Henrico County, Virginia: Beginnings of Its Families: Part II Transcribed by Kathy Merrill for the USGenWeb Archives Special Collections Project ************************************************************************ USGENWEB ARCHIVES NOTICE: These electronic pages may NOT be reproduced in any format for profit or presentation by any other organization or persons. Persons or organizations desiring to use this material, must obtain the written consent of the contributor, or the legal representative of the submitter, and contact the listed USGenWeb archivist with proof of this consent. The submitter has given permission to the USGenWeb Archives to store the file permanently for free access. http://www.usgwarchives.net *********************************************************************** Henrico County, Virginia: Beginnings of Its Families: Part II. William Clayton Torrence William and Mary College Quarterly Historical Magazine, Vol. 24, No. 3. (Jan., 1916), pp. 202-210. HENRICO COUNTY, VIRGINIA: BEGINNINGS OF ITS FAMILIES. Part II. By WILLIAM CLAYTON TORRENCE. "It is only shallow minded pretenders, who either make distinguished origin a matter of personal pride, or obscure origin a matter of personal reproach." Daniel Webster(1). The "classification" which is inevitably necessary in a study of this nature is doubtless the most difficult of the many problems which confront the investigator. Social distinctions there most assuredly were in the colony of Virginia, but the elasticity of the "lines" and the almost constant shifting to admit to the higher circles those who had acquired substantial economic standing, makes it difficult indeed to "classify" with any degree of certainty. An objective methods alone holds the slightest promise of success in such an undertaking and such a method will be wholly relied on in this study. The basis of "social distinction" in colonial times was economic; the foundation of the structure was in wealth. Those who possessed wealth (comparatively speaking) were the best fitted for ruling at that time for their wealth was the means by which they acquired - not ability - but the training of ability for political life; and colonial life was a veritable net-work of politics. The office holding class inevitably became the highest social class and as wealth was a pre-requisite to training a basis for classification is secured by strict adherence to economic values and the classification itslef made by grading men and families according to their possessions and offices during specified time periods. ______________________________________________________________________ (1) I am indebted for this quotation to A Book of Strattons . . . Compiled by Harriet Russell Stratton, Chattanooga, Tennessee. Page 203. "In the seventeenth century all of the work of a public character was done by the foremost men in the community . . . the wealthiest and the most prominent citizens". This quotation from Philip Alexander Bruce's Social Life of Virginia in the Seventeenth Century (though Doctor Bruce makes the statement in dealing with more strictly local, or county, affairs) is an excellent summary of conditions in the colony at large and may be justly applied to other time periods than the seventeenth century. To this (in connection with the subject under discussion here) should be added: every man, during the colonial period, had full opportunity for enjoying the fruits of his personal labor. Ability of even the crudest nature possessed the value of utility and where a footing had been gained (however slender) there was nothing to prevent a man's economic and social advance. By wisely using the ability he possessed that ability was strengthened and broadened: by his efforst a man gained experience and by his efforts he also gained means. Every condition was favorable, land was easily obtainable, help could be had by obtaining indentured servants, and the accumulation of substance meant that a man could purchase negro slaves. Through the course of years wealth multiplied and position came. There was happily lacking the debauching influence of rapidly made fortunes. Instead of the vulgar irresponsibility with which we meet in the "get-rich-quick" people of later days we find in the people of the earlier time an increasing sense of public responsibility, for political service was the highest goal to the man of fortune. By "industrial honesty" men were able to build and to climb. Unquestionably a tendency towards democracy was manifested from earliest times in Virginia; becoming stronger with the growth of institutions until finally "race" became the only fundamental distinction. But regardless of the fundamental equality of all men of the Caucasian race there appeared all of the phenomena of "social distinction." Granting the superficiality of these "distinctions" and their inherent power of variation, dealing with the facts seriously is the only method by which we shall ever attain to complete understanding of the history of our race in the colonial period of its development. Page 204. In this attempted "classification" of the Henrico families who are the subject of our study let us bear the following in mind: First, that the objective method employed elminates all tradition and uses only such facts as the records reveal relative to the economic and political positions occupied by individuals and families. Second, social position was in colonial times, as it is now, relative: the individual and the family had their "standing" in the community in which they lived; this "standing" was of course "transferable" as the members of the family moved into other communities, provided always that it was maintained in the new home by individuals or the family as a whole. Third, the status of an individual or a family or of a "branch of a family" during a specified time-period is no evidence that such was their status either prior to or after that specific period. Period after period should be studied carefully and a view of the whole attained in order to a thorough understanding of the historical aspects and social significance of development or deterioration. And last, but by no means least, let us recall the adage from Burns: "The rank is but the guinea's stamp, The man's the gowd for a' that." Many will recall the words as having been spoken to them first in gentle chiding when one of the childhood's most human hours stuck in "bridling" or in immature exclamation of false pride. As a datum of experience let it be recorded that the profound truth underlying Burns' homely phrase comes as a revelation to every genuine student of family history and strikes a light on the phenomenon of "class" (which ordinarly viewed seems just an illustration of chance) and frees him (as Truth alone can) from the narrowness of the purely personal interest, placing individuals and families in their rightful historical position as parts of "the whole" in the world -process. It is certainly a matter for much regret that the European ancestry of comparatively so few of the Henrico County families is at this present time known. There are no doubt buried away in the English records data which would establish many points of Page 205. interest to us in this investigation and it is hoped that some day these may be unearthed. As it is we shall have to depend on the data hereto- fore brought to light. Of those persons whose names appear in the "List of the Liveinge & Dead in Virginia 1623 (1624)" the English ancestry of only four is positively known. These four are Christopher Branch who was living on the College Land, John Berkeley who settled a plantation at Falling Creek, Robert Hallam who was living at the Neck of Land and Thomas Baugh who was living at the College land in 1625. Christopher Branch was the son of Lionel Branch of London, Gentleman, grandson of William Branch of Abingdon, Berkshire, Gentleman, and great grandson of Richard Branch of Abingdon, Woolendraper. Christopher Branch is himself styled "gentleman" in the record of his marriage(1). John Berkeley was the son of Sir John Berkeley "of the castle and manor of Beverstone in the county of Gloucester, England, an eminent branch of the Berkeleys of Berkeley Castle"(2). Robert Hallam was of a family in Essex, England, and brother of William Hallam, of Burnham, Essex, salter, and of Thomas Hallam whose son Thomas Hallam was of London, salter(3). Thomas Baugh was the son of John Baugh and grandson of Rowland Baugh, Esquire, of Twining, in the County of Worcester(4). Of those whose names apepar in the list of Heads of Families in Henrico(5), in 1679 (though not in the list for 1624) the English __________________________________________________________________________ (1) The facts are fully set forth in James Branch Cabell's Branch of Abingdon . . . Richmond, Virginia (1911). (2) WILLIAM AND MARY QUARTERLY, VI. p. 135. (3) Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, XIII, p. 55. (4) Ibid., VII, p. 424, and Stanard's Some Emigrants to Virginia, p. 5. In the Virginia Magazine, etc., Vol. XIX, p. 193, is mention of William Baugh, late of London, now gone into Virginia (date 5 June, 1639). Mr. Stanard adds that "probabaly this is William Baugh who was born about 1610 and was a justice of Henrico County in 1656." (5) For this list see WILLIAM AND MARY QUARTERLY, Vol. XXIV, p. 131, et seq. Page 206. ancestry of only six is known: Isham, Pleasants, Randolph, Chamberlaine, Batte and Byrd. Mrs. Isham (of the list) was the widow of Henry Isham (first of his family in Virginia) who was born about 1628, came to Virginia about 1656 and died about 1676. He was the son of William Isham (1588-1631) and Mary, daughter of William Brett of Toddington, Bedford, and grandson of Sir Euseby Isham of Pytchley, of an ancient Northamptonshire family(1). John Pleasants, the immigrant, was born about 1644-5, in Norwich, England, the son of John Pleasants (born 1618) of St. Savior's, Norwich, worsted weaver; grandson of John Pleasants (1588-1640) of All Saints and St. Saviour's, Norwich, worsted weaver, great grandson of Robert Pleasants (ante 1558-1591) of Norwich; great great grandson of William Pleasants (died 1583) of All Saints and St. Paul's Parishes, Norwich(2). William Randolph (1651-1711) the first of the "Turkey Island Randolphs" was the son of Richard Randolph (1621-1671) of Morton Hall, Warwickshire; grandson of William Randolph (1572-1650) of Little Haughton, Northampton- shire; great grandson of Richard Randolph, of Hams, Sussex, Gentleman. Henry Randolph (1623-1673), an uncle of William Randolph, also settled in Henrico County(3). Thomas Chamberlaine (circa 1652-1719) was the son of Edmund Chamber- laine of Maugersbury (who died 1676) and grandson of Edmund Chamberlaine of Maugersbury, Esquire, sheriff of Gloucestershire (who died 1634) and great grandson of Sir Thomas Chamberlaine, of Prestbury, Gloucestershire, ambassador from Henry VIII, Edward VI, and Elizabeth to several courts(4). ________________________________________________________________________ (1) Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. IV, p. 123 and Vol. XVIII, p. 85, et seq. (2) Ibid., Vol. XVI, p. 218; XVII, pp. 84, 197, 319, 425. (3) Ibid., Vol. III, p. 261 and WILLIAM AND MARY QUARTERLY, Vol. IV, p. 125. Thomas Randolph (1605-1639), the poet, was a half-brother of Henry Randolph (who came to Virginia) and of Richard Randolph (father of William, of "Turkey Island"). (4) Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. XXIII, p. 158. Page 207. Thomas Batte(1) was the son of John Batte, Esquire, captain in the regiment of Agbrigg and Morley and justice of the peace in the West Riding, and his wife Maratha, daughter of Thomas Mallory, Dean of Chester; grand- son of Robert Batte, fellow and vice master of University College, Oxford; great grandson of Henry BAtte and great great grandson of Henry Batte, of Okewell in Birstall (in the West Riding, Yorkshire) who lived in the reigns of Henry VIII, Edward VI, and until the second year of Queen Elizabeth(2). William Bryd (circa 1653-1704) was the son of John Bryd, of London, goldsmith, (a descendant of the Byrds of Brexton in Cheshire) and his wife Grace, daughter of Thomas Steege a prominent man in the colony of Virginia(3). Of the European ancestry of the remaining persons(4) whose names appear in the list for 1679 nothing is positively known and though there are tranditions bearing on this point in many of their families, and indexes and lists of English genealogical works mention a majority of the names, yet these traditions and men- _______________________________________________________________________ (1) Thomas Batte has no descendants of the name in Virginia at this day. His only (known) son, Thomas Batte, Junior, having left issue only one daughter. There are, however, many descendants of Thomas Batte, Senior, through his daughters. Those persons of the name of Bate now resident in Virginia are descendants of Captain Henry Batte (a brother of Thomas Batte, Senior) who lived in Charles City County, later Prince George, was a member of the House of Burgesses and a milita officer. The brothers, Thomas and Henry Batte, had two uncles, named Wililam and Henry Batte, who were in Virginia at an earlier date. (2) Waters Genealogical Gleanings in England, p. 105. (3) Basset. The Writings of Colonel William Byrd of Westover in Virginia, Esq. (4) In a note appended to an abstract of the will of John Farrar, the elder, of London, Esqr., dated 24 April, 1628, and proved 28 May, 1628 (see Virginia Magazine &c., Vol. XXII, p. 398) Mr. Stanard says: "As it is evident that William Farrar of Virginia [who was living at Jordan's Journey in 1624 and whose descendants' names apepar in the Henrico list for 1679] was not a son of Nicholas Farrar, Sr. [see statement of that theory in Virginia Magazine, &c., Vol. VII, pp. 219, 433], it looks as if his father has been placed by this will." For a suggestive note relative to the Gowers, see Virginia Magazine, etc., Vol. XVII, p. 399 et seq. Page 208. tions of the names will not be considered here as the limits of this study preclude the consideration of other matieral than established facts(1). Now that we have recorded what is proved as to the English ancestry of these early settlers in Henrico County let us consider the facts presented by the records as to the status of these people from the time of their earliest appearances, and with these FACTS as a standard we shall not go far wrong in "placing" these Henrico families. The most powerful of the Henrico families (during the period under discusion) were the Randolphs, Cockes, Eppses and Byrds. William Randolph (1651-1711) was the descendant, on both sides of the house, of generations of gentlefolk. Henry Randolph (the uncle of William) had gone to Virginia about the middle of the seventeenth century. He occupied the not unimportant political office of Clerk of Henrico from about 1656; and was clerk of the Virginia House of Burgesses from about 1660 to his death in 1673. William Randolph was "well intro- _________________________________________________________________________ (1) As nothing can be definitely stated as to the European ancestry of these people it does not seem amiss to give here the approximate years of the births of many of them. These years of birth are approximated from statements made by the parties themselves in making depositions in various cases tried in Henrico County Court. The word about should be inserted in every instance between the name of the person and the year. John Howard, 1636; William Hatcher, 1613; Charles Roberts, 1649; James Eakin, 1631; Edward Goode, 1647; Charles Featherstone, 1637; John Willson, 1647; John Juddlesee, 1640; Charles Mathews, 1634; Peter Harris, 1618; Gilbert Jones, 1642; Henry Watkins, 1638; William Giles, 1650; Benjamin Hatcher, 1642 or 4; William Puckett, 1657; Peter Ashbrook, 1649; Thomas Puckett, 1658; Edward Stratton, 1655; John Millner, 1640; Thomas Risbee, 1639; Lewis Watkins, 1641; Abraham Womack, 1644; Edward Hatcher, 1633 or 7; Henry Pue, 1634; Samuel Knibb 1654; Edward Bowman, 1655; Gilbert Elam, Sr,. 1631; Godfry Ragsdale, 1644; Peter Rowlett, 1637; Edward Thacher, 1642; Robert Woodson, 1634; Thomas East, 1640; Giles Carter, 1634; Abraham Childers, 1655 or 6; George Archer, 1654; Bartholomew Roberts, 1637; Thomas Perrin 1639; John Bayly, 1651; Joseph Royall, 1646; William Clarke, 1637; Henry Lound, 1619; Martin Elam, 1635; Charles Clay, 1645; Thomas Gregory, 1622; Edward Lester, 1640; Robert Bullington, 1632; Anthony Tall, 1655; John Greenhaugh, 1615; Timothy Allen, 1639; John Aust, 1650; Nicholas Perkins, 1646. Page 209. duced" at his coming into the colony. He succeeded his uncle as clerk of the county holding the office until 1683 when he was in turn succeeded by Henry Randolph (son of the first Henry). William Randolph occupied during the years of his residence in Virginia nearly every office of either prominence or financial worth in Henrico County: magistrate, clerk, coroner, militia officer (of various grades) member of the House of Burgesses, moreover, he was speaker of the House and clerk of the House and for a short time in 1695 was attorney general of Virginia. William Randolph married Mary, daughter of Henry Isham (see ante) who settled in Henrico County, was a merchant, militia officer and bore the distinctive "gentleman" affixed to his name. Mrs. Randolph was also the sister of another Henry Isham, who engaged extensively in merchandizing, and of Mrs. Ann Eppes the wife of Colonel Francis Eppes (the third of his name) who was a grandson of the first of the Eppes family in Henrico. William Randolph left, at his death, a most comfortable fortune and the succeeding generations of his house formed, wtih him their "founder", a constellation of ability seldom rivalled in the history of the American Colonies. Of the English ancestry of Richard Cocke (circa 1600-1665) and Francis Epped (died ante 1655) nothing definite is known(1), but from their first appearances in the colony, which was quite early, they both occupied a very solid position. Richard Cocke was several times a member of the House of Burgesses and county lieutenant of Henrico. Richard Cocke amassed considerable means for the times in which he lived but just what were his other occupations, besides planting and politics, is not now known. His sons and grandsons, at one time or another, occupied nearly every office of dignity and profit in Henrico County and as the years went by and other parts of the colony __________________________________________________________________________ (1) A number of notes on various branches of the Cocke family in Eng- land may be found in Virginia Magazine, etc., Vol. III, p. 285 and Vol. V, p. 304, et seq. though they contain nothing definite as to the parentage of Richard Cocke of Virginia. Of the English ancestry of the Eppeses, all that may be definitely said is that Francis Eppes, the first in Virginia, probably descended from a family of the name in County Kent. The coat of arms used by the Virginia Eppses, almost from the time of the immigrant, is that ascribed to Epes or Eppes, of Canterbury, Kent." Page 210. were settled and devloped we find later generations of this family occupy- ing the foremost positions(1). Francis Eppes, the first of his line in Virginia and in Henrico County, was a member of the House of Burgesses, magistrate and in 1652 was elected to the Governor's Council. His son John Eppes was a man of prominence in Charles City County and his son Francis Eppes, the second (circa 1628- 1678) was for some years a magistrate in Henrico County and lieutenant colonel of militia; he also engaged in merchandizing. The succeeding generations of the Eppes family (residing in Henrico, Charles City, Prince George and Chesterfield Counties) were prominent office holders and people of substantial means(2). William Byrd (1653-1704) founder of the family in Virginia "was secure in many possessions" when he first came into the colony about 1674. He was the son of John Byrd, a London goldsmith, and his wife Grace Stegg, daughter of Thomas Stegg, "one of the leading merchants of the colony", who had been prominent in the political life of Virginia about the middle of the 17th century, and sister of Thomas Stegg, the younger (who died in 1670) who was a member of the governor's council and auditor general of Virginia. The younger Stegg owned a considerable estate in Virginia and at his death in 1670 left the most of it to his nephew, William Byrd. William Byrd was a planter and merchant and engaged extensively in the Indian trade and in the political life of his times. He occupied the offices of magistrate, militia officer, member of the House of Burgesses and member of the governor's council. He was also Auditor and Receiver General of the colony. The first William Byrd after residing some years in Henrico County moved to Charles City County and consedquently future generations of family are associated with the history of that county rather than with Henrico's. The history of the first three generations in Virginia of this remarkable family is most fascinatingly told by John Spencer Bassett in the introduction to The Writings of Colonel William Bryd of Westover in Virginia, Esqr. (To be Concluded.) __________________________________________________________________________ (1) Cocke Family: Virginia Magazine, etc., Vols. III, IV and V. (2) Eppes Family: Ibid., Vol. III, p. 281 and p. 393 et seq.