a wife with a maiden name and this Holloway's wife is Unknown-353290. Chris Brady seems the most active in the Holladay family.
posted by Liz (Noland) Shifflett
Hi Ian, I did not realize there had been any messages on the profiles. You are absolutely correct with all three of your questions. Thank you for taking it on as there is a lot of well researched information in this profile that really should be attached to other members of the family. Holloday-399 is also a duplicate of this same man.
posted by Chris Brady
Thanks Chris. I will wait to see if Liz or anyone else has any other comments, otherwise I will go ahead and complete the merge with "Holloway" as the LNAB.

Ian

posted by I. Speed
Ian & Chris,

I posted a reply to Darlene's comment on Holladay-399 - https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Holladay-399#comment_5775966

I've looked over this profile & Holladay-399 & the profiles attached as their fathers (and "Unknown"'s father Charles) & think that perhaps the William with Thomas as father is not intended to represent the same person as this William. But as I mentioned there, it has been a while since I looked closely at this family.

posted by Liz (Noland) Shifflett
While it is unsourced, the death date & location indicate this profile is for Robert - the son of William and Ann. This profile should be attached as a child of this couple.

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Holloway-3337

posted by Chris Brady
Holladay-162 and Holloway-2922 appear to represent the same person because: These are the same person. Holloway is the correct LNAB as indicated by his will.
posted by Chris Brady
Hi US Southern Colonies Project/Profile Managers: I have locked this profile (added PPP) to preserve the spelling of Holloway in the pending merges (see #Research Notes). Profiles that are PPP must be managed/co-managed by a project, so I have also added the US Southern Colonies Project as a manager.

Give me a holler if you have any questions.

posted by Liz (Noland) Shifflett
Holladay-162 and Holloway-2922 do not represent the same person because: the name was Holloway
posted by Mark Royston
Holladay-399 and Holloway-2922 do not represent the same person because: the name was Holloway
posted by Mark Royston
Holladay-162 and Holloway-2922 appear to represent the same person because: The difference in names is no reason to reject a match. These are clearly the same people with the same relationships. All bio information is copied directly on the profile from the sources listed - whish are the same sources used on both profiles.
posted by Chris Brady
Holladay-399 and Holloway-2922 appear to represent the same person because: These are the same people with the same relationships. The fact that the unsourced profile uses the name Holloday does not change that fact.
posted by Chris Brady
Holladay-162 and Holloway-2922 do not represent the same person because: the name is Holloway not Holloday
posted by Mark Royston
Holladay-399 and Holloway-2922 do not represent the same person because: It's not Holloday; it's holloway
posted by Mark Royston
Holladay-399 and Holloway-2922 appear to represent the same person because: These are duplicates. The last name used in his will was Holloway.
posted by Chris Brady
Holladay-162 and Holloway-2922 appear to represent the same person because: There are duplicates. The name used in his will was Holloway.
posted by Chris Brady
Holloway-4930 and Holloway-2922 appear to represent the same person because: Created a new profile, but the two Holloways are one in the same
posted by Denny Carlisle
Holladay-206 and Holladay-162 are not ready to be merged because: Too much conflicting evidence with the mothers and no sources to back up the many wives of William's father.
posted on Holladay-162 (merged) by Emma (McBeth) MacBeath M.Ed MSM
Holladay-206 and Holladay-162 appear to represent the same person because: Clear duplicate. I would recommend that Sarah Webb is not the correct mother if William's father married her in 1678 and William was born in 1658
posted on Holladay-162 (merged) by Emma (McBeth) MacBeath M.Ed MSM
Holladay-399 and Holladay-208 are not ready to be merged because: sources need to be used with Holladay-399 before a merge can be considered
posted on Holladay-162 (merged) by Kern (Thompson) Brogan
Holladay-162 and Holladay-213 appear to represent the same person because: Duplicate
posted on Holladay-162 (merged) by Doug Matthews

Rejected matches › Joseph Holliday (abt.1811-)

H  >  Holloway  >  William Holloway

Categories: Virginia Colonists