THE
RELIABILITY OF FLORANCE LOVELESS KEENEY ROBERTSON’S RESEARCH ON COLONEL
FRANCIS LOVELACE, COLONIAL GOVERNOR OF
NEW YORK DURING 1668-1673
For
more than three centuries, the efforts of genealogists to understand the
lineage, life and legacy of Colonel Francis Lovelace of Kent have been
hampered by the persistence of several fundamental and inter-related
factual errors. First made by 17th Century English journalists,
and then perpetuated by several generations of English and American
historians and genealogical archivists, these errors have continued to
mislead genealogists in the United States to this day. In order of their
cumulative impact, the errors in question include:
1).
Confusion over the lines of descent of the two major English lines of the
family: the Lovelaces of Bethersden, Kent and those of Hurley in
Berkshire.
2).
Confusion over the identities of the four “Francis Lovelaces” who
lived at roughly the same time in either England or North America.
3).
Confusion over the identities of the two Lovelace Governors of New York
Colony: Governor Francis Lovelace (tenure: 1668-1673) and Governor John
Lovelace (tenure: 1708-1709).
4).
Confusion over Colonel/Governor Francis Lovelace’s marital
status; in particular the belief that he married and left behind direct
descendents in North America.
The
repetition of these errors in the United States for more than two hundred
years can be explained by several factors, including: US genealogists’
general lack of understanding of English society (and especially its
gentry and aristocracy), an excessive dependence by US researchers upon a
few readily available sources of English/British genealogical
documentation, and the eagerness of some Anglo-Americans to prove their
descent from English nobility.
The
problem of establishing Colonel Francis Lovelace’s true identity goes
back to the very first mention of him by English journalists. The earliest
public announcement of his appointment to the New York Governor’s post
(dated April 16, 1667) mistakenly identified him as ‘the brother of Lord
Lovelace (of Hurley).” (Pleasants, “Francis Lovelace,” p. 178). This
and other mistakes were echoed by a number of British (and later American)
biographical summaries published during the next three centuries. For
example, Gibbs, (Vol. VIII, pg. 235), claims that William Lovelace
[1650-1676] was “The son of the Hon. Francis Lovelace, Gov. of New York,
1668-1673, who was the 2nd son of the 1st Baron [of
Hurley],” and The National Encyclopedia of American Biography (Vol. 13)
identified Governor John Lovelace as “the grandson” of Governor
Francis Lovelace.
The
old Chinese saying, “When one dog barks a falsehood, ten thousand others
take it up as truth” fairly well summarizes the impact of these
“cascading errors” upon many Lovelace/Loveless genealogists over the
years.
I. How
many other Francis Lovelaces lived during the period 1620-1684?
The identity of Colonel
Francis Lovelace of Kent (1622-1675) has frequently been confused
with that of three other prominent individuals named Francis Lovelace who
lived in England or North America during the same time period. These
individuals included:
Francis Lovelace, the
second son of Richard, Lord Lovelace of Hurley, Berkshire, (also known as “Francis Lovelace of Culham Court”) who
was born about 1620, and lived an uneventful life in Berkshire until his
death in 1672.
Francis
Lovelace, the recorder of Canterbury, the son of Lancelot Lovelace (of
Kent). Baptized in 1594, and buried about 1664, this Francis was
removed from office in 1643 because of his Royalist sympathies, but was
reinstated after Charles II was restored to power. On May 25, 1660 he gave
a famous speech formally welcoming the returning Charles II and his Queen
to Canterbury.
Francis Lovelace,
Gent.—a Baltimore County merchant
and a cousin of the children and grandchildren of Anne (Lovelace) Gorsuch.
His parentage and date of birth remain unknown, but he appears to have
lived most of his life in the Colony of Maryland, where he died in 1684.
II. How Do We Know Colonel Francis
Lovelace Never Married?
Evidence
from several documentary sources indicates that Colonel Francis Lovelace
never married or produced any direct descendents in either England or the
“New World.” In addition to the specific reference to his
“bachelor” status contained in English probate records at the time of
his death, while serving as Governor, Francis once described his lack of
married experience in his own words. In a June 21, 1671 letter to a
Justice Wood suggesting a course of action in prosecuting a case of
alleged rape, Governor Lovelace states:
“I
received your lettre (sic) of the 19th instant, [
] have considered every part of it, but cannot give [
] u a full determinacion, which you in Charity will [ ]lieve when you reflect on my State and Condicion, as a
Batchelor, and soe not verst in those
Affairs relating to Man and Woman…” (Christoph and Christoph, pp.
426-427).
Another
event that took place during Governor Francis’s tenure in New York City
also documents his unmarried status. A detailed first-hand description of
the elaborate 1671 funeral ceremonies following the death of the
Governor’s nephew, eleven-year-old William Lovelace, contains a list of
those in the funeral procession. The list notes “Thomas Lovelace Esq.,
father to the deceased and his Lady in close Mourning,” and then lists
“Coll. Ffrancis Lovelace p’sent Governor of New Yorke and uncle to the
deceased in close Mourning single."
Captain Dudley Lovelace, “uncle also to the deceased,” is described as
attending “in like Mourning single.”
(As contained in Eberlein, pg. 256). Neither Francis nor Dudley Lovelace
was accompanied by “a Lady.”
While
the above evidence does not preclude the possibility that the Governor
fathered some illegitimate children, either in England, on the Continent,
or during his 1650-1652 visit to Long Island and Virginia, it does put him
on record as a single man during the first four years of his tenure as
Governor of New York. But, couldn’t this Francis Lovelace have been
married prior to, or after the period 1668-1671? Apparently
ignorant of, or preferring to ignore, the information on Colonel
Francis’s life and lineage unearthed by Pleasants and others during
1909-1920, some US genealogists have sought to answer this question in the
affirmative.
The
most elaborate of these attempts was made by Florance Loveless Keeney
Robertson in her privately-published volume entitled The
Lovelace-Loveless and Allied Families. Published in 1952 in limited
quantities, the book has done much to perpetuate the mythology of “the
New York heirs of Governor Francis Lovelace.” Ms. Robinson claims that
in 1659 Governor Francis secretly (his family allegedly was opposed to the
match for “class” reasons) married (“in America”) a Maryland woman
named Blanche Talbot. This marriage produced a son named Edward in 1662--a
Naval Lieutenant who died in battle in 1714. Edward’s son John then came
to North America in company with his uncle, New York Colonial Governor
John Lovelace (1672-1709), and settled “on large tracts of land” in
Dutchess County, New York. This John Lovelace is cited as the progenitor
of those New York Lovelaces who later moved up the Hudson River to Albany
and Saratoga, and west to the Syracuse area (Robertson, pp. 54-56).
Ms.
Robertson’s ignorance of the facts regarding Colonel Francis’s life is
readily apparent, but difficult to comprehend given the extensive details
on the subject available to her in 1952. The evidence she marshals to
prove the existence of “Governor Francis’s marriage” does not hold
up under scrutiny. The most credible historical and biographical
information available shows that, after his 1650-1652 visit to Virginia,
Colonel Francis did not return to North America until 1667. Between 1652
and 1658 he was in exile in France and Holland. In 1659-1660 he was a
prisoner in the Tower of London. For the next seven years he lived in
England. All of this suggests that Governor Francis had little opportunity
to marry Blanche Talbot (or any other woman in “The Colonies”) during
the period 1652-1667. During his tenure as Governor of New York, he claims
to have been a bachelor, and no records from that time show him as
espoused. Finally, after Francis Lovelace died in 1675 (Robertson provides
erroneous death dates of either 1683 or 1686), his brother Dudley
inherited his estate, and there were no claims made against it by any
direct heirs.
Ms.
Robertson’s claim that Colonel Francis Lovelace was secretly married
“when about 38 years of age” (i.e. in 1660-1661) to a woman who “was
opposed by the Lovelace family as not being as closely associated with
royalty as themselves” is rooted in her misreading of footnote “a”
on page 235 of Volume VIII of Gibbs. Referring to the erroneous statement
in the text above that confuses Governor Francis Lovelace with “Francis
Lovelace of Culham Court,” the footnote states: “For his petition in
1661 in relation to his ‘being inveigled to marry without the privity
(sic) of his relations, and much below his quality and condition,’ see
Hist. MSS, Com., 7th Rep., p. 144.” Because Ms. Robertson had
the wrong “Francis Lovelace” in mind, she came to the wrong
conclusion.
Ms.
Robertson’s book claims that references to Governor Francis’s marriage
to Blanche Talbot are contained in “records possessed by President
Jefferson” held by The Library of Congress. The document in question--a
December 6, 1669 letter from Governor Lovelace to Governor Sir William
Berkeley of Virginia--deals with the guardianship arrangements for William
Whitby Jr., (recently arrived from England) the son of Katherine Gorsuch
(Governor Lovelace’s niece) and William Whitby (deceased) of Middlesex
County, Virginia. The “Ruth” Gorsuch cited in some transcriptions of
the letter is actually “Kath,” or Katherine Gorsuch.* The letter
contains no references to Governor Lovelace’s marriage, to a son of his,
or to Blanche Talbot (See: Pleasants, “Virginia in 1650-1652,” Virginia
Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. 17, no. 3 (July, 1909), pp.
288-291).
*According
to J. Hall Pleasants’ 1916 article in The Virginia Historical
Magazine (now known as The Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography), “William Whitby the elder, the husband of Ruth Gorsuch,
lived in Warwick County, Virginia; he was Speaker of the House of
Burgesses in 1653…The son lived in Middlesex County, Virginia and
appears to have led an uneventful life and to have died unmarried. His
will, filed as that of William Whitby of Pyanketank River in the county of
Middlesex, “planter,” was dated July, 1676, and proved July 23,
1677” (Pleasants. “The Gorsuch and Lovelace Families,” pp. 81-93.)
Could
Colonel Francis Lovelace simply been a homosexual who had no interest in
relationships with women or the establishment of a nuclear family?
Perhaps, but in the course of his research the author discovered at least
one piece of evidence that suggests the contrary. Family Tree Maker’s
“Virginia Colonial Records, 1600s-1700s” (CD#503) contains a
transcript of the will of a young woman named Mary Digges, who died in May
of 1643. She was a sister of Edward Digges (1620-1675), who later served
as Governor of the Colony of Virginia (1655-1656). Among the heirs listed
in her will is a “Mr. Francis Lovelace.” The full text of this will is
reproduced below:
“MARY
DIGGES of Chilham Castle, County Kent, virgin, youngest
daughter of Sir Dudley Digges
Knight, late Master of the Rolls, deceased.
Will 4 May 1643; proved 23 May
1643. To be buried in vault in Chilham
built by my father. To poor of
Chilham 5pds. To Bridge 40s. To each of
my brothers 100pds. To Brother
in law Arnold Brayning Esqre 140pds.
To kinsman Richard Thornhill
Esqre 50pds. To
Mr. Francis Lovelace 10pds.
To Dame Frances ye Lady of Sir
Thomas Baker Knight 10pds. To sister in law
Mary Digges wife of my Eldest
Brother Thomas Digges 20pds. To sister Ann
wife of Anthony Hammond Esq my
jewels. To Joan Lovell , my maid servant
20pds. Executor: Anthony Hammond
my Brother in law. Witnesses: Paul
Stroud, John Stroud. Sentence.
Parties Anthony Hammond and Thomas Digges
of Chilham, Edward Digges gent,
Leonard Digges gent, and Herbert Digges
gent Brothers. (Archdeaconry of
Canterbury Liber, 1643, No. 35)
The
map of County Kent contained in John Speed’s 1612 “Theatre of the
Empire of Great Britain” (the earliest published atlas of the British
Isles) shows “Chylham” as located some seven miles southwest of
Canterbury and about twenty miles northeast of the village of Bethersden.
The problem here is to determine which “Francis Lovelace” is being
referred to in Mary Digges’ will: “Colonel” Francis of Bethersden,
or “Francis, Recorder of Canterbury.” Both would have been about 20
years old in 1643, and both could have been socially acquainted with the
youngest daughter of Sir Dudley Digges. Like the Bethersden Lovelaces, the
Digges (along with the Sandys and other prominent Kentish families) had
been early investors in The Virginia Company, and it is possible that
their children were acquainted with each other.
The
above record contains no information concerning Mary’s age, the cause of
her death, or the nature of her relationship with “Mr. Francis
Lovelace.” However, the fact that Mary placed him in the hierarchy of
her will just below her two brothers and another “kinsman” is a strong
indicator of her esteem. If this was the case, it is highly likely that
young “Francis Lovelace” was a close friend of the unfortunate Mary
Digges, and perhaps one of her principal mourners. We know nothing of the
activities of Francis Lovelace of Canterbury at the time of Mary’s
death, but by May, 1643 Francis Lovelace of Bethersden was a junior
officer in the English Civil War. Such duty could easily have prevented
him from attending her deathbed or funeral. If an amorous relationship did
indeed exist between young “Colonel Francis” and Mary Digges, then her
death may have been the great “romantic disappointment” of his life,
and the cause of his celibacy.
III. Did Thomas or Dudley Lovelace Produce
any Surviving Children?
Because
Governor Francis died without a direct heir, the question of whether his
surviving brothers, Dudley and Thomas, left any heirs behind in “The
Colonies” has been of great interest to Lovelace/Loveless genealogists
in the United States. Along with the possibility that some cousins of
Governor John Lovelace accompanied him to New York during 1708-1709, the
possibility that Thomas or Dudley left some undiscovered children behind
in the New York area offers the best chance of explaining “The
Governors’ Puzzle”* that has long obscured the origins of the New York
wing of the Lovelace family in North America.
Thomas
Lovelace
Thanks to
the groundbreaking work of Pleasants and the recent publication of records
from Francis Lovelace’s tenure as a colonial Governor, we know quite a
bit about the experience of Thomas Lovelace and his family in “The New
World.” Documents from the period show Thomas as a member of the
Governor’s Council of New York during 1669-1673, and he was one of a
dozen signatories to the deed of sale for Staten Island in 1670 (Paltsits,
pp. 340-341). He served in several other posts, and by 1672-73 was one of
the justices of the city of New York (Pleasants, “Francis Lovelace,”
pp. 188-189).
By “pluck and luck”
(he was able to postpone his deportation until the English had regained
control of the colony) Thomas managed to hold onto his 340-acre plantation
(known as “Lovelace Farme”) on the east end of Staten Island (See
Christoph, Calendar of N.Y. Colonial Manuscripts, Indorsed Land Papers,
p. 213) following the 1673 Dutch re-conquest, and he continued to reside
and hold office (as High Sheriff of the County of Richmond) there until
his death in late 1688 or early 1689 (See Christoph & Christoph, Books
of General Entries of the Colony of New York, 1664-1688,
pp. 338-339).
Although
his wife’s name remains a mystery, Thomas Lovelace is known to have had
at least one son, William Lovelace, who died at age eleven and was buried
following an elaborate state funeral ceremony held at Fort James in 1671
(For a detailed description of this bizarre event, See: The American
Historical Review, Vol. IX, (1904), pp. 522-525). Evidence that Thomas
produced other children has remained elusive. Pleasants noted, however,
that “there is no question that when Thomas Lovelace died…he was
without issue surviving, and that “Lovelace Farme” passed to his niece
Mary Duxbury.” However, Pleasants allowed for the possibility that Mary
Duxbury might have been the daughter of Dudley Lovelace or his sister
Katherine Hayne (Pleasants, “Francis Lovelace,” pg. 191).
*This
“puzzle” has been exacerbated by major gaps in the public records of
New York Colony and New York State, principally caused by the destruction
of the records of “Old” Trinity Church in a catastrophic fire that
engulfed large parts of New York City in December, 1776, and the March 29,
1911 fire that destroyed 270,000 manuscripts and 450,000 books held at the
New York State Library in Albany.
Dudley
Lovelace
Sometimes
known as “Dudley Posthumous Lovelace” (because he was born after his
father’s death) and generally referred to in official documents as
“Captain Dudley Lovelace,” Dudley’s role in his brother’s colonial
administration was largely a military one, although he also served on the
Governor’s Council and in the courts. He owned a plantation on Staten
Island, as well as a grant of land near Hurley further up the Hudson
River. When the Dutch fleet attacked Fort James, Dudley Lovelace was one
of the fort’s three commanders. Unlike his brother Thomas, he was
imprisoned and eventually repatriated to England. Neither he nor any of
his immediate family ever returned to North America.
There
is no evidence that Dudley Lovelace was married prior to or during his
service in New York Colony during 1668-1673. After his return to England,
however, he appears to have married his cousin, a woman named Mary
Lovelace, in 1678 and produced a daughter who died in 1679. The
administration of his estate following his death in 1686 mentions no
children, and the commission was issued to Dudley’s sister, Joan Caesar,
rather than “his relict,” Mary Lovelace. (Pleasants, “Francis
Lovelace,” p. 194). There
appears to be no concrete evidence, therefore, that Dudley Lovelace left
any direct descendents in North America. Nonetheless, Pleasants and others
have speculated that the “Francis Lovelace, Gent.” who died in
Maryland in 1684 (his will was dated March 3, 1683-84 and proved May 19,
1684) might possibly have been Dudley or Thomas Lovelace’s son.
Daniel
Lovelace
Williamsburg,
Virginia
February,
2002
|
Full Table of
Contents
Author’s Note
Scope and Purpose
Sources
Introduction
Family Origins
Service in the English Civil War
Overseas Service During the Commonwealth Interregnum
His Visit to Virginia in 1650-1652
Colonel Francis’s Family Agenda in Virginia
In the “Secret Service” of the Exiled Charles II
Service as a High Government Official, 1660-1667
How England Acquired the Colony of New York
“Jurat Coram Me”: Governor Francis as a Colonial Administrator
Governor Francis Lovelace as a Businessman
Governor Francis and Nepotism: Thomas and Dudley Lovelace Help Govern New York
Military Surprise and Disaster
Was Governor Lovelace Responsible for the Loss of New York to the Dutch?
Financial Disaster, Disgrace, and Death
“Frank” Lovelace: A Summary
Epilogue: 1688: “The Revenge of the Berkshire Lovelaces”
The Berkshire Lovelaces Produce a Second Lovelace Governor of New York
The Death and Partial Resurrection of the Lovelace Peerage
APPENDICES:
How do we know that Colonel Francis Lovelace Never Married?
Did Thomas or Dudley Lovelace Produce Any Surviving Children?
Locations in the United Kingdom Associated With the Life of Colonel Francis
Lovelace of Kent
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Primary Sources
Secondary Sources
ILLUSTRATIONS:
Undocumented Portrait of Governor Francis Lovelace
Title Page of Richard Lovelace’s 1649 Volume of Poems "Lucasta: Epodes,
Odes, Sonnets, Songs, &c.”
Abbreviated Genealogical Chart of the Lovelaces of Kent and Berkshire
Map of Localities in England Connected With American History
Genealogical chart: Ancestors of Francis Lovelace, Governor of New York Colony
Genealogical Chart: Descendants of William Lovelace, Of Woolwich, Kent
Copy of an August, 1642 Broadside Entitled “The Parliament’s Resolution,
Concerning the King’s Proclamation for Setting Up Of His Standard,” which
mentions the capture of “Lord Lovelace.”
Detail from Captain John Smith’s 1612 Map of VirginiaPortrait of Virginia
Governor Sir William Berkeley
Map Showing the Locations of Jamestown Island and Green Spring Plantation
Sketch of Green Spring Mansion made by Benjamin Latrobe in 1796
Map of Eastern Virginia, The Chesapeake Bay, and Maryland in the 18th Century
Photograph of Old Christ Church in Lancaster County, Virginia
Title Page of the May 25, 1660 Speech of Francis Lovelace, Recorder of the
City of Canterbury, Welcoming King Charles II Upon His Arrival to Kent
Title Page of Samuel Holland’s “Panegyrick on the Coronation Of His most
Sacred Majesty Charles II.”
Portrait of Charles II, by Samuel Cooper.
Map of New York, the Lower Hudson River, and Long Island During the Early
1660s.
The Costello Plan of New Amsterdam in 1660.
Autographs of the First Two English Governors of New York.
Signatures of Witnesses to the Indian Deed Conveying Staten Island in 1670.
Samuel Holland’s Poem “On the Death of My Much Honored Friend, Colonel
Richard Lovelace.”
Title Page of “Lucasta: Postume Poems of Richard Lovelace Esq,” London,
1659.
Dedication page of the 1659 “Lucasta” volume: “To The Right
Honorable John Lovelace Esquire.”
Francis Lovelaces’s Portrait of His Brother Richard on the Frontispiece of
the 1659 “Lucasta” Volume.
Broadside Entitled “Great News from Oxford, or an Exact Account of the
Several Transactions of My Lord Lovelace, In a Letter to a Friend.”
(December 9, 1688)
Genealogical Chart: Ancestors of John Lovelace, Governor of New York Colony.
Genealogical Chart: Descendants of John Lovelace, Of Berkshire.
Copy of Title Page of Governor John Lovelace’s Speech To the General
Assembly of New Jersey, March 4, 1708.
Map Showing the Sources of Palatine Emigration in The German Rhineland.
Photograph of the Tombstone of Rev. Joshua Kocherthal in the Evangelical
Lutheran Church, West Camp, N.Y.
Title Page of the Sermon Preached by William Vesey at the 1709 Funeral of
John, Lord Lovelace, Baron of Hurley.
Portrait of Ada, Countess of Lovelace, as a Young Woman.
|