Search

Start Over Creator Okes, Lonnie L.
West Virginia and Regional History Center

Arthur and Jenkins Families (Allegheny County, Va.) Genealogy

0.01 Linear Feet Summary: 1/4 in. (1 folder)
Leo E. Arthur and Lillie Estelle (Peggy) Jenkins married in 1926 and lived in Covington and Hinton, Virginia. This sixty-page typescript copy of the "Arthur and Jenkins Families" genealogy includes information about their ancestors and descendants, particularly the Arthur, Jenkins, Doyle, Johnson, and Okes families. It primarily documents the history of the Henry and Mandy M. Arthur family of Allegheny County, Virginia, from the mid-nineteenth century to the mid-twentieth century, and the Thurmond and Phoebe Strong Jenkins family of Bath County, Virginia, from the early nineteenth century to the mid-twentieth century. Lonnie L. Okes, who compiled the genealogy, married Jane Ardeth Arthur Okes, the daughter of Leo and Peggy Jenkins Arthur, in 1952.
1 result

Arthur and Jenkins Families (Allegheny County, Va.) Genealogy 0.01 Linear Feet Summary: 1/4 in. (1 folder)

Okes, Lonnie L.
Leo E. Arthur and Lillie Estelle (Peggy) Jenkins married in 1926 and lived in Covington and Hinton, Virginia. This sixty-page typescript copy of the "Arthur and Jenkins Families" genealogy includes information about their ancestors and descendants, particularly the Arthur, Jenkins, Doyle, Johnson, and Okes families. It primarily documents the history of the Henry and Mandy M. Arthur family of Allegheny County, Virginia, from the mid-nineteenth century to the mid-twentieth century, and the Thurmond and Phoebe Strong Jenkins family of Bath County, Virginia, from the early nineteenth century to the mid-twentieth century. Lonnie L. Okes, who compiled the genealogy, married Jane Ardeth Arthur Okes, the daughter of Leo and Peggy Jenkins Arthur, in 1952.

Content Warning

ARVAS is an aggregator of archival resources. ARVAS does not have control of the descriptive language used in our members’ finding aids.

Finding aids may contain historical terms and phrases, reflecting the shared attitudes and values of the community from which they were collected, but are offensive to modern readers. These include demeaning and dehumanizing references to race, ethnicity, and nationality; enslaved or free status; physical or mental ability; religion; sex; and sexual orientation and gender identity.

Many institutions and organizations are in the process of reviewing and revising their descriptive language, with the intent to describe materials in more humanizing, inclusive, and harm-reductive ways. As members revise their descriptive language, their changes will eventually be reflected in their ARVAS finding aids.

Limit your search