BARBADOES CLARKS by Linda Sparks Starr MAR 1996 [A big THANKS to Douglas Tucker and David Goodwin for making this update possible. Doug receives special credit for separating two CLARKE families in Christ Church Parish and Dave for recognizing the intriguing coincidence of surnames of neighbors. To save typing, unless otherwise noted, the people mentioned lived in Christ Church Parish. Something sound familiar? Some is a repeat of my JAN update on Michael Clark. LSS] I think we are all familiar with the tradition passed down mainly through the MOORMANs that members of the CLARK and MOORMAN families and a TERRELL set sail on the Glasgow spring 1669. The CLARKs supposedly stayed in Barbadoes, but the others continued to VA the next year. Mary Stewart checked out the Web site [http://image.vtls.com/colonial/ ] for VA Lib collection of colonial records project -- references to ships. She found the Glasgow first mentioned in 1708 and last in 1748. Although noth ing conclusive can be drawn from this, it's another item on a growing list of "Just where did early researchers find this?" Meanwhile, Doug contacted a librarian at London's Guildhall Museum; he asked specifically about records of ships sailing from Liverpool during the late 17th century and if passenger lists were commonly available? The librarian said many sailing records and passenger lists are available, but are not always com- prehensive. However, some are fairly good especially for certain ports and particularly if passengers "were transported". Many are located in the Maritime Annex to the British Museum; others in regional museums like the one in Devon. He thought many had been published years ago, "perhaps in Boston". He mentioned another possibility: the records of commercial vessels that were eligible for military call-up at English ports during the 17th century. He explained these would typically give the vessel name, owner, Captain, tonnage and regular commercial use. [My personal feeling is, this part of the tradition is so specific, it has to come from some where. Of all the non corroborated statements, I think this might be the most important one to find. Could the published lists be _Passenger and Immigra- tion Lists_, edited by P. William Filby and Mary K. Meyer? Sorry -- the title page I have doesn't include publishing data. The page I have is further labeled: "Index, 1st edition, vol. 1, A-G." It's an alphabetical list which gives name, age (if known), place of arrival (not limited to port cities), year and source where information was found on each individual named. My copies were sent by a researcher of another line; I haven't checked for the Glasgow passengers. LSS] Now to Christ Church Parish, Barbadoes where another Clarke family lived whose given names closely resemble "ours". They were there by 1644 which is well before Michael and Margaret Clark are supposed to have arrived (1669). The Patriarch, Chris topher Clarke Sr. (c1620-1695), and his wife, Ann, had four sons and one daughter who survived to adulthood. Christopher Sr. out lived his wife and all children except daughter Elizabeth Tres cott. He named in his will (per _Barbadoes: Wills and Administration_) daughter Elizabeth, a grandson Christopher, granddaughter Ann who was dau of deceased son Thomas, a friend and a god-son. Doug got the christening dates for all children except Michael from Hotten. He SUSPECTS Michaell was born before they arrived in Barbadoes; he failed to note the birth year for daughter Elizabeth. Michaell c1642- 14 JUL 1679 Roger 1644-1689 Elizabeth c1648-aft 1695 Christopher Jr. 1654-1679 Thomas 1657-bef 1695 Doug then constructed families for Christopher Sr's children by using the above wills book and Hotten. Michaell and Elizabeth Clarke had three children -- Christopher (b.c1662), Ann (married John Biggs) and Elizabeth. Roger Clarke married Mary Maggs, a Quaker; her father, George, left her only a ring worth a shilling in his 1677 will because she married a non-Quaker. Roger and Mary lived in adjacent St. Michael's Parish. Their children 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 wife, Elizabeth, had one child -- Anne (b.1678 married David Robinson). Christopher Clark Jr. (1654-1679) and his wife, Mary (d. 1715), named their only daughter, Mary (b. 1671). The above Michaell is NOT the "MOORMAN tradition" Michael whose wife was named "Margaret". Michael of tradition died before 20 MAY 1678 for on that date Margaret Clark, widow, sold part of her interest in a 1,020 acre plantation and in 25 Negroes. Doug's theory about this sale is son Micajah "liquidating" his larger portion (as eldest son) of Michael's estate before relocating in Virginia. With this information in hand, Doug took another look at the 1680 Barbadoes census. [I've copied Doug's data graph for all CLARKEs living in Christ Church Parish and paraphrased his conclusions below.] 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 above Christopher is Christopher Sr. (c1620-1695); his sons Michaell and Christopher Jr. were deceased; and his son, Roger, lived in adjacent St. Michael's Parish. Of the remaining names, Doug believes only Margaret, Francis and Roger belong to Michael d.1678. Based solely on tradition, Doug explains that only the absent Micajah and above Francis and Roger were 21 in 1680. He believes under English Colonial Law they were the only sons of Michael and Margaret old enough to own land, thus be taxed in 1680. He theorizes that Micajah was in Virginia by this date. The above Thomas presents some difficulty; Doug BELIEVES this Thomas is the son of Christopher Sr. (c1620-1695). However, another Thomas Clark resided in Barbadoes in this time frame. This second Thomas was a leader in the Quaker community and was always referred to as "Sr." The census Thomas may be the son of Christopher Sr.; or son of Michael d.1678 if tradition errs and he was older; or he may belong to another CLARK family al together. In the colonial period, the designation "Sr." and "Jr." did not imply specific relationships between two in dividuals; these were used to differentiate between individuals of the same name--one is older than the other. The Edward of the 1680 census, PROBABLY 21, may or may not be the Edward Clark who married Catherine Rowland in 1668. Again, he is not Michael and Margaret's son unless tradition errs. The wife of Edward Clark of New Kent Co. VA 1690s [PRESUMED son of Michael d. 1678] APPEARS to be an Elizabeth. [Other possibilities e.g. daughter were not raised in my "Re-thinking Edward Clark."] William Clarks are even more difficult to sort out. One William died in early 1680 leaving one minor son. Depending on when the census was taken that year, the above COULD BE the one who died later that year. Two other Williams in the parish were still minors in 1680 [again, unless tradition errs.] That leaves one remaining William, married to an Ann; they christened a daughter, Ann, in 1676. The above is likely him, IF they were still living in the parish in 1680. Obviously more work needs to be done in Barbadoes records. Doug admits to using the traditional birth dates and children's names for Michael d.1678 in ruling out the above Edward and Wil- liam as belonging to this family. He offers as a bit of credence to the traditional ages of Michael's sons the 1679 survey. This asked for the number of white men over the age of 16 who were available to bear arms. Margaret Clark's plantation had four white men over the age of 16. Tradition would have these ages for Michael Clark's sons in 1679: Francis 22, Roger 20, William 18 and Christopher 16. Thus, Doug feels they are the ones enumerated ASSUMING the elusive Micajah had already left for Virginia. If he were still around and counted (roughly age 24), then Christopher's age would be backed to 15. Sons Thomas and Edward were 14 and 12 respec tively, thus not counted in the survey. I don't believe the sur vey indicates that ALL FOUR were her sons. In 1680 she had 5 ser- vants on her plantation; surely at least one was a white male over the age of 16. Wouldn't he/they have been counted in the sur- vey? But then, why weren't more of her sons counted? Thus the survey is just something else to consider; it doesn't prove any thing, either way. There's yet another Thomas Clarke mentioned in Barbadoes records -- "Thomas Clarke of London", mercantilist. That this Thomas and Michael d.1678 may be connected is SUGGESTED by a deed 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 Bland and one-half of 50 Negroes." Doug BELIEVES the comment "of Thomas Clarke" signifies the in dividual was employed as resident caretaker of land owned by Thomas Clarke of London. Could Michael's land have originally belonged to Thomas Clarke of London? Would that constitute a con- nection of sorts? VA Genealogies by Rev. Horace E. Hayden, page xvi reveals a connection between this Thomas Clarke of London [how many notable Thomas Clark's can there be?] to the BOLLING family. "The Bollings doubtless are descended from Tristram Boll- ing, of Bradford County, York, who had Robert Bollyng, of London 'Sadler and silk throwster', 1633 ... who married Ann, daughter of Thomas Clarke of London, and had John, eldest son, probably the John of Allhallows, London, whose son Robert, came to VA and established the distinguished Bolling family there." [Doug believes Capt. Christopher's son Bolling was named for Hen rico Co.'s Robert or John Bolling, descendants in this line. I'm personally looking for a BOLLING connection back in England in either the CLARK or JOHNSON line. Christopher's "near neighbor" was a BOWLES, not BOLLING -- another explanation for the name.] Meanwhile David Goodwin sent information found in _Barbadoes and America_, by David ________ [he couldn't find the title page. We've all been there.] This book covers the 1679 census and the 1715 one. Although the 1715 census is a bit late for our study, coincidence of surnames of the neighbors of Clarks in Barbadoes and neighbors of Capt. Christopher in New Kent Co. are striking. In 1715, only one family lived between Christopher Clarke and John MacKenny. This Christopher Clark [whom I place as probable son of Roger/ Mary Maggs based on birthyear] is 42 (in 1715); his wife is 46 and they had five children -- boys aged 15 and 12 and girls 14, 8 and 5. John MacKenny was 40 with a wife aged 40 and three children -- boys 12 and 7 and girl 7 months. Dave con tinues: "In the same parish, some 24 names after MacKenny is James Clarke, 36; his wife 45; and a male, 20. Listed 28 names BEFORE Christopher is William Clarke 29, wife 29 and boys 15 and 13, and girls 5 and 2." Dave describes _Barbadoes Records_, by Joanne Sanders as a com prehensive four volume set of marriages, births and deaths. It shows Christopher Clarke marrying Sarah Patterson 16 DEC 1694. Thomas Clark "who seems roughly contemporary with above Chris topher" married Elizabeth Morehead 4 AUG 1689. Christopher Sr. was an overseer of the will of James Crutchlow which was wit nessed by Archibald Moorehead. This will was recorded April 22, 1672. Also in the Sanders books: Jno. McKinney married Ann Heard, wido, 11 DEC 1715 in St. Michael's Parish. An Alexander MacKenny's will was dated 2 NOV 1681, naming a wife Susannah and son Thomas. His executor was Arthur Collins. Witnesses were Daniel Moerikell, John Mullineux and Francis Ball. The will was probated 18 NOV 1681. [If any have not seen my Capt. Christopher update, an Alexander MacKeney was a near neigh bor in New Kent Co. 1698 and later.] Dave adds that "Mullineux" is a Quaker name in VA as well as in Babadoes. [Margaret Clark, widow of Michael, may have married Charles Collins 1682. "Collins" as a given name appears on a group sheet I looked at last week -- can't remember if it were CLARK or JOHNSON!] Lord Anthony Ashley-Cooper, Earl of Shaftesbury Another tradition which is part of this extended family group may not be familiar to some. "In a nutshell", three theories for the surname of Penelope, wife of Capt. Christopher Clark, have been proposed. She IS the daughter of Edward JOHNSON and not a BOLLING which was based on the given name of one of their sons. The third theory: she is a MASSIE granddaughter of the Earl of Shaftsbury, Lord Anthony Ashley-Cooper. If I'm not mistaken, this comes from Agnes Clark/Benj. Johnston line. With COOPER connections in mind, consider this. In Doug's words: "An Ursula Clarke of London Hall Street, 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 later hus band or her maiden name, no way to tell... one of Powell's brothers-in-law is Thomas Cooper Esq. who I believe is a brother or younger son of Baronet John Cooper of Rockbourne, father of Anthony Ashley-Cooper. Sir John Cooper was the original investor in Barbadoes circa 1630, not his son Anthony who inherited the property interest sometime later." [Capt. Christopher's younger brother Francis named a daughter Ursula.] An earlier Christopher CLARK Sr. / COOPER connection is found in a MAY 1662 land deed 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 deceased) and Robert Saunders west and on to the sea south. An interesting aside: the price was œ150 plus 9,000 pounds of sugar, not tobacco! [And for what it's worth, one daughter of Robert ADAMS married a Saunders; two married MOORMANs and one a CLARK.] Doug theorizes that Michael Clark d.1678 is the same Michael Clark "who was active in recruiting colonists for both Barbadoes and Virginia on behalf of Sir Anthony Ashley-Cooper ... Clark's name crops up regularly prior to 1670 in accounts of Shaftesbury's colonial activities, but never after 1670." To "prove" the English Michael is the same person as the Barbadoes Michael Clark, Doug offers the following circumstantial evidence. (1) The Barbadoes Michael was clearly a man of means based on the amount of land, servants and slaves he owned at the time of his death. (2) The concidence that the last year records for Michael appear in England is the stated year his assistant was charged with improper financial conduct and is the traditional year the Glasgow sailed with his family and MOORMANS aboard. Things to Consider Lord Ashley-Cooper was among the proprietors who settled South Carolina. A common trading route was from England to Barbadoes and nearby islands and then to South Carolina. While reading South Carolina histories, Doug found references that the sloop "Three Brothers" left Barbadoes for South Carolina 15 MAR 1670, but was driven north by storms. It took refuge in the Nansemond River, Virginia until the storm blew over. Doug wonders if the MOORMANs "unloaded" in Nansemond, giving rise to the tradition that Thomas was a first settler in South Carolina. Nothing proven, BUT documentation for a ship from Barbadoes to Nansemond Co., VA the right year deserves consideration. [Heh, it's the closest we've come to documenting any of the tradition!] [I THINK he found this in _Southern Colonies in the Seventeenth Century 1607-1689_, by Wesley Frank Craven, vol. one: "A History of the South", published by LA St. Press: 1949, about page 336. I didn't copy the part about the Three Brothers, but page 335 closely follows Doug's comments before this incident. Obviously I didn't make the connection to the MOORMANs, but do have a vague memory of reading about a lost ship. LSS] Doug contacted Guilford College to see what they had on the early Quaker meeting at Somerton. "They do have some original docu ments from the pre 1700 period, but the information is not in digital form and is in the form of 'rare manuscripts' requiring special handling." He also learned some interesting things about Somerton. "The Quaker refuge near Somerton was set up by Edward Bennett (on some of his vast holdings in Nansemond and neighboring Isle of Wight Cos.). Bennett had been a Colonial Governor of VA [He was a Puritan when appointed by Cromwell] and had become a Quaker about the time he turned over the governorship to Wm Berkeley... Wil liam Ballard ... lived on adjacent property along what became known as Quaker Swamp, but was not a Quaker ... The Somerton refuge was actually nearer to Holland, VA than to the present-day Somerton and served as a sort of way-station for Quaker families. Few stayed at the refuge for more than a couple of years. No Quaker owned land at Somerton -- Bennett simply let the Quakers clear and use it, and used his considerable influence to keep the authorities at bay. The Quaker farmers or yeomen helped Bennett satisfy the settlement and crop planting requirements for his huge land tract. The Goodwins were neighbors of the Bennett's and one of the Goodwin sons was appointed sheriff of Nansemond. Rather than evicting the Quakers, Sheriff Goodwin apparently sym pathized with them and later became a Quaker himself." Does anyone besides me think its almost too coincidental that Lord Ashley-Cooper and the other proprietors signed the agreement to actively colonize South Carolina in March 1669 -- the same date the MOORMANs and CLARKs reportedly left England? Dave and others are working with English records in Exeter and Warwick. The first MOORMAN in VA records was a grocer from War- wickshire. I feel we are making headway on these families.