James Charles Stuart was born on June 19, 1566 in Scotland. His father was Lord Darnley and his mother was Mary Queen of Scots. James' father was murdered in 1567, before James was even a year old. His mother "was forced to abdicate the Scottish throne soon afterward due to her suspected involvement in the murder." (1) You'll also recall that Mary sought safety in England by seeking help from her cousin Elizabeth, Queen of England. Instead of receiving help she was imprisoned and eventually executed. When Mary abdicated the throne, James, at the age of 13 months, became King James VI of Scotland. (2)
Fast forward now, thirty-six years later, and Elizabeth, the Queen of England, dies childless. King James the VI of Scotland becomes James I King of England. This was the first time the two kingdoms were unified under one King. James would be known as King James VI of Scotland and James I of England. Queen Mary must have been smiling somewhere. Mary lost her kingdom but got the last laugh (sort of, she was dead after all) when her son took over for Elizabeth, the one who had her executed. With James' ascension to the throne, he began a long line of Stuart successors to the throne of England. (3)
Description: King James I of England and VI of Scotland, by Daniel Mytens, 1621. National Portrait Gallery, London: NPG 109
Date: See description
Source: Scanned from the book The National Portrait Gallery History of the Kings and Queens of England by David Williamson, ISBN 1855142287.
Author: Daniël Mijtens (circa 1590–circa 1647)
Permission: (Reusing this file) Reproduction of a painting that is in the public domain because of its age
In 1606 King James chartered the Virginia Company of London. It was formed as a company designed to make a profit for it's shareholders by founding an English Colony in America. In 1607 the Virginia company landed 104 settlers in North America and named the new settlement "Jamestowne" in honor of King James. Jamestowne (the spelling later changed to Jamestown) was the first permanent English settlement on the American mainland. Some historians called King James the "founding monarch of the United States". (5)
Date: Between 1606 and 1624; originally uploaded to en.wikipedia on 16 August 2007.
Source: Plates between pp. 29 and 30 of Wesley Frank Craven (1957, republished 11 April 2009) The Virginia Company of London, 1606–1624 [Jamestown 350th Anniversary historical booklet, no. 5], Williamsburg, Va.: Virginia 350th Anniversary Celebration Corporation (republished by Project Gutenberg as EBook #28555) OCLC: 22551439. The caption reads: "Virginia Seal. Courtesy Mrs. L. T. Jester and Mrs. P. W. Hiden." Image originally from the U.S. National Park Service Colonial Jamestown website accessed on 11 April 2004 (Internet archive of page text athttp://web.archive.org/ web/20040430213806/http://www.nps.gov/colo/Jthanout/VACompany.html.) Similar images of the seal can be seen athttp://www.preservationvirginia.org/rediscovery/page.php?page_id=22 and http://web.ukonline.co.uk/lordcornell/iwhr/va/via.htm. Transferred from en.wikipedia by Hejsa.
Author: Probably the Virginia Company of London; original uploader was VirginiaProp at en.wikipedia.
Permission(Reusing this file): This image is in the public domain due to its age.
In 1609 the Plantation of Ulster began. For years England battled with Gaelic speaking clans in northern Ireland. They were difficult if not impossible to manage for the English authorities. Eventually England moved in with force and killed or pushed out most of these clans. In 1609 northern Ireland was almost vacant. King James wanted settlers to move into this area that were supportive of his rule. He took over all the land in this area and re-distributed the land to new settlers from Scotland and northern England. This is a very short description and an over simplification of a very important and complicated action. Some say this action has had ramifications all the way to modern times. The main reason I mention it is because, from what I have been able to find out, though I have not proven this, is that my Galbraith (later Galbreath) ancestors immigrated from Scotland to northern Ireland during the early or mid 1600s along with thousands of other people from Scotland. These Scotsmen moved into virtually empty space and continued with their farming operations or working on farms just as they had in Scotland. In other words, though they lived in Ireland now, they still considered themselves as being Scotsmen. A century later these Scotsmen's descendants immigrated to the English Colonies in North America in large numbers. A large number settled in Pennsylvania, along with my ancestor, James Galbreath, in the early 1700s. They later were called Scotch-Irish or Scots-Irish by historians but as I mentioned above, the people themselves still called themselves Scotsmen or Scottish. The historians were the ones that coined the Scotch-Irish term years later. (6) So this action certainly had far reaching effect on me and my family. But more on that at a future date, I hope, when I write about the Galbreath line of my family tree.
Description: Map of Ulster
Date: 5 February 2004 Morwen 200x249 (28005 bytes) (map)
Source: Originally from en.wikipedia; description page is (was) here
Author: User Morwen on en.wikipedia
Permission(Reusing this file): Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license is included in the section entitled GNU Free Documentation License. This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license.
The third action by King James the VI of Scotland and King James the I of England (boy that is a long title) that I will mention is one that everyone reading this already knows about and is probably very familiar with. In 1604 King James appointed 54 of the leading scholars in the kingdom to translate the bible into English. In 1611 the "Authorized Version of 1611" was published. This translation became known as the King James Version of the Bible and eventually became the most popular version around the world. (7) Indeed this version is still preferred by many even today.
King James died in 1625 at the age of 58. Amazingly enough, royal power was passed orderly and peacefully to James' adult son, something that had not happened for some time. Charles, the second son of James I, was born in 1600. As the eldest surviving son he became King Charles I upon James' death.
Artist: After Sir Anthony van Dyck
Title: Portrait of King Charles I in his robes of state
Description: Studio version of much copied original in the Royal Collection, Windsor Castle
Date: 1636
Medium: oil
Current location: Royal Collection
Object history: Earl of Sheffield; Listed for sale at London, Christie's, 25 November 1911, lot 117 (unsold); Sold at Parkenthorpe, London, 1912; Sold to Mrs. Whitelaw Reid at New York, Anderson Galleries, 15 May 1935, lots 1195-96; Acquired by Mrs. Elinor Dorrance Hill, Newport, Rhode Island, who gave it to the Wadsworth Atheneum Museum, Hartford, Connecticut; Sold to anonymous buyer at New York, Christie's, 25 May 1999, lot 81 (as Workshop of van Dyck); Sold at New York, Sotheby's, 26 January 2012 for $86,500
References: http://wallacelive.wallacecollection.org:8080/eMuseumPlus?service=ExternalInterface&module=collection&objectId=65046
Source/Photographer: http://www.she-philosopher.com/gallery/lely.html (original upload); http://www.sothebys.com/en/auctions/ecatalogue/2012/important-old-master-paintings-n08825/lot.197.html (higher resolution upload)
Has anyone been keeping count of how many Kings and Queens and assorted others have lost their heads during the 150 years I have written about? I don't remember how many either, but it has been a bunch.
.jpg)
Artist: Paul Delaroche (1797–1856)
Title: The Execution of Lady Jane Grey
Date: 1833
Medium: oil on canvas
Accession number NG1909
Object history 1902: bequeathed to National Gallery by the Second Lord Cheylesmore
Inscriptions Signature and date
Source/Photographer The National Gallery online
Permission(Reusing this file) This is a faithful photographic reproduction of a two-dimensional, public domain work of art. The work of art itself is in the public domain for the following reason: This work is in the public domain in the United States, and those countries with a copyright term of life of the author plus 100 years or less.
This file has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights.
The official position taken by the Wikimedia Foundation is that "faithful reproductions of two-dimensional public domain works of art are public domain".This photographic reproduction is therefore also considered to be in the public domain. In other jurisdictions, re-use of this content may be restricted; see Reuse of PD-Art photographs for details.
I have followed the comings and goings of the heads of the nobility (that's a little pun there). Now, I want to take a look at the rest of the country and see what life was like during the 1500s for the Armisteads and the various social classes.
There were four social classes at this time. The Nobility, which I have talked about, the Gentry, the Yeoman, and finally the Laborer. What was work like for the people in each social class? What were the living conditions like?
By 1500 England had been settled for a long time, but there were large amounts of land still available to be populated. Two centuries of plague had precipitated a sharp decline in populations and England was only starting to make its recovery. England's population in 1500 was about two million. This number would increase to five million by 1650. In 1500 only one person in ten lived in a town in England. Serfdom was starting to disappear but that did not change the fact most of the population, which was the Labor class, still worked for the Gentry and Yeoman classes. After the dissolution of the priory's in 1536-40, more land was made available but the owners of land in the lowlands started to enclose areas for their exclusive use in raising sheep for wool, leather, and meat. These lands had previously been "commons" where the labor class grazed their livestock, maybe a cow or sheep, so they could have butter, milk, and cheese to sell. When the commons were enclosed, the labor class no longer had a place to raise their livestock. Many left the farm and went to the towns to try to find a way to make a living. (9)
Labor/Poor Class.
http://sites.duke.edu/midsummer/category/background-information/social-cultural-and-economic-significance/
The average lifespan was low in England. Disease was the most prolific killer, particularly among the young. Poor sanitation contributed to this problem. It was a struggle to live until you were 30, but if you did you had a good chance to make it to 60. (10) "In 1555-59 bad harvests followed by another influenza like epidemic killed more than one in twenty of the English people." "About half the people in England were poor." (11) They suffered from a lack of food, clothes, shoes, and in the city, from a lack of shelter. In some parts of London 15 or 20 of the poor crammed into live in one room. Many were homeless. In the countryside the poor were farm laborers. Wages were low, with both parents and children doing what they could to survive. This is a quick snapshot of the labor class, the bottom of the social order. (12) They lived difficult lives to say the least.
On the upper end of the scale, but just below the Nobility, was the Gentry Class. The Nobility comprised only about 55 families in England and the Gentry Class comprised only about 5% of the population. The Gentry Class also consisted of wealthy men and were large land holders. The lower classes looked up to the Gentry and Kings and Queens looked to the Gentry to enforce laws and maintain order. They were appointed Justices of the Peace and Judges of the local courts. They set the food prices and collected taxes, which were used to help the poor. "Knights, Squires, Gentlemen, and Gentlewomen composed the Gentry social class." (13)
Gentry Class.
http://sites.duke.edu/midsummer/category/background-information/social-cultural-and-economic-significance/
Making up the class below the Gentry, but above the Labor class, was the Yeoman. They were not rich like the Gentry nor poor like the Laborer. Yeomen were considered the middle class of this time. They owned land and were comfortable but they worked very hard to earn their living. Though they lived a good life they were never-the-less still subject to ruin if disease struck their livestock or some other misfortune hit them. Besides being hard workers, the Yeomen also were generally very religious compared to the Gentry or Nobility. This class included craftsmen, farmers, and tradesmen. (14)
Yeoman Class.
http://sites.duke.edu/midsummer/category/background-information/social-cultural-and-economic-significance/
The Armisteads were in the Yeoman Class. Robert, John, Roger, and Anthony were all farmers as indicated by their wills. It appears that sheep raising was an important part of their farms. Leeds, a town just a few miles south east of Kirk Deighton, was the wool center of England in the 1500s, so I would think sheep raising was prevalent in that area. Also, in the four wills I read, bushels of wheat and barley were bequeathed along with sheep, oxen, ploughs, and farming equipment. That was in addition to their "farm holds, and leases". (15)
Though it seems that most of the early Armisteads were farmers, there were also a number of Armisteads in the Clergy. There were also many Armisteads who were champions of education as indicated by the fact they were benefactors, Head Masters, and Governors of grammar schools in the area.
As a reminder, I am using the spelling of Armistead, but remember there were several different spellings in the records. While I am on that subject, I want to quote from the website www.surnamedb.com. It states, regarding the name of Armistead, "The unusual and interesting name, long associated with Yorkshire, is of medieval English origin, and is a topographical surname denoting residence by a hermit's cell. The derivation is from the Middle English "(h)ermite", hermit, and "stede", place, ultimately from the Old French "ermite", and Olde English "stede". The local pronunciation of the word "ermite" was "armit", hence the early phonetic spelling Armetstede..." "The first recorded spelling of the family name is shown to be that of Laurencias del Armetsted, which was dated 1379, in the 'Poll Tax Returns Records of Yorkshire', "... "Surnames became necessary when governments introduced personal taxation. In England this was known as Poll Tax." Topographical surnames were among the earliest created, since both natural and man-made features in the landscape provided obvious and convenient means of identification in the small communities of the Middle Ages." (16)
We know the Armisteads I have mentioned (Robert, John, Roger, Anthony, William) were all in Yorkshire near Kirk Deighton. But where did their ancestors come from? Did they move here from somewhere else? To try and pinpoint the Armisteads origins, I looked at a website by Kenrick Armitstead. (Note the spelling of his name.) In a very well written post on his site, Mr. Armitstead takes the name back to the ancient parish of Giggleswick. (My personal favorite parish in England. I just love saying it!) In his article Kenrick Armitstead states that Giggleswick is located in the West Riding of Yorkshire and that it was a Norse settlement. The name means "the wick or village of Gikel". Also, he says "Astride the boundary between Giggleswick and Clapham, it's western neighbor, lies the farmhouse known as Armitstead. There was originally a hamlet here, but all that remains of it is the farm together with outbuildings containing various remains of previous houses." (17) There must have also been a hermit cell near by to give the origin of the name but he doesn't mention one in this article.
Hermit Cell
http://www.misyononline.com/new/may-jun2013/peace-peace
Again quoting from Mr. Armitstead's article regarding our previously mentioned Laurence de Armitstead. "A Franklin (later this became Yeoman) was a farmer not of gentle birth who owned his own land, and in 1379 Laurence de Armitstead was the only Franklin in Giggleswick, the highest taxpayer in the village apart from Robert Stainford, the Lord of the Manor..." (18)
Kirk Deighton is located about 45 miles east of Giggleswick per google maps. I would think that this distance would not have been too far to expect a younger son that did not inherit land to move there and try to get his start. Kenrick Armiststead, however, advances the proposition that the Armitsteads worked for the noble Percy family or as he put it, "...were numbered among their retainers..." In other words they owned some land and leased some land from the Percy family. Because the Percy family was the primary land owner in Giggleswick and also in Kirk Deighton, some of the Armitsteads would have moved into the Kirk Deighton area to farm and work the Percy family's land. (19) This branch of the family in Kirk Deighton, at some point, began to spell their name as Armistead. You may remember another connection I mentioned previously between these two parishes. William Armistead of Kirk Deighton married Anne Ellis of Giggleswick.
On this map you can see Giggleswick, close to Settle, Kirk Deighton close to Wetherby, and Skipton, where Ermystead's Grammar School is located. All located within a close proximity.
Google Maps.
What conclusions can we draw from all this? Probably not any absolutes but taken all together I think there is a lot of circumstantial evidence that my line of Armisteads goes back through Kirk Deighton and then to Giggleswick Parrish in England.
I think I have promised before to get to William and Anne, but then I have gotten long winded on something else. Will I be writing about Anne Ellis and William Armistead next time? Well, you'll just have to tune in and see for yourself.
References:
(1) http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/kinginde.htm
(2) Ibid
(3) Ibid
(4) Ibid
(5) Ibid
(6) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plantation_of_Ulster
(7) http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/kinginde.htm
(8) http://www.britannia.com/history/monarchs/mon47.html
(9) http://www.historytoday.com/steven-gunn/britain-1500
(10) http://www.historytoday.com/steven-gunn/britain-1500
(11) http://www.lukas-krumnacker.de/Englisch/British-history/1500-1750/index.htm
(12) http://www.historytoday.com/steven-gunn/britain-1500
(13) http://sites.duke.edu/midsummer/category/background-information/social-cultural-and-economic-significance/
(14) Ibid
(15) Harris, john Michael, Camberwell, London, England. Article placed on the Enchanted World website: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~enchantedworld/Armistead/index-english.htm
(16) http://www.surnamedb.com/Surname/Armistead
(17) http://www.fitzwalter.com/afh/Armitstead/armithist1.htm
(18) Ibid
(19) Ibid
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please include your e-mail address.
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.