Unexpected: Marriages, Deaths, A Royalist Plot, and an Expensive Face in 17th Century Virginia–Ann Custis Yeardley & Sarah Thorowgood Yeardley Interwoven, Part II

The Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel, 17+ Miles Connecting Virginia Beach to the Eastern Shore, Begins on Thorowgood Lands

The first known mention of Francis Yeardley in Lower Norfolk County (later named Princess Anne, then Virginia Beach) was in June 1647.   As noted in the prior post, Francis and his older brother Argoll, sons of Gov. George Yeardley, had settled in Accomack (later called Northampton County) on the Eastern Shore (Chesapeake Penninsula).  Argoll had inherited their father’s lands, been appointed to the Governor’s Council, married, avoided the plague, and was enjoying a prosperous life.  While Francis had acquired 3,000 acres by transporting 60 headrights, he was still a bachelor and not as successful as his brother.  (See Interwoven Lives: Part I)

Eastern Shore and Lower Norfolk  residents often shared merchant ties and attitudes from their common “outlier” status in the Virginia Colony.  As the Thorowgood’s  Lower Norfolk lands were close to Cape Henry at the entrance to the Chesapeake Bay,  there would have been much shipping passing by, and it was a straight path from Hungars and Nassawadox Creek where the Yeardleys lived to the Thorowgood lands on the Lynnhaven Bay/River. So whether Francis came there for  business or was looking for additional land and opportunities, he and several local acquaintances spent the night of June 10, 1647 at the house of the twice widowed Sarah Thorowgood Gookin.

St. John’s House, St. Mary’s, MD  by L.H. Barker; Possible model for initial Thorowgood House

An Unexpected Death

In a court deposition on June 12, Francis Yeardley stated,  “Mr.  Peregrine Bland being at the house of Mrs. Sarah Gookin in Lynhaven, broke his fast …in company of me and others and fed heartily…and drinking in the interim moderately…till his occasions calling him to go with Mr. Eyres and Mr. Hall, Chyrurgeon (surgeon).” Francis encouraged him to wait until the heat of the day had passed, but Bland proceeded on.  Mr. Eyres went to check on him and discovered Bland had fallen asleep  in a “barne fort” on the way. When Francis returned to check on him, he found Mr. Bland “lying on his right side, his arms under his head, dead, and purging at the mouth frothy blood.”  From the inquest, it was determined there was no foul play, and, thus, their hostess,  Sarah  Gookin, was spared an appearance in court. [1]

Some have used this passage to conclude that Sarah ran a tavern on her property at which these gentlemen were staying.  However, it was expected hospitality to provide food and shelter for travelers in those days, and these were notable guests.  Licensed ordinaries (taverns) existed in Lower Norfolk County, and that very year  the  county court granted licenses to two individuals. None were to Sarah Gookin. [2]

A 17th c Malt House

Francis and Sarah had frequent involvement with the Lower Norfolk County Court over more than a decade,  but there are no records of licensing, taxing, debts, sales, shipping, disputes, or gatherings for an ordinary connected with the Thorowgoods, Gookins, or Yeardleys .  The existence of Gookin’s Landing and the building of a malt house (to produce malted beer) are evidence of smart businesses, but not proof of a tavern.   The ceramics and artifacts found during the archaeological excavation of the Thorowgood’s original house site are expensive wares, not the type or quantity expected at a tavern site. Furthermore, all the sworn depositions from this incident clearly refer to the guests staying at Mrs. Gookin’s “house,” not another structure. (See Knives, Forks, and Silver Spoons: The Material Culture (and Jewels) of Sarah Offley Thorowgood Gookin Yeardley in 17th Century Virginia )

It was more than a century later during the Revolutionary era that there were references to a Pleasure House tavern in the Thorowgood area.  It was even noted on a map when Benedict Arnold was commanding British troops in the area.  That tavern burned  in the War of 1812. [3]

An Unexpected Marriage

Whether the visit by Francis Yeardley  was the start or the continuation of an ongoing courtship, he wooed  Sarah Offley Thorowgood Gookin, and they were married within six months .  They then lived on Sarah’s estate in Lower Norfolk County.   That next year Yeardley patented additional adjoining lands based on transporting more headrights:  20 English, 7 Africans, and Simon, the Turk. [4]

Sarah Thorowgood Portrayed at Thorowgood House Center

This marriage likely surprised many.  Francis was more than 10 years younger than Sarah.*  There were obvious advantages for Francis, but what enticement was there for level-headed, wealthy Sarah?  Sarah had enjoyed the legal advantages of being a “feme sole” for four years after the death of her second husband and had managed the estate well.  Yet, she was also raising 5 children, and her daughters were coming near age for their own marriages.  In addition, Sarah was locked in a dispute with the Lower Norfolk justices over the accounting of her children’s inheritances.  Was she tiring of the business responsibilities or lonely for companionship or looking for a way to expand and enhance her social experiences and the status of her children?  Their marriage seemed to be one of mutual convenience, but there must also have been some spark that drew these two dynamic personalities together, as there were likely other viable suitors.  Smart Sarah, though, had learned from the example of Francis’ mother, Lady Temperance Yeardley, and set up a pre-nuptial arrangement to protect her finances before her third marriage. [5] (See The Fascinating and Formidable Sarah Offley Thorowgood Gookin Yeardley of 17th Century Virginia)

The Custis Clan from Rotterdam

Rotterdam Map by Frederick De Wit 1690 wiki commons

Argoll Yeardley’s life was also changing.  Unfortunately, his wife Frances died around 1648, leaving him alone with their young children:  Rose, Frances, and Argoll II.  That following year,  Argoll accompanied his tobacco shipment to Rotterdam and returned, perhaps unexpectedly, with their new stepmother, Ann Custis.   It was an era of economic ties and competition between England and Holland, and numerous English merchants, such as Ann’s parents, Henry and Joan Custis,  had moved to the cosmopolitan trade center of Rotterdam.  In addition to their cloth business, Henry and Joan established St. John’s Head, a  Rotterdam inn, that was popular with English merchants and ex-patriots.  The Custises would have hosted many eligible and wealthy merchants, so we do not know what set Argoll apart that Ann should agree to leave her comfortable home for the challenges of the Eastern Shore.  As with Sarah Offley’s marriage to Adam Thorowgood, Ann must have had a courageous and adventuresome spirit. [6]

Ann’s acceptance of the marriage proposal brought the Custis family to Virginia.  Her uncle, John Custis I, may have accompanied them or arrived shortly thereafter.  Although John I conducted business, acquired property, and made periodic visits, he never settled there.  However, Ann and Argoll Yeardley enticed her brothers John Custis II, William II, and Joseph,  to join them, bringing a Custis dynasty to the New World.   John II and William II who were born in Holland, though to English parents, were not naturalized by Act of Assembly until April 1658 which then allowed them to purchase land and hold office “as if they had been Englishmen born.” A woman’s citizenship was that of her husband. [7]

An Unexpected Guest

Argoll Yeardley’s land on Hungar’s Creek

In 1650, Colonel Henry Norwood on his journey from England found himself stranded on the Eastern Shore.  In his journal, he related that when he approached Argoll and Ann Yeardley, he was warmly received, having known Ann from when she was a child and her father who “kept a victualling house in that town, lived in good repute, and was the general host of our nation there.”  Colonel Norwood said “I was received and caressed more like a domestic and near relation than a man in misery and a stranger.  I stayed there for a passage over the bay, about ten days, welcomed and feasted not only by the esquire and his wife, but by many neighbors that were not too remote.” [8]

Sadly, the Yeardley’s house that provided such a welcome burned in 1651.  However, we know from Argoll’s 1655 inventory that their next house was well furnished and had at least a hall chamber, a parlor chamber, a hall, two garrets, a kitchen, and a room over the kitchen as well as a dairy.  Argoll and Ann Yeardley were living comfortably on the Eastern Shore and had the added joy of the birth of two sons, Edmund and Henry.  Unfortunately, neither of them would have issue. [9]

Sir William Berkeley

Civil War Strife in Virginia

Meanwhile,  England was being torn apart by Civil War.  Gov. Berkeley, with whom Argoll served on the Council, maintained his loyalty to King Charles I and his son, Charles II, even after the king was beheaded in 1649.  As noted in a prior post, Gov. Berkeley had actively persecuted the Virginia Puritans in Upper and Lower Norfolk, resulting in many moving to Maryland, and he had refused to comply with Parliament’s orders.   On the Eastern Shore and elsewhere, several spoke out against the King which led the Assembly to prohibit speech in favor of the regicide, the change to Parliamentary governance, or in challenge to local government authority.  At times, tensions flared. [10] (See Religious Tolerance/ Intolerance in 17th c Virginia)

Shortly after the English Civil War began, Richard  Ingle, the master of the ship Reformation and an avowed supporter of the parliamentary cause,  got into an argument with Francis Yeardley about the King and Parliament while he was docked on the Eastern Shore.  Argoll, who was also on board, attempted to calm them.  However,  Ingle grabbed a poleax and a cutlass and ordered all Virginians off his ship. As a Councillor and the Commander of the Eastern Shore, Argoll responded, “I arrest you in the King’s name.” Ingle replied, “If you had arrested me in the King and Parliaments name I would have obeyed it for so it is now.”  He then forced the Virginians, including Francis and Argoll, to leave his ship and sailed to Maryland, boasting of his defiance of Yeardley.  However, months later, Argoll forgave Inge “of and from all manner of debts, suits, and controversies.”[11]

Gov. Berkeley was finally forced to resign and surrender when ships with Parliamentary forces arrived in Virginia in 1652.   Argoll Yeadley was appointed to the new Council of Richard Bennett, the Commonwealth’s Governor, and was tasked with obtaining the signatures of the Northampton residents who had to swear their allegiance to the Commonwealth.  Whatever the citizens may have felt, this was done without incident.[12] 

English Fashions 1600s   wiki commons

Sisters-in-Law: Ann & Sarah

Despite their age differences, Ann Custis  and Sarah Offley Thorowgood Gookin  had married the Yeardley brothers within two years of each other and became sisters-in-law.   Their husbands continued to be involved in each other’s ventures and drew the Custis brothers into their affairs.  But did Sarah and Ann ever meet or visit or write each other?  The records are silent, but these two dynamic women surely knew of and influenced each other.

They likewise shared common grief in losing their Yeardley husbands a year apart:  Argoll in 1655 and Francis in 1656.  We do not know the circumstances of their deaths,  but both died unexpectedly without wills.  Did Sarah and Ann confide concerns about their husbands’ health  or exchange condolences? Sarah died a year after Francis.  They had not had any children together. [13]

Argoll’s Insufficient Estate

Ann was appointed the executrix of Argoll’s estate when he died intestate.   Settling his estate was complex. The inventory and appraisal of the estate on  October 29, 1655 revealed that Argoll had 10 ewes, 16 cows, and 3 horses; 2 indentured servants with 3 months of service left in their contracts; and 2 Negro men, 2 Negro women (their wives), and 4 Negro children, only one of which was to be freed at adulthood (see prior post), providing further evidence that their Africans were enslaved, not indentured.  The Yeardleys had lived comfortably with  cupboards, beds, linens, a large Dutch looking glass (mirror), books, cookware, pewter, silver plate,  a small boat, and more.  Argoll’s estate was appraised at the equivalent of 41,269 pounds of tobacco which should have been adequate to pay off the usual debts.[14]

However, growers of tobacco and trade merchants lived in a world of credit, and their cash flow was often in flux.  At the moment of Argoll’s unexpected death, he had extended his credit beyond his means, for Ann reported to the court in November 1655 that she had paid out “a considerable sum of tobacco beyond assets to the creditors of her dead husband.”   Ann Yeardley was ordered to find what she could to pay debts, but was granted a Quietus Est or termination of remaining debts by the court. Fortunately, real estate was not included in the assessment, so Argoll II still inherited his father’s property, and Ann received her widow’s dower interest which she released to Argol II when he agreed to deed land to her sons (his stepbrothers). [ 15]

Conspiracy?  Follow the Money

How did a well respected gentleman such as Argoll end up in such a quandary? Some of his money might have been spent on the joint project initiated by his brother Francis to establish relations and trade with Roanoke tribes in North Carolina which Francis wrote about in 1654.  The amount Argoll owed his notable Eastern Shore neighbors was only 11,604 pounds of tobacco  which was able to be paid off. However, more than twice that (28,874 lbs. tobacco and 677 Dutch Guilders) was claimed by the Custis family.  How could Argoll, who had hosted the emigrant Custises and provided them land, servants, and cattle, ended up owing them so much in just 5 years?  John II, who could not yet purchase land,  had even been leasing a plot from Argoll since 1653. [16]

John Thurloe, Cromwell’s Secretary of State

On Christmas Day, 1654, Ann’s older brother, Edmund Custis III, was arrested in London with Henry Norwood and other co-conspirators in a plot to supply weapons for an anticipated revolt against Cromwell and for the restoration of the monarchy.  The agents of John Thurloe, the Secretary of State and spymaster under Cromwell,  discovered “5 chests and 2 trunks of arms now found at his (Edmund’s) house.”

According to one conspirator’s confession, the plan also included hiring a ship of one of Edmund’s brothers (likely Robert who was a shipmaster) to smuggle additional arms into England. Edmund claimed that the arms he had in the house were to send to Virginia, but the Commonwealth Assembly had not requested them.  Edmund was sent to prison with Norwood.  After Captain Norwood had innocently stayed at the Yeardley’s home in 1650, he had gone to Jamestown and may have initiated the plot in conjunction with Governor Berkeley.  Assets of 1,000 pounds  from Governor Berkeley were subsequently funneled to Edmund Custis.[17]

Dutch Republic Rijksdaalder 1622

The claims made against Argoll’s estate which included the 677 Guilders and 10,383 pounds of tobacco were due to this Edmund Custis, called innocently a London merchant, and his brother Joseph, who may have helped handle things while Edmund was imprisoned.  John Custis, Sr. (Ann’s uncle) claimed he was owed 14,227 pounds, and John Custis II claimed 4,154 pounds based on goods delivered by his brother Robert to Argoll Yeardley in Virginia.  For all the money owed to the Custises, there were no equivalent goods accounted for in the inventory or evidence of services rendered or shipments lost or in process.  Perhaps the Custises had contributed when Argoll had to rebuild his burnt house several years before, but even that and the generally “old” furnishings in his household  inventory would not equal what he owned.

The claims were made by the Custises who lived at least part-time in Virginia, avoiding review by an English court.  Despite Argoll’s oath of allegiance to the Commonwealth, had some of his wealth gone to the purchasing of arms or the funding of a planned rebellion? Or had Argoll unsuccessfully invested in some of Edmund III’s shipping ventures, made even more risky during the First Anglo-Dutch War of 1652-1654? Knowing their sister/ niece’s situation, why did Ann’s family not forgive some of her debt?  Edmund would later forgive John II a debt.  Ann must have had a difficult and  anxious year in 1655: her brother in prison, her husband dead, and her wealth gone.  Ann’s brother, John Custis II, did assist her in settling the estate and handling the dwindled assets of her children. [18]

Married, Again

Ann Custis Yeardley soon remarried, as was common with Virginia widows.   Not to be confused with the ancient planter John Wilcox who had also lived on the Eastern Shore,  Ann’s second husband, John Wilcox/ Wilcocks served as a representative to the Assembly in 1658 and  acted as an attorney for other settlers, served on a jury, and helped resolve disputes before the courts.  Wilcocks owned land in the area known today as Pear Plain across from Argoll Yeardley on Hungars Creek.  A child William was born to them in 1661, but unfortunately did not live long after his baptism.  [19]  (See The Widow Thorowgood and the Power and Perplexities of 17th Century Widows in Virginia)

The Face Worth 1,000 Pounds 

Jenean Hall uncovered  from the Northampton Court records the story of John Wilcocks’ extraordinary concern for his wife.  Ann Custis Yeardley Wilcocks developed unspecified sores on her face which led her husband to make an agreement with  John Rhoads, a chirugeon (surgeon) then on the Eastern Shore,  to pay 1,000 pounds of tobacco for his “paines and means” if Rhoads could provide a long term cure of her sores, lasting at least from spring through fall.  Wilcocks later increased the offer to 2,000 pounds.  This was a substantial offer.  Rhoads expressed some hesitancy on his choice of treatments because Ann was pregnant at the time, but took the deal.

However, Wilcocks did not pay Rhoads that sum.  Rhoads sued Wilcocks for payment in April 1662,  but the Northampton court was not impressed by the treatment or improvement, for the justices found that the provision of  his “diets” (meals–maybe room and board?)  was “sufficient satisfaction for the medicines administered.” In addition, Rhoads had to pay the court costs. Unfortunately, in the following weeks, John Wilcocks became seriously ill and died, leaving Ann pregnant and widowed for the second time.   Perhaps hoping to collect more from the estate of John Wilcocks,  Rhoads again petitioned the court in October for payment for Ann’s treatment.  The court, however, rejected it as it was the same plea and there was “no further cause of suit appearing, neither the cure  manifested nor any other application used.”  Once again, Rhoads had to pay court costs. [20]

Sadly, it seems Ann was not cured at the time, but many questions remain unanswered.  Was this a case of exorbitant doctor fees or lofty claims of a cure that could not be provided?  A gesture of love or a demand for vanity?  What sort of sores were these?  It was likely more than a case of usual acne or hormonal imbalance,  as Ann had borne children before.  Perhaps, acne had worsened with streptococcus or staphylococcus bacteria. The sores did not sound like pox marks which would not have had seasonal variation.

It had only been a few decades since the  physician Jan Jessen had published his famous work On Skin and Skin Disorders,  so there was still much uncertainty on the nature of human skin and the causes and treatment of skin problems. Lancing/ bleeding/leeches, face plasters, biologic treatments like honey or camphor oil, herbal applications like aloe or onion, more dangerous chemical applications of mercury, lead, or silver, or simply the control of one’s diet were all in practice. While understanding of diseases and treatments has changed over the centuries, the story of a loving husband’s support for his wife’s struggle for a cure still resonates today. [21]

Widowed, Again

In May 1662 just prior to his death, John Wilcocks prepared a will  and shortly thereafter  revised it.   He left to his wife Ann his “whole estate real & personal lands and chattels during her natural life” which, on her decease, would go to their  “child or children now in her womb.”  But he was also inclusive of his stepsons,  Henry and Edmond (Ann’s children with Argoll Yeardley), authorizing Ann to divide of his personal estate as inheritance for them as “to her shall seem fitting” and made them successively his heirs in case of the death of the child in the womb.  He reminded his wife that he had “desired to be in some large measure helpful to the children or child of my brother Henry if he should have any.”

In his codicil, he made it clear that “my beloved wife…shall solely and wholly enjoy my whole estate…giving no account of waste to any person.” He also specified that he forgave his brother any debts he owned him and designated that if there were a child of his brother, it would receive 200 acres and  6 cows.  John Wilcocks was a generous man who clearly trusted his wife Ann, but unfortunately left no descendant to emulate him.  There is circumstantial evidence, based mostly on land records, that Ann Custis Yeardley Wilcocks next married a younger man, John Luke, who lived with her on the Wilcocks property until her death.  They had no children together. [22]

Legacies of the Ladies

The Thorowgoods are rarely acknowledged in Eastern Shore history; yet as Francis’ wife, the powerful Sarah would have had some impact on affairs there.  The Thorowgood genes and heritage infused the Eastern Shore through the marriage of her daughter Elizabeth Thorowgood to John Michaels, and thus to their Custis grandchildren. The Yeardley genes  and heritage likewise came  to Lower Norfolk through Argoll’s daughter Frances Yeardley II who married Adam Thorowgood II.  The Thorowgood, Custis, and Yeardley women may not be the names that are usually remembered in history,  but they played important roles in weaving the complex tapestry of the developing Virginia society.

* There is question regarding the birth years of Argoll and Francis Yeardley.  The 1624 Muster recorded Argoll as 4; Frances  as 1; and their older sister as 6 years old while living in James City with their parents.  A birth year of 1619/20 for Argoll meant he would have been unusually young when he married, inherited his father’s lands, and was placed on the Council.  Likewise, Frances would have been  young to receive a patent for bringing headrights.  Disparities in the ages listed for other individuals in the Muster have raised questions as to what reference point was used, i.e. Adam Thorowgood was listed as 18, although he was 20 in 1624.  In  depositions given in 1630 for the suit Yardley v. Rossingham (C24/561 Pt2/136), William Claiborne stated “the eldest son known by Argall Yardley… being of the age of some thirteen years or thereabouts and the second of the age of some twelve years.”  Susanna Hall stated in her deposition that the daughter was “some 16 years of age or thereabouts; the eldest son some 14 years old, and the youngest some 12 years old.”  This would adjust Argoll’s birthdate to about 1616 or 1617 and Francis’ birthdate to around 1618 or 1619.    The adjusted dates seem more reasonable. [See footnote 5]

Next Post:  Dutch Merchants in the Chesapeake and Thorowgood Brides

Special Thanks to Jenean Hall, Eastern Shore historian and author, and Jorja Jean, Virginia Beach historian and researcher, for their insights and assistance.

Footnotes:

1. Walter, Alice Granberry, Lower Norfolk County Virginia, Court Records: Book “B” 1646-1651/2 (Baltimore: Clearfield, 2009), 40-41. Turner, Florence Kimberly, Gateway to the New World: A  History of Princess Anne County Virginia, 1607-1824 (Easley, South Carolina: Southern Historical Press, 1984), 55.
2.  Walter, Book “B,” 59-60.  Pieczynski, Christopher, The Pleasure House: A Research Study Submitted to the Virginia Beach Historic Preservation Commission (June 30, 2020).  Accessed 4/20/2023  online at https://www.vb.gov.com
3. Luccketti, Nicholas M., Robert Haas and Mathew Laird, Archaeological Assessment of the Chesopean Site, Virginia Beach, Virginia (Williamsburg, VA: James River Institute for Archaeology, Inc, December 2006), 6-7, 28-30. Outlaw, Merry and Bly Bogley (cataloguers), “Site Number 44VB48: Thorowgood or Chesopean, Virginia Beach,” Archaeological Specimen Catalog for The Virginia Research Center for Archaeology, 1980.
4. Walter, Book “B,”  53  (53a), 49 ( 50), 58-59 (60), 74 (76a), 81 ( 90a).
5. Morgan, Edmund S., American Slavery, American Freedom (New York: W.W. Norton, 1975), 166-167.  Hotten, John Camden, The Original Lists of Persons of Quality (Berryville, Virginia: Virginia Book Company, 1980; originally published in London, 1874), 123, 222.  Dorman, John Frederick, Adventurers of Purse and Person Virginia 1607-1624/5, v. 3, 4th edition (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co, Inc., 2007), 865-866.  McCarthy, Martha W.,  Virginia Immigrants and Adventurers, 1607-1635 (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 2007),  775.  Nugent, Nell Marion, Cavaliers and Pioneers: Abstracts of Virginia Land Patents and Grants 1623-1666, v. 1 (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 1979), 81.  Currer-Briggs, Noel, “Parentage and Ancestry of Sir George Yeardley and Temperance Flowerdew,” National Genealogical Society Quarterly, 66, 17-28.
6. Dorman, 866.  Whitelaw, Ralph T., Virginia’s Eastern Shore, v.1 (Richmond: Virginia Historical Society, 1950), 289. Lynch, James B., Jr, The Custis Chronicles: The Years of Migration (Camden, Maine: Picton Press, 1992), 36-37, 49-50.
7. Lynch, 137-151, 159-160, 217.  McCartney, Jamestown People to 1800 (Baltimore:  Genealogical Publishing Company, 2012), 131-134.
8. Lynch 137-138.  Whitelaw, 289. Turman, Nora Miller, The Eastern Shore of Virginia 1603-1964, (Onancock, Virginia: The Eastern Shore News, Inc., 1964), 49-51.
9. Whitelaw, 289. Dorman 866. Bruce, Philip Alexander, Economic History of Virginia in the Seventeenth Century (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1907), 157. Mackey, Howard and Marlene A. Groves, Northampton County Virginia Record Book: Orders, Deed, Wills 1654-1655,  v. 5 (Rockport, Maine, Picton Press, 1999), 222-225.
10. Perry, James R., The Formation of a Society on Virginia’s Eastern Shore, 1615-1655 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1990), 209-210.  Wise, Jennings Cropper, Ye Kingdome of Accawmacke or the Eastern Shore of Virginia in the Seventeenth Century (Richmond: The Bell Book and Stationary Co., 1911), 133-136.
11. Perry 207. Hall, Jenean, unpublished papers, 2023.
12. Bond, Edward L., Damned Souls in a Tobacco Colony: Religion in Seventeenth Century Virginia (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 2000), 158-159. Neill, Edward D.  Virginia Carolorum: The Colony Under the Rule of Charles the First and Second (Albany:Joel Munsell’s and Sons, 1886, reprinted by Scholar Select), 217-225.
13. Dorman, 328, 865-866.
14. Turner, Nora MIller and Mark C. Lewis, “Inventory of the Estate of Argoll Yeardley of Northampton County, Virginia in 1655,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, 70:4 (October 1962), 410-419. Whitelaw, 290.
15. Mackey, Howard and Marllene A. Groves, Northampton County Virginia Record Book: Deeds, Wills & Etc. 1665-1657, v. 6 and 7-8 (Rockport, Maine: Picton Press, 2002), 37-38.
16. Mackey, v.6 and 7-8, p. 9-10, 21-22.  Lynch, 160.  Salley, Alexander S., Jr., (editor), Narratives of Early Carolina 1650-1708 (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1911. Facsimile copy by Elibron Classics, 2005), 25-29. “Money in the 17th century Netherlands,” accessed online 7/3/23 at Dutch money
17. Lynch, 63-66, 106-107.  Harrison, Fairfax, “Henry Norwood (1615-1689),” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography,  33:1 (January 1925), 6-7.    “Henry Norwood,” wikipedia.  Accessed online 7/3/23.
18. Mackey, v.6 and 7-8, p. 9-10.  Lynch, 58-59.
19. McCartney, Jamestown, 446.  Whitelaw, 412-413.  Mackey, Howard and Candy McMahan  Perry, NorthamptonCounty Virginia Record Book: Deeds, Wills & Etc 1637-1666, v. 7, (Rockport, Maine: Picton Press, 2002), 175-176.  Lynch, 139. Hall, Jenean, unpublished papers, 2023.
20. Mackey, Howard and Marlene A. Groves, Northampton Count Virginia Record Book: Court Cases 1637-1664, v.8 (Rockport, Maine: Picton Press, 2002), 228-229, 269-270. Hall, Jenean, unpuplished papers, 2023.
21. Murphy H., Skin and Disease in Early Modern Medicine: Jan Jessen’s De cute, et cutaneis affectibus (1601). Bull Hist Med. 2020;94(2):179-214. doi: 10.1353/bhm.2020.0034. PMID: 33416551; PMCID: PMC7850318. Mahmood NF, Shipman AR. The age-old problem of acne. Int J Womens Dermatol. 2016 Dec 2;3(2):71-76. doi: 10.1016/j.ijwd.2016.11.002. PMID: 28560299; PMCID: PMC5440448.
22. Lynch, 138-139, 224-225.  Whitelaw, 412-413.  Hall, Jenean, unpublished papers, 2023.

John Gookin, Sarah Thorowgood, The Nansemond Tribe, and Virginia Puritans from Ireland

The deposition of Henry Catelin…with Robert Hayes being appointed by order of the Court…to (ap)praise and divide the estate of Capt. Adam Thorowgood deceased doth say upon his oath that Mr. John Gookin and his wife Sarah were very careful to have the estate equally divided for the children[1]

Captain John Gookin, though not as well known or remembered as his famous father Daniel Gookin, Sr., or brother Daniel Gookin, Jr., left his mark on early life in Virginia through his complex, if short, life. John was respected and trusted by his community and competent in the handling of his estates and business affairs. At the early and unexpected death of her first husband, Sarah Thorowgood had become a wealthy widow in Lower Norfolk County, Virginia, responsible for a large estate and four children under 10 years of age. Within a year, she chose to marry John Gookin. See post “The Widow Thorowgood.”

English With An Irish Plantation

The Gookins were an established family in Kent, England in the 16th and 17th century with an  acquired family seat at Ripple Court.  On January 31, 1608/9, Daniel Sr. married Mary Byrd, the daughter of the learned Rev. Richard Byrd, a canon of Canterbury Cathedral.  Daniel Sr. and Mary had five sons, naming their third Daniel (Jr.) and their fourth John (the name of Daniel Sr.’s father and brother).   Daniel Jr. was born in 1612, and, based on the birthdates of the other brothers, John, the son of Daniel Sr., would have been born about 1613.  Although Daniel Sr. received English lands from his father,  he decided around 1611 to move his family to join his older brother Vincent Gookin who had established himself in Munster, Ireland, in 1606.  John, the father of Daniel Sr. and Vincent, joined them soon thereafter.[2]

The Desmond Rebellions in Ireland

The Munster region in southwest Ireland was still recovering from the devastation of the Desmond Rebellions and the Nine Year’s War (Tyrone’s Rebellion) between the English and the Irish which did not conclude until 1603.  The English poet Edmund Spenser, who fought in those wars, said that in parts of  Munster, “they were brought to wretchedness…creeping forth upon their hands, for their legs could not bear them; they looked Anatomies of death; they spoke like ghosts crying out from their graves….a most populous and plentiful country suddenly left void of man or beast.”  Shortly thereafter, the Gookins joined other “New English” Protestant settlers who were granted land to establish plantations on the confiscated lands of the Irish rebels. It was here that Daniel Jr. and John Gookin probably spent most of their childhoods.[3] 

Vincent had settled at Courtmacsherry in County Cork to take up the profitable pilchard fishing industry.  Daniel Sr. took residence in Coolmain across the bay from Vincent before purchasing the castle and lands of Carrigaline in 1616.   Daniel Sr., though, had his sights on more than a piece of Ireland.  For some, colonization in Ireland was a step towards the greater adventure of settling in the New World. Daniel Sr. was likely inspired and  encouraged by his neighbor Captain William Neuce who was his business partner, a veteran of the Nine Years War, and founder of the successful Irish towns of Bandon-Bridge and Newcestown.  Neuce and Gookin both invested in the Virginia Company, applied for land patents, and made plans to go to Virginia.[4]

Ventures to Virginia

Historic Jamestowne NPS

When Capt. Neuce proposed to bring 1,000 settlers to Virginia at his own expense by 1625, the Virginia Company of London received the offer with enthusiasm and awarded him not only a patent, but privileges and the title of Marshall of the Colony, although they acknowledged “no present necessity ” for such an office.  William, his wife, and brother Thomas came to Virginia in 1620 and settled in  Elizabeth City (today’s Hampton/Newport News). Thomas became deputy for distribution of the Company lands,  built two reception houses for new immigrants,  and fortified his home to shelter neighbors. 

Likely inspired by them, Daniel Gookin Sr. had an approved proposal to bring cattle out of Ireland to Virginia by November 1620, and in July 1621, he asked the Council to be granted a plantation as large as was given to William Neuce.   Daniel Gookin Sr. arrived in Virginia from  Ireland in November 1621 on the Flying Harte to the acclaim of the Virginia Council:[5]  

There arrived here about the 22nd of November a ship of Mr. Gookins out of Ireland wholly upon his own adventure …which was so well furnished with all sorts of provision, as well with cattle as we could wish all follow their example, he hath also brought with him about 50 more…that adventure besides some 30 other Passengers.  We have according to their desire seated them at Newports News, and we do conceive great hope (if the Irish plantation prosper) that from Ireland great multitudes of people will be like  to come hither.

Despite glorious beginnings, fate was not kind to these ambitious and well-intentioned neighbors from Ireland.  Thomas Neuce died of illness in 1622.  Captain William Neuce was appointed to the Council by Governor Yeardley and recommended for knighthood, but was dead by January 1623.  Daniel Sr. continued his efforts in colonization, but never attained financial success for his endeavors and died impoverished in Ireland in 1633. [6] 

Water’s Creek (now Mariner’s Lake), Newport News

The same fall that Gookin Sr. arrived in Virginia, the 17-year-old Adam Thorowgood disembarked from the Charles at Jamestown and proceeded to Water’s Creek near Blount Point in Elizabeth City to serve as an indentured servant to Edward Waters.  Daniel Gookin Sr. claimed the land just below Water’s Creek on the James River and called his new home Marie’s Mount.  Being neighbors, their paths surely crossed, but with no thought that their families would eventually intertwine.  They were both survivors of the Powhatan Uprising of 1622, only months after their arrival. [7]  See post “1622: The Powhatan Uprising”

Marie’s Mount

Good real estate often stays good real estate. The site that Daniel Gookin Sr. chose on the James River not far from the confluence with the Nansemond River is today covered by the Newport News shipyard (America’s largest industrial shipbuilder) and a terminus for the largest coal exporting site in the U.S.  While nothing of Marie’s Mount remains to be found, a small window opened between 1928 and 1935 when a Newport News physician, Jerome Knowles, found a large exposed 17th century trash pit on the eroding banks of the James River in the area of Marie’s Mount.  Dr. Knowles eventually donated the artifacts to Iver Noel Hume, the director of archaeology for Colonial Williamsburg, where the collection still resides.  Dr. Hume noted the artifacts were from the 2nd quarter of the 17th century (the Gookin era) and stated there was “the finest group of Pisa marbled slipwares that I have seen or heard of from any other site.” The quantity and type of artifacts in this happenstance collection seemed to be in line with the presence of around 30-50 people at the Gookin site. [8] 

Historic Jamestowne NPS

Daniel Sr. did not bring his family with him to Virginia in 1621, but in the few months before the unforeseen Powhatan uprising, he apparently had sufficient houses and fortifications constructed for the 35 or so people at Marie’s Mount so that there was not the devastation that occurred at other settlements.  Feeling confident, he did not obey the Commissioner’s command to pull his group back to Elizabeth City for safety, but continued to cultivate his land.  A few months later, Daniel Sr. returned to London, then Ireland, leaving his plantation in the care of his servants.  He sent additional supplies and 40 more  settlers, but never himself returned to Virginia. 

Nansemond Tribe

Despite the provisions and protective buildings, the plantation suffered from disease and continued attacks from the Nansemond warriors.  An inventory for the 1624 Muster revealed that Marie’s Mount had only 20 settlers remaining, but was well provisioned with, among other items, 16 “pieces” (guns), 200 lbs. of shot, 20 swords, 2,000 dried fish, and 15 cattle.  Back in England, Daniel Sr. was appointed by the Virginia Company to assess colonists’ losses from the massacre. [9]

Shipyard in area of  Marie’s Mount

Not giving up hope despite the risks, Daniel Sr. sent his two sons, Daniel Jr. and John, to the plantation at Marie’s Mount.  In 1630 Daniel “Gooking, gent. in Newport Newes, Virginia,” who would have turned 18 , granted land to the servant Thomas Addison for his service to the family.  There were also reports that Daniel Jr. was involved in trade and exploration among the Indians in the upper Potomac region and developed skills as an interpreter of the Algonkian language.  In 1633,  Captain David DeVries, a Dutch merchant, visited the “wealthy planter named Goegen” when anchored off Newport News.  When Daniel Gookin Sr. died in 1633, he left Marie’s Mount jointly to Daniel Jr. and John, implying that John had been living there as well.  Later, they conveyed the land to John Chandler.[10]  

Living Along the Nansemond River

Daniel Gookin’s Land on Nansemond River

As the threats of Indian attacks decreased and settlers started moving south of the James River,   New Norfolk County was created in 1636.   Just a year later, that county was ready to be divided again, becoming Upper Norfolk County (which became Nansemond, then Suffolk County) and Lower Norfolk County.  Over 35,000 acres were claimed in patents in just three years.  Adam Thorowgood received a 5,000+ acre grant in Lower Norfolk County (later Princess Ann County).

Jefferson-Fry Map, 1755. Gookins owned on upper Nansemond River as it comes off the James River

The Gookin brothers each acquired land  in Upper Norfolk.  Daniel claimed the upper knob of land between Chuckatuck Creek and the western bank of the Nansemond River near where it joins the James River.  In October 1636, John received 500 acres a little south of Daniel’s plot but also along the upper western bank of the Nansemond.  See post “English Settlers to Virginia Beach”

John ultimately acquired 1490 acres, including 640 acres in Lower Norfolk County adjoining the Thorowgood estate in October 1641 after his marriage to Sarah Thorowgood. This land came to him for transporting 13 persons, which included 7 unnamed negroes.  John and Daniel Gookin also patented land on the Rappahannock River along with Richard Bennett and other neighbors from the Nansemond region, although neither were resident there. [11] 

Nansemond River Near Fort Site

Early settlers constructed Nansemond Fort probably as a defensive palisade when they started to move into this isolated area. The fort site was occupied by English settlers continuously from 1635-1680, but evolved in its uses and construction.  Fortunately, an archaeological excavation was conducted at the site under Nicholas Luccketti of the James River Institute for Archaeology in 1988 prior to the land being developed.  It appeared to be a private fortification that served for both protection and to separate ownership and work areas.  Dr. Luke Pecocaro noted similarities between the construction at the fort  during the 1640s  and Irish bawn enclosures and fortifications. Settlers, such as the Gookins and others with Irish plantations, seemed to draw upon their Irish experiences in establishing their Virginia homesteads.[12] 

Puritan by Association

Daniel Gookin Jr. was a well known Puritan in Virginia, Maryland, and Massachusetts.  But was John?  There were those fervent Puritan devotees who left England for New England in that era, but there were many in England and even Virginia with more moderate Puritan leanings who desired church reform and simplification, supported  Puritan Parliament initiatives, and were concerned with King Charles I and his brother James II’s toleration of Catholic “popery.” Religious affiliation in Virginia was somewhat obscured by the limited number of ministers available for congregations.[13]

While most government officials and Jamestown residents remained staunchly Anglican and tried to enforce adherence to the official religion, there were dissensions in Virginia as well as England in this pre-English Civil War era.  The Munster area in Ireland that the Gookins came from was also known to have  Puritan connections. Puritan influence in Virginia became  particularly strong in Upper and Lower Norfolk and on the Eastern Shore. Richard Bennett, a friend and neighbor of the Gookins, went on to become the first Governor under the Puritan Commonwealth Era government.[14] 

Lacking a qualified minister, Daniel Gookin, Richard Bennett, and 69 other citizens from Upper Norfolk signed a letter in May 1642 addressed, not to William Laud, the Archbishop of Canterbury, but to Puritan “Pastors and Elders of Christ Church in New England.”  They requested ministers be sent them from New England “that the word of God might be planted amongst us by Faithful Pastors and Teachers.” Unfortunately, only 10 of the 71 signers are now known.  John Gookin was at that time living in Lower Norfolk, but still had land in Upper Norfolk, so may well have been one of the signatories. As early as 1633 when the Dutch visitor, Capt. DeVries, discussed English politics with Daniel Jr., Daniel leaned toward supporting Parliament, rather than the royalists. Daniel Jr. also became involved in intercolonial trade with the Puritans in  New England even before he moved there. [15]  

Daniel Gookin’s Plaque Placed in Jamestown’s Memorial Church

Adam Thorowgood was another with Puritan leanings. His brother, Rev. Thomas Thorowgood, in England became one of the Puritan Westminster Divines.  Sarah and Adam were married in a congregation in London with strong Puritan ties, so she would not have opposed Puritan views in her new husband.  In the 1640s, many in Lower Norfolk County supported their popular Puritan preacher, Rev. Thomas Harrison, even though he was brought to court for not teaching out of the Anglican Common Book of Prayer and was ultimately forced to leave by Berkeley’s government.  I would put John Gookin at least in the probably Puritan leaning category.  The next post will further explore Puritan connections with Virginia , including Daniel Gookin Jr.’s contributions to the Puritan cause in New England. [16]

Mr. and Mrs. John Gookin

William Moseley II Portrait  at Thoroughgood House Center

How and when Sarah Thorowgood met John Gookin is unknown.  Adam would have known John’s father from Marie’s Mount.  Being influential and wealthy families in the New Norfolk area, the Thorowgoods and Gookins would have interacted.  John was about 28 years old and never married when the 31-year-old widow Sarah Thorowgood  agreed to marry him out of many possible suitors.  They were married before March 15, 1640/41 when the courts ordered Mrs. Sarah Gookin to make an inventory of Adam Thorowgood’s estate.  Over the next year, Sarah and John had a child, Mary Gookin.  Mary grew up to marry Capt. William Moseley II, the son of William I and Susannah Moseley, the very couple who  exchanged jewels for cattle with Sarah and her third husband, Francis Yeardley, when they arrived from Rotterdam.[17] 

As would be expected under the legal concept of coverture, John Gookin took financial responsibility for the Thorowgood estate after the marriage.  He pursued debt collection and represented the Thorowgood heirs in land matters in court.  After his marriage, John stepped out of his older brother’s shadow and was quickly elevated to responsible positions and accorded increased status.  Thomas Willoughby and John Gookin agreed to jointly build a store at Willoughby Point for the benefit of the community.  John later was designated to provide a ferry at Lynnhaven on the lands of the Thorowgood heirs. “John Gookin’s Landing,” referred to in later deeds, was on Samuel Bennett’s Creek near the site called Ferry where the Old Donation Church was built. John was reported to represent Lower Norfolk County in the Assembly in 1640. [18] 

John Gookin, Esq., Commissioner and Commander

Floyd Painter’s Discovery of Chesopean Site Basement Stairs of Original Thorowgood Home, VA. Pilot, 1957

In 1642, Governor Berkeley appointed John Gookin, Esq., a commissioner of the Lower Norfolk County Court and Commander of all the Western Shore of Linhaven.  That same year, his brother Capt. Daniel Gookin Jr. was also appointed by Gov. Berkeley as a commander in Upper Norfolk.  John assumed responsibilities previously held by Adam Thorowgood and became the presiding justice of the court that year. The elegant and spacious Thorowgood home into which John had moved was once again in the rotation of places to hold court.  However, being a justice did not prevent him from being sued.  John Gookin was held financially liable for the physical injuries that his overseer, who had then died, had inflicted on another servant.[19] See post “Archaeological Discovery of …Chesopean Home.”

The first jury trial in Lower Norfolk County also concerned John Gookin.  Whereas fellow justices generally had no qualms about passing judgment on cases involving their peers, they decided that using a jury of 12 men provided the “most equitable way” in this matter.  As noted in a prior post, the hogs belonging to Capt. John Gookin escaped their pen and damaged the corn field of his neighbor Richard Foster.  As Gookin had installed sturdy fencing to try to keep his hogs in and  Foster had none to keep animals out, the jury found for Gookin.  At that time, planters were expected to fence in their plants if they wanted to protect them from roaming animals. [20] 

The Gookins and the Nansemond Indians

In the early years of the Jamestown Settlement, settlers had the expectation that the Indians would provide them corn, either by trade or force.  The Nansemond tribe south of the James River under the paramount chiefdom of Powhatan first encountered Capt. John Smith and the English in 1608 when, under threat,  they provided 400 baskets of corn.  Although in the English perspective they parted good friends, hostilities increased as more demands were made for food and land.  In 1609, Capt. John Martin was ordered to settle with his soldiers on Nansemond lands, but two of his advance soldiers went missing and were later found dead.  After having been told that his men had been sacrificed and that “their brains had been cut and scraped out of their heads with mussel shells,” Capt. Martin ordered a complete destruction and desecration of the Nansemond’s sacred Dumpling Island.  George Percy reported: [21]

We beat the savages out of the island, burned their houses, ransacked their temples, took down the corpse’ of their dead kings from off their tombs, and carried away their pearls, copper, and bracelets where with they do decore their kings’ funerals.

Thereafter, the English and Nansemonds were avowed enemies.  The Nansemonds participated in the Powhatan uprising of 1622 and attacked  Daniel Gookin Sr.’s Marie’s Mount and Edward Water’s Blount Point where they  kidnapped  Adam Thorowgood’s master and mistress.  However,  Edward Bennett’s plantation bore the brunt of that Nansemond attack with 53 dead.  As noted earlier, the Nansemonds continued to periodically attack settlers at Marie’s Mount.  The English sought revenge, but it was not until the late 1630s that the Nansemond threat was lessened, and they started to withdraw upriver or into the southern and northwestern branches of the Nansemond River.[22]  

Nansemond Tribe

With many of the Powhatan tribes subdued and pushed off their lands,  the Virginia General Assembly took a more reasoned approach in 1640 in handling individual conflicts between Indians and the English.  A law was passed that if an Englishman had a grievance against an Indian, he “should take it to the nearest militia commander, who would then detain without violence the next available Indian person from the same tribe as the one accused,” who would then be exchanged for the culprit.  It was under this law, then, that Commander John Gookin reported to the colony’s Quarter Court at James City in November 1642 the “outrages and robberies committed by the Indians belonging to Nansemond in the County of Upper Norfolk and secured an order that they should be punished.” The Nansemond crimes must have occurred in Lower Norfolk, but as the Nansemonds lived in Upper Norfolk, it fell to John’s brother, Commander Daniel Gookin, “to approach the Nansemond chief, for return of the stolen items and to apprehend the culprits.”  The outcome is unknown. [23]  

Nansemonds at Mattanock Town, Suffolk

However, not all relations with the Nansemonds were hostile.  In 1638, John, the son of Captain Nathaniel Bass, married a Christianized Nansemond woman, ” ye daughter of ye King of ye Nansemond Nation, by name Elizabeth.”  Other Nansemonds also converted and married into the Bass family, resulting in a group of Christianized Nansemonds during the 17th and 18th centuries that were allowed to continue to live on their lands.  Some of their  descendants are still living in Portsmouth and Suffolk County, Virginia. [24] 

An Early Death

John Gookin was dead by November 22, 1643 at the age of 30.  Sarah Offley Thorowgood Gookin, 33, was once again a widow, now with 5 young children and responsibility for administering John’s estate as well as that of her former husband Adam Thorowgood.  No record exists with Sarah’s thoughts about her husbands or her feelings of loss with their deaths.  Nor do we know the cause of John’s death or the arrangements she made for his burial.  However, he must have held a special place in her heart.  At the time of her death 14 years later, she ordered two black marble tombstones from England, one being inscribed:

Here lyeth ye body of

Captain John Gookin

and also ye body of

Mrs. Sarah Yeardley

who was wife to Captain Adam Thorowgood

first, Captain John Gookin and 

Colonel Francis Yeardley

who deceased August 1657

Church Point Memorial on Lynnhaven River

This inscription was recorded in 1819 when someone visited the graveyard of the first Lynnhaven Church that was sinking into the Lynnhaven River.  Today there is only a memorial near the site of church and graveyard. There was no record made of what had been written on the second black marble tombstone or any of the other graves at the site.  However, by 1853, all vestiges of the church and graveyard were gone.  It was reported that “a tall man may wade out to this submerged burial-place and feel with his feet… the gravestones and their inscriptions.” William Forrest in his description of the Lynnhaven at that time further reflected, [25]

the remains of those who were interred there, now lie low beneath the sandy band of the river; and over the stones which mark ‘a couch of lowly sleep,’ rolls on the cool, clear flood of Lynnhaven….How deeply, how strangely, how securely buried! 

Special thanks to Dr. Luke Pecoraro, Director of Archaeology, Drayton Hall, South Carolina, for his insights and assistance.

Footnotes

[1]  Walter, Alice Granberry, Lower Norfolk County, Virginia Court Records Book “A” 1637-1646 (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Company, 1994), 100.

[2] Gookin, Frederick William, Daniel Gookin, 1612-1687, Assistant and Major General of the Massachusetts Bay Colony (Chicago: privately printed, 1912; Reprinted through Bibliolife), 11-16, 30.  

[3] Pecoraro, Luke J. “Mr. Gookin Out of Ireland, Wholly Upon His Owne Adventure”: An Archaeological Study of Intercolonial and Transatlantic Connections in the Seventeenth Century, PhD. Dissertation, Boston University Theses and Dissertations, 2015, 85-93. Gookin, 29-30. “Desmond Rebellions,” Wikipedia, accessed online August 1, 2022.

[4] Pecoraro, 92-95, 100.  Kingsbury, Susan Myra, The Records of the Virginia Company of London volume IV  (Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1935), 210.

[5] Gookin, 38-39.  Kingsbury, Susan Myra, The Records of the Virginia Company of London volume III  (Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1933), 587.  McCartney, Martha W., Virginia Immigrants and Adventurers 1607-1635: A Biographical Dictionary, (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Company, 2007), 519.

[6] Gookin, 50-55. Horning, Audrey, Ireland in the Virginian Sea: Colonialism in the British Atlantic (Chapel Hill: North Carolina University Press, 2013), 315-316.  McCartney, 519-520. Percoraro, 39.

[7] Pecoraro, 11-12.  Stauffer, W.T., “The Old Farms,” William and Mary College Quarterly Historical Magazine, 14:3 2nd series (July 1934), 203-204.

[8] Pecoraro, 263-264.

[9] Pecoraro, 40-42.  McCartney, 332.

[10] Pecoraro, 44-48.  Stauffer, 203-204.  

[11] Gookin, 57. Nugent, Nell Marion, Cavaliers and Pioneers: Abstracts of Land Patents and Grants 1623-1666 (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., 1979) 100, 129.  Mason, G.C. “The Colonial Churches of Nansemond County, Virginia,” William and Mary College Quarterly Historical Magazine, 21:1 series 2 (January 1941), 37-38. Pecoraro, 184.

[12] Horning, 342. Pecoraro, 211-214, 241.

[13] Gookin, 65. Butterfield, Kevin, “Puritans and Religious Strife in the Early Chesapeake,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, 109:1 (January 2001), 6-8.

[14] Pecoraro, 44, 50-52.  Butterfield, 9-11.  Hatfield, April Lee, Atlantic Virginia: Intercolonial Relation in the Seventeenth Century (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004), 115-116.

[15] Butterfield, 11-13. Hatfield, 105-106, 116. Pecoraro, 44, 50-52. Neill, Edward D., Virginia Carolorum: The Colony Under the Rule of Charles the First and Second (Albany:Joel Munsell’s and Sons, 1886, reprinted by Scholar Select), 167-168.

[16] Butterfield 10-11, 22-28.

[17] Walter, 45.  Dorman, John Frederick, Adventurers of Purse and Person 1607-1624/5  volume 2 (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., 2005, fourth edition), 99-105, 107.

[18] Walter, 66, 89, 113, 116b, 118.  McCartney, Martha W., Jamestown People to 1800 (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Company, 2012), 175-176.  Kellam, Sadie Scott and V. Hope Kellam, Old Houses in Princess Anne Virginia  (Portsmouth, VA: Printcraft Press, 1931), 27-28.

[19] Walter, 90, 95, 97, 100.  Gookin, 65. Pecoraro, 49.

[20] Walter, 103.

[21] Rountree, Helen C., Pocahontas’s People: The Powhatan Indians of Virginia through Four Centuries (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1990), 47, 52.  Percy, George, “A True Relation of the Proceedings and Occurrents of Moment which Have Happened in Virginia” in Edward Wright Haile (ed.) Jamestown Narratives (Champlain, Virginia: Roundhouse, 1998), 501.

[22] Rountree, 79-82.

[23] Rountree, 83-84.  Dorman, 103. Horning, 342.

[24] Rountree, 84-85.

[25] Dorman, 103.  Forrest, William, Historical and Descriptive Sketches in Norfolk and Vicinity (Philadelphia: Lindsay and Blakiston, 1853), 459-460.  Turner, Florence Kimberly, Gateway to the New World: A History of Princess Anne County, Virginia 1607-1824 (Easley, South Carolina: Southern Historical Press, Inc, 1984), 57.  Mason, G.C. “The Colonial Churches of Norfolk County, Virginia,” William and Mary College Quarterly Historical Magazine, 21:2 series 2 (April 1941).

 

Knives, Forks, and Silver Spoons: The Material Culture (and Jewels) of Sarah Offley Thorowgood Gookin Yeardley in 17th Century Virginia

 

William Moseley II Portrait  at Thoroughgood House Center

In July 1650, Francis Yeardley, who had married Adam Thorowgood’s widow (Sarah Offley Thorowgood Gookin Yeardley), purchased an enameled gold and diamond buckle for a hatband, a gold ring set with a diamond, ruby, sapphire, and emerald, and a gold enameled pendant with diamonds from the newly arrived William Moseley.  On his part, Moseley, who had arrived in Virginia from Rotterdam cash poor with his wife, received two draft oxen, two steers, and five cows.  Sarah Yeardley must have been pleased to own such exquisite jewels, yet there were probably few occasions in the still developing Lower Norfolk County to show them off.  Moseley used his livestock to secure success in becoming an influential and wealthy citizen of the colony. Was it a fair exchange? [1]

While it can be difficult for archaeologists to tie artifacts to specific owners, Sarah lived at the Chesopean site in Lower Norfolk from the time she and Adam built their house in 1635 until it burned in the 1650s.  When the cellar of this site was uncovered in the 1950s, there was no evidence of any other substantial building there during those intervening 300 years.  Thus, Sarah, her three husbands, their children, and their indentured and enslaved workers would have been the occupants.  While Sarah’s jewels were not left behind at the site,  other artifacts have been found which bespeak their fine mid-17th century lifestyle.  (See prior post: Archaeological Discovery of Adam and Sarah Thorowgood’s Lower Norfolk “Chesopean” Home

What Money Can Buy

One Room House   St. Mary’s Cittie, Maryland

In Dr. James Horn’s comparison of  17th century housing of poor, middle class, and wealthy individuals in selected counties in England and the Chesapeake region, he also contrasted their material possessions based on inventories taken at their deaths.  While the data is not complete because not all inventories were recorded or survived, the study provides a unique sampling across socio-economic lines and geographic areas. Like with the early colonial houses,  significant differences among the groups were found, with Chesapeake  colonists generally having fewer and older possessions in their homes than did their counterparts in England.   Poor and lower-middle class householders made up the majority of the population on both sides of the Atlantic, but the poor in England generally had more of the basic necessities, like beds, tables, chairs or something to sit on, blankets, and the basic utensils for cooking and eating.  In the Chesapeake region, some of the very poor did not even have a proper mattress or any sort of formal seating.  There was less contrast among the wealthy in terms of what they possessed, although the quality and quantity of the goods generally favored those in England. [2] See Disappeared: Envisioning 17th Century Virginia Great Houses.

By the time Adam received his 5,350 acre land grant for Lower Norfolk in 1635, he would have been counted among the  wealthy and influential in Virginia.  How would that have been reflected in his home? While a copy of Adam’s will of 1640 was preserved through an article in The Richmond Standard in 1881, his will did not enumerate his household goods, and his ordered inventory has been lost.  However, that same article included an addendum added to Adam’s will at the Quarter Court of James City on April 15, 1641 which listed those items which Mrs. Thorowgood requested as a widow to be designated for use in her chamber.  The court considered the request “a fit allowance.”  The list provides a glimpse into the possessions Sarah considered important. [3] 

Further evidence of their wealthy style of living comes from the site itself.  Following Floyd Painter’s excavation in 1955, a few of the noted artifacts became lost, although photos of them remain.  A catalog of the over 5,000 remaining artifacts found by Painter and local homeowners was created by Merry Outlaw and Bly Bogley (Straube) in 1980 for The Virginia Research Center for Archaeology.   In addition, limited test units were excavated by the James River Archaeological Institute (JRIA) under Nicholas Luccketti in 2005 where additional artifacts and features were found in neighborhood yards around the area of the now covered cellar.  Whereas the inventory shows a portion of what Sarah and Adam shared before his death, the site artifacts extend the finds into the 1650s. [4] 

Knives, Forks, and Silver Spoons

Silver Spoon, Bone Cutlery Handles, and Partial Knife Blade from Chesopean Site. Thoroughgood House Center

Based on the records of Lower Norfolk County Court from 1637-1675, Dr. Horn found that none of the recorded inventories among the poor, the lower middle class, middle class, upper middle class,  or even wealthy individuals in that area listed cutlery knives or forks.  Only 36% of the poor listed spoons in their inventories, and surprisingly only about 60% of those in the middling groups reported them, leaving one to wonder if they only counted metal, but not wooden utensils.  In her 1641 petition, Sarah Thorowgood Gookin requested her knives, forks, and the 12 silver spoons which had been given to her as a gift.  She also asked for the other items made from “plate” (silver) which she had enjoyed with Adam, including the salt cellar, a silver bowl, a silver tankard, and a silver wine cup.  Silver was not only prestigious, but could be used for monetary exchange. [5]

Archaeology supported Sarah’s claims.  The 1980 catalogue included pewter and silver spoons, a decorated maidenhead knop latten spoon, and several bone cutlery handles which are pictured above.  While most of the Lower Norfolk population used spoons, it would have been exceptional to eat at the Thorowgoods’ refined table with knives, forks, and spoons. [6]

Ceramics, Glass, and Kitchen Wares

Decorated delftware and Rhenish blue and gray from Chesopean Site.                    Thoroughgood House Center

The variety of 17th century ceramics found at the Chesopean site is impressive.  As noted in the prior post, Francis Yeardley arranged for their “dining room” to be plastered.  While rooms were generally multi-purpose in that era,  dining must have been a prominent use of that space.  There was a particularly large selection of Dutch ceramics at the site, reflecting the significant trade between Dutch and English merchants living in Rotterdam and planters living in Lower Norfolk and the Eastern Shore.  Francis Yeardley’s widowed older brother, Argall, made at least one merchant trip to Rotterdam himself in 1649 when he met and married Ann Custis who was from one of the many ex-patriot English merchant families living there.  Through their encouragement, Ann’s brother, John Custis II, came to join them on the Eastern Shore of Virginia where he eventually built the Arlington House highlighted in the last post. All four of Adam and Sarah’s children married individuals with Dutch merchant connections:  Adam II to the daughter of Argall Yeardley; Ann to Job Chandler; Elizabeth to John Michael; and Sarah II to the Dutch Merchant, Simon Overzee.  The Yeardley, Thorowgood, and Custis families were involved with Dutch trade.  In a study of 17th century Dutch ceramics in Colonial America, Wilcoxen noted: 

…it is significant that one of the largest aggregations of Dutch artifactual remains yet found archaeologically in Virginia was recovered from the so-called Chesopean site, believed to have been a part of Adam Thoroughgood’s seventeenth century land holdings. [7]

Tin-Glazed Delftware from Chesopean Site. Thoroughgood House Center

In the 1980 inventory there were almost 400 fragments of blue and white Anglo-Netherlandish delftware plates, dishes, and mugs in addition to over 60 pieces of polychrome delftware dishes, drug jars, and ointment pots (Anglo-Netherlandish referring to the tin-glazed delftware being produced almost indistinguishably in both Holland and England at the time.) There was also a North Holland slipware porringer and fragments of North Holland slip-trailed dishes. From Northern Italy,  there were marbleized slipware and sgrafitto slipware dishes.  In addition, there was a Staffordshire midland purple vessel (often used for storing butter) as well as post-medieval London redware, North Devon coarseware, and other English pieces. 

 Rhenish Brown Bartmann Jugs at St. Mary’s, MD

From the Rhine area of Germany, there was a Rhenish brown “bearded man” Bartmann jug , colorful German Werra slipware,  and  fragments of blue and gray Rhenish stoneware jugs and tankards.  This amazing array of European ceramics also included  Iberian olive jar fragments.  In addition, there were glass bottles, some of which were rimmed for, and found with, pewter screw lids, and  fragments of a stemmed wine glass. Sarah had pitchers, colanders, skillets, and pots for her kitchen in addition to numerous utilitarian pieces made of local coarseware which was probably the only ceramic many of her fellow Virginians ever possessed. [8]  

Dutch tile from Chesopean site. Thoroughgood House Center

The limited excavation conducted by JRIA in 2005 found around 200 more ceramic shards which were consistent with Painter’s findings of primarily mid-17th century wares including Anglo-Netherlandish delftware, Northern Italian Pisa slipware, Rhenish jugs, and post-medieval London redware. [9]

 Fabrics and Furnishings

As fabric and wood do not survive long in the ground, they are rare to find at an archaeological site.  However, Sarah’s request list gives a glimpse of what she and Adam had.  For her chamber, Sarah requested a table with a tablecloth and napkins, a table carpet, six chairs, six stools, six cushions, and a child’s wicker chair.  It must have served as a comfortable family area for her four children and new husband, John Gookin.   She also asked for a cupboard with cupboard cloths in addition to her bed (mattress) in the bedstead (frame) with two sets of sheets and pillow cases, a blanket, and both a linen and a wool coverlet. For additional comfort, she wanted the warming pan, a chamberpot, a pewter basin and ewer (water pitcher), a candle snuffer, a pair of andrions for the fireplace as well as fire tongs and an ash shovel.  It must have been a delightful room. [10] 

English Cupboard at Thoroughgood House Center

Appraised goods at the time of Francis Yeardley’s death in 1656 included a carved box and cupboard and a set of diaper-weave cloth with 10 napkins. Francis must have been a bit flamboyant as he also had a red undersuit, suit, cloak, and boot hose toppers as well as, more proper for the conservative Commonwealth era, a black suit and cloak. Among their neighbors in Lower Norfolk, inventories showed only 60% of the middle class had sheets, 12% a cupboard, and 20% warming pans while for the more wealthy, 75% had sheets, 67% a cupboard, and 41% warming pans according to their inventories. The Thorowgoods again stood out among their neighbors.[11]

At the Chesopean site, items related to the fabrics and furnishings in their home were found.  There were curtain rings for hanging bed curtains, upholstery tacks, fireplace tools with brass finials, and a bale seal for a bolt of cloth, probably of French or German origin.  Also found was a delftware chamber pot as well as coarseware chamberpots possibly for the servants. [12]

Leisure and Luxury Items

Sarah’s family clearly had a more comfortable and enriched life than most Virginians at the time.  None of the inventories of their middle class neighbors and only 25% of their more wealthy ones reported pictures on their walls.  In her 1641 request, Sarah asked for six pictures for her chamber in a house of five or more rooms.   The limited 1656 inventory of Francis Yeardley  listed one looking glass, ten Dutch pictures, and nine books “great and small.”  [13]

Pipe Bowls and Razor Blade from Chesopean Site. Thoroughgood House Center

Sarah’s husbands were not only growers, but also consumers, of tobacco.  At the site were found fragments from  English and Dutch clay pipes as well as some made locally.  In the 2005 excavation, the heel of a Dutch tobacco pipe was found marked with “TIP” which stood for Thiel Janz Proost and dated from 1650-1670.  An English tobacco pipe was left behind with the “WC” mark which has been found at other 17th century sites, including Matthews Manor and Littletown at Kingsmill that were discussed in the last post. [14]

Bone Comb from Chesopean Site

Also in the rubble of the cellar were fragments of book clasps, glass beads, a die made of bone, and a mouth harp.  There was a bone comb of the type we use today to remove lice.  The fact that it survived intact hopefully indicates that it did not have to be used often for that purpose.  Also found were a piece of mirror and an iron razor as well as fragments of scissors, a thimble, and straight  pins.  These  artifacts help piece together a picture of their daily family life and enjoyments. [15]

Dating the Site

Charles I Richmond Round Farthing from WikiCommons

Inadvertently helping with the dating of the finds at the Chesopean site located on Adam Thorowgood’s granted land, someone conveniently left behind a few coins to be discovered. Most notable are two Richmond Round farthings.  They were of little worth in the 17th century (1/4 of a penny), but of great worth now.  Rather than being produced by the Royal Mint, King Charles I issued a patent to produce this farthing to the Duchess of Richmond which she held from 1625-1634.  They are now extremely rare and, in Virginia, have only been found at Jamestown and the Chesopean site. They fit right into the occupancy period of the Thorowgoods.[16]

17th c German Werra Slipware from Chesopean Site. Thoroughgood House Center

Along with dated coins, ceramics are one of the most reliable ways to date a site.  The Chesopean site is replete with datable mid-17th century ceramics.  Out of the thousands of fragments, only about a dozen were from the 18th or 19th century.  This is in stark contrast to the Thoroughgood brick house site where many 18th and 19th ceramics were found, but none from the 17th century.  In the 17th century, the Thorowgoods were the only owners of the Chesopean site land.  If there was an earlier, temporary outpost south of the James River (as was postulated for a Henries Town), it was not at the site of this cellar.   As there is no other supported explanation for this extraordinary find, it is somewhat unfortunate it was initially designated as the Chesopean site, obscuring the actual ownership of these remarkable artifacts.  Recognizing it as the Thorowgood Site or Manor would not decrease the importance of the still standing and remarkable early 18th century Thoroughgood House, but would rather broaden the story of these significant early founders, give identity and context to the artifacts, and enhance the legacy of Adam and Sarah and their  descendants.  (Confused by the spellings?  See Telling (and Spelling) the Thorowgood Story.)

The Jewels

Sarah Thorowgood as Portrayed at Thoroughgood House Center

What became of Sarah’s jewels?  In Sarah’s will in 1657, she ordered that “her best diamond necklace and jewel should be sent for England to purchase six diamond rings and two black tombstones.”  The rings were likely the popular mourning rings given to close family and friends as a remembrance.  The black tombstones were used to memorialize Sarah and her second husband John Gookin.  However, when her agent, Mr. Trott, had the jewelry sold in England, it brought less (£ 15) than needed (£ 19), so Sarah’s estate had to pay an additional  £4. [17] Were the jewels considered less valuable in England than in the colonies or was a merchant taking advantage of a far-off colonial customer?  And Sarah left us with a mystery.  If she had her “best diamond necklace and jewel” sold, were there other lesser jewels?  What happened to those? We will never know all that Sarah Offley Thorowgood Gookin Yeardley possessed, but it is evident she enjoyed a prosperous and comfortable life in 17th century Virginia. 

Upcoming Posts:  Adam Thorowgood, Justice and Member of the Governor’s Council

Footnotes:

[1] Parramore, Thomas C., Peter C. Stewart, and Tommy L. Bogger, Norfolk: The First Four Centuries (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 1994), 38-39. “Letter Extracted from the County Record Book 1. Lower Norfolk County,” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, 35 (1927), 50-51.

[2] Horn, James, Adapting to a New World, (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1994), 309-313, 321-323.

[3] “The Thorowgood Family of Princess Anne County, Va.,” The Richmond Standard, vol. IV, 26 November 1881, 1.

[4]  Luccketti, Nicholas M., Robert Hass, and Matthew Laird, Archaeological Assessment of the Chesopean Site, Virginia Beach, Virginia.  Report submitted by JRIA to Historic Resources Coordinator, City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, December 2006, 6-7.  Outlaw, Merry and Bly Bogley (cataloguers), “Site Number 44VB48: Thorowgood or Chesopean, Virginia Beach,” Archaeological Specimen Catalog for The Virginia Research Center for Archaeology, 1980.

[5] Horn, 311, 324.

[6]  Luccketti, 7.  Outlaw, 5-7.

[7] Wilcoxen, Charlotte, Dutch Trade and Ceramics in America in the Seventeenth Century (Albany:  Albany Institute of History and Art, 1987), 21.

[8] Luccketti, 7-9, 25.  Outlaw, 1-7.  Mansfield, Stephen S., Princess Anne County and Virginia Beach: A Pictorial History (Norfolk: The Donning Company, 1989), 18-19.

[9] Luccketti, 26-27.

[10] “The Thorowgood Family of Princess Anne County, Va”

[11]  Horn, 310-321, 324-325.  Brayton, John A., Transcription of Lower Norfolk County, Virginia, Records: Record Book C 1651-1656 (Baltimore: Clearfield Co. for the author, 2010), 434-435 (entry #203).

[12] Outlaw, 4-7.

[13] Brayton, 435.

[14] Luccketti, 27-28.

[15] Outlaw, 3-7.  Martin, Ann Smart, “Material Things and Cultural Meanings:  Notes on the Study of Early American Material Culture,” William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd Series, LIII:1, January 1996, 5-7.

[16] Luccketti,28.

[17] Brayton, John A., Transcription of Lower Norfolk County, Virginia, Records: Wills and Deeds, Book D 1656-1666 ( Jackson, Mississippi: Cain Lithographers, Inc., 2007), 116 (entry #117), 295 (entry #289).