BARBADOES CLARKS
by Linda Sparks StarrMAR 1996
[A big Gratitude to Douglas Tucker and David Goodwin for making this put in the picture feasible. Doug receives eccentric gratitude for in-between two CLARKE families in Christ Church Province and Dave for recognizing
the nosy providence of surnames of neighbors. To set aside
typing, unless before noted, the people mentioned lived in
Christ Church Province. Something good quality familiar? Slightly is a be reminiscent of my JAN put in the picture on Michael Clark. LSS]
I think we are all finale with the knowledge passed down mainly
through the MOORMANs that members of the CLARK and MOORMAN
families and a TERRELL set travel on the Glasgow skip 1669. The
CLARKs superficially stayed in Barbadoes, but the others continued
to VA the adjacent year. Mary Stewart tartan out the Web site
[http://image.vtls.com/colonial/ ] for VA Lib edition of
colonial chronicles project -- references to ships. She origin the
Glasgow first mentioned in 1708 and buttress in 1748. Still noth
ing surely can be ineffectual from this, it's sundry be about on a
burgeoning list of "Blameless where did before researchers find this?"
Meanwhile, Doug contacted a librarian at London's Guildhall
Museum; he asked to be exact about chronicles of ships maritime
from Liverpool all the rage the late 17th century and if passenger
lists were regularly available? The librarian thought numerous maritime chronicles and passenger lists are accessible, but are not unendingly com- prehensive. Calm, some are very good spare for solid
ports and scrupulously if passengers "were rambling". Bountiful
are located in the Sailing Postponement to the British Museum; others in neighboring museums like the one in Devon. He meant numerous had been published years ago, "maybe in Boston". He mentioned
sundry possibility: the chronicles of responsibility vessels that were skilled for military compose at English ports all the rage the 17th century. He explained these would typically give the tube name,
landowner, Head, tonnage and backdrop responsibility use.
[My personal feeling is, this part of the knowledge is so
dedicated, it has to come from some where. Of all the non
corroborated statements, I think this authorization be the highest critical one to find. Possibly will the published lists be" and Immigra-
tion "edited by P. William Filby and Mary K. Meyer? Regretful
-- the title subject I abide doesn't wrap publishing fastest. The
subject I abide is kindness labeled: "Touch, 1st back copy, vol. 1, A-G." It's an alphabetical list which gives name, age (if
open), place of way in (not hemmed in to port cities), year and
source where information was origin on each have fun named. My
copies were sent by a researcher of sundry line; I haven't
tartan for the Glasgow passengers. LSS]
Now to Christ Church Province, Barbadoes where sundry Clarke
family lived whose particular names powerfully resemble "ours". They were gift by 1644 which is well prematurely Michael and Margaret
Clark are thought to abide trendy (1669). The Patriarch, Chris
topher Clarke Sr. (c1620-1695), and his spouse, Ann, had four sons
and one newborn who survived to independence. Christopher Sr. out
lived his spouse and all type except newborn Elizabeth Tres
cott. He named in his will (per": Wills and
Administration ) newborn Elizabeth, a grandson Christopher,
granddaughter Ann who was dau of invalid son Thomas, a friend
and a god-son.
Doug got the christening dates for all type except Michael
from Hotten. He SUSPECTS Michaell was uneducated prematurely they trendy in Barbadoes; he bungled to note the dawning year for newborn
Elizabeth.
Michaell c1642- 14 JUL 1679
Roger 1644-1689
Elizabeth c1648-aft 1695
Christopher Jr. 1654-1679
Thomas 1657-bef 1695
Doug next constructed families for Christopher Sr's type by
using the higher wills book and Hotten. Michaell and Elizabeth
Clarke had three type -- Christopher (b.c1662), Ann (married
John Biggs) and Elizabeth.
Roger Clarke married Mary Maggs, a Quaker; her gain, George,
consumed her only a ring practice a shilling in his 1677 will while she married a non-Quaker. Roger and Mary lived in adjoining St.
Michael's Province. Their type were: Christopher (b.1672
married Sarah Patterson), Ann (b. 1674), Roger (1676-1678) and
Mary (b.1679 married John Herringman).
Thomas Clarke (1659-c1680) and spouse, Elizabeth, had one teenager -- Anne (b.1678 married David Robinson).
Christopher Clark Jr. (1654-1679) and his spouse, Mary (d. 1715),
named their only newborn, Mary (b. 1671).
The higher Michaell is NOT the "MOORMAN knowledge" Michael whose
spouse was named "Margaret". Michael of knowledge died prematurely 20 MAY 1678 for on that date Margaret Clark, widow, sold part of her
engross in a 1,020 acre plantation and in 25 Negroes. Doug's
theory about this succession is son Micajah "liquidating" his overweight slice (as eldest son) of Michael's assets prematurely relocating in Virginia.
In the midst of this information in fling, Doug took sundry look at the 1680 Barbadoes ask. [I've made-up Doug's fastest graph for all CLARKEs
perky in Christ Church Province and paraphrased his conclusions
underside.]
Acres Servants Negroes
Margaret Clarke 167 5 78
Francis Clarke 21 17
Edward Clark 1
Roger Clarke 20 11
Christopher Clark 60 31
William & Complt 7
Thomas 15
The higher Christopher is Christopher Sr. (c1620-1695); his sons
Michaell and Christopher Jr. were deceased; and his son, Roger,
lived in adjoining St. Michael's Province.
Of the yet to be paid names, Doug believes only Margaret, Francis and Roger belong to Michael d.1678. Based a short time ago on knowledge, Doug explains that only the lost Micajah and higher Francis and Roger
were 21 in 1680. He believes under English Colonial Law they
were the only sons of Michael and Margaret old sufficient to own
land, subsequently be taxed in 1680. He theorizes that Micajah was in Virginia by this date.
The higher Thomas presents some difficulty; Doug BELIEVES this
Thomas is the son of Christopher Sr. (c1620-1695). Calm,
sundry Thomas Clark resided in Barbadoes in this time position.
This second Thomas was a leader in the Quaker community and was
unendingly referred to as "Sr." The ask Thomas may be the son of
Christopher Sr.; or son of Michael d.1678 if knowledge errs and
he was older; or he may belong to sundry CLARK family al
together. In the colonial indicate, the designation "Sr." and
"Jr." did not hint dedicated relationships amid two in
dividuals; these were used to chronicle amid individuals
of the actual name--one is last than the a long way.
The Edward of the 1680 ask, Perhaps 21, may or may not be the
Edward Clark who married Catherine Rowland in 1668. Over, he is
not Michael and Margaret's son unless knowledge errs. The spouse
of Edward Clark of New Kent Co. VA 1690s [Supposed son of Michael
d. 1678] APPEARS to be an Elizabeth. [Other augur e.g.
newborn were not raised in my "Re-thinking Edward Clark."]
William Clarks are yet patronizing grown-up to sort out. One William died in before 1680 leaving one tiny son. Depending on equally the
ask was unavailable that year, the higher Possibly will BE the one who died vanguard that year. Two a long way Williams in the province were still minors in 1680 [again, unless knowledge errs.] That plants one
yet to be paid William, married to an Ann; they christened a newborn, Ann, in 1676. The higher is normal him, IF they were still perky
in the province in 1680. Obviously patronizing work needs to be all-embracing in Barbadoes chronicles.
Doug admits to using the unyielding dawning dates and novice
names for Michael d.1678 in deliver a verdict out the higher Edward and Wil- liam as belonging to this family. He offers as a bit of load
to the unyielding ages of Michael's sons the 1679 survey. This
asked for the number of waxen men over the age of 16 who were
accessible to tolerate weaponry.
Margaret Clark's plantation had four waxen men over the age of
16. Teachings would abide these ages for Michael Clark's sons in
1679: Francis 22, Roger 20, William 18 and Christopher 16. So,
Doug feels they are the ones enumerated ASSUMING the vague
Micajah had already consumed for Virginia. If he were still shout
and counted (powerfully age 24), next Christopher's age would be
backed to 15. Sons Thomas and Edward were 14 and 12 respec
tively, subsequently not counted in the survey. I don't be wary of the sur vey indicates that ALL FOUR were her sons. In 1680 she had 5 ser-
vants on her plantation; absolutely at smallest possible one was a waxen male over the age of 16. Wouldn't he/they abide been counted in the sur- vey? But next, why weren't patronizing of her sons counted? So the
survey is just no matter which as well to consider; it doesn't prove any reason, either way.
There's yet sundry Thomas Clarke mentioned in Barbadoes chronicles
-- "Thomas Clarke of London", mercantilist. That this Thomas and
Michael d.1678 may be basic is Suggested by a aim 20 MAY
1678 (recorded 3 SEP 1679) whereby the widow Margaret Clarke sold
part of a plantation of 1,020 acres "abutting the land of Ralph
Parrott, Col. Sam Newton, John Redman late of Thomas Clarke, John
Searle, James Lee, and William Monotonous and one-half of 50 Negroes."
Doug BELIEVES the suggestion "of Thomas Clarke" signifies the in
dividual was employed as boarder doorkeeper of land owned by
Thomas Clarke of London. Possibly will Michael's land abide oddly
belonged to Thomas Clarke of London? Would that get on to a con-
nection of sorts? VA Genealogies by Rev. Horace E. Hayden, subject
xvi reveals a connection amid this Thomas Clarke of London
[how numerous enormous Thomas Clark's can gift be?] to the BOLLING
family. "The Bollings in all probability are descended from Tristram Boll- ing, of Bradford Borough, York, who had Robert Bollyng, of London
'Sadler and silk throwster', 1633... who married Ann, newborn
of Thomas Clarke of London, and had John, eldest son, most probably the John of Allhallows, London, whose son Robert, came to VA and
popular the celebrated Bolling family gift."
[Doug believes Capt. Christopher's son Bolling was named for Hen
rico Co.'s Robert or John Bolling, kind in this line. I'm
actual looking for a BOLLING connection back in England in
either the CLARK or JOHNSON line. Christopher's "in the neighborhood neighbor"
was a BOWLES, not BOLLING -- sundry observe for the name.]
Meanwhile David Goodwin sent information origin in" and
"by David "[he couldn't find the title subject.
We've all been gift.] This book covers the 1679 ask and the
1715 one. Still the 1715 ask is a bit late for our study,
providence of surnames of the neighbors of Clarks in Barbadoes
and neighbors of Capt. Christopher in New Kent Co. are alluring.
In 1715, only one family lived amid Christopher Clarke and
John MacKenny. This Christopher Clark [whom I place as anticipated
son of Roger/ Mary Maggs based on birthyear] is 42 (in 1715); his
spouse is 46 and they had five type -- boys wrinkled 15 and 12 and
girls 14, 8 and 5. John MacKenny was 40 with a spouse wrinkled 40 and three type -- boys 12 and 7 and girl 7 months. Dave con
tinues: "In the actual province, some 24 names at what time MacKenny is James Clarke, 36; his spouse 45; and a male, 20. Fine hair 28 names Early Christopher is William Clarke 29, spouse 29 and boys 15 and
13, and girls 5 and 2."
Dave describes by Joanne Sanders as a com
prehensive four gift set of marriages, births and deaths. It
shows Christopher Clarke marrying Sarah Patterson 16 DEC 1694.
Thomas Clark "who seems powerfully inexperienced with higher Chris
topher" married Elizabeth Morehead 4 AUG 1689. Christopher Sr.
was an superintendent of the will of James Crutchlow which was wit
nessed by Archibald Moorehead. This will was recorded April 22,
1672. As well in the Sanders books: Jno. McKinney married Ann
Heard, wido, 11 DEC 1715 in St. Michael's Province.
An Alexander MacKenny's will was outmoded 2 NOV 1681, launch a spouse Susannah and son Thomas. His the person behind was Arthur Collins.
Witnesses were Daniel Moerikell, John Mullineux and Francis Drop.
The will was probated 18 NOV 1681. [If any abide not seen my
Capt. Christopher put in the picture, an Alexander MacKeney was a in the neighborhood neigh bor in New Kent Co. 1698 and vanguard.] Dave adds that "Mullineux"
is a Quaker name in VA as well as in Babadoes. [Margaret Clark,
widow of Michael, may abide married Charles Collins 1682.
"Collins" as a particular name appears on a group sheet I looked at buttress week -- can't come and get somebody if it were CLARK or JOHNSON!]
Member of the aristocracy Anthony Ashley-Cooper, Earl of Shaftesbury
Distinctive knowledge which is part of this lingering family group may not be finale to some. "In a nutshell", three theories for the
nickname of Penelope, spouse of Capt. Christopher Clark, abide been proposed. She IS the newborn of Edward JOHNSON and not a BOLLING
which was based on the particular name of one of their sons. The
third theory: she is a MASSIE granddaughter of the Earl of
Shaftsbury, Member of the aristocracy Anthony Ashley-Cooper. If I'm not offensive, this comes from Agnes Clark/Benj. Johnston line.
In the midst of COOPER connections in mind, contemplate this. In Doug's words:
"An Ursula Clarke of London Categorize Manner, London is mentioned in the 1656 Barbadoes will of Richard Powell. Ursula is Richard
Powell's sister-in-law so Clarke may be the name of a vanguard hus
band or her maiden name, no way to tell... one of Powell's
brothers-in-law is Thomas Cooper Esq. who I be wary of is a brother or younger son of Baronet John Cooper of Rockbourne, gain of
Anthony Ashley-Cooper. Sir John Cooper was the original investor
in Barbadoes circa 1630, not his son Anthony who inborn the
assurance engross soon vanguard." [Capt. Christopher's younger
brother Francis named a newborn Ursula.]
An backside Christopher CLARK Sr. / COOPER connection is origin in
a MAY 1662 land aim whereby Edward Cranfield of Barbadoes sold
360 acres to Nathaniel Kingsland. The land abutted the lands of
Robert Newman, Christopher CLARKE, Robert Cole, east of Robert
Mills and William COOPER, north of Thomas cooke (John Cooke
invalid) and Robert Saunders west and on to the sea south. An
sensational aside: the price was 150 plus 9,000 pounds of
sugar, not tobacco! [And for what it's practice, one newborn of
Robert ADAMS married a Saunders; two married MOORMANs and one a
CLARK.]
Doug theorizes that Michael Clark d.1678 is the actual Michael
Clark "who was active in recruiting colonists for every Barbadoes
and Virginia on behalf of Sir Anthony Ashley-Cooper... Clark's
name crops up universally previous to 1670 in accounts of
Shaftesbury's colonial activities, but never at what time 1670." To
"prove" the English Michael is the actual person as the Barbadoes
Michael Clark, Doug offers the successive circumstantial contemplation.
(1) The Barbadoes Michael was anyway a man of rites based on the
debt of land, servants and slaves he owned at the time of his
failure. (2) The concidence that the buttress year chronicles for Michael presume in England is the recognized year his subsidiary was charged with illegal financial influence and is the unyielding year the
Glasgow sailed with his family and MOORMANS aboard.
Kit to Referee
Member of the aristocracy Ashley-Cooper was with the proprietors who fixed South Carolina. A adult years trading direction was from England to Barbadoes and side islands and next to South Carolina. What reading
South Carolina histories, Doug origin references that the sloop
"Three Brothers" consumed Barbadoes for South Carolina 15 MAR 1670, but was encouraged north by storms. It took back away in the Nansemond Flood, Virginia until the payment blew over. Doug wonders if the
MOORMANs "unloaded" in Nansemond, kindly rise to the knowledge
that Thomas was a first immigrant in South Carolina. Burn
proven, BUT go by for a ship from Barbadoes to Nansemond
Co., VA the right year deserves harmony. [Heh, it's the
side we've come to documenting any of the tradition!]
[I Notion he origin this in" Colonies in the Seventeenth
Century 1607-"by Wesley Honestly Weak, vol. one: "A Note
of the South", published by LA St. Press: 1949, about subject 336.
I didn't copy the part about the Three Brothers, but subject 335
powerfully follows Doug's clarification prematurely this affair. Obviously I didn't make the connection to the MOORMANs, but do abide a dim
protect of reading about a given up for lost ship. LSS]
Doug contacted Guilford Learned to see what they had on the before
Quaker meeting at Somerton. "They do abide some original docu
ments from the pre 1700 indicate, but the information is not in
digital form and is in the form of bleak manuscripts' requiring
eccentric organize."
He moreover perceptive some sensational kit about Somerton. "The
Quaker back away in the neighborhood Somerton was set up by Edward Bennett (on some of his unrestrained holdings in Nansemond and closest Coral reef of Wight Cos.). Bennett had been a Colonial Proprietor of VA [He was a
Puritan equally exactly by Cromwell] and had become a Quaker about
the time he turned over the governorship to Wm Berkeley... Wil
liam Ballard... lived on adjoining assurance scheduled what became
open as Quaker Sink, but was not a Quaker... The Somerton
back away was especially faster to Holland, VA than to the gift
Somerton and served as a sort of way-station for Quaker families.
Few stayed at the back away for patronizing than a couple of years. No Quaker owned land at Somerton -- Bennett handily let the Quakers
settle up and use it, and used his fat lean to keep the
institution at bay. The Quaker farmers or yeomen helped Bennett
persuade the village and goods planting needs for his
widespread land tract. The Goodwins were neighbors of the Bennett's and one of the Goodwin sons was exactly sheriff of Nansemond.
Extremely than evicting the Quakers, Sheriff Goodwin by all accounts sym pathized with them and vanguard became a Quaker himself."
Does being also me think its nearly too likelihood that
Member of the aristocracy Ashley-Cooper and the a long way proprietors signed the esteem to excitedly pay South Carolina in Show 1669 -- the actual
date the MOORMANs and CLARKs reportedly consumed England?
Dave and others are functioning with English chronicles in Exeter and Warwick. The first MOORMAN in VA chronicles was a grocer from War-
wickshire. I feel we are making headway on these families.
0 comments:
Post a Comment