KINFOLK AND OTHER INTERESTED: After five years, we appreciate that some of you are getting impatient relative to the release of the "Further Chronicles of the Pamunkey Davenports," but we're facing both quantity and quality challenges. Part 1, "Beginnings and Settlement North of the James River," left Doc's hands a month ago and is now being edited by Dr. Judy G. Russell, a Davenport-Baker Pamunkey who is a professional book editor--meaning Part 1 is getting a thorough edit and vetting, which takes time, for Judy has a full-time job in book publishing and also teaches Law at Rutgers University. She has no deadline, will move Part 1 along as rapidly as possible. Hopefully it will be ready for publication sometime before 1July2006. Part 1 took almost two years longer than initially expected because we encountered so much error in earlier research that we had to go back to scratch and start over, documenting as we went. In addition to required error correction, we found the Pamunkey Davenport Family to be larger than we thought--and it was big already--meaning we had new lines to identify and take through the Colonial and Post-Revolution years. However, because of out-migration we were able to cut off Part 1 neatly at 1820 with only a few items thereafter. Part 2, "Settlement South of the James River," is now getting Doc's full attention. It has few of the error problems encountered in Part 1 because little research has been done and even less has been published concerning Southside Virginia Pamunkeys. If less has been published, then less has been misinterpreted or erroneously hooked onto, meaning less overburden. The worst errors we have encountered are pasted together marriages (Henry Davenport, Sr.'s totally missed first family of eight was an omission, not an error), but those wronged marriages are easily rectified although some Mormon baptisms of the Dead should be redone. Where we had scads of errors to overcome in Part 1, we had and have scads of original record research to do for Part 2. We mistakenly concluded eighteen months ago that once we had Part 1 done with all its difficulties and record losses, that Part 2 would be downhill, no burned counties other than Buckingham--which we could work around. Not so, while we did what we thought was a thorough search of the records of Cumberland, Halifax, Charlotte, Powhatan, and Buckingham (such as it is), we now know that we must give Campbell and Bedford a thorough vetting if we are to maintain our quality level. Further, we need to take the research as far forward as 1850 in some instances, for the Pamunkey Davenports squirted from Amherst (north of the James) into Campbell and Bedford, back and forth between Campbell and Charlotte, between Cumberland and Powhatan, Powhatan and Prince Edward, Prince Edward and Buckingham, and Prince Edward and Halifax after 1805. Where Part 1 included movement to South of the James in Virginia, it primarily noted movement out of Virginia to the Carolinas, Georgia, and Kentucky, Part 2 includes movements within Virginia for decades before out migration. Then too, we had the large accumulation of Pamunkeys in far southwest Washington County, Virginia, who proliferated mightily then exploded in migration in all directions but East. We've delegated those folk to Whit Davenport, a California-born WCV (Washington County, Virginia) Pamunkey, who is doing his kin as Part 3 of the Chronicles. Where Whit is in terms of completion, we know not, for he, too, has encountered errors in research that have become vested with tradition and cousins that tend towards intractability. In short, Part 1, almost 800 pages, should be ready by mid-year next. Part 2, now 674 pages with much research yet to be done, should be ready by mid-year 2007. Part 3 of at least 180 pages, Whit's job, ready when he says so. Part 4 concerns Elias Davenport, fourth son of Davis Davenport, and settlement in Northeastern North Carolina and Georgia, all compiled from secondary sources, can be released anytime, but has the lowest priority. That's where we are at the moment. Have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. John Scott "Jersey Doc" Davenport Robert L. "Billy Bob" Davenport Nevada Jack Ralph Judy G. Russell Whitley "WCV" Davenport

PAMUNKEY KIN & OTHERS INTERESTED: We have a new kind of Pamunkey Davenport joining in our common effort, namely the descendants of Congressman Thomas Davenport's second family, who assumed the Davenport surname after the Congressman's death in 1838. The Congressman (1825-1835), of Halifax County, Virginia, left behind a marital and children mess, in the sense of moral neatness, that was further complicated by some awful pasted together genealogy either by bluenosed (morality cleanup) folk or ignoramuses who took liberties with similar names. First and foremost, the Congressman was the fourth Thomas Davenport in generation sequence, his line from Davis Davenport being (1) Thomas, Sr., of Cumberland; (2) Captain-Surgeon Thomas, Jr., of Cumberland and the Georgia Continental Line; (3) Colonel Thomas of Cumberland and Halifax; and (4) Colonel and Congressman Thomas of Halifax. Contrary to widely circulated charts, the Congressman's wife was not Jane Lipscomb Davenport, daughter of David Davenport of Cumberland, son of Martin, Sr., of Hanover. Jane was a minor when David died in Dec1802, had a guardian appointed by Cumberland Court, and subsequently married the guardian's son John Bradley, all of which is a matter of public record had someone done a modicum of research. Congressman-to-be Thomas married Jane Davenport in Halifax on 28May1799. This Jane was not easy to identify, but deep digging provided a strong circumstantial case for attributing her to Lucy Davenport, who married Permenas Colquitt in Halifax on 20Mar1794. Colquitt, a close Terry cousin of the Davenports, was an older man, having been a Halifax planter and landowner adjoining Thomas Davenport (II) and James Davenport, Sr., both sons of Thomas, Sr., since 1775, was favored by Colonel Thomas Davenport (III), or he would not have been Colquitt's bondsman for the marriage to the Colonel's cousin Lucy Davenport. We identify Lucy by the fact that Permenas and Lucy named their second son Henry Davenport Colquitt, having named their first son Anthony Colquitt, which was the name of Permenas' father. So, we assume that Lucy Davenport Colquitt was a daughter of Henry Davenport, Sr., of Cumberland-Buckingham and his first, yet unidentified first wife, and a member of Henry's first family of at least eight, none of which heretofore have been recognized by members of Henry's second family by Ann Pemberton. When Henry disinherited his first family in the late 1780s in favor of the seven minor children in his second family, those older children, in most part, moved from Cumberland to Halifax--including Henry, Jr., who soon after arrival married his first cousin Ann Davenport, daughter of James, Sr.; Drusilla who married Thomas Donahoe in Cumberland before they moved as a couple; Susannah who married Obediah Kent who came from Halifax to marry her in Cumberland, then take her back to Halifax; Patsy, married to Richard Walden in Cumberland before the Revolution and moved to Halifax in the early 1790s; and Lucy, who surely came with her sisters, and brought her daughter Jane Davenport. If Jane had her mother's surname, she was likely born without benefit of clergy. Whatever, all of these children of Henry, Sr., lived in the same neighborhood in Halifax as did Bedford and James, Jr., sons of James, Sr., who had inherited their father's land, and Colonel Thomas (III) who had inherited the land of his father Captain-Surgeon Thomas (IV). In fact, Permenas Colquitt's land adjoined that of Colonel Thomas, making Jane Davenport, daughter of Lucy Davenport Colquitt, a girl next door to Thomas (IV), eldest son of the Colonel. The proximity doubtless played a part in subsequent developments. Consider that Thomas (IV) was born in 1782, that he was a short, age-wise, 17-year-old when he married Jane in 1789, and that Permenas Colquitt, Jane's stepfather, was his bondsman. Take into account that Colonel Thomas Davenport (III) was as important a man in Halifax as existed at the time, and that he had been bondsman for Permenas Colquitt's marriage, that Thomas (IV) was his eldest son, and he was not bondsman for his son and heir! One suspects the presence of a Colquitt shotgun in this marriage, particularly since an underage Thomas married without a permission letter to the Clerk of Courts. Halifax records strongly indicate that Thomas (III) and Thomas (IV) were alienated thereafter, traveled in different social circles. There was considerable friction amongst the Davenports in Halifax during the nine years following the Thomas (IV) marriage and the Thomas (III) death in 1808. Bedford Davenport, for example, the wealthiest and second most prominent Davenport in Halifax after the Colonel, did not underwrite the Sheriff bonds of the Colonel (III) for the years 1806 and 1807 although he signed the bonds for Sheriffs before and after his cousin. Thomas (IV) was the administrator of his father's estate only because the Colonel died suddenly, a widower and intestate. As eldest son, Thomas (IV) had first turndown to administrate. He administrated. The estate, suprisingly, was not large, consisted largely of books. This takes Thomas (IV) to where he had Halifax County all to himself, Thomas-wise. Although forced into a vocation sooner than expected, Thomas had excellent business acumen, quickly became a successful merchant and engaged in financial affairs and responsibilities reflecting a precociousness. He began a career as a militia officer which took him from Ensign to Colonel. Prior to Thomas (IV) all Davenport land in Halifax had been south of the Banister River, which divides the Fork of the Dan and Staunton rivers. Thomas located in Meadesville, north of the Banister, and in 1805 he was appointed Overseer of a road gang which included, among a number of others, Joseph Varner. At that time, Varner's daughter Mary was three-years-old. Davenport was age 23. In Jun1820, Mary Varner, age 18, bore Thomas Davenport a daughter Eliza. He was still married to Jane, although there is a claim, unverified, that Jane died in 1820. In the next ten years, Mary bore the Congressman three more children: Martha, c1823; John S., 2Mar1825; and Nancy, 1828. In the Census of 1830, Mary Varner was listed as a Halifax head of household of age 20-30 with one male and three females therein fitting the known ages of Eliza, Martha, John S., and Nancy. She was credited as having one Slave, alleged by Mary's descendants as belonging to Thomas Davenport and loaned to Mary. We need to take a second look at the Congressman's 1830 Census enumeration. When Thomas (IV) made his will on 15Oct1838 (probated 26Nov1838), he first named Mary Varner's four children, identifying them name, and giving each $50. (He made no provision or legacy for Mary.) He then named two "natural sons," George W. Davenport and Walter T. Davenport, to have $1500 each. The balance of his estate was devised to his daughter Adeline Spencer. Washington City social history notes that the Congressman's daughter had been his social hostess during his decade there, suggesting that wife Jane had died before 1825. Davenport left nothing to Mary Varner, who possibly had alienated him by moving from Halifax to Patrick County where she and family joined her father Joseph Varner on land awarded him for service in the Revolution. By the Census of 1850 Mary and all of her children had taken the surname Davenport. As Mary Deavenport, age 46, she was listed in Patrick County, Southern District, as the head of a household that included daughter Martha, age 27, and daughter Nancy, age 21. Eliza had married Abel Trent, Sr., and John S. had, or soon would, marry Martha A. Floyd, both lived in adjoining Henry County, Horsepasture District. We have previously considered that the "natural sons" named by the Congressman in his will were additional illegitimates, but recognized. Since finding John S. Varner Davenport, we now believe that both George W. and Walter T. were legitimate sons, were identified as "natural" because there was also son John S. who was illegitimate, and that the Congressman was being delicate in language usage. We have seen genealogical data indicating that the Congressman's two sons moved to Georgia contrary to their father's wishes, where they were both successful merchants there and in Alabama. We have received detailed data from a descendant of Eliza Varner Davenport, who married Abel Trent, Sr., and has entered appropriate names and dates in the Pamunkey Davenport Five-Generation Chart. The web site will be updated shortly. Another stone turned over. John Scott Davenport Holmdel, NJ

For those of you who have been thinking about participating in the Davenport Surname DNA Project - here is an added incentive. Our testing company has offered a limited number of $30 discounts on new participants purchasing a 25 or 37 Y-DNA test. The offer expires December 31, 2005. Since Rootsweb doesn't like us to mention prices, I'll just say that it amounts to a 17% and 13% discount, respectively. If you are interested - please contact me privately. For more information on the DNA Project, please go to >http://www.DavenportDNA.com< Bill Davenport >wbdave@aol.com Administrator Davenport Surname DNA Project

Oops. Another Bill Davenport has pointed out my error. Thomas the senator is # C2b1. Davis > Thomas > Thomas > Thomas Sorry about that. Bill Davenport >wbdave@aol.com -------------------------------- In a message dated 11/27/2005 6:18:13 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, WBDave writes: Jack, Thomas may be a Pamunkey. Davis > Thomas > James > Thomas T. # C1C4 at >http://www.pamunkeydavenport.com/davis_5_gen_report_20051020.pdf It looks like the senator was born in Cumberland County, Virginia and later lived in Halifax County. See this link: >http://www.infoplease.com/biography/us/congress/davenport-thomas.html Thomas the Pamunkey seems to be in the same area and is in the right age group.. I know Doc is out of town, so perhaps some other Pamunkey researcher could confirm this. Bill Davenport >wbdave@aol.com

I am looking for a valid email address for Janice Davenport Todd. She is listed in Nevada Jack's Davenport Directory as a descendent of Capt. Richard Davenport of Boston. Her posted address does not work. So Janice - if you read this - please contact me. Or, if someone knows her address - please contact me. Thanks, Bill Davenport >wbdave@aol.com

Jack, Thomas may be a Pamunkey. Davis > Thomas > James > Thomas T. # C1C4 at >http://www.pamunkeydavenport.com/davis_5_gen_report_20051020.pdf It looks like the senator was born in Cumberland County, Virginia and later lived in Halifax County. See this link: >http://www.infoplease.com/biography/us/congress/davenport-thomas.html Thomas the Pamunkey seems to be in the same area and is in the right age group.. I know Doc is out of town, so perhaps some other Pamunkey researcher could confirm this. Bill Davenport >wbdave@aol.com ------------------------------ In a message dated 11/26/2005 10:39:42 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, nvjack@nvbell.net writes: From: REDSKIN567@aol.com [mailto:REDSKIN567@aol.com] Sent: Saturday, November 26, 2005 7:04 PM To: Jack@Ralph.org Subject: Davenports Hello, My gg grandfather was Thomas Davenport of Halifax County Va. that was a senator from 1825 to 1835. do you have anything on this gentleman? Thank you so much. Viola Trent Skinnell ________________________________________ Hello Viola, I do not have the information you are looking for but it is possible that one of the subscribers to DAVENPORT-L do and I am sharing your message with all of them. Hopefully, one of them will reply to you. Nevada Jack

I am still looking for William Samuel Davenport (Devenport), DOB: approx 1798, borned in South Carolina. Would appreciate anything you could tell me about him. I think he married Jane Rutledge and moved to Tennessee circa 1821. Thanks in advance. DotPort@AOL.com

_______________________________________ From: REDSKIN567@aol.com [mailto:REDSKIN567@aol.com] Sent: Saturday, November 26, 2005 7:04 PM To: Jack@Ralph.org Subject: Davenports Hello,   My gg grandfather was Thomas Davenport of Halifax County Va. that was a senator from 1825 to 1835.  do you have anything on this gentleman?    Thank you so much.                                                                        Viola Trent Skinnell ________________________________________ Hello Viola, I do not have the information you are looking for but it is possible that one of the subscribers to DAVENPORT-L do and I am sharing your message with all of them. Hopefully, one of them will reply to you. Nevada Jack

Christmas gift - yes, it's a good idea. Stagnated - no. We have had over 25 new Davenport participants this year. We are currently waiting on the results of the five who have joined in the past month. Bill Davenport Administrator Davenport Surname DNA Project ------------------------- In a message dated 11/17/2005 :18:41 PM Eastern Standard Time, Davenport@post.Harvard.edu writes: Can't think of what to give someone for Christmas? Perhaps a Davenport DNA test is just the thing! We've kind of stagnated in the process!

Shortly after posting of the 5 Generation report, a similar inquiry came to Doc, who asked me to look into it. It appears that there were two Nancy Davenport marriages in Wayne Co., KY; one in 1812 to Peter Phipps and one in 1828 to John Casada. These appear to have been different Nancy Davenports. Casada genealogists note that John Casada moved to Georgia and settled among the sons of Osborn Davenport. From this it has been concluded that Nancy Davenport d/o Osborn and Mary (aka Mollie, Polly) Davenport was the one who married John Casada. The erroneous Phipps connection had been in circulation for at least 5 years that I know of. The person who initially made the connection may have been confused partially because there was a Phipps family in Washington Co., VA ( WCV ) nearby Osborn Davenport before he moved to Wayne Co., KY. It would be easy to assume that they migrated together to Wayne Co., KY. I recommend that The 5 Generation Report entry for Nancy d/o Osborn Davenport be changed to read... "possibly married in 1828, John Casada", instead of "Peter Phipps", pending further verification. It is curious that Osborn from WCV and John Davenport, said to be from Patrick Co VA both moved near Parml(e)yville in Wayne Co., KY. Both Osborn's and John's children appeared to have intermarried with Parml(e)ys. I have doubts about whether John was who they think he was. I would be interested to know more about him. Please excuse the delay, as your all know genealogy expands to consume all available time. Whit Davenport

(Please excuse garble in previous version, I forgot to turn "rtf" off.) Shortly after posting of the 5 Generation report, a similar inquiry came to Doc, who asked me to look into it. It appears that there were two Nancy Davenport marriages in Wayne Co., KY; one in 1812 to Peter Phipps and one in 1828 to John Casada. These appear to have been different Nancy Davenports. Casada genealogists note that John Casada moved to Georgia and settled among the sons of Osborn Davenport. From this it has been concluded that Nancy Davenport d/o Osborn and Mary (aka Mollie, Polly) Davenport was the one who married John Casada. The erroneous Phipps connection had been in circulation for at least 5 years that I know of. The person who initially made the connection may have been confused partially because there was a Phipps family in Washington Co., VA ( WCV ) nearby Osborn Davenport before he moved to Wayne Co., KY. It would be easy to assume that they migrated together to Wayne Co., KY. I recommend that The 5 Generation Report entry for Nancy d/o Osborn Davenport be changed to read... "possibly married in 1828, John Casada", instead of "Peter Phipps", pending further verification. It is curious that Osborn from WCV and John Davenport, said to be from Patrick Co VA both moved near Parml(e)yville in Wayne Co., KY. Both Osborn's and John's children appeared to have intermarried with Parml(e)ys. I have doubts about whether John was who they think he was. I would be interested to know more about him. Please excuse the delay, as your all know genealogy expands to consume all available time. Whit Davenport From: "Steven C. Perkins" <SPerkins@interaccess.com> To: DAVENPORT-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [DAVENPORT] Nancy Davenport and Peter Phipps, Wayne Co., KY Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 21:09:21 -0600 >Hello: > >I note that the summary of the Davis Davenport descendants, >http://www.pamunkeydavenport.com/davis_5_gen_report_20051020.pdf (page 53) >has the parents of Nancy Davenport, wife of Peter Phipps of Wayne Co., KY, >as Osborne Davenport and Mary Davenport, and lists their children as >unknown. This is in contrast to research that has her parents as John >Davenport and Nancy Burnett who married in Patrick Co., VA (June Baldwin >Bork, _The Burnetts and their Connections_, and Asher Leon Young, _The >Phipps Tree, vols 1 and 2_). Several researchers on the Phipps list >believe John Davenport and Nancy moved on to Indiana. > >The children of Peter Phipps and Nancy Davenport are given as Sinai b~1812, >Eli 1813-1882, James b~1816-d aft 1870, Elizabeth b~1818, Malinda 1820-1896 >married James Ball, Talitha b~1825, Mary b ~1826, William R. 1829-1918, and >Andrew 1831-1900. > >Has new documentation been found that supports either of the >identifications of the parents of Nancy Davenport Phipps? > >Thanks, > >Steven C. Perkins > > > >Steven C. Perkins SPerkins@interaccess.com > http://stevencperkins.com/genealogy.html > http://jgg-online.blogspot.com > > > >============================== >Census images 1901, 1891, 1881 and 1871, plus so much more. >Ancestry.com's United Kingdom & Ireland Collection. Learn more: >http://www.ancestry.com/s13968/rd.ashx >

Can't think of what to give someone for Christmas? Perhaps a Davenport DNA test is just the thing! We've kind of stagnated in the process!

Hello: I note that the summary of the Davis Davenport descendants, http://www.pamunkeydavenport.com/davis_5_gen_report_20051020.pdf (page 53) has the parents of Nancy Davenport, wife of Peter Phipps of Wayne Co., KY, as Osborne Davenport and Mary Davenport, and lists their children as unknown. This is in contrast to research that has her parents as John Davenport and Nancy Burnett who married in Patrick Co., VA (June Baldwin Bork, _The Burnetts and their Connections_, and Asher Leon Young, _The Phipps Tree, vols 1 and 2_). Several researchers on the Phipps list believe John Davenport and Nancy moved on to Indiana. The children of Peter Phipps and Nancy Davenport are given as Sinai b~1812, Eli 1813-1882, James b~1816-d aft 1870, Elizabeth b~1818, Malinda 1820-1896 married James Ball, Talitha b~1825, Mary b ~1826, William R. 1829-1918, and Andrew 1831-1900. Has new documentation been found that supports either of the identifications of the parents of Nancy Davenport Phipps? Thanks, Steven C. Perkins Steven C. Perkins SPerkins@interaccess.com http://stevencperkins.com/genealogy.html http://jgg-online.blogspot.com

PAMUNKEY DAVENPORTS OF THE KENNEDY LINE: While we have tied off data entry for Part 1 of the Chronicles, research continues for identification of Davenport Kennedy, our family genealogical my stery. We have acquired two new (to us) facts or alleged facts concerning DK: 1. At least a half dozen Kennedy genealogies posted on GEDCOM and/or accessible in the Ancestry data base state that DK was married to Mary Edwards in Mar1783 in Spotsylvania County. The problem with this claim is that DK died and was probated in Louisa County on 11Nov1782, per Court records. But there is enough circumstantial evidence to prevent rejecting the identification completely, for there was a Mary Edwards, widow of Augustine Edwards of Spotsylvania, located close to DK's plantation beginning in 1771. We have strong evidence that DK's widow Mary was not the mother of his eight orphans. (Incidentally, there was no son Samuel--it was a clerk's error, who wrote Samuel when he should have written Sarah. Both fore and aft of the Samuel error in the records, the name is clearly Sarah, and the sex was female. But the erroneous Samuel appears in a number of genealogies and has been baptized and endowed by the Mormons.) James Edwards, father of Augustine, was the second of that name in sequence, had a plantation on the north bank of the North Anna in Spotsylvania County from 1741 until his death in 1788. Most importantly, he was the son of the James Edwards of King William County who had patented the land whereon Davis Davenport's plantation was located in 1701. James Edwards, Jr., had grown up with the Davis Davenport family as the next door neighbors North (Captain Thomas Terry was the next door neighbor South). James, Jr., relocated up the Pamunkey/North Anna to settle on 400 acres adjoining Thomas Graves, husband of Ann Davenport, daughter of Davis. The Graves north bank land was no more than a mile up the North Anna from Martin Davenport, Sr.'s patent on the south bank in Hanover County. The Edwards plantation was within two miles of Davenport Kennedy's plantation--owned by Richard Davenport, which straddled the Hanover-Louisa County Line. You will find that James Edwards, Jr., appears often in the Chronicles, 1741-1789, with multiple associations with the Davenports and their Arnold cousins. Edwards married the widow of Benjamin Arnold and made her children his principal heirs. The point of all this is that Mary Edwards, widow of James Edward's son Augustine, was a viable, plausible candidate for having been the widow of Davenport Kennedy also. The location for the marriage would fit, but the date does not. (We suspect that James Edwards, Jr., married a daughter of Davis Davenport, considering the Graves and Davenport associations in Spotsylvania County. DK was part of the same social milieu.) 2. As to the first wife of DK and the mother of his eight children, scratch a daughter of Thomas Montague as a prospect. Montague was still unmarried when he took DK's indenture as an apprentice to learn Carpentry in 1752, could not have been the father of DK's first wife, married c1758, for Dicey, DK's first child and the ancestress of a large number of Pamunkey Davenports, was born in Jun1759. More grist for the mill. John Scott Davenport Holmdel, NJ

At 10:55 PM 11/14/2005, WBDave@aol.com wrote: >Plus, someone should look into any connection with the Sharpe's, >Burton's, Buchanan's, or Hatcher's. (I >have email addresses). Depending on which group of Buchanans, there may well have been a fair amount of intermarrying with the Davenports -- Buchanans, Bakers and Davenports were all pretty closely knit in Burke County NC. -- Judy

This also explains why we see many 2 to 3 month date conflicts on the older dates. An old document might state "the 3rd month" - meaning May. Then today, if someone didn't know any better, he would interpret this as March, and enter that into his genealogy records. Bill Davenport >wbdave@aol.com -------------------- In a message dated 11/14/2005 11:39:08 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, dcraw4d@austin.rr.com writes: I have been having the pleasure of reviewing entries in an online transcribed bible where the oldest date is 1613 from England. Many of the month entries were written using strange descriptions such as VIIber, VIIber, IXber, & Xber. I was so curious about these strange entries that I "googled" one of these examples and found website http://www.jaydax.co.uk/genlinks/palaeography-numdate.html titled Paleography - Numbers and Dates. Many of you may already be educated with this type of date entry but I wasn't. Oh! VIIber = September VIIIber = October IXber = November Xber = December So why doesn't IXber = September and Xber = October, check out the website to learn more. Don (Davenport) Crawford

Jacque and others, In regards to Davenport/Davis DNA progress. Shortly after the first Pamunkey DNA test results came in over two years ago, Doc and I joined the Davis List on Rootsweb. Doc posted a query to that list expressing an interest in anyone that might have information about Gentleman Richard Davis. We are hoping to find a descendent to compare to our Pamunkeys. So far we have heard nothing. Each time there has been any mention of a Davis in the Virginia area in the 1600's I have contacted the writer. No luck there either, but we are still watching. To date, there have been no near DNA matches between the Pamunkeys and any Davis. There are a couple close matches with a Sharpe, Burton, Buchanan, and some Hatcher's. I have been watching the Davis Surname DNA Project, but no leads yet. Early this year we received a donation of a free 37 marker test for a "Descendent of Richard Davis of 17th Century Northside New Kent (now King & Queen County) Virginia." That is still available. Last month, one of our Pamunkey participants took a different kind of Y-DNA test - a "multiplex Haplogroup" test. A Haplogroup is a much broader pattern of DNA. It's not good for matching families, since thousands of lines could have the same Haplogroup, but it can be used to eliminate others that don't belong in the same Haplogroup. We knew the Pamunkeys were Haplogroup Rb1, which is the most common Haplogroup in Western Europe. But most of the other Davenport lines were also Rb1. This "multiplex" test would break it down farther into sub groups. The Pamunkeys belong to Haplogroup R1b1c* - which, unfortunately is also a very common group. However, now we know that if someone is not R1b1c* - then there is no recent connection. I suspect within the next couple years researchers will be able to pinpoint the area this group originated. So... that's where we stand. We still need to find a descendent of Richard Davis or one of his brothers or Davenport uncles. Plus, someone should look into any connection with the Sharpe's, Burton's, Buchanan's, or Hatcher's. (I have email addresses). If anyone has any questions or has any information - please contact Doc or me. Bill Davenport >wbdave@aol.com Administrator Davenport Surname DNA Project ---------------------- In a message dated 11/14/2005 6:44:01 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, JSDDOC@aol.com writes: DNA Bill: Tell Jacque what we been doing relative to seeking Pamunkey Davenport comparisons with DAVIS DNA, and where we currently stand. Doc

DNA Bill: Tell Jacque what we been doing relative to seeking Pamunkey Davenport comparisons with DAVIS DNA, and where we currently stand. Doc

PAMUNKEY KIN & OTHERS INTERESTED: All of what follows is displayed in detail in Part 1, "The Further Chronicles of the Pamunkey Davenports," which goes to Judy for editing tomorrow, but since several of you have elected to post the claim that Richard Davis, Gentleman, was the father of Davis Davenport, without a caveat, on the Web as a part of your Davenport genealogy, let us outline what you are claiming. Such parentage claim is speculative and based on circumstantial evidence and rationalization. Here's the factual basis and the rationalization therefrom: The earliest documentation of Davis Davenport found todate is the survey made for Major John Waller in May1696 which clearly identifies Davis Davenport's plantation as adjoining upriver on the Mattaponi. Further, the written description that accompanied the surveyor's plat starts "[Point] A. The beginning[,] Swamp below davis davenport's landing." By this record, which was preserved in Waller Family archives and now can be found in the Rare Documents Collection at the Library of Virginia, we know that Davis Davenport in 1696 had both a plantation and landing, hence was a man of some substance, for the Plantation was evidence of a mature man of settlement and development, and the Landing was evidence of commercial activity of some degree, further implying Davis' maturity. In Colonial times the Mattaponi was a deep tidewater river, a seagoing ship could sail up the Mattaponi as high as Arnold's Ferry, now Aylett, twenty miles upriver from Davis Davenport's landing, itself seventeen miles upriver from the York River, an arm of Chesapeake Bay. While the Mattaponi has silted in during the past three hundred years, the tidal forces remain. The daily report of High & Low Tides in 2005 includes Aylett on the upper Mattaponi as one of the measuring points. Having established a specific location for Davis, we were able, by tedious patent sorting to surround the Plantation and Landing with land activity from 1608 forward. All of the activity prior to 1650 was Indian-related. In 1696 Davis Davenport's improvements were technically in the Chickahominy Indian reservation, but the Chickahominies, as well as the neighboring Pamunkey Indians, had dwindled to a shadow of what they were in Powhatan days, would soon give up their alleged independence and become subjects of the King. Their two reservations included all of Pamunkey Neck and became King William County in 1701. Backtracking Davis Davenport's land environment and social milieu, we were able to establish that the land across the Mattaponi from where Davis was located in 1696 was patented by Edward Digges, Gentleman, as a 2,350-acre tract in 1653. Digges lived in Jamestown, was a member of Council of State, and was one of the three Governors of the Colony during Commonwealth period (1650-1660). In 1660, Richard Davis patented 660 acres adjoining Digges. In 1662, Davis perfected his patent on Digges Creek and added 40 acres. In 1667, Davis repatented his tract as 700 acres. In 1673, George Morris, County Surveyor, patented 434 acres on Digges Creek, adjoining Richard Davis. In 1674 Richard Davis added to his holding with a 250-acre patent adjoining George Morris. In 1675 Richard Davis patented 370 acres adjoining "land he lives on." In 1677 Richard Davis patented another 370 acres, adjoining two of his neighbors but not himself. In 1685 Davis made his last patent, 166 acres adjoining or near his 1677 land acquisition. Excluding duplicate patentings, Richard Davis, Gentleman, between 1660 and 1685 acquired 1,546 acres on the north side of Mattaponi, back from the River. Because New Kent County deeds for Colonial Times were destroyed by fire, we have no idea of what Richard Davis did with any of his land. The north side of Mattaponi as well as Pamunkey Neck became part of King & Queen County in 1691. No mentions of Richard Davis were found in King & Queen County patents. Colonial deeds of King & Queen have also been destroyed by fire. As to the land holdings directly across the Mattaponi from where Davis Davenport was located in 1696, Edward Digges, Gentleman, lost his title to Digges Creek tract in 1665 when Governor Berkeley declared it "deserted," meaning Digges had abandoned the land, and granted it to Major Thomas Walker of Gloucester County. In 1687 Lt. Colonel Thomas Walker repatented the land as 2,600 in St. Stephen's Parish, which was Edward Digges' patent of 1653 with 300 additional acres found by resurvey. Later in 1687, John Walker, son of Thomas Walker, patented 560 acres adjoining his father. By the bounding land owners described, Richard Davis had possibly sold off some of his land. When the Waller survey was made in 1696, John Walker was identified as the landowner over against [across from] Waller on the Mattaponi River. Because of his broad holdings which by then included those of his father, Walker was also across from Davis Davenport. Waller and Davenport were in Pamunkey Neck. Walker was in King & Queen. The community of Walkerton in King & Queen today is approximately a quarter mile upriver from the Davis Davenport location of 1696. (In 1702, Davis Davenport lived adjacent to the Sheriff of King William John Waller, and lived across the river from King & Queen Sheriff John Walker. He had the right kind of neighbors.) The King & Queen Quit Rent List of 1704 assessed John Walker for 6,000 acres, which appears to have included Richard Davis' lands, Thomas Walker's lands, and his own patent. Three Davises were listed: Nathaniel Davis, 300 acres; John Davis, 90 acres; and Edward Davis, 100 acres. These were small planters, were unlikely to have been sons of a Great Planter such as Richard Davis had been. The fact that the Davis land had been merged into the Walker holdings suggests that Richard Davis had no male issue--which might explain how Davis Davenport came to have his given name. As an illegitimate, Davenport had no standing for inheritance, but considering what he had in 1696 and the fraud that cast an onus on his land, he had to have been taken care by other means, have enjoyed the patronage of wealth and power--being set up with 200 acres and the wherewithal to create a plantation and a landing could have done it. The King William Quit Rent List of 1704 assessed four Davises, all for 200 acres each. Two of those Davises are documented as being English born, were distant from Davis Davenport. William and John Davis, father and son, were located southeast of Davis Davenport diametrically across John Waller's 930-acre survey, but tracking those Davises, before and after, provided no evidence, direct or circumstantial, of association with Davis Davenport or any of his sons. As near as we could determine, Davis Davenport in 1696 was located less than two miles South, across Walker land on the North side of Mattaponi, from where Richard Davis had lived in 1677. Excluding duplicate patentings, Richard Davis, Gentleman, between 1660 and 1677 acquired 1,546 acres on the north side of Mattaponi, back from the River. Davis Davenport had to have had someone of wealth and stature looking out for him, and the only Davis within thirty miles of where Davenport was located in 1696 who was a major land owner, a Great Planter, ipso facto also a Gentleman, was Richard Davis. Davis Davenport's second son was named Richard. Coincidence? There is plausibility and possibility in this scenario, but there is no proof. Likely will never be proved or disproved--unless the answers are buried in private papers, for all of the pertinent public records extant for Colonial Virginia have been searched, page by page. There are fifty-six pages of data in the "Further Chronicles" before a fact concerning Davis Davenport is recorded. So now you know. John Scott Davenport Holmdel, NJ

I have been having the pleasure of reviewing entries in an online transcribed bible where the oldest date is 1613 from England. Many of the month entries were written using strange descriptions such as VIIber, VIIber, IXber, & Xber. I was so curious about these strange entries that I "googled" one of these examples and found website http://www.jaydax.co.uk/genlinks/palaeography-numdate.html titled Paleography - Numbers and Dates. Many of you may already be educated with this type of date entry but I wasn't. Oh! VIIber = September VIIIber = October IXber = November Xber = December So why doesn't IXber = September and Xber = October, check out the website to learn more. Don (Davenport) Crawford Donald C. (Davenport) Crawford, b. 1936 TX; > Clifton Ellison Davenport, 1893 TX - 1982 TX; > James Richard Devenport, 1864 AR - 1900 TX; > Henry Devenport, 1838 MS - 1904 TX; > John Devenport, Jr., 1795 NC - 1869 AR; > John Devenport, Sr., 1758 NC - 1796 NC; > Dorrel Devenport, 1733 VA - 1785 NC; > Elias Davenport, 1712 VA - 1767 NC; Davis Davenport, c1660 VA - c1735 VA.