Annie, Headrights have been one of the most misinterpreted of early colonial records. A headright could be generated every time an individual entered a colony so if an individual came to Virginia, returned to England to conduct business or visit family, then returned to Virginia, there could be two separate headright claims. It's documented that some individuals crossed the Atlantic multiple times. I've seen a deposition from a woman, in her 70s I believe, who testified in a court case that she had crossed the Atlantic 5 times. It's also easy for us to forget that the colonies were separate. If a Virginian, perhaps even a native born one, went south to North Carolina, then returned to Virginia, that counted as an entry into Virginia - another headright could be claimed. Then, of course, there was also some outright fraud going on. Someone would take a headright claim to officials in one county to get land, then go to another county to get more land on the same claim. One wa! y I try to distinguish between a multiple entry and possible fraud is to see how many of the other names in the set match. It's unlikely that the same set of 12 to 20 people would be travelling together on multiple trips. Another problem with headrights is that the person who eventually made the claim for the land was often not the one who actually transported them. Headrights were a form of currency. They were transferable and could be bought, sold, traded, perhaps even multiple times. Finally, the dates only tell you the date the headright was being claimed, not the actual date of transport. The headrights didn't expire and some were held and possibly passed around for decades before they were "cashed in" by the current owner. The only thing for certain is that transport occurred prior to the claim. So, with regard to the six headrights for a "Thomas Daniell", there may have been multiple individuals or multiple entries to Virginia (or combination of the two), and there is no certainty of any direct relationship between the claimant and the persons transported - maybe there was, maybe there wasn't. It's only a clue that can be used in combination with other records (deeds, church registers, wills, etc) to see if there was a relationship. Ken > > From: ShuShuFlyPie@cs.com > Date: 2004/03/19 Fri PM 10:34:12 EST > To: DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: [DANIEL-L] Cavaliers & Pioneers ~ DANIEL > > Payne, There is one thingy I noticed while reading and typing out these lists > of "incoming shipments" and that is, they ALL have double Ls in their > names.... so, shouldn't we dismiss the theory of "certain families only used..... " > or, this being an indication from where a certain person belonged in the scheme > of things??? > > And, I have what is probably a "duh" question to the list..... <g> [Keeping > in mind, I haven't sent all DANIELLs in the first book as yet.] > > Question: There are six "THOMAS DANIELL" names in the first book.... as > having arrived in 1649, 1653, 1657, and three of 'em in 1664. Does this mean that > SIX DIFFERENT men with the name of THOMAS DANIELL came in these years? > > Wasn't there something illegal about being used more than once in order for > someone to receive land? What have I missed? What sez a particular person did > indeed do service for their benefactor in payment of their passage? No doubt > people sometimes returned to their original home soil, and with some coming > back to the colonies...... I'm discovering that "things" haven't really changed > in the last 300 years, just getting worse... as to when it comes to doing the > right thing, whether on the law books or not... so, why not in these cases > also? > > By now, think I should be elgible for The Black Sheep Society. <g> > > Enquiring minds wanna know. > Ole Nettles Annie > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List Archives at: > http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL > >