PIATT-L Archives

Archiver > PIATT > 2004-11 > 1099769376


From: "Sharolynn Pyeatt" <>
Subject: Other John PYATT's
Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 12:29:43 -0700


Thanks to you, Dick. That does help. According to a number of sources,
John PYATT, b. 1750, the son of John PYATT and Hannah LABRUCE married
three times and his 3rd wife was Charlotte WITHERS. I haven't gotten
around to collating the information I've gathered about him yet. I
spent over 2 hours writing yesterday's 2 e-mails, and have quite a bit
yet to present. I just haven't known whether to continue to post what
I've found to the list.



I know that information has been published about the PYATT-PYEATT
families in North and South Carolina. In the end, I may come to the
same conclusion as other researchers. But, for now at least, it seems
that at least two different family lines surface in the Carolina's.
What we've gathered from the participants in the DNA study seems to
support the assumption that not all PIATT-PYATT-PYEATT families in the
U.S. can be traced back to Rene. Past publications have intermingled
these Caolina families, in some cases trying to tie all to Rene in New
Jersey and Pennsylvania. In other cases, Rene and the New
Jersey-Pennsylvania PIATT's have been ignored, coupled with the
assumption that the Carolina PYATT lines go straight back to England.
My hope in presenting my short-term research findings is that, perhaps
by looking at the evidence with new eyes or with the evidence presented
in a single forum, as researchers we can sort some of these early
PYATT's into their appropriate family groups. It's looking to me like
the surname follows both patterns, i.e. to Rene & New Jersey and
directly to England. John PIGHT of Hilton Head Island and Georgetown,
SC may be the immigrant ancestor for some PYATT's, just as Rene is the
immigrant ancestor for others.



One option that I forgot to mention regarding the disappearance of John
PYATT from church and land records between 1719 and 1737 is that he may
have returned to England to inhabit his property at North
Pastures-perhaps, to claim his inheritance and establish himself as the
owner of those properties. It could also be that I just haven't
searched enough for other sources that kept him in South Carolina during
those years.



So, my question is... do I keep presenting what I have found? Are
others finding this boring? Should I assume that I'm the last one to
research all of this and just research it for my own benefit and
discontinue my posts?



What do others think? Do I continue to post or do I cease and desist?





Thanks for all of your patience!!



Sharolynn






This thread: