Meixner Messages

Thursday, January 15, 2015

Armistead Family History #7 - The Next Generation

Bacon's Rebellion, Virginia, and England at the End of the Seventeenth Century

Between 1650 and 1700, Virginia and the other British Colonies grew rapidly, increasing the total population of the colonies from 50,400 to 251,000. Virginia grew from 18,700 to 58,600 and was still the largest colony, by population, closely followed by Massachusetts at 55,900. By 1700, twelve of the thirteen original colonies had been established, with Georgia yet to be founded. The other colonies consisted of New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, North Carolina, and South Carolina. (1)

In 1680 "the English clockmaker Thomas Tompion [was] the first to make successful use of the hairspring in pocket watches" (2) and Edmund Halley became intrigued by a comet. He later worked out the computations to show how often this comet passed by earth. The comet became known as Halley's Comet. However, even as scientific advancements were being made around the world, in 1692, witch hunts erupted in Salem, MA and continued into 1693. The resulting hysteria produced one hundred and fifty arrests and nineteen deaths. (3) Also, as I mentioned last time, Bacon's Rebellion caused major confrontations in Virginia Colony in 1676.

While the reasons for the build up that eventually led to Bacon's Rebellion were somewhat complicated, there are several events that we can point out that were contributing factors. Economic issues, an ever present issue it seems, came into play. Economic conditions were bad due to low prices for tobacco, high prices for manufactured goods from England, and competition from Maryland and the Carolina's. All of these factors came together to create unrest and unhappiness amongst the colonists. Add to the poor economy waves of turbulent weather conditions such as hurricanes, hailstorms, and alternate dry spells and floods during the previous year and it is easy to see why colonists were worried and upset.

All these events together combined to cause deep frustrations felt by the colonist. When this happens people look for someone to blame and some way to vent. The last spark for the Rebellion came after a dispute between a local tribe of Doeg Indians, who felt they had been cheated in a business deal, and a local plantation owner. In an attempt to get restitution the Doeg tribe raided the colonist. A retaliatory raid by the colonists on the Doeg tribe followed and of course this only brought about more raids by both sides.

Portrait of Sir William Berkeley, Governor of Virginia. Image ca. 1917 of a painting at Library of Virginia, after an original painting circa 1663.

Painter Hariott L.T. Montague after Sir Peter Lely - Page 146 of Mary Newton Stanard (1865-1929), Colonial Virginia, its People and Customs. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott & Co., 1917. From digital scan athttp://archive.org/details/colonialvirginia00stan
License details: This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published (or registered with the U.S. Copyright Office) before January 1, 1923. Public domain works must be out of copyright in both the United States and in the source country of the work in order to be hosted on the Commons. If the work is not a U.S. work, the file must have an additional copyright tag indicating the copyright status in the source country.

In an effort to try and gain control of the situation, Governor Berkeley set up a meeting between the parties involved in the confrontations. Unfortunately, after the meeting ended, several tribal chiefs were murdered. Things deteriorated even further from there. Another move Berkeley made in attempting to gain control of this volatile situation was to try and seize control of trade with the Indians. In an attempt to have more say over trade he named his associates as favored traders and in doing so he left out the regular traders, some of whom had traded with the Indians for years. Of course this only caused further unrest. It is at this point in the sequence of events that Nathaniel Bacon entered the picture. Nathaniel Bacon was one of those regular traders with the Indians that was left out. To make matters worse, Berkeley had also recently refused to grant Bacon a commission in the military.

LOC description is "[Nathaniel Bacon, three-quarter length portrait, seated, facing right] Engraving by T. Chambars after a painting by Seipse. created/published [between 1760 and 1800]."

Date between 1760 and 1800
Source: http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/collections/jefferson_papers/nbacon.html
Author: Engraving by T. Chambars after a self portrait
Licensing: 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.

In retaliation for these actions, Bacon accused Berkeley of favoritism and of failure to solve the problems with the Indians. Bacon now took matters into his own hands. Armed with jugs of brandy and a promise to foot the bill, Bacon was elected to be the General of several hundred of the local militia. Bacon then proceeded to lead his men against the Indian tribes. Unfortunately, his attacks included attacking a group of friendly Indians and again the situation just got worse.

Berkeley was facing a disastrous situation. He offered up a pardon to Bacon for taking the law into his own hands if he would turn himself in. In the interim Bacon was elected to be one of the Burgesses from his county. He arrived to take his seat in June 1676. Berkeley pardoned him and let him take his seat. However, during a debate over the "Indian problem" Bacon suddenly left the assembly. He later returned to the statehouse with his militia forces, surrounded it, and demanded a commission from Berkeley. Berkeley refused and famously told Bacon to go on and shoot him. Bacon did not shoot him but instead switched to pressuring and threatening the members of the assembly into giving him a commission and left with his armed force of men. Since he was in the Assembly at this time, I think my ancestor Anthony Armistead was standing there while Bacon aimed his rifle at Berkeley. When Berkeley would not back down, I think Anthony saw the rifles moved and aimed at him and the other assemblymen. They probably acted prudently in giving into Bacon and giving him his commission. Who knows if Bacon would have carried through with his threats to shoot them.

At this time, Berkeley decided to take his leave of the capital and Bacon was basically allowed to come back in and take control. He remained in control through September. During this time Bacon issued a "Declaration of the People", calling Berkeley corrupt and playing favorites. He also demanded loyalty from the colonists.

Finally, Berkeley started to marshal his forces to move against Bacon. Greatly angered by this action, Bacon burned the capital city of Jamestown. This extreme action turned the tide against Bacon and his followers. On Oct 26, 1676, Nathaniel Bacon died of acute dysentery and it was only a short time until Berkeley regained control of the colony.

It is at this point of the story that my ancestor, Anthony Armistead, played a part in the end of the Rebellion. He was a member of the House of Burgesses and was selected to be a member of Berkeley's court that brought court martial proceedings against members of Bacon's rebels. Of course Bacon was already dead but twenty-three of Bacon's rebels were eventually convicted and hanged, including the former governor of Albemarle Sound Colony, William Drummond.

Over the years historians have proposed different reasons behind Bacon's attacks, but it seems that it has mostly been concluded that this was a case of Bacon trying to seize an opportunity to increase his power and standing and the result was a "power struggle" between Bacon and Berkeley, two strong willed men. A short time later the crown recalled Berkeley to London and relieved him of the office of governor. In May 1677 a formal peace treaty was signed between the Indians and the colonists and relative peace was restored to the colony. William Berkeley died in July 1677 in England, where he was trying to clear his name. (4)

King James II

Painting bySir Godfrey Kneller (1646–1723). See source website for additional information.This set of images was gathered by User: Dcoetzee from the National Portrait Gallery, London website using a special tool. All images in this batch have been confirmed as author died before 1939 according to the official death date listed by the NPG. 1684. National Portrait Gallery: NPG 666 While Commons policy accepts the use of this media, one or more third parties have made copyright claims against Wikimedia Commons in relation to the work from which this is sourced or a purely mechanical reproduction thereof. This may be due to recognition of the "sweat of the brow" doctrine, allowing works to be eligible for protection through skill and labour, and not purely by originality as is the case in the United States (where this website is hosted). These claims may or may not be valid in all jurisdictions.As such, use of this image in the jurisdiction of the claimant or other countries may be regarded as copyright infringement. Please seeCommons:When to use the PD-Art tag for more information.See User:Dcoetzee/NPG legal threat for more information. This tag does not indicate the copyright status of the attached work. A normal copyright tag is still required. See ommons:Licensing for more information.

By this time, after only three short years, Parliament had had enough of James II. In 1688 they turned to Mary, James II's protestant daughter, and her husband, William of Orange, in an effort to get rid of James II. William was the current ruler of Holland. The English Parliament asked him to invade England and to help them force James II from the throne. William agreed and invaded England. Rather than be captured and suffer the consequences, (and we all know what usually happens to royalty that falls out of favor and gets captured) James fled to France. In actuality, William assisted James in his effort to leave the country. James lived out his days in France and William of Orange and Mary assumed the throne of England as William III and Mary II. (6)

I have to stop and take a little break here. I don't know about you but to me this king and queen thing in England is very complex and confusing. Anyone from Great Britain that happens to read this post: is this a hard subject in school? I would think it would be very difficult to remember and keep up with all the various cris-crossing of families between countries and kingdoms, etc. And now, according to a recent report, there is even more to muddle the picture. A recent report by scientists on the genetic analysis of King Richard III's DNA shows there was a break in the male line. In other words there was an instance of female infidelity. (Somewhere along the line there was a male who slipped into the bedroom of one of the females in Richard's bloodline and....well, you know the rest.) To read the article about King Richard III's DNA analysis, go to the website at: http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-30281333. Interesting story.

I know my explanations of bloodlines etc. are short and possibly confusing. If you would like to dig in deeper go to: www.britannia.com/index.html. It is a very interesting website where you can read much more about the monarchs.

OK, I'm refreshed, let's forge ahead. Mary II was born in 1662. She was the daughter and second child of James II and Anne Hyde. It seems sons and daughters were often a part of a monarch's foreign policy and Mary was no exception. When her uncle, Charles II, was king, he married her off to William of Orange, Nov. 4, 1677. Mary was only fifteen and he was twelve years older than she was. In addition he repulsed Mary. Oops, not a great way to start a marriage. Fortunately, I guess, Mary "eventually came to love both the man and his country". (7) On Williams part, he promptly started an affair with one of Mary's ladies in waiting. The affair was long lasting but Mary was devoted to her husband.

Ceiling of the Painted Hall, detail of King William III (1650-1702) and Queen Mary II (1662-94) Enthroned, 1707-14

Author: Painting: Sir James Thornhill (1675-1734) / Royal Naval College
Date: 18th century
Photo: James Brittain
Source: http://www.bridgemanartondemand.com/art/86713/Ceiling_of_the_Painted_Hall_detail_of_King_William_III
Licensing: 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: The author died in 1734, so this work is in the public domain in its country of origin and other countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 100 years or less. This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published (or registered with the U.S. Copyright Office) before January 1, 1923. 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.

Although the Parliament had succeeded in getting rid of James II, they had created a dilemma. They wanted Mary to rule as Queen and William to be Prince Consort. William and Mary had other plans and the Parliament soon gave in and made them King William III and Queen Mary II, co-rulers of England. William and Mary ruled until Mary's death from smallpox in 1694. She died childless. William died in 1702, after being thrown from a horse. (8)

After Berkley was relieved as governor in 1677, Sir Herbert Jeffries was appointed as governor of Virginia Colony. Over the remaining 22 years of the 17th Century, there were five more governors and three lieutenant governors. In Elizabeth City County, a third Generation of Virginia Armisteads started to make their mark on the colony. But before getting into the next generation, let me review the Virginia Armisteads.

You recall that William and Anne Armistead were the first to settle in Virginia around 1635-36 and that they had four known children: William, John, Anthony, and Frances. The eldest son, William, probably died before 1660, John moved up to Gloucester County, and Anthony stayed in Elizabeth City County. Their daughter, Frances, was somewhat unlucky in marriage, having two husbands die a short time after marriage, but did finally have a longer lasting third marriage.

Because the father, William, was so successful, both surviving sons were able to start out as prosperous plantation owners. As a consequence they were also prominent leaders in their respective counties and served in prominent political positions. I recounted the list of positions they held in my last post and, also, as I mentioned above, Anthony played a part in events surrounding Bacon's Rebellion. In addition, John, was appointed to a vacancy on the Governor's Council in 1688 by Governor Francis Howard, baron Howard of Effingham. John was on friendly terms with the Governor, who at times resided at the home of John's son-in-law Ralph Wormley. John Armistead would only serve two and a half years on the council because when William and Mary ascended to the throne, he refused, as John stated "thro Scruple of Conscience", to swear allegiance to the new monarchs. Seven years later he would be reinstated by the Crown but he never took the oath. He may have died by this time or he may have retired from politics. We do not know the exact date of his death. (9)

So while John and his descendants were prospering in Gloucester County, Anthony and his descendants were prospering in Elizabeth City County. I listed Anthony and Hannah's children in my last post but to recap, they had: William, Robert, Hannah, Judith, and Anthony. Their eldest son, Major William Armistead (1667-1716), continued the Armisteads influence in the government of the colony. He served as Sheriff of Elizabeth City, 1695, Justice from 1692 to 1715, Burgess, 1692-93, 1700-1705, 1710-1713 and was a Major in the militia.

Major William Armistead married first, Hannah Hinde, and second Rebecca Moss. With Hannah it is believed he had Anthony Armistead (1691-1738), John Armistead (1692-1734), William Armistead (1694-1727), Hinde Armistead (1696-1722), and with Rebecca he had Moss, Robert, Edward, Hannah, Dunn, and Judith. I've included a chart with the family information below.

Individual Report for Major William Armistead. Printed from Family Tree Maker.

As the 17th Century was coming to a close there were big changes taking place in the Virginia Colony. After Bacon torched the capital city of Jamestown in 1676, the city struggled to recover. Many structures were not rebuilt. Meanwhile, a few miles up the road at what started out as a militia defense outpost, a settlement was growing. This outpost was called Middle Plantation and that would become the settlement name. Significantly, this was the home of Bruton Parish Church and, beginning in 1690, the home of Reverend James Blair. Blair was appointed commissary for the colony by the Bishop of London. The Bishop wanted the commissary to eliminate abuses by the clergy, such as drinking on the job, not holding services, etc. He also wanted a Seminary in the colony to train new ministers. Rev. Blair set about carrying out his duties. Because he did not like Jamestown, he located as much power and authority in middle Plantation as possible. (10)

Photograph of the front of the Wren Building at the College of William & Mary in Williamsburg, Virginia, USA, taken by Moody Meixner Oct 9, 2011.

In 1693 Rev. Blair secured a charter for a college in Middle Plantation. He named the college William and Mary in honor of the current monarchs, William III and Mary II. The College of William and Mary became only the second college to be founded in the colonies, Harvard was the first. To quote from the College's website: "William & Mary has been called 'the Alma Mater of a Nation' because of it's close ties to American founding fathers. A 17-year old George Washington received his surveyor's license through the college and would return as its first American chancellor. Thomas Jefferson received his graduate education here, as did presidents John Tyler, and James Monroe." (11)

An oil painting of Rev. James Blair, founder of the College of William and Mary.

Author: Attributed to Charles Bridges (1690–1747)
Date.: 1735–1743
Source/Photographer: Original is owned by the College of William and Mary and hangs in the Great Hall of the Wren Building. Image uploaded from Encyclopedia Virginia: link
Licensing: 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.

The website continued "The college is famous for it's firsts: the first U.S. institution with a Royal Charter, the first Greek-letter society (Phi Beta Kappa formed in 1776), the first student honor code, the first college to become a university, and the first law school in America." As the site also stated: "Not many colleges can say they've cancelled classes because 'the British invaded'". (12)

By 1698 Middle Plantation had grown into an established settlement. Back in Jamestown the statehouse burned for the 4th time and support grew stronger to move the capital from Jamestown. The Assembly finally decided to move the Capital to Middle Plantation and the settlement's name was changed to Williamsburg.

Williamsburg's Governors Palace

This is an image of a place or building that is listed on the National Register of Historic Places in the United States of America. Its reference number is 66000925 More images.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Backpalace.jpg. Uploaded to en: by Agriculture on February 20, 2005 and licensed under GFDL; croppe by Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:44, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Old Capitol Building, Williamsburg.

Note the incorrect flag, the red saltire wasn't added to the Union Jack until 1801, i.e. after the USA achieved independence from the United Kingdom. This is an image of a place or building that is listed on the National Register of Historic Places in the United States of America. Its reference number is 66000925 More images.
Date: 7 December 2007
Source: Taken by Tijuana Brass; Transferred from en.wikipedia; description page is/was here.
Author: Original uploader was Tijuana Brass at en.wikipedia
Permission(Reusing this file) This work is in the public domain in that it was published in the United States between 1923 and 1977 and without a copyright notice. Unless its author has been dead for several years, it is copyrighted in jurisdictions that do not apply therule of the shorter term for US works, such as Canada (50 p.m.a.), Mainland China (50 p.m.a., not Hong Kong or Macao), Germany (70 p.m.a.), Mexico (100 p.m.a.), Switzerland (70 p.m.a.), and other countries with individual treaties. See this page for further explanation.

So in 1699 the colony had a new Capital. It took a few years to get the town laid out as they wanted, to get the proper infrastructure (roads), and to build the necessary buildings (like a new statehouse), but Williamsburg grew and prospered. Jamestown, meanwhile, continued to decline.

Just as the 18th Century would bring new directions for Virginia, the new century would also bring new directions for some of the Armistead family as well. I'll discuss that in my next post.

References:

(1) http://web.viu.ca/davies/h320/population.colonies.htm
(2) http://bcw-project.org/timelines/the-second-civil-war
(3) http://www.fm.coe.uh.edu/timeline/1600s.html
(4) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacon's_Rebellion and http://www.nps.gov/jame/historyculture/bacons-rebellion.htm
(5) http://www.britannia.com/history/monarchs/mon50.html
(6) http://www.britannia.com/history/monarchs/mon51.html
(7) Ibid.
(8) Ibid.
(9) http://www.encyclopediavirginia.org/Armistead_John_fl_1650s-1690s
(10) Morgan, Timothy E., Williamsburg, A City That History Made, Arcadia Publishing, Charleston, South Carolina, 2004, pg 26-27.
(11) http://www.wm.edu/about/history/index.php
(12) http://www.wm.edu/about/history/index.php

Sunday, September 14, 2014

Armistead Family History #6 - A New Home in Virginia Colony

Settling in Elizabeth City County

In 1636 the Virginia Colony had a population of about 5,000. By 1640 Virginia Colony had over 10,000 people, Plymouth and Massachusetts had just under 10,000 people, and the population of all of the colonies together was only 26,634, so as you can see, most of the population was centered in two colonies. By 1650 the population of Virginia was only 18,700 and still concentrated around the James River, with just a small area in Gloucester County just north of the York River. (1) I put together a crude map below to give you an idea of the concentration of the population in 1650.

The area shaded in blue is obviously water located in the James and York Rivers, Chesapeake Bay, and Mobjack Bay. The red shading shows where the population was located in 1650. The dates indicate when the town or county was formed. Map drawn by Moody Meixner using information from a map published by Houghton Mifflin Company.

Back in England, King Charles I was on the throne but in the Virginia Colony William and Anne were settling into their new life. Colonial records show William Armistead receiving a grant for headrights to 450 acres in Elizabeth City County on 7 July 1636. The said land "lying SE upon land of Mr. Southell, N.E. upon land of John Branch, E. upon the Cr. & W. into the woods. Trans. of 9 pers: Ann his wife, Rowland Owen, Rich Clements, Robt. Glenister, Yorath Dane, Rich. Banks, Robt. Kendall, Andr. Strecher, Gilbert Guy." This means William paid for 9 people to be transported to the Colony and was rewarded with 450 acres. On 16 May 1638 he purchased another 300 acres in the same area when he completed a transaction with Richard Popeley. (2)

Over the next two decades William would enter into several more transactions that we can find in existing records. It is likely there may have been others that we no longer have records to. He expanded his operations northward into Gloucester County along the Eastermost River and near Mobjack Bay when he transported 24 people and received 1213 acres. At the same time another 600 acre transaction is recorded in the same area for transporting 12 people. (3)

William and his sons were among the earliest of the English settlers that opened up this land for farming and settlement by others from Europe. He was truly one of the early pioneers.

Colonist building a house.
Goodrich (1), S. G. A Pictorial History of the United States. Philadelphia: E. H. Butler and Company, 1883. http://ushistoryimages.com/sources.shtm

Of course during this time William and Anne were also busy having and raising a family. I have not been able to find any surviving records for the exact dates of birth for their children, nor do I know if there were additional children that were born that died early. I have only found four children that survived to adulthood. A possible birth date for the eldest of their children, William, is about 1634-1636. William was the oldest and there is a case to be made he was born in England, but there is no record for it. The next child we know of is John, who I have estimated was born ca. 1638-1640. Anthony is the next child we know of and I place an estimated birth of around 1642-45 for him. The last child is Francis, and I have placed a date of birth for her as ca. 1647-48. If someone out there has documented dates or a reason for better estimates please let me know.

At the time of William and Anne's arrival in Virginia Colony, the governor was Sir John Harvey. He was appointed by the king in 1628 and served to 1639. Because he remained mostly in England, there were acting governors in Virginia: John Pott (1629-30), The Honorable John West (1635-1636), and Col. George Reade (1638-1639). Sir Francis Wyatt was appointed for the years 1639-1642. (4)

Probably the most important or most significant appointment of governor came in 1642, with the appointment of Sir William Berkeley. Berkeley was born into a landed gentry family in England in 1605. Though his father died when he was only 12, Berkeley inherited land and was able to secure a proper education. Between the status of his family and his education he was able to gain a place in the household of King Charles I in 1632. This facilitated his entry into "The Wits", a court literary circle. He flourished there, writing several plays. He would then gain a knighthood for fighting in the First and Second Bishops' Wars (1639-40). (5)

Portrait of Sir William Berkeley, Governor of Virginia. Image ca. 1917 of a painting at Library of Virginia, after an original painting circa 1663.
Painter Hariott L.T. Montague after Sir Peter Lely - Page 146 of Mary Newton Stanard (1865-1929), Colonial Virginia, its People and Customs. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott & Co., 1917. From digital scan athttp://archive.org/details/colonialvirginia00stan
License details: This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published (or registered with the U.S. Copyright Office) before January 1, 1923. Public domain works must be out of copyright in both the United States and in the source country of the work in order to be hosted on the Commons. If the work is not a U.S. work, the file must have an additional copyright tag indicating the copyright status in the source country.

In 1641 Berkeley was appointed to replace Sir Francis Wyatt as Governor of Virginia. He proved to be a very capable governor. He worked for a prosperous Virginia in four ways: "a diverse economy; free trade; a close knit colonial society; and autonomy from London." (6) He used his own farm to experiment with many different crops to try and point the way to more diversity in the crops that were planted. This effort was not particularly successful but another initiative was. In presiding over the General Assembly he asserted his position to push for more autonomy from England, allowing the Burgesses to share his powers in running the government. The Assembly was, in effect a "miniature Parliament", assuming strong local rule. In addition he enacted friendly policies toward the Native Americans. As we will see, this last action would prove to create a major crisis for him later on. Because of this and other actions, Berkeley's positive influence was felt in Virginia for a long time. He was looked on as a very successful governor until Bacon's Rebellion broke out in 1676, during his second stay in office. I'll have more to say about Bacon's Rebellion later. (7)

Berkeley's first turn at governor came to an end in 1652. When civil war broke out in England between the king and parliament, Berkeley supported the king. Even after Charles I was beheaded in 1649 he continued to support the Stuarts. He pulled this juggling act off until parliament sent troops to the colony in 1652 and he was forced to resign. Parliament allowed him to keep his land in Virginia, and his head, I might add. (8)

Oliver Cromwell
Painting: Samuel Cooper (died 1672) - National Portrait Gallery, London: NPG 514
Oliver Cromwell, by Samuel Cooper (died 1672). See source website for additional information. This set of images was gathered by User: Dcoetzee from the National Portrait Gallery, London website using a special tool. All images in this batch have been confirmed as author died before 1939 according to the official death date listed by the NPG.

Oliver Cromwell was born in 1599 in Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire, England. He was born into a minor gentry family, he attended Cambridge University, and was elected to parliament 1628-1629.
He was elected again in 1640 and was in parliament when Civil War broke out between parliament and Charles I in 1642. Cromwell had no military experience, but never-the-less he formed a force of Calvary, known as "Ironsides", and in a few years rose to the rank of lieutenant-general. He was victorious in numerous battles against the king's forces and convinced the parliament to establish a professional army. He would eventually be a driving force behind bringing Charles I to trial and bringing about his hanging. (9)

Title: Portrait of King Charles I in his robes of state
Artist: After Sir Anthony van Dyck
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)

For the next few years Cromwell continued to have battles to win, which he did, and he continued to grow in strength politically, until he was strong enough to proclaim himself Lord Protector. "In 1657 he refused the offer of the crown. At home Lord Protector Cromwell reorganized the national church, established Puritanism, readmitted Jews into Britain, and presided over a certain degree of religious tolerance. Abroad, he ended the war with Portugal (1653) and Holland (1654) and allied with France against Spain, defeating the Spanish at the Battle of the Dunes (1658). Cromwell died on Sep. 3, 1658 in London." (10) That sounds like a very successful time as Lord Protector. In addition, and probably most important, he would forever set the direction of parliament having control of the crown. Parliament passed a number of laws to assure it's power in the future. (However, the English never seem to be satisfied, because only three years after the crown was restored in 1660, Cromwell's body was dug up and hung, drawn and quartered. Hmmm, not even sure what to say about that.)

Upon Cromwell's death in 1658, his son, Richard, became his successor, but was only lord protector for about 9 months before abdicating. He fled to Paris but would later return to England under an assumed name, where he lived until his death in 1712. (11)

Well, so much for a Protectorate, let's bring back the royal kings and queens! In May 1660, Charles II was made the King of England. Charles was the second son of Charles I and Henrietta of France. Remember, just a few years ago they hung his dad but now they are bringing in the son as king and digging up poor old dead Oliver to hang.

Charles was born in 1630 and spent his teenage years fighting Parliament's forces. When his dad was executed, he escaped to France and spent the next 8 years roaming around Europe. He would marry Catherine of Braganza, but would have no "legitimate" children. In 1660, after Richard Cromwell's abdication, Charles was invited back to England to become King Charles II. (12)

King Charles II by John Michael Wright or studio- National Portrait Gallery, London: NPG 531
See source website for additional information. This set of images was gathered by User: Dcoetzee from the National Portrait Gallery, London website using a special tool. All images in this batch have a known author, but have manually examined for strong evidence that the author was dead before 1939, such as approximate death dates, birth dates, floruit dates, and publication dates.

So, as I mentioned before, although England had a king again, it's destiny was forever changed. Going forward there would be no royal prerogative and Parliament would have the superior role over the crown. Political parties emerged in the Whigs and Tories. Charles' reign lasted for 25 years but was not a great reign. Besides Charles' ineffectiveness as king, the country suffered two great tragedies. In 1665 the Great Plague of London caused 100,000 deaths in one year and just one year later the Great Fire of London destroyed 13,200 houses and 81 churches. (13) On the bright side during his reign, "British chemist Robert Boyle defines the inverse relationship between pressure and volume in any gas", (This would become known as Boyle's Law.) and in 1672 "Isaac Newton's experiments with the prism demonstrate the link between wavelength and color in light." (14)

"Charles' era is remembered as the time of 'Merry Olde England'. The monarchy, although limited in scope, was successfully restored - the eleven years of Commonwealth were officially ignored as nothing more than an interregnum between the reign of Charles I and Charles II." (15) Charles died in 1685 from a stroke.

With the Restoration of the king in 1660, Sir William Berkeley's fortunes brightened. In that year he was appointed as governor of Virginia Colony again. This time around Berkley's term as governor would not work out as well as the first.

By the year 1660 many things had changed in the Armistead household. I have not found any direct death records, but I believe both William and Anne, as well as their son William, were all dead by 1660. In "York County Virginia Records, 1659-1662" I found the following reference: "I, John Armstead, as heir and one of the executors of Mr. William Armstead, dec'd, assignee of Mr. Mathew Bassett, impower Thomas Penrynn to implead and present John Insworth at county court and proceed agst him. Last of Aug. 1660, Jno. Armstead, Wit: Walter Blake, Edward Goodall" (All spelling as in original text.) (16) John would have to be the only one still living to be heir because he was second oldest son behind William, Jr. So at this time, only John, Anthony and Francis are still living.

Printed from Family Tree Maker charts for William Armistead.

As I have mentioned, William, Sr. was a large land owner, having operations in Elizabeth City County, York County, and Gloucester County. It appears that as soon as John was old enough to handle the operation in Gloucester, William, Sr. sent him to manage that property. In about 1665 John married Judith Robinson in Gloucester and became a very successful plantation owner in his own right. They had four children, Judith, Elizabeth, Henry, and William. Descendants of John would play very important roles in the history of the U.S. I hope to spend some time later on this branch. I have covered some of them in other posts that you may recall.

William and Anne's only surviving daughter, Frances, married three times, outliving her first two husbands, Rev. Justinian Aylmer, and Lt. Col. Anthony Elliott. She then married Capt. Christopher Wormeley. I am uncertain how many children she had, possibly two or four. Frances died 25 May 1685.

Anthony Armistead, (1645-1726) the third son of William and Anne, stayed in Elizabeth City County. By now you have noticed that I have put some of the names in bold type and underlined them. If you haven't noticed you really weren't paying attention or have a big problem with your eyes. The reason for doing this is to try to help you with who my direct line ancestors are. I think it will help keep things straight as I move down to each generation. I have determined from my research that Anthony is the next in line of my ancestors. There are certainly disagreements out there about the Armistead's tree, in fact I have changed my tree a couple times, but I will proceed with giving my direct line as I see it at this point, because I believe it to be the most logical based on records I have read. Anthony married Hannah Ellyson (1648-1728) in about 1666. Anthony is listed in the records mostly as Captain Anthony Armistead so I will use that as well. They had five children: William (1667-1716) (who was a Major), Anthony (1668-1728) (who was a Lt. Col.), Robert (1674-1742), Hannah (1679-1748), and Judith (1680-1750). (17) Some dates are estimates and some are accurate, being based on wills, newspapers, etc.

Printed from Family Tree Maker charts for Captain Anthony Armistead.

Captain Anthony Armistead and his elder brother John Armistead (referred to in records as "The Councilor") assumed important roles in the early Virginia Colony. John Armistead, The Councilor, was high Sheriff of Gloucester County and also served in the Assembly in 1680-82, 1685-1686, and in 1688 was named to the Council of State. Captain Anthony was Captain of horse in the militia, served as Justice of the Peace, and was Sheriff in Elizabeth City County. He was elected to the Assembly as a Burgess in sessions, 1676-77, 1680-82, 1683-84, 1693, 1695-96, 1696-97, 1698, 1699, and 1703. He was on the "committee in 1700 that reported a revision of the laws that was approved by the general assembly in 1705." (18) (19) Having been elected or appointed to these positions, tells us he was a large land owner and a man of exceptional influence in his county and the colony.

Being in the Assembly in 1676-1677 turned out to be an historical two years for Captain Armistead.

Next time I will write about the Armisteads and Bacon's Rebellion in the years 1676-1677, the Virginia Colony, and England in the last part of the 17th Century.

References:

(1) http://web.viu.ca/davies/h320/population.colonies.htm
(2) Nugent, Mell Marion, Cavaliers and Pioneers, Abstracts of Virginia Land Patents and Grants, 1623–1800, Vol One, Press of the Dietz Printing Co., Richmond, VA., 1934, pg. 45, Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2012 with funding from University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, http://www.archive.org/details/cavalierspioneer00nuge,
(3) Ibid., pg. 218.
(4) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_colonial_governors_of_Virginia
(5) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Berkeley_(governor)
(6) Ibid.
(7) Ibid.
(8) Ibid.
(9) http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/cromwell_oliver.shtml
(10) Ibid.
(11) Ibid.
(12) http://www.britannia.com/history/monarchs/mon49.html
(13) Ibid.
(14) Ibid.
(15) Ibid.
(16) Weisiger, III, Benjamin B., York County Virginia Records, 1659-1662, Iberian Publishing Co., Athens, Georgia, 1989.
(17) Genealogies of Virginia Families, From the William and Mary College Quarterly Historical Magazine, Vol I, Adams-Clopton, Indexed by Carol Lee Ford, Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc. , 1982, pg. 121.
(18) Ibid. pg., 120-121.
(19) Tyler, Lyon G., M.A.LL.D., History of Hampton and Elizabeth City Virginia, The Board of Supervisors of Elizabeth City County, Hampton, Virginia, 1922, pg. 27-28, 38.

Monday, June 9, 2014

Armistead Family History #5 - The Decision

William and Anne Armistead

England Births and Christenings, 1538 - 1975 for Kirk Deighton, Yorkshire, England, shows a Christening date for William Armisteed, son of Anthony Armisteed. The date is Aug 3, 1610, which indicates he was probably born a little earlier that year. I've mentioned Kirk Deighton several times in previous posts and included maps indicating the location. The Christening took place at All Saints Church, Yorkshire, England.

This is a copy of the record as it is listed on the FamilySearch website. The citation is at the bottom of the page above. Record of William Armisteed's Christening.

My cousin, Claudia, was fortunate enough to make a trip to England a few years ago and took several photographs of the old church. Yes, I am very jealous and I have this little plan hatching in the back of my mind that someday soon Kay and I are going to make a trip to England so I can visit that church. Anyone like to come along?

So just how old is this church where my ancestor was christened? A church is mentioned in a survey made in 1086 which may have been located where the present church is located. The existing north arcade is c1150-1175. Additional alterations and additions were made in the 1300s, and again between 1425-50. Extensive rebuilding took place in 1849. The stained glass is Victorian. (Information from the website at: http://spofforthandkirkdeightonparish.co.uk/kirk-deighton)

Please be sure to read the captions under these pictures to see what Claudia had to say about them.

Claudia had this note about the church: "The church was locked and we had to walk into town (two blocks) and call the man to let us in. He was on his way our of town but when Graham told him we had come all the way from Texas, he came and let us in. As we were walking up to the Church, he turned to me and said, 'So you are Armisteads then'? We must be famous."
All photographs courtesy of Claudia Brown.

From Claudia Brown, "All Saints Church, Kirk Deighton, Yorkshire, England: Picture of the iron gate at the front of the Church. The people in the picture are my sister, Brenda Neve Rumbellow and her husband Graham. I was fortunate to be able to meet them in England and Graham, an English citizen, took us on this tour to the Church. Claudia Brown, September 2009."

"All Saints Church, Kirk Deighton, Yorkshire, England: View of the church from the front walkway. The caretaker told us that the Clock face had been replaced and the old one was in the churchyard. When we talked to him about the baptism of William Armistead in 1610, he said that the baptistery font in the Church was the new one, circa 1874, (don't you love the antiquity of this place?) and that the original font was placed on top of the old clock face in the Churchyard."

Claudia mentioned above about the baptismal font. This is a picture of the old font from William's 1610 baptism sitting on top of the old clock face. That is pretty awesome to think William Armistead was christened from that font.

All photographs of All Saints Church are the property of Claudia Brown.

As I have noted previously, William was the first born of Anthony and Francis Armistead. Marriage records indicate William Armistead, Yeoman, and Anne Ellis, spinster, from Giggleswick, were married in 1632. From the records I have seen, I believe William and Anne had four children: William, John, Anthony, and Francis. It is quite possible there were other children born that did not survive. The dates of birth and possibility of other children are up for speculation because, as we will see, this couple immigrated to the British Colonies in America a few years later and many records from this early period in the colonies have been lost.

Just a short 28 years after Jamestown was founded in 1607, and at the age of 25, William Armistead made the decision to emigrate and live in the fledgling colony that would eventually become the state of Virginia. In 1635 there was a population of less than 5000 in the entire colony, mostly in the 6 counties along the James River. William decided to head to Elizabeth City County, which had only been established the year before and had probably less than 500 colonists in the entire county.

The Virginia Colony had gone through some very difficult times during the first 28 years, which I will get into later, and it seems to me there would have been a lot of reasons for not going. Not the least of these would have been the possibility that you would not survive the ocean voyage from England. From the records it appears William made the trip in 1635 and then Anne came over alone in 1636. She was a brave and devoted wife to make the trip alone. I found in the records that many wives were afraid to make the trip, and I can't blame them. Many wives refused to leave England, and families were split when the husband went on alone. "One wife refused to follow her husband preferring to be, 'a living wife in England than a dead one in the sea'." (1)

The page below lists Anne and the date she sailed to the colony from England. I do not know if she had a child with her when she came. It appears to me that small children may not have been listed.

In the list above Anne Armestead is the fourth one down. It shows her arrival in 1636 and she was sponsored by her husband, William Armestead. (Both spelled with an "e" instead of an "i". This list is from the book Early Virginia Immigrants by George Cabell Greer.

On the website "Understanding Your Ancestors", Leslie Albrecht Huber described a trip to the colony this way: "The technicalities of leaving England were bewildering. Emigrants needed licenses and passports (then a document that allowed one to 'pass the Port'). After 1634, they also had to have certificates of good conduct from their local minister and agree to take a loyalty oath. Then the emigrant had to locate a ship. Since transatlantic voyages were still uncommon, finding one could involve a lot of searching and negotiations." (2)

Writing about the voyage itself Huber said, "Shipwreck, though greatly feared, wasn't the most notable danger. Of the nearly two hundred voyages to New England in the 1630s, only one ended in disaster. Even then, most of the passengers survived. More threatening in reality was sickness. Severe seasickness or dysentery plagued some passengers. Fatal diseases were sometimes brought on board and spread quickly through the passengers in the small, confined spaces. One ship, for example, arrived with small pox distributed among the passengers." (3)

In my blog a couple years ago I wrote about the difficult and dangerous trip that my Meixner ancestors made in 1881. This trip was nearly 250 years earlier than that. The ships were much smaller and were very susceptible to storms at sea and to disease that bred on ship. However, according to Huber in her blog, "...overall the trip to New England, although frightening and uncomfortable, was relatively safe - safer than immigration to the New World would be during the mass migration of the 1800s." (4) I think the key word there is "relatively" safe. It was still very dangerous but maybe not as dangerous as in the 1800s. (See Huber's blog at http://www.understandingyourancestors.com/wea/default.aspx It is a very good site.)

Let's explore other reasons for or against going to the new colony. One reason can be found in the marriage record which indicates William Armistead was a Yeoman, meaning he owned land. As the first born son, he also stood to inherit land from his father. It seems like he had things going pretty good in England, so why leave? By 1635, Anne had most likely had their first child, so he probably had a young family under his responsibility as well. So why would he head out in 1635, leaving his family behind for many months to try to make it in this new colony. Maybe it was ambition, or pride, that made him want to head out and make it on his own. Possibly the opportunities were few as far as expanding his land holdings in Yorkshire. Despite the bad things going on in the colony, there were undoubtedly reports coming back of thousands of acres of fertile land and of the great opportunities for acquiring land. The use of headrights gave a person of means an ability to expand his land holdings rapidly. (More on headrights later.) Or maybe it just came down to William being the adventurous type. There could be many reasons, including events taking place in England, that may have influenced his decision. One issue causing friction in England was religion, other issues were "widespread unemployment, bad harvests, and political turmoil". (5) I don't know all the pros and cons, but obviously the pros won out. I would say my top guesses for why he decided to go would be ambition and opportunity.

In the book Albion's Seed, Four British Folkways in America, David Hackett Fischer writes: "The great majority of Virginia's upper elite came from families in the upper ranks of English society. Of 152 Virginians who held top offices in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth century, at least sixteen were connected to aristocratic families, and 101 were the sons of baronets, knights and the rural Gentry of England." He goes on to say in a footnote: "Gentry Families included Armistead, ...". (6) (His list includes several other family names that I did not include here.) I think it is interesting that Fischer has found in his research that the Armisteads were of Gentry stock. I have thus far stated they were from the Yeoman class, because that is what the records stated. Obviously William Armistead was well established to be able to come to the colony and start on his own and his descendants did go on to hold top offices in the colony. One estimate I saw stated 75% of colonists were indentured servants or in some way indebted when they arrived in the colony. (7) The cost of the trip was expensive and there was limited opportunity to get started on your own. In addition to the cost of the passage, you had to bring your own food for the trip and also provisions to last until you could obtain land and raise a crop. In the case of the 75% listed above, they could not afford to pay for their passage but were brought here by others. In 1618, The Virginia Company set up rules for the "headright" system. Because so few could afford the cost of the trip, the Virginia Company had to come up with a way to encourage immigration to the colony and they needed workers. The headright system consisted of a provision stating anyone settling in Virginia, or anyone paying to bring someone to Virginia, would receive fifty acres of land per person. Or said another way, fifty acres per "head". (8) This is where "headright" came from. The indentured servants, of course, had to work off the cost of the trip by signing agreements to work for a certain number of years for the person who payed for their passage. This could range from 4 or 5 years to 10 years.

I think it is safe to say that William Armistead was very well established and recognized the opportunity available if he was brave enough to make the trip to the colony. I feel certain he understood he would be one of the elite or ruling class if he made the trip. It was a big risk but that risk could result in big gains for him. Later I'll show where William brought many people to Virginia and acquired significant land using headrights.

Before I move on, I want to step back and give you a little more history of the Virginia Colony.

Replica ship Susan Constant in port at Jamestown Settlement, a living history museum

JamestownShipsCC BY-SA 3.0
Uploaded by Citypeek
Warfieldian - Own work
Created on June 15 2007

In Dec of 1606 the Virginia Company sent three ships, Susan Constant, Godspeed, and Discovery, from England to North America to found a colony. After five months, the ships reached the new land, sailed up the largest river, which they named the James River after the king, located an island that they found suitable for a colony, and proclaimed the name of the island to be Jamestowne Island. On May 14, 1607, the surviving 104 men went ashore to establish the first enduring English settlement in America. (9)

Map of Jamestown Island, showing the terrain and location of the original 1607 fort. (Modern roads, causeway, and buildings not shown)

Map showing terrain of Jamestown Island (as it appeared in the middle of the 20th century). Indicated are the location where the 1607 James Fort was discovered (in 1994), as well as where it had traditionally thought to have been located.
License details: This image or media file contains material based on a work of a National Park Service employee, created as part of that person's official duties. As a work of theU.S. federal government, such work is in the public domain. See the NPS website and NPS copyright policy for more information.

As it turned out, the location selected was much less than desirable as a site for the colony. In fairness to the leaders who selected the location they were following the Virginia Company's instructions for how they should choose the proper site. But even with all the hardships to come the settlement survived and as William M. Kelso says in his book Jamestown, The Buried Truth, "The American dream was born on the banks of the James River." (10) This is a wonderful little book that I recommend you read. Also, I recommend you go to Virginia and visit Jamestown (as well as Williamsburg and Yorktown, etc.). Mr. Kelso is the Head Archaeologist of the Jamestown Rediscovery Project. He and his group have made some amazing discoveries on Jamestown Island and have re-written much of what was thought about Jamestown. If you visit the site be sure to allow plenty of time to see the original site and all the archaeological digs going on plus the museum. Also, go next door and see the reconstruction of the three ships that landed there. (That last item is something I did not do and now regret.)

Model of original Jamestown Fort.

Archaeological digs on the Jamestown Fort site.

Jamestown Church and graveyard.

Photographs property of Moody Meixner. Taken Oct 11, 2011.

Description: View of Jamestown Island today looking toward the statue of John Smith by William Couper [1] which was erected in 1909. The Jamestown Church, circa 1639, is in the left background.

Date: 13 May 2007
Source: http://www.army.mil/-images/2007/05/13/4008/army.mil-2007-04-25-132212.jpg
Author: NPS Photo

Additional colonists arrived in Jamestown over the next two years, but conditions at Jamestown remained severe. In Jamestown People to 1800, Martha W. McCartney writes about a study of tree-ring data from a bald cypress tree near Jamestown Island, conducted by the University of Arkansas. In the study they concluded there was a severe drought that lasted from 1606 to 1612. This was the driest period in that area for hundreds of years. This condition created problems for the Native Americans as well as the colonists. By the winter of 1609-1610 things were so bad that this period became known as the "Starving Time". (11) By spring only sixty of 215 colonists that had arrived there survived. (12) This little group decided to abandon the settlement and sailed a short way down river toward the Atlantic. Fortunately, (though the demoralized group that was fleeing might not have seen it that way) they met supply ships and new leadership on their way to the colony so they turned back to the Jamestown Settlement. After the arrival of the new supplies, Jamestown seemed to be rejuvenated. Other hazards plagued the colonist, however, but more colonist continued to come. By 1622 the colonists' rapid encroachment into the surrounding areas, which were Native American territories, created a volatile situation that culminated with the natives attacking the colonists on March 22nd. As a "result...more than one-third of the colonists lost their lives." (13)

Never-the-less the colony survived and continued to expand in to other areas along the James River and along the Chesapeake Bay. Most of the other areas afforded a better environment for living and farming than Jamestown Island did, but Jamestown continued to serve as Virginia Colony's capital even as new colonists started settling in other areas. In 1619 a new governor of Virginia arrived, named Sir George Yeardley. He implemented a subdivision of the colony into four large boroughs that spanned the James River. Each borough was allowed to send two delegates or Burgesses to Jamestown to serve in an assembly. Designated as the assembly's sergeant-at-arms was the provost marshal of Jamestown. "On July 30, 1619, delegates or Burgesses from 11 of the colony's 12 communities gathered in the church as members of the New World's first legislative assembly." (14) Representative government in America began on that day. Governor Yeardley and his six councilors were also present. By 1623 the governor and his council were convening regularly as a judicial body. The assembly could not change the laws that were set down for the colony's governance but they could draft laws that then became subject to approval of the monarch. Local courts were in place by 1625 in two of the boroughs. In 1624 the Virginia Company's charter was revoked and the Virginia Colony became a colony of the Crown. After that the monarch appointed the governor of the colony and his councilors and the governor appointed lesser officials.(15)

"In 1634 the colony was subdivided into eight shires or counties. It was then that James City, Charles City, Elizabeth City, Henrico, Warwick, York, Isle of Wight, and Accomack counties were formed, replacing the four corporations (boroughs) that were established in 1619. There were 4,914 settlers in the Virginia Colony in 1634, and new immigrants were arriving constantly." (16) Each county had a court with justices of the peace, a sheriff, a clerk, and others like constables and tithe-takers. Local life revolved around the county seat and that is where the Burgesses were elected. (17)

Map of Elizabeth City County. This county no longer exists. It was merged into Hampton City several years ago.

This is a Virginia highway map that I have marked up to show where Jamestown Island is located, the upper left green circle, and the James River, circled in the middle, and Elizabeth City County where is was (it is no longer in existence) and the Chesapeake Bay.

So this sets the stage for William Armistead to leave his home in England and come to the Virginia Colony and settle in Elizabeth City County. I get excited when I think about William and Anne Armistead heading to the new world. This is another defining moment in my family story, just as Frank and Theresia Meixner's decision to leave the Austrian Empire in 1881 was a defining moment. Just think, these Armistead ancestors, William and Anne, are two of only 5,000 people that were there at this point in time. They were part of the original settlers of Virginia and America. My Armistead ancestors were participants in settling America, and participants in the new government in America.

The Armisteads are on the list of qualifying ancestors for the Jamestown Society, so if you are interested in joining the society you need to show how you are related to the first Armistead and you can become a member. Here is the address: http://www.jamestowne.org/

So a new life begins in the Virginia Colony for William and Anne. How will this new life go?

References:
(1) http://www.understandingyourancestors.com/ia/settingSailToNE.aspx UnderstandingYourAncestors.com by Leslie Albrecht Huber, © 2006, 2007, 2008. All rights reserved.

(2) Ibid.

(3) Ibid.
(4) Ibid.
(5) Ibid.
(6) Fischer, David Hackett, Albion's Seed, Four British Folkways In America, Oxford University Press, New York, 1989, pg. 216.
(7) Ibid, pg 227.
(8) http://www.lva.virginia.gov/public/guides/va4_headrights.htm
(9) Kelso, William M., Jamestown, The Buried Truth, University of Virginia Press, Charlottesville and London, 2006, pg. 14-15.
(10) Ibid, pg. 1.
(11) McCartney, Martha W., Jamestown People to 1800, Genealogical Publishing Company, Baltimore, 2012, pg. 5-6.
(12) Kelso, pg. 20.
(13) McCartney, pg. 12.
(14) Ibid, pg. 9.
(15) Ibid, pg. 10.
(16) Ibid, pg. 12.
(17) ibid, pg. 12.