Hi all, This my first post. One of my g grandfathers Garland Dickenson was born in Louisa county 1773 and died in Abingdon in 1795. On ancestry.com there all different kinds of opinions about who his parents were. Some say it was Archulaus Dickenson and others say Elijah Dickenson. I can not prove either way. Can anyone help? I noticed there are 7 Dickenson cemeteries in the Castlewood area. Does anyone know who is burred in these. Maybe that will help. I live in Blountville, TN and plan a trip to check out the cemeteries if I can gain access. Thanks in advance for any help, Howard Craig

Hi Howard, I had the following in my notes on the Dickenson family and thought it might help you. DICKENSONS OF SOUTHWEST VIRGINIA By Mary Jane Knisely There have been various errors in the "Dickenson Story" as it has come down to us. Two of the more glaring errors are (1) that Mary Powell, wife of Henry Dickenson, the Clerk, was the daughter of Ambrose Powell, and (2) that the Virginia Dickensons were descended from Henry, who came to Virginia with brothers Walter and John in 1654. The search for Mary Powell constitutes a study in itself, which is not presented in this treatise. The denouncement of Wharton Dickenson's story of the three brothers was published in the Virginia Genealogist, Volume 18, page 243, October-December 1974. Here the subject is not so much negation of stories as developing a positive framework of the family history. We therefore begin circa 1800 with related family members in the Southwest Virginia area. These members are Archelaus, Humphrey, Henry, James, Mary, Elizabeth and Fanny. We have no marriage date for Henry Dickenson and Agnes Jennings. The Jennings family of Hanover and Nottoway Counties, have kept records which state that Agnes was born in 1729 (19) - that she was born in 1727, (20) in Hanover County, Virginia. Her father owned large acreages of land in several Virginia counties, and descendants have traced the family back to the 1500's in England. Of Henry's birth we have no record, but we know he was born in Caroline County, Virginia, apparently at a time when this section was still a part of King William County. He is reported to have had at least 7 siblings. (21) His father was Thomas Dickenson, who left a will in Caroline County in 1734, which has not been preserved. (22) The author made inquiry in the Caroline County Court House and the State Library at Richmond. We know that Henry was left a homestead of 466 acres in Louisa County. According to the land patents of Louisa County, Thomas Dickenson got 1,000 acres of land on Elk Creek 17 August, 1725, on both sides of the Overton Fork of the Elk Creek. (Although listed as Louisa County, this area was in Hanover County in 1725). Henry's legacy was part of this land patent. Henry and Agnes sold this land, together with "the houses and appurtenances thereto belonging, the same is the land given and bequeathed by the last will and testament of Thomas Dickarson, late of the County of Caroline (dec'd) unto his son Henry, relation being had to the county court of Caroline, it will more fully appear." This land was sold to Griffith Dickarson. (23) Louisa County as formed from Hanover in 1742. It would appear then, that the Jennings family lived near the Dickenson holdings in Louisa, which would explain how Henry met Agnes Jennings. Judging from such birth dates as we have of their children, they were probably married in the 1740's, about the time the area was changed from Hanover to Louisa. Whether this legacy to Henry was raw land or developed by Henry and Agnes, we do not know. In either event, it was definitely a homestead when Henry decided to sell it in 1765. Why he wanted to leave and go to Prince Edward County is an unsolved puzzle. No land grant for Henry in Prince Edward County has been discovered. We do know that Henry served in what was called the "Indian Militia" in 1754 (24). On 17 September, 1758 Henry was paid 5 shillings for furnishing provisions for the militia, and was still on the military roster at that time. (25) This was the era of the French and Indian Wars, and lands were sometimes granted for military service. The government had no money to pay the militia, and in fact, many men refused to serve. The Indians were such a peril that men would not leave their families unprotected to join the militia. (26) The only recompense that could be offered militia men was land. A record of such a grant may exist, but the author has not found it. Land patents were being given by King George II of England in Prince Edward County in 1745 and 1763. (27) But there is little reason to suppose that Dickensons would receive land from such a source. They were already an "old family in the colonies," and not likely to come under the notice of the King of England. In searching the deeds of Prince Edward County, the first entry concerning Henry Dickenson was on 18 July, 1774, at which time he deeded 133 acres of land on the Sandy River to his son William. (Bounded on one side by land of Archelaus Dickenson). (28) On the same day, Henry sold John Maddox 150 acres on a fork of the Sandy River (on Owens and Womack's line). (29) In other words, Henry is selling land, and has seemingly already given land to Archelaus, though we have not learned how or where or when he got the land. However, some of the early records of Prince Edward County were destroyed in the War between the States. We do not know whether Henry removed his family before or after the sale of the Louisa property, which makes it problematical where James was born. We can deduce that Henry sent some of his children to school in Louisa County. We find from the records that one Philip Cosby taught a private community school in the vicinity of Elk Creek. Philip died in 1763, and among those indebted to his estate were: Henry Dickenson 1 pound 19s. O. D. Griffith Dickenson, 1 pound 19s. O. d. For seven months and 16 days schooling. (30) This does not tell us which child was the pupil. But we can deduce that Henry, who later became Clerk, and who was 13 years old at the time of Philip Cosby's death, quite probably, at one time or another, was a student in this school. With the Dickenson farmstead and the school both on Elk Creek, the inference is strong. We have no definite information on the religious affiliations of the family. For many years Dickensons were members of the Baptist Church known as Goldmine (on a Creek by that name) in Louisa County. But their surviving records begin in 1770, and the family under discussion was by then, presumably, in Prince Edward County. We do have some reason to believe they were not Presbyterians. Church records of Old Briary are available, and no Dickensons are listed. (31) The author knows of no early records in Washington County to indicate the church affiliations of the family. We believe Agnes Jennings Dickenson died in 1785. A census was taken in that year in Prince Edward County, in which Henry Dickenson is shown with 3 whites in his family, 1 dwelling and 4 other buildings. Family legend says that after Agnes died, Henry went to live with James, his youngest son, in Russell County, and took along 20 slaves. It is likely the census was taken early in the year, because we find in Washington County, under the date of 8 December, 1785, "Henry Dickinson, late of Prince Edward County," gave his daughter Fanny one Negro slave named Benjamin "I lent to Nathaniel Scott." This places Agnes' death as some time in 1785. We have no record of Henry's death. The last court entry is that quoted above in which Henry Dickenson gave the slave to John, son of Humphrey - 21 August, 1792. Henry's father, as has been shown by the deed in Louisa County referred to above, was Thomas Dickenson. We do not know who Thomas married. T. E. Campbell, in his book on Caroline County, stated that in 1744 Sarah Dickenson renounced the will of Thomas Dickenson because her legacy was less than her dower. (32) In the Caroline County Order Book 1740-46, on page 457 is the case of summons in dower between Sarah Dickason, widow, plaintiff and William Daniel, the Younger, defendant (march 1744-45). This case came up in the May court (page 472) and was continued. It came up again the following September (page 533) and was again continued. On December 13 Sarah Dickerson posted her bond to William Daniel, proved by the oaths of Samuel Bowdre, John Williams and John Bushell (p. 545). The next day, Saturday, December 14, the action in dower between Sarah Dickason, plaintiff and William Daniel, defendant was dismissed, being agreed. (P. 553). There is nothing here to show that Sarah Dickason (Dickenson) is the widow of Thomas. She is merely styled as a widow, and we have no knowledge as to how many "Widow Dickensons" were in the area in 1744. In any event, Thomas' will was filed in 1734, and ten years would be pretty late to protest a will. T. E. Campbell was a native of Caroline County and knew the people. He might have had records not available to the general public, to state that "Thomas Dickenson had 8 children in 9 years. (P. 47). But if Mr. Campbell knew that Thomas' widow was Sarah, such record is not available to us. The action in dower, which seems to indicate that this Sarah was a Daniel before her marriage. Genealogies of Virginia Daniels have been searched for a Sarah who married a Dickenson, but without result. The matter of Thomas' wife bears further study, but at present we have no presumptive evidence to identify her. We are reaching back now to an era when records are sparse, and proof is difficult. We are told by C. W. Cram, in his book "Gods, Graves and Scholars," that hypothesis belongs to the working method of any science: it is a legitimate form of speculation proceeding from established results. However, the hypothesis must be based on established results - in other words, also on documents - and not "wandering in the wild blue yonder." Wharton Dickenson did just this, falsifying data and foisting a fraudulent genealogy on Dickenson descendants. Unfortunately, it is muchly referred to and widely disseminated. As has clearly been shown above, one cannot accept statements in books, but must refer back to the documents which they purport to interpret. Ray S. Worth, in his book on Tennessee Cousins, contains errors on Dickensons, which have been used without checking the original source. Statements in books have often been in error, and it is not permissible to use books to build a genealogy; only documents. With this in mind, we begin the search for the forebears of Thomas Dickenson, and lacking records which have been destroyed, we must proceed to gather existing facts and project a probably theory. Examining the land grants of Caroline County, we find that the Dickensons have grants in St. Margaret's Parish: 1717 Thomas Dickenson, 390 acres on the North Anna at the mouth of Hawkins Creek. 1717 Griffith Dickenson, 400 acres on the North Anna, above Thomas Dickenson's grant. 1725 William Dickenson, 400 acres - North Anna 1726 Thomas Dickenson, 400 acres - North Anna 1727 William Dickenson, 400 acres - North Anna 1728 Griffin Dickenson, 400 acres - North Anna We know that Caroline County was formed in 1727 from King and Queen, King William and Essex Counties. Hence these grants were mostly made prior to the time the area was officially known as Caroline. The next record we find preceding, are the Quit Rents of 1704. Here we find: Dickason, Thomas, King William County 100 acres Dickason, William, King William County, 100 acres One would assume that the Thomas who had 100 acres in King William County in 1704 is the same Thomas who got 390 acres in 1717, and he acquired more land in the same area - since it was the boundary line that put him in Caroline when it was "pinched off" of King William County. Are there two brothers living in the area in 1704 (William and Thomas) who are joined by a younger brother, Griffith at a later date? Was some of this land retained in King William County? In 1731, among the tithables of that County was listed: Thomas Deekens. (33) We have entries in King William County concerning William. Most of the records were destroyed by fire in 1885. We do find that in 1704 Phillip Whitehead sued the estate of John Pettivor, dec'd, and the Commissioners were Thomas Spencer, Thomas Butler and William Dickinson. (34) >From the sparse records photographed and placed in the Virginia State Library, is a volume of papers between 1702 and 1707 of King William County. On page 372 is an entry showing that William Dickason and Abraham Willaroy bought a lot of < acre in Delaware Town on 20 day of June, 1707, for which they paid 482 pounds of tobacco. The witness signatures are torn off. In another volume of salvaged papers for the years 1721-1722, is a fragment of a deed in which Nathaniel Dickinson conveys 78 acres of land to Rich. Watts. This instrument is torn and mutilated, but the sum of 20 pounds is mentioned, and "yearly rent of one pepper corn at the feast of St. Michael...be demanded to the intent that by virtue of these presents...the said Rich. Watts may be in actual possession of these premises." Nathaniel also says this is land of which he is "rightfully seized." It is attested 15 day of February in, the Seventh Year of the Reign of __________. 1721 was the seventh year of the reign of George I. This is somewhat curious. In no other record do we find Nathaniel was granted any lands, and there was so many missing records of Quit Rents that we have no information on how Nathaniel acquired this land. But he says he is "rightfully seized." Can we assume that Nathaniel does not like King William County, and has decided to sell out and go elsewhere? Is he related to the other Dickensons who apparently do like this area? We do not know where Nathaniel went, but we do find that a Nathaniel Dickenson died in Louisa County in 1753, and he left one of his plantations to his son, Griffith. (35) We can look upon this as presumptive evidence that the Nathaniel who made the will was related to Griffith Dickenson of King William or Caroline County. We note from the entry of the will of Thomas Dickenson on 13 June 1734, that it was presented by Griffeth Dickerson and Thomas Dickerson, the executors, and that it was proved by the witnesses James Garland and James Dickerson. (36) It would seem that Griffith is Thomas' brother, and that the other executor is the son of the deceased. We have no clue as to whether James is also a son or not. It seems likely. As for the Garlands, they took up lands on the opposite banks of the North Anna, in Hanover County. We believe that Dickensons married Garlands. This is shown in later records where we find a Garland Dickenson of Louisa County is an absentee owner of land in Hanover County. (37) Presumably the James Garland who witnessed Thomas' will is a son-in-law. There are so many Dickenson records in the middle and late 1700's in this general area that it is difficult to make any lineage record that is not specifically stated in documents. However, let us apply chronology to the records we have found. It is noted that William Dickenson can be placed in King William County in 1704 and again in 1707. But his name does not appear in the land grants of 1717. The name William does not appear in the grants until 1725. In the meantime, we find Nathaniel selling land in 1721 of which he is "rightfully seized," but for which there is no record of a land grant. It appears then that the William found in 1704 is older than Thomas, and has died between 1707 and 1717, and that a son Nathaniel, who is younger than Thomas, has inherited his land. The William who appears in 1725 is not likely to be the same William of King William County. Do we then have a William Dickenson, with sons named Thomas, Griffith and Nathaniel? As we go farther back in the records, it can be shown that this is a chronological possibility. William Elmore Dickenson of West Virginia worked on his family history, in which he states that his James Dickenson was the son of Thomas Dickenson and Susanna Robinson of Caroline County, and that Thomas is a descendent of Griffith Dickenson who patented land in James Cittie County in 1656. (38) William Elmore Dickenson offered no proof of this, and he died in 1915 in Texas. Griffith Dickenson is a name so common in the 1700's and even up to the present date, that sorting them is no mean task. However, in the 1600's there is only one Griffith Dickenson. Griffith is an uncommon first name, and to be repeated so consistently down the years indicates it is a family name, let us examine the records of the Griffith Dickenson of the 1600's, and try to locate an earlier link than 1717. We find that Griffith Dickinson is named as a member of the New Kent County Militia in 1702. (39) Can we assume that Griffith is younger than Thomas, and served in the New Kent County Militia before going over to join Thomas and William? Other documents we can pursue will also pertain to Dickensons in New Kent County, as will be shown. Was he named for his grandfather? Let us see what we can find on the Griffith Dickenson in Virginia in the 1600's. He did indeed patent land in Virginia on 5 January, 1656, 300 acres on the southwest side of Moses Creek and on the northerly branch of Tomahack Creek above Nickatorinces quarter, for transporting 6 persons, himself twice, Elizabeth Dickenson, William Jones and Susan Crotch. This, of course, is a count of 5, not 6. The author checked this patent with the originals in Virginia State Library, and it is correct as given above. Therefore, it would seem that his wife Elizabeth is also counted twice. (40) Such grants were given in the amount of 50 acres for each person transported. However, one must not assume that the date of the patent represents the date of arrival. The patent might be based on those who had long since arrived and settled. This entry does tell us that Griffith had made at least two trips from England before 1656, and the inference is that his wife also made two trips. That she was his wife can also be shown by the records of St. Martin Orgar, London, where the marriage record shows that Griffith Dickenson married Elizabeth Springall on 12 June, 1649. (41) No ages or parents are given in this document. The rate lists show that Thomas Springall was a resident there in this period, but no proof of parentage has been found. (42) We can deduce that Griffith and Elizabeth came to Virginia any time between 1649 and 1956, for the first time. Griffith was apparently not a planter, and seemingly patented the land because he could get it. He was a trader, dealer, speculator or some kind of business man. In existing records of Surry County, we find the entry "26 June, 1656/7 The balance of the books of Maj. Jno. Westhorpe, dec'd. One of creditors was Griffith Dickenson. (43) On 16 December, 1664 there is the petition of Griffith Dickinson, entreating his friend Capt. Thomas Pittman to petition the court on his behalf and grant an order against John Dolyes(?) Estate. (44) Also on 3 May, 1656, Jno. Baldwin and Griffith Dickson have a suit, which they ask Robert Stanton to defer to the next court. (45) Then we find Griffith pursuing a proposition frowned upon by the authorities. On 10 September, 1663, an order of the Assembly: Divers persons (5) have erected wares in the Face of the town, contrary to the order of the Assembly. Each was assessed a fine of 2,000 pounds of tobacco and cask. One of these culprits was Griffith Dickenson. (46) Commentators like McIlwain, familiar with the terminology then current, states that wares refers to weirs, which was the term used for a dam. These five men seem to have built a dam in the James River, at or near Jamestown, which in some way upset the order of things. They obviously did not believe their project would have deleterious effects, but the event proved them wrong. His business deals must have been profitable. The Assembly apparently knew these men could pay a stiff fine. They probably also had to stand the expense of tearing down the dam. We do not know the date of Griffith's death, but we know it was before 1673. We find this entry: 28 May, 1673. The difference between Tho. Wilkinson as marrying the relict of Griffith Dickeson, and William Towne, is referred to the next county court of New Kent, who are to determine the difference. (47) Who is William Towne, and what does he have to do with the widow's property? Did William Towne marry a daughter of Griffith and Elizabeth, and is trying to get some of Griffith's estate out of the hands of her step- father, Thomas Wilkinson? Did any sons come into this litigation? We do not know, because the records of New Kent County have been destroyed. The last record we had on Griffith was 16 December, 1664, in Surry County. He may have die din the late 1660's. Since we know the marriage took place in 1649, we now see why Thomas, Griffith and Nathaniel are not likely to be the sons of Griffith, but presumably grandsons. And this would tie in with the presumption that William of King William County is their father. If William was born in the early 1605's and died after 1707, he would have lived a reasonable life span. But to presume that Nathaniel, who died in 1753 is a child of Griffith of Virginia, would be, though not impossible, yet improbable. Having located the family in New Kent County, where Griffith's estate is to be adjudicated, we look for other entries that might be significant. On the April 16, 1684 charges and levies of New Kent County. John Diggason is awarded 21 pounds of tobacco for carrying a letter to Lt. Story. On Thursday 28 October, 1686, in a letter submitted by the clerks to their Lordship, one of the members of the Custom Commission is William Dickinson. (48) The names John and William are too common to assign without proof. But we can bear in mind, since we have still another entry that may or may not be significant. In the next century we find he will of William Morris of New Kent County, filed on 25 January, 1745/6, naming among his heirs, his daughter Eliza Dickenson and his grandsons John and Arthur Dickenson. (49) We do not know Griffith's origin. In the parish of St. Martin Orgar where he was married in London, no Dickenson families can be found in the records for that period. Considerable work has been done on English records, without finding a clue. That he was the son of Jeremiah Dickenson, who came over in 1620, can now be disproved. Jeremiah patented land in James Cittie County in 1636 and 1638. (50) There are two entries in the records concerning these lands. "10 April, 1651 to Robert Taylor, 500 acres in James Cittie County on the Chippoakes, beginning at Swan Bay and north toward the river mouth, formarly granted to Jeremy Dickenson by patent dated 6 May, 1638, and granted to said Taylor by order of the Governor and Council 24 October, 1650, in the right of his wife, the daughter- in-law of said Dickenson." (51) In other words, there is no male claimant to Jeremiah's land. Nomenclature of the day was not consistent with ours, so that we do not know whether Robert Taylor's wife was a daughter of Jeremiah, or possibly his widow. But the claimant is not a male bearing the name of Dickenson. The other entry is: "Surry County, Virginia 22 June 1668. Thomas Ludwell, Esq., Escheator General, Writ 5 October 1667 to enquire what lands Jeremiah Dickeson was at the tyme of his death seized of. Jury find that Jeremiah Dickinson was at the time of his death seized of 500 acres in James Citty County (but now called Surry) upon Upper Chipoakes Creeke, commonly known by the name of Swan Bay, which became due unto Jeremiah Dickinson by patt. 6 May 1638 and that Jeremiah Dickenson made noe will, neither is there any heire in the country. We give verdict that the 500 acres is escheated." (52) Our records show that Griffith's widow, if not Griffith himself, was in the colony in 1667 and 1668. Obviously the old records which claim the Dickensons descend from Jeremiah, are in error. The search continues for some document showing the origin of Griffith. Dickensons have ever been prolific as well as adventurous, as is evident to anyone who has made much of a study of English records pertaining to them. In the 1600's they were by no means all living in England, as can be seen by examining the records of Bermuda, West Indies, and New England. A Thomas Dickenson was in Charleston, South Carlina as early as the 1600's. It is no easy problem to locate Griffith's origins. Caroline Caroline DeBiasi cdbrc@charter.net