Hello all,
As promised, I've worked my way through Maryp's post and my BEVAN information.
Looking back at a previous message that I wrote to Norman, it's evident that I should have phrased my words a little more carefully. When I wrote of a connection from Samuel BEVAN through to Frederick BEVAN, it implied a direct male line between the two because both surnames were BEVAN. In fact the connection is through Frederick's mother Mary and, in turn, through her mother Mary. Both were Mary BEVAN before marriage and both married BEVANs. Confused?

The line is:-
Samuel BEVAN (b1758) married Agnes LONG in 1779.
Their son Rowland BEVAN (b1780) m. Elizabeth BEVAN in 1805.
Their daughter Mary BEVAN (b1821) m. James BEVAN in 1844.
Their daughter Mary BEVAN (b1845) m. Francis BEVAN in 1869.
Their son Frederick BEVAN was born in 1886.
Four generations of marriages and only one non-BEVAN!
That'll teach me to be more precise when pontificating.

Regards,
Lee.