Big changes have come to — all content is now read-only, and member subscriptions and the Shop have been discontinued.
Learn more

Chat | Daily Search | My GenForum | Community Standards | Terms of Service
Jump to Forum
Home: Surnames: Churchill Family Genealogy Forum

Post FollowupReturn to Message ListingsPrint Message

Re: @ Malcom Churchill, posting Re: Mary Churchill and Roger Jones
Posted by: Malcolm Churchill (ID *****4717) Date: May 21, 2011 at 08:57:26
In Reply to: Re: @ Malcom Churchill, posting Re: Mary Churchill and Roger Jones by jane mullis of 3037

Dear Jane,

Sorting out your Churchill ancestry is proving to be quite a mystery and a puzzle. I'll try to work my way through it as best I can, but I don't at this point have an answer.

Many thanks for your kind words. I'm not sure they are all deserved, but I do try my best for accuracy and understanding.

I think we need at this point to get as many dates into the discussion as possible. A key one is the marriage date of Thomas Blakey and Margaret Jones. In your posting 2877 you say 1686. In your posting 2880 you say 1667. I assume the latter date is an error, but if it is not, it of course changes everything.

I have not done any research on the parish or parishes that include Middlesex County, but I have done some in connection with the other Virginia Churchill family. In that case at least, a parish covered a considerable area, that is, a whole county or more. I don't think that William being added to the parish register membership in 1684 implies that he belonged to another Middlesex County parish prior to that. HIs will shows that he maintained a connection to his English parish until his death, so he may well have remained affiliated with his English parish until 1684. The evidence supports the conclusion that he emigrated to Middlesex County and did not live elsewhere in Virginia.

The earliest record of William in this country is that he appears as a Deputy Sheriff in Middlesex County in 1674. As he would have been only 24 or 25 at the time and would have required some time to get established in Middlesex County before being appointed to a formal position, I think it's safe to assume that it was to Middlesex County that he emigrated. All subsequent records associate him with Middlesex County.

Of course, that he immigrated to Virginia prior to 1674 and appeared with his first wife Mary in the Order Book of Middlesex County in 1683, but had only two daughters by that first wife, raises a question as to when and where he was married and when his daughters were born. He could have married early, in England, and perhaps left his wife there, possibly with a daughter, while he got established in America. Or he might have married later, closer to 1783, in Virginia.

I would not read too much into the fact that there appears to be no record of marriages of William's daughters in the Christ Church records. As I recall, not all of the births of William's son Armistead's children are recorded in the church records. An entry is great evidence, but the absence of one may simply mean the event wasn't recorded.

Coming to Churchill Blakey, what is the exact entry for his birth? One possibility that has occurred to me is that Margaret Jones might have died and that Thomas Blakey might then have married a Churchill daughter.

It seems improbable that there would be two Churchill Blakeys born at about the same time and that there would be no family connection to Churchills in the case of one of them.

What is the date of the marriage of Churchill Blakey to Sarah George?

There are two things that I think could be relevant, depending on what additional information shows. One is that what little information thre is on William's eldest daughter suggests that it's not certain her name was Mary. The other is that William's daughter Susannah is named in his will of 1710 as Susannah Churchill, and the use of Churchill implies that she was not yet married. This is possible, since her mother did not die until sometime after 1683. In 1710 she could still have been of marriageable age and subsequently married a Blakey. However, if she had a son Churchill Blakey it would not have been the same Churchill Blakey that you found in the church records.

The pieces of this puzzle are not fitting together at this point. I also forgot to review the citation you asked me to look at, and I'm afraid I may lose this draft if I try to review it before sending this. I'll look at it as soon as I send this. You may cite me in your final interpretation, by which time hopefully the puzzle pieces will be fitting together.


Notify Administrator about this message?
No followups yet

Post FollowupReturn to Message ListingsPrint Message
Search this forum:

Search all of GenForum:

Proximity matching
Add this forum to My GenForum Link to GenForum
Add Forum
Home |  Help |  About Us |  Site Index |  Jobs |  PRIVACY |  Affiliate
© 2007 The Generations Network