SKU: 48887065338

1815 Directory of Virginia Landowners: Tyler County, Virginia

Sale price$11.69 Regular price$12.99
Save 10%

Shipping Estimate
USA
  • USA
  • CAN

Ships within 48 hours · Estimated delivery Jul 11 - Jul 16

Promo Codes Available:

For Your Every Summer RSVP, with Code: SUMMER15

Description

1815 Directory of Virginia Landowners: Tyler County, VirginiaThis is the Tyler County, Virginia entry in the series of 1815 Virginia Landowners Booklets. It's an alphabetical listing of all 1815 landowners found in this county, as well as the accompanying description of the location of said property. A helpful resource for Virginia genealogy! About this series: In 1782 the General Assembly of Virginia enacted new tax laws which created within each county an enumeration of land and certain personal property.

This is the Tyler County, Virginia entry in the series of 1815 Virginia Landowners Booklets. It's an alphabetical listing of all 1815 landowners found in this county, as well as the accompanying description of the location of said property. A helpful resource for Virginia genealogy!

About this series:

In 1782 the General Assembly of Virginia enacted new tax laws which created within each county an enumeration of land and certain personal property. These early land tax laws required a tax commissioner in each district of a county to record a list of the names of persons owning land or town lots, the quantity of land owned and its value, and the amount of tax owed. By 1813, a brief geographic description (usually citing an adjacent stream, road, or other landmark) was required; in 1814, the distance and direction from the courthouse for each parcel was also added to the tax rolls.

The present work is an alphabetical listing of all 1815 landowners found in each county, as well as the accompanying description of the location of the said property. We have not included the number of acres, taxes assessed, or any transactions between landowners which may have been noted on the tax rolls; also, in many cases the geographic location was provided as "adjacent to John Smith", etc. and, while useful many times to a genealogist, was considered to be beyond the objectives of this project. The reader is encouraged to consider the information here-in as an "outline" of early landowners in Virginia rather than a "text" due to the year-to-year variation in information provided to the clerk (or recorded by the clerk), omissions, lack of "identifiers" to determine if "same name" was also "same person" within a district or across districts, marginal quality/clarity (in a few cases) of the microfilm copy, and, not least, errors on the part of either the original clerks or the current author while transcribing.

Some of the approaches to utilizing the 1815 landowner information include:

  • observe distinct clusters of the same surname within a county in order to clarify the common surnames such as "Smith", "Anderson", etc;
  • identify non-resident landowners and their county (or state) of residence (these people often being former residents of the current county);
  • determine neighbors with different surnames (often being relatives);
  • use the 1815 information as a "bridge" from the 18th and 19th century deed/will books to the 17th and 18th century land grants/patents in the county;
  • evaluate the 1810 to 1840 census information which generally grouped neighbors;
  • substitute this information for missing deed/will books in the "burned" counties; and, clarify/enhance vague deed/will information in the counties with more complete records. 

FORMAT OF PRESENTATION: Each entry is listed as: Surname, name, personal identifiers (if any); location/place-name of land; miles/direction from the 1815 courthouse. If multiple owners are listed for a property, the listing is duplicated under each of the owner's surnames (i.e "Smith and Brown" is also listed as "Brown, --see Smith"); when multiple owners share a common surname, the property is only listed once. When a landowner had land at more than one location/place-name, the miles/direction listing for each parcel is in the same sequence as the location listing (i.e. James RV, Slate CK; 12N, 5SW.). In the few cases where a landowner had "many" parcels, the miles/direction notation is attached to the location listing (i.e. Sandy RV- 5NE, Willow CK-7S, etc.)

(Sample page is from Orange Co., VA 1815 Directory of Landowners)

Shipping Notes
  • Free Standard Shipping on $100+ Orders to the USA.
  • Except Preorder products are shipped in 48 hours.
  • Delivery to the USA:
  1. Standard Shipping : 3-10 business days
  • If time is of the essence, please consider selecting expedited delivery for faster service.
Exchange/Return Notes
  • We offer a 30-day return/exchange service after receiving.
  • Final sale items are not eligible for returns or exchanges.
  • To process your return/exchange, please contact us at [email protected]
  • Please click here for more details>>> Return & Exchange Policy
SKU: 48887065338

Discover Niche Categories That Outsell

Top-Converting Item to Boost Your Average Order

4.6 ★★★★★
Based on 2191 reviews
Sort
Highest Rating
Newest First
Oldest First
Product Reviews
S
Verified Purchase
Shannon
Birmingham, US
★★★★★ 5
Great deal! Yummy!
Flavor Name: Blue Raspberry, Size: 25.4 Fl Oz (Pack of 1)
Using for our dirty soda bar, this brand is a delicious addition to our flavors! Nice bottle, great price!
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on May 27, 2026
N
Verified Purchase
Nicholas
Lake Worth, US
★★★★★ 4
Comparing to the coffee giant version
Flavor Name: Brown Sugar, Size: 25.4 Fl Oz (Pack of 1), Flavor Name: Brown Sugar, Size: 25.4 Fl Oz (Pack of 1)
Starbucks comparison (from a personal standpoint): I’m fortunate enough to have a bottle of Starbucks Brown Sugar. Problem is, I’m almost out. Looking around at some alternative options, and reading the reviews- I see some saying this is a good substitute. Because I happen to have the syrup on hand, I figured I should see if it is, because it would be great given the low cost of DaVinci syrup. This picture I’m attaching is just to see the color difference. Consistency wise, the DaVinci syrup is much lighter, more runny. The Starbucks is definitely a thicker liquid, that runs much slower. Flavor is the big one: DaVinci is lighter on taste, and sweeter. The best way to describe the flavor is comparing DaVinci’s to 100% real maple syrup that’s been diluted down with water. It’s good, but not really similar (in my opinion) to Starbucks Brown Sugar. Starbucks is more smokey in flavor, more strong/bold. My drinks are made using espresso, oak milk, cinnamon powder, and ice. I made my drink the same way, but used DaVinci Syrup this time. I found that the same amount of syrup that I use for the Starbucks, didn’t feel like it had a strong enough flavor. What did I do? I added an extra ounce of DaVinci hoping to get a stronger flavor. The problem is, DaVinci is more sweet than the Starbucks syrup (in my opinion) and ended up making my drink taste too sweet. It’s sweet enough that I’m not going to finish drinking it. I’m not knocking the DaVinci syrup itself. I think it’s a good brand and a good flavor. It’s just not the flavor I was hoping would solve my issue for a Starbucks imitation. I would encourage anyone to still try this syrup, but do so to enjoy it for being its own flavor.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on January 18, 2026
S
Verified Purchase
Sammie Jo
Belleville, US
★★★★★ 5
Almost tastes like chocolate milk!
Flavor Name: Chocolate, Size: 11.5 Fl Oz (Pack of 12)
I usually dislike protein drinks. But I need It, and this one actually almost tastes like chocolate milk. I’ve tried the other flavors of this brand, and for me, this is the least protein tasting one. Banana came close.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on May 13, 2026
A
Verified Purchase
Abhigna Kajiwala
Chelsea, US
★★★★★ 5
The Gold Standard: Premier Protein Chocolate Shake
Flavor Name: Chocolate, Size: 11.5 Fl Oz (Pack of 12)
The Premier Protein Chocolate Shake is, in my opinion, the benchmark for ready-to-drink protein shakes. Whether you're a serious athlete, a busy professional, or someone trying to hit daily protein goals, this shake delivers on taste, convenience, and macros. Taste & Texture (Surprisingly Good) Let's be honest: most shelf-stable protein shakes taste like chalky chemicals. This is where Premier Protein shines. The Chocolate flavor is rich, creamy, and surprisingly satisfying without being overly sweet. It tastes like a genuine, albeit light, chocolate milk. Crucially, the texture is smooth and velvety; there is virtually no grittiness or unpleasant artificial aftertaste. I genuinely look forward to drinking these, which is half the battle with supplements. They are best enjoyed ice-cold! Unbeatable Nutritional Profile The macros are what make this shake truly exceptional: 30g of High-Quality Protein: Perfect for post-workout recovery, satisfying hunger between meals, or boosting the protein content of coffee/recipes. 1g Sugar & 5g Carbs: This low-carb, low-sugar profile makes it ideal for nearly any diet, including keto and low-glycemic plans. 160 Calories: A great way to add significant protein without excessive calories. Verdict & Best Uses I always keep a case of these shakes stocked. They are a true time-saver for fast breakfast additions, quick muscle fuel after the gym, or a guilt-free late-night snack. If you are struggling to find a convenient, affordable, and high-protein option that actually tastes good, look no further. This product is a staple.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on December 3, 2025
D
Verified Purchase
diane west
Louisville, US
★★★★★ 5
An easy way to add protein to your diet
Flavor Name: Chocolate, Size: 11.5 Fl Oz (Pack of 12)
A nice way to add more protein to my diet. The taste in the texture are always the same. I like that it doesn’t change.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on May 7, 2026

recommand products