I didn’t realize until this past year how fragile is the very idea of a nation state. I sat through all those hours of undergraduate history classes dutifully remembering names and events in the Thirty Years War and the Hundred Years War and the Louis of France without much comprehension.
It turns out, this wasn’t all my fault. Steven Pincus believes it was the consequence of an English politician, Thomas Macaulay, who wanted people to think their past had been a bland, inevitable progression from the Magna Carta to the Hanovers who ruled when he was alive.
However, Bernard Bailyn, in his review of Pincus’ new book, argues the second overthrow of the Stuarts in 1688 was the consequence of competing views of a nation state, one dominated by a single man who inherited his position, and one dominated by a merchant elite. While men who favored a state argued about the form, he suggests there were still a great number who simply rejected the very idea of centralized power.
Except for New England, organized by merchants and dominated by Puritan congregations, many of the men who migrated to the colonies still held the medieval view of landed property owners as sovereign. Richard Dunn suggests none of the Caribbean colonies accepted the legitimacy of their proprietors, the Stuarts or Cromwell, and worked through their assemblies to defy any authority. Within the Macaulay tradition, most of these disputes have come to be described as instances of modern Englishmen demanding representation instead of medieval barons refusing to submit.
The proprietors themselves tended to see themselves as medieval barons in the tradition of the Bishop of Durham, Anthony Bek, who was granted extraordinary powers in exchange for protecting England on the Scots border in the late thirteenth century. The Earl of Carlisle, James Hay, demanded the vulnerable Charles I delegate similar powers to raise maintain an army, shire the land, and collect taxes, duties and quit rents in Barbados in 1627 that had been granted to William Alexander in Nova Scotia in 1621.
When Anthony Ashley-Cooper, the most active partner among the South Carolina proprietors, drew up the Fundamental Constitutions of Carolina in 1669 he assumed he had the same powers as Durham to organize the colony. The colonists simply refused to ratify it, and continued to reject every revision. Unlike the colonists who came with William Bradford to Plymouth, they didn’t propose an alternative constitution. They simply rejected any contract for government.
After Ashley-Cooper died in 1683, the Carolina colonists abandoned any pretense of accepting central authority. The large areas of settlement argued with each other, and people within the settlements quarreled among themselves. In 1719, the colonists simply took power from the proprietors and asked to become a royal colony, not for the benefits of order, but to ensure they were legally free of any existing rules or obligations.
Today, we call countries like Afghanistan run by territorial barons cum war lords failed states, when, in fact, like many of the Caribbean and Carolina planters they never entered into the world of nations. It was a fragile concept when James II was trying to implement it, and it remains so today.
Notes:
Dunn, Richard S. Sugar and Slaves, 1972.
Macaulay, Thomas. History of England, 1848-1855.
Pincus, Steven. 1688: The First Modern Revolution, 2009, reviewed by Bernard Bailyn in The New York Review of Books, 29 November 2009.
Showing posts with label 30 South Carolina (1-5). Show all posts
Showing posts with label 30 South Carolina (1-5). Show all posts
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Sunday, October 11, 2009
South Carolina - John Colleton
Some of South Carolina’s roots lie in the English Civil War.
Our school books simplify that war by saying it was fought between the Puritan Roundheads and the Anglican and Catholic Cavaliers, the men of Massachusetts versus the planters of Virginia and Maryland. As with most wars, the conflicts were more complex. The west of England, centered on the port and merchants of Bristol, was competing with the upcoming merchants of London on the eastern shore. Parliament was jockeying to maintain its privileges against a monarch who believed he had absolute power. The House of Lords, representing inherited landed money, was under siege by the House of Commons which represented the merchants and new wealth. The Scots, Irish and Welch were still protesting union.
Many credit John Colleton with suggesting the settlement of Carolina to Anthony Ashley-Cooper, a Londoner with investments in Barbados. However, his background did not automatically qualify him for such reward from the Stuarts. His family had risen to the status of gentlemen in Exeter, the center of the Devon woolen industry in southwestern England. His father, Peter, was high sheriff in 1618; his sister Elizabeth married Hugh Crocker who became mayor.
When war came in 1642, mercantile and industrial Exeter supported Parliament against the king. Royalist forces laid siege to the town in August, and forced men like Colleton and Croker to retire. Colleton apparently lost his rights to income from his estates in Cornwall in the ensuing months.
When John Berkeley asked him to raise and arm a private army to support the dominant royalist force in the region, he agreed. They apparently fought at the Battle of Stratton in May of 1643 which Berkeley won for Charles I. Parliament won the war in 1645, although Exeter remained royalist country until Thomas Fairfax defeated Berkeley in 1646.
Colleton next appears in the public record in 1648 asking to have the income from his estates reinstated. Meanwhile, Charles was still fomenting rebellion and new fighting broke out soon after Colleton received his dispensation in March. In August he must not have been considered a rebel because he was granted permission to go to Calais.
After Charles was executed in 1649, supporters of his son regrouped in exile and had the younger Charles issue demands for recognition of his succession from the colonies. Massachusetts refused, but Virginia, where Berkeley’s brother William was governor, agreed. Barbados chose to stay as neutral as possible to protect its trade with both London and Amsterdam.
Disgruntled and impoverished soldiers from the royalist army fled to the colonies, including Barbados where Humphrey Walrond refused to accept neutrality and forced the governor to pledge to Charles in 1850. It was in this year John Berkeley says he ran into Colleton in Holland.
Oliver Cromwell sent a fleet to blockade Barbados in 1651. In 1652, a compromise was signed with now Colonel Colleton supporting Cromwell’s admiral, George Ayscue, who then appointed Daniel Searle governor. Soon after, Charles sent Francis Willougby as his governor of the island.
Colleton, in fact, was an ally of Thomas Modyford, who had arrived in Barbados in 1647. Modyford had been a mayor of Exeter and George Monck refers to both Modyford and Colleton as cousins in a 1663 letter to Willoughby. Both joined the subsequent plots to overthrow Searle.
The royalist cause was not a simple one, when men like Walrond squabbled with men like Modyford. After the restoration of the Stuarts many had to rearrange their biographies to emphasize when they had supported the ultimate winners. John Berkeley did the rehabilitation for Colleton in 1660 when he wrote a letter that became the model for all the heroic biographies that followed our civil war some 200 years later.
Berkeley said Colleton had sacrificed his fortune to support the royalist cause in the English civil war, left the country for the Caribbean after Charles I was executed in 1649 to avoid taking an oath, and continued to scheme for his son’s return from exile. He even introduces the now contemporary euphemism used to denigrate civil war in Ireland as mere "troubles."
However, while Berkely would like to have used Colleton to remind Charles of his own service, he hedged his language with "to the best of my knowledge" in case reports surfaced that suggest Colleton was not quite as steadfast as proclaimed.
Berkeley knew the myth of loyalty was more important than the reality, and that personal self-interest was best wrapped in that myth. When he lobbied for the Carolina grant, he gave us both
a colony and a narrative legitimizing disobedience.
Notes:
Berkeley’s letter to Charles II as reproduced by William Betham in The Baronetage of England, 1802.
Our school books simplify that war by saying it was fought between the Puritan Roundheads and the Anglican and Catholic Cavaliers, the men of Massachusetts versus the planters of Virginia and Maryland. As with most wars, the conflicts were more complex. The west of England, centered on the port and merchants of Bristol, was competing with the upcoming merchants of London on the eastern shore. Parliament was jockeying to maintain its privileges against a monarch who believed he had absolute power. The House of Lords, representing inherited landed money, was under siege by the House of Commons which represented the merchants and new wealth. The Scots, Irish and Welch were still protesting union.
Many credit John Colleton with suggesting the settlement of Carolina to Anthony Ashley-Cooper, a Londoner with investments in Barbados. However, his background did not automatically qualify him for such reward from the Stuarts. His family had risen to the status of gentlemen in Exeter, the center of the Devon woolen industry in southwestern England. His father, Peter, was high sheriff in 1618; his sister Elizabeth married Hugh Crocker who became mayor.
When war came in 1642, mercantile and industrial Exeter supported Parliament against the king. Royalist forces laid siege to the town in August, and forced men like Colleton and Croker to retire. Colleton apparently lost his rights to income from his estates in Cornwall in the ensuing months.
When John Berkeley asked him to raise and arm a private army to support the dominant royalist force in the region, he agreed. They apparently fought at the Battle of Stratton in May of 1643 which Berkeley won for Charles I. Parliament won the war in 1645, although Exeter remained royalist country until Thomas Fairfax defeated Berkeley in 1646.
Colleton next appears in the public record in 1648 asking to have the income from his estates reinstated. Meanwhile, Charles was still fomenting rebellion and new fighting broke out soon after Colleton received his dispensation in March. In August he must not have been considered a rebel because he was granted permission to go to Calais.
After Charles was executed in 1649, supporters of his son regrouped in exile and had the younger Charles issue demands for recognition of his succession from the colonies. Massachusetts refused, but Virginia, where Berkeley’s brother William was governor, agreed. Barbados chose to stay as neutral as possible to protect its trade with both London and Amsterdam.
Disgruntled and impoverished soldiers from the royalist army fled to the colonies, including Barbados where Humphrey Walrond refused to accept neutrality and forced the governor to pledge to Charles in 1850. It was in this year John Berkeley says he ran into Colleton in Holland.
Oliver Cromwell sent a fleet to blockade Barbados in 1651. In 1652, a compromise was signed with now Colonel Colleton supporting Cromwell’s admiral, George Ayscue, who then appointed Daniel Searle governor. Soon after, Charles sent Francis Willougby as his governor of the island.
Colleton, in fact, was an ally of Thomas Modyford, who had arrived in Barbados in 1647. Modyford had been a mayor of Exeter and George Monck refers to both Modyford and Colleton as cousins in a 1663 letter to Willoughby. Both joined the subsequent plots to overthrow Searle.
The royalist cause was not a simple one, when men like Walrond squabbled with men like Modyford. After the restoration of the Stuarts many had to rearrange their biographies to emphasize when they had supported the ultimate winners. John Berkeley did the rehabilitation for Colleton in 1660 when he wrote a letter that became the model for all the heroic biographies that followed our civil war some 200 years later.
Berkeley said Colleton had sacrificed his fortune to support the royalist cause in the English civil war, left the country for the Caribbean after Charles I was executed in 1649 to avoid taking an oath, and continued to scheme for his son’s return from exile. He even introduces the now contemporary euphemism used to denigrate civil war in Ireland as mere "troubles."
However, while Berkely would like to have used Colleton to remind Charles of his own service, he hedged his language with "to the best of my knowledge" in case reports surfaced that suggest Colleton was not quite as steadfast as proclaimed.
Berkeley knew the myth of loyalty was more important than the reality, and that personal self-interest was best wrapped in that myth. When he lobbied for the Carolina grant, he gave us both
a colony and a narrative legitimizing disobedience.
Notes:
Berkeley’s letter to Charles II as reproduced by William Betham in The Baronetage of England, 1802.
These are humbly to certify to your sacred Majesty, THAT John Colleton, some time of Exeter, Esq. engaged for your majesty’s royal father, in the beginning of his troubles, raised and commanded a regiment under me, consisting of 1100 men, well armed, without any charge to his then majesty, or compulsion of his people, which was very costly to him, he never receiving any pay or free quarter, to my knowledge, and the soldiers very little either; that he furnished moneys and arms, to a good value, when he was driven from his habitations and estate, in Cornewal, before the Battle of Stratton, for which I am confident he hath not had satisfaction; that he being chosen a commissioner by the county of Exon, for the carrying on of the service of your Majesty’s royal father, in the associated counties of the west, did therin good service.
That he did, at several other times, procure and lend moneys, and procure and furnish good store of armes and ammunition, when his majesty’s affairs were in great straits, and gave credit, and staid long for considerable sums yet unpaid, of many of them, whereby a good sum must de due to him. That he suffered much by your majesty’s enemies, by being of your part, I believe to the value of above sixty thousand pounds, and he was well contented to stay for his disbursements, and bore his sufferings cheerfully, proposing to himself no other satisfaction, that I could perceive, than your majesty’s restoration. That after your majesty’s exile, he was ever active and helpful to your majesty’s agents, in England, in his person, and with his purse, which I my self know to be true, and have been informed thereof by divers others.
That he forsook England, for many years, to avoid the oaths, subscriptions, &tc, imposed upon your subjects, by your enemies, destructive of your majesty’s interest, as I found him, in Holland, in the year 1650, and returned not until your majesty’s restoration.Letter from George Monck, Duke of Albemarle, to Francis Lord Willoughby," 31 August 1663, reproduced on University of North Carolina docsouth website
That he hath kept his loyalty unspotted, to the last, as far as I can be informed, or understand.
I am sure he hath done your majesty, faithful and good service many ways, and all this, in order to his duty and allegiance, without any respect to reward or gain, that I can perceive by him.
19th of Xth, 1660
Jo. Berkeley
Sunday, October 04, 2009
South Carolina - Primogeniture
Aristocratic South Carolina wasn’t promoted by England’s aristocrats, but by their sons who were disinherited by primogeniture, the law that dictates the eldest son inherits everything.
The legal tradition, dating back to the Normans, produced a large number of ambitious young men with no inherent stake in the status quo, not only ready to support whoever seemed most likely to further their personal needs to amass fortunes, but willing to reconsider alliances whenever it suited them. The changing course of civil war in England in the 1640's increased the fluidity in society.
After the execution of Charles I in 1649, his sons, Charles and James, took refuge in Holland, where their supporters could see the profits made by the Dutch West Indies Company from sugar and slavery. When Charles II returned to England in 1660 and began consolidating a loyal peerage by granting new titles, the largest number, indicating the greatest concentration of wealth, went to 13 men in Barbados in 1661.
When the Stuart brothers were restored, their supporters maneuvered for patents to establish new colonial enterprises. The charter for lands stretching south from Virginia was issued in 1663 to Anthony Ashley-Cooper, John and William Berkeley, George Carteret, John Colleton, William Craven, Edward Hyde, and George Monck.
Some were direct supporters of Charles like Monck and Ashley-Copper who engineered his return, but most were friends or supporters of his ambitious, younger brother, James, who had no resources to reward them himself. Hyde’s daughter, Anne, was James’ wife while Craven was financially supporting his aunt Elizabeth. John Berkeley and Carteret drew closer to James during their shared exile in Holland.
More important, of the original Lords Proprietors, three were oldest sons, but only one enjoyed the privileges of fortune and rank. Craven’s father was a self-made man who had risen to mayor of London without title. Ashley-Cooper’s father died in Dorset when he was a minor and the estate dwindled through trustee mismanagement. Carteret was the son of an unpropertied man on Jersey.
Of the others, Colleton was the second son of the high sheriff of Exeter, Monck was the second son of an Exeter gentlemen in straitened circumstances, Hyde was the third son of a Cheshire county family, and the Berkely brothers were the fourth and fifth sons of a courtier to the king from Somerset who died in debt.
Monck and John Berkeley are the only ones who were active in battle for some period of time. John’s brother William spent the war in Virginia, Carteret retired to Jersey, and Craven stayed in Bohemia. However, each contributed funds to the royalist cause when necessary. Of the others, Ashley-Cooper changed from a royalist to a supporter of Parliament and Hyde moved the other way. Colleton raised troops for John Berkeley in the early 1840's, but then steered a moderate course in Barbados in the 1850's.
The quest for title and fortune meant most of the Carolina proprietors were involved as investors or proprietors in at least one other colonial grant. Many of these began as schemes promoted by the Stuart cousin Rupert, the younger son of Elizabeth. The first, to explore for gold in Africa in 1660, included Ashley-Cooper, John Berkeley, Craven, and Monck. Three years later, the company was reorganized to handle the African slave trade and included John Berkeley, Carteret, Colleton, and Craven.
When England took possession of the Dutch territories north of Virginia in 1664, Charles II gave them to his brother, who then gave the part of the land now New Jersey to John Berkeley and Carteret. The first investors in 1665 in what became the Hudson Bay Company of Canada included Carteret and Peter Colleton, John’s oldest son. In 1668, Ashley-Cooper, Craven, and Monck became involved.
The swirling coterie of younger sons and ruined oldest ones circling the younger Stuart seeking reward for temporary loyalties in overlapping charters is reminiscent of the crony capitalism of George Bush’s presidency when the energy, mortgage and private equity industries flourished in a time of negligent surveillance. There even came a time when the need for more money to finance the colonial stock companies brought in the talented men in the next orbit like Robert Boyle and John Locke.
As we pick through the debris of the current economic crisis, we recognize how many were simply out to amass wealth with as little effort as possible, and how few were willing to do the hard work necessary to build new enterprises. Likewise, among the Carolina proprietors, the ones with some experience in the colonies, regardless of their royalist ties, were the only ones willing to work to convert the charters and investments into profitable enterprises. William Berkeley sent William Drummond to colonize the Albermarle area in 1664 while Ashley-Cooper sent settlers from England to what’s now Port Royal in 1670, after Colleton died in 1666. In the next generation, the only Carolina settler was the third son of Colleton, James.
Note: Many of the proprietors are now better known by their titles. In order of rank, Monck became the Duke of Albemarle while Hyde was made Earl of Clarendon, Ashley-Cooper the Earl of Shaftesbury, and Craven the Earl of Craven. John Berkeley rose to the Baron of Stratton. The others were made baronets without rights to sit in the House of Lords.
The legal tradition, dating back to the Normans, produced a large number of ambitious young men with no inherent stake in the status quo, not only ready to support whoever seemed most likely to further their personal needs to amass fortunes, but willing to reconsider alliances whenever it suited them. The changing course of civil war in England in the 1640's increased the fluidity in society.
After the execution of Charles I in 1649, his sons, Charles and James, took refuge in Holland, where their supporters could see the profits made by the Dutch West Indies Company from sugar and slavery. When Charles II returned to England in 1660 and began consolidating a loyal peerage by granting new titles, the largest number, indicating the greatest concentration of wealth, went to 13 men in Barbados in 1661.
When the Stuart brothers were restored, their supporters maneuvered for patents to establish new colonial enterprises. The charter for lands stretching south from Virginia was issued in 1663 to Anthony Ashley-Cooper, John and William Berkeley, George Carteret, John Colleton, William Craven, Edward Hyde, and George Monck.
Some were direct supporters of Charles like Monck and Ashley-Copper who engineered his return, but most were friends or supporters of his ambitious, younger brother, James, who had no resources to reward them himself. Hyde’s daughter, Anne, was James’ wife while Craven was financially supporting his aunt Elizabeth. John Berkeley and Carteret drew closer to James during their shared exile in Holland.
More important, of the original Lords Proprietors, three were oldest sons, but only one enjoyed the privileges of fortune and rank. Craven’s father was a self-made man who had risen to mayor of London without title. Ashley-Cooper’s father died in Dorset when he was a minor and the estate dwindled through trustee mismanagement. Carteret was the son of an unpropertied man on Jersey.
Of the others, Colleton was the second son of the high sheriff of Exeter, Monck was the second son of an Exeter gentlemen in straitened circumstances, Hyde was the third son of a Cheshire county family, and the Berkely brothers were the fourth and fifth sons of a courtier to the king from Somerset who died in debt.
Monck and John Berkeley are the only ones who were active in battle for some period of time. John’s brother William spent the war in Virginia, Carteret retired to Jersey, and Craven stayed in Bohemia. However, each contributed funds to the royalist cause when necessary. Of the others, Ashley-Cooper changed from a royalist to a supporter of Parliament and Hyde moved the other way. Colleton raised troops for John Berkeley in the early 1840's, but then steered a moderate course in Barbados in the 1850's.
The quest for title and fortune meant most of the Carolina proprietors were involved as investors or proprietors in at least one other colonial grant. Many of these began as schemes promoted by the Stuart cousin Rupert, the younger son of Elizabeth. The first, to explore for gold in Africa in 1660, included Ashley-Cooper, John Berkeley, Craven, and Monck. Three years later, the company was reorganized to handle the African slave trade and included John Berkeley, Carteret, Colleton, and Craven.
When England took possession of the Dutch territories north of Virginia in 1664, Charles II gave them to his brother, who then gave the part of the land now New Jersey to John Berkeley and Carteret. The first investors in 1665 in what became the Hudson Bay Company of Canada included Carteret and Peter Colleton, John’s oldest son. In 1668, Ashley-Cooper, Craven, and Monck became involved.
The swirling coterie of younger sons and ruined oldest ones circling the younger Stuart seeking reward for temporary loyalties in overlapping charters is reminiscent of the crony capitalism of George Bush’s presidency when the energy, mortgage and private equity industries flourished in a time of negligent surveillance. There even came a time when the need for more money to finance the colonial stock companies brought in the talented men in the next orbit like Robert Boyle and John Locke.
As we pick through the debris of the current economic crisis, we recognize how many were simply out to amass wealth with as little effort as possible, and how few were willing to do the hard work necessary to build new enterprises. Likewise, among the Carolina proprietors, the ones with some experience in the colonies, regardless of their royalist ties, were the only ones willing to work to convert the charters and investments into profitable enterprises. William Berkeley sent William Drummond to colonize the Albermarle area in 1664 while Ashley-Cooper sent settlers from England to what’s now Port Royal in 1670, after Colleton died in 1666. In the next generation, the only Carolina settler was the third son of Colleton, James.
Note: Many of the proprietors are now better known by their titles. In order of rank, Monck became the Duke of Albemarle while Hyde was made Earl of Clarendon, Ashley-Cooper the Earl of Shaftesbury, and Craven the Earl of Craven. John Berkeley rose to the Baron of Stratton. The others were made baronets without rights to sit in the House of Lords.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
South Carolina - Bacon’s Rebellion
Nathaniel Bacon’s Rebellion is the first use of force in what was to become the United States to thwart the policies of the legally established government.
The governor, William Berkeley, had become somewhat rigid with age and longevity in office. In 1676, the House of Burgess, responding to demands from Bacon, proposed reforms that would limit Berkeley’s power and restore some rights to landless men. Bacon stormed the sitting assembly with 500 armed men and demanded a military commission. His men then attacked local Indians, before returning to burn Jamestown. The rebellion collapsed when Bacon died and England sent Berkeley reinforcements.
The revolt has been ensconced in popular history as the first battle between freedom loving poor folk and the tyranny of an unelected government, even though the dispute lay over the rights of native Americans to land they had cleared and developed, which the government sought to protect. Some even think much of it was motivated by family feuds between Berkeley and his wife’s family, the Culpepers, who were related to Bacon.
The psychology of fear in Virginia was closer to the reaction of New Englanders to attacks by Indians encouraged by England’s enemies in the French and Indian Wars, which coincided with the Salem witch hysteria in 1692, than it was with the reactions of men allied with the losing side in the English civil war who supported Humphry Walrond in Barbados in 1650 because they felt mistreated.
The difficulties of early frontier life were real. Richard Thompson migrated to Maryland in the 1630's on a ship that had stopped en route at Barbados. In 1637, he returned home to find his wife, children and servants killed. During the English civil war he remarried and moved to the Virginia area between the Potomac and Rappahannock, where he died in 1649 when his children were still toddlers.
In 1662 his son Richard came of age and named Thomas Willoughby his legal guardian. He had been granted land south of the James near Norfolk and married Willoughby’s daughter, Sarah. Willoughby’s grandfather, Thomas, had migrated to Virginia and acquired land through his connections with Percival Willoughby, an investor in the Virginia Company.
The Willoughby family entered the English peerage with Christopher, who was knighted by Henry VIII for military action at Tournai in 1513. His oldest son, William, established the Erseby line, his second son, Christopher, began the Parhams, and his youngest of five boys, Thomas, served as Chief Justice and married an heiress. Their son Robert married Dorothy Willoughby; their grandson, the Percival, married Francis Willoughby of the Eresby branch.
Francis Willoughby of Barbados was descended through the Parhams. Jorge H. Castelli thinks the immigrant Thomas may have been the fifth son of Francis’ great-grandfather Charles.
The Willoughbys not only intermarried, but maintained other face-to-face contacts. Thomas, the husband of Sarah Thompson, was sent to London for his education at the Merchant Taylors School founded by one of the livery companies in London. In 1655, Francis Emperor wrote to the same Thomas Willoughby in Barbados for help in recruiting a Puritan minister.
Emperor had left Barbados in 1650, probably when the royalists, led by Humphrey Walrond, were threatening dissidents, and moved to the Norfolk area which, April Hatfield says, had become a magnet for emigrants from the island. The local economy was tied to export trade, supplying naval stores and dried meat provisions. Settlers from England were more likely to move north of the James where tobacco was grown.
Men like Emperor continued to trade with relatives in Barbados, and provided an example for islanders who needed more land than was available there. In 1652 Thomas Modyford had written to Berkeley about the possibility of sending settlers. In 1662 Francis Willoughby had done the same. Even Guy Molesworth, who’d been forced to leave the island in 1650, was in Jamestown in 1660 as an aide to Berkeley.
Hatfield says about 9% of the population of Virginia’s eastern shore were immigrants from other colonies. The son of Isaac Allerton, a somewhat unscrupulous New England merchant who had originally trained as a tailor, moved to Virginia where he became active in the tobacco trade. The younger Isaac eventually married Thomas Willoughby’s sister Elizabeth and moved to the area above the Rappahannock that had been opened after the Indians were subdued.
When Bacon rebelled, personal experience as much as family ties determined who supported whom. Richard Thompson, the Willoughby in-law who grew up hearing about Indian depredations, supported Bacon and later issued a written apology. Allerton, the Willoughby in-law who grew up hearing about family ties to the leading Pilgrim magistrates, supported Berkeley. Thomas himself was dead and his son, Thomas, was too young to participate.
When you look for concrete links between generations to show the diffusion of attitudes towards government and threats of armed rebellion, it is extremely difficult to do more than establish people knew one another. Everyone knows brothers who never speak, and anyone who’s looked at family genealogies knows the problems that arise when the same name is repeated. Some still aren’t convinced Allerton’s wife wasn’t Elizabeth Thompson, sister of Sarah and Richard, instead of their sister-in-law, Elizabeth Willoughby.
But I suspect somewhere in those dusty records, more likely in those for an indentured servant following Francis Emperor than for a major landowner, lay the lines of influence that possibly tie the uprising in Barbados with later ones in this country through oral history. We can only guess what might have been, not what was.
Notes:
Allerton, Walter Scott. A History of the Allerton Family in the United States: 1585 to 1885, 1900.
Brooke, Francis Taliaferro. "Some Contemporary Accounts of Eminent Charaters," William and Mary Quarterly Historical Magazine, 1908, on Richard Thompson.
Castelli, Jorge H. "Willoughby Family of Parham," Tudorplace website.
Hatfield, April Lee. Atlantic Virginia: Intercolonial Relations in the Seventeenth Century, 2007.
Kennedy, Mary Seldon. Seldens of Virginia and Allied Families, volume 2, 1911, on Willoughby family.
Lepore, Jill. Review of Mary Beth Norton, In the Devil's Snare, The New York Times Book Review, 3 November 2002., discusses Indian background of Salem witch trials.
Nichol, Margaret Nolan. "The Thompson Family" of Northumberland County, Virginia, Genealogenie website.
The governor, William Berkeley, had become somewhat rigid with age and longevity in office. In 1676, the House of Burgess, responding to demands from Bacon, proposed reforms that would limit Berkeley’s power and restore some rights to landless men. Bacon stormed the sitting assembly with 500 armed men and demanded a military commission. His men then attacked local Indians, before returning to burn Jamestown. The rebellion collapsed when Bacon died and England sent Berkeley reinforcements.
The revolt has been ensconced in popular history as the first battle between freedom loving poor folk and the tyranny of an unelected government, even though the dispute lay over the rights of native Americans to land they had cleared and developed, which the government sought to protect. Some even think much of it was motivated by family feuds between Berkeley and his wife’s family, the Culpepers, who were related to Bacon.
The psychology of fear in Virginia was closer to the reaction of New Englanders to attacks by Indians encouraged by England’s enemies in the French and Indian Wars, which coincided with the Salem witch hysteria in 1692, than it was with the reactions of men allied with the losing side in the English civil war who supported Humphry Walrond in Barbados in 1650 because they felt mistreated.
The difficulties of early frontier life were real. Richard Thompson migrated to Maryland in the 1630's on a ship that had stopped en route at Barbados. In 1637, he returned home to find his wife, children and servants killed. During the English civil war he remarried and moved to the Virginia area between the Potomac and Rappahannock, where he died in 1649 when his children were still toddlers.
In 1662 his son Richard came of age and named Thomas Willoughby his legal guardian. He had been granted land south of the James near Norfolk and married Willoughby’s daughter, Sarah. Willoughby’s grandfather, Thomas, had migrated to Virginia and acquired land through his connections with Percival Willoughby, an investor in the Virginia Company.
The Willoughby family entered the English peerage with Christopher, who was knighted by Henry VIII for military action at Tournai in 1513. His oldest son, William, established the Erseby line, his second son, Christopher, began the Parhams, and his youngest of five boys, Thomas, served as Chief Justice and married an heiress. Their son Robert married Dorothy Willoughby; their grandson, the Percival, married Francis Willoughby of the Eresby branch.
Francis Willoughby of Barbados was descended through the Parhams. Jorge H. Castelli thinks the immigrant Thomas may have been the fifth son of Francis’ great-grandfather Charles.
The Willoughbys not only intermarried, but maintained other face-to-face contacts. Thomas, the husband of Sarah Thompson, was sent to London for his education at the Merchant Taylors School founded by one of the livery companies in London. In 1655, Francis Emperor wrote to the same Thomas Willoughby in Barbados for help in recruiting a Puritan minister.
Emperor had left Barbados in 1650, probably when the royalists, led by Humphrey Walrond, were threatening dissidents, and moved to the Norfolk area which, April Hatfield says, had become a magnet for emigrants from the island. The local economy was tied to export trade, supplying naval stores and dried meat provisions. Settlers from England were more likely to move north of the James where tobacco was grown.
Men like Emperor continued to trade with relatives in Barbados, and provided an example for islanders who needed more land than was available there. In 1652 Thomas Modyford had written to Berkeley about the possibility of sending settlers. In 1662 Francis Willoughby had done the same. Even Guy Molesworth, who’d been forced to leave the island in 1650, was in Jamestown in 1660 as an aide to Berkeley.
Hatfield says about 9% of the population of Virginia’s eastern shore were immigrants from other colonies. The son of Isaac Allerton, a somewhat unscrupulous New England merchant who had originally trained as a tailor, moved to Virginia where he became active in the tobacco trade. The younger Isaac eventually married Thomas Willoughby’s sister Elizabeth and moved to the area above the Rappahannock that had been opened after the Indians were subdued.
When Bacon rebelled, personal experience as much as family ties determined who supported whom. Richard Thompson, the Willoughby in-law who grew up hearing about Indian depredations, supported Bacon and later issued a written apology. Allerton, the Willoughby in-law who grew up hearing about family ties to the leading Pilgrim magistrates, supported Berkeley. Thomas himself was dead and his son, Thomas, was too young to participate.
When you look for concrete links between generations to show the diffusion of attitudes towards government and threats of armed rebellion, it is extremely difficult to do more than establish people knew one another. Everyone knows brothers who never speak, and anyone who’s looked at family genealogies knows the problems that arise when the same name is repeated. Some still aren’t convinced Allerton’s wife wasn’t Elizabeth Thompson, sister of Sarah and Richard, instead of their sister-in-law, Elizabeth Willoughby.
But I suspect somewhere in those dusty records, more likely in those for an indentured servant following Francis Emperor than for a major landowner, lay the lines of influence that possibly tie the uprising in Barbados with later ones in this country through oral history. We can only guess what might have been, not what was.
Notes:
Allerton, Walter Scott. A History of the Allerton Family in the United States: 1585 to 1885, 1900.
Brooke, Francis Taliaferro. "Some Contemporary Accounts of Eminent Charaters," William and Mary Quarterly Historical Magazine, 1908, on Richard Thompson.
Castelli, Jorge H. "Willoughby Family of Parham," Tudorplace website.
Hatfield, April Lee. Atlantic Virginia: Intercolonial Relations in the Seventeenth Century, 2007.
Kennedy, Mary Seldon. Seldens of Virginia and Allied Families, volume 2, 1911, on Willoughby family.
Lepore, Jill. Review of Mary Beth Norton, In the Devil's Snare, The New York Times Book Review, 3 November 2002., discusses Indian background of Salem witch trials.
Nichol, Margaret Nolan. "The Thompson Family" of Northumberland County, Virginia, Genealogenie website.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)