Diana SKIPWITH, wife of Edward Dale
CMW12635
composed which was published in the January, 2000 issue of TAG pointed out
contemporary records which called into question whether Katherine Dale, Edward
Dale's daughter, could have been a daughter born of his marriage to Diana
Skipwith.
I'm advised that Mr. Douglas Richardson has researched this topic and I would
certainly be interested in his comments, etc.
Charles Ward
CMW1...@aol.com
douglasr...@hotmail.com
Thank you for post below regarding the colonial immigrant, Diana
Skipwith, wife of Major Edward Dale, of Lancaster Co., Virginia. I'd
be glad to share my comments on this matter.
As your recent article in TAG pointed out, Diana Skipwith is known to
have appeared under her maiden name in records dated 1655, whereas her
husband, Edward Dale's eldest daughter, Katherine (Dale) Carter, was
evidently born about 1652. Under normal circumstances, one would
conclude that if Diana witnessed under her maiden name after
Katherine's birth, that Diana couldn't possibly by Katherine's mother.
This would presumably be an open and shut case.
However, there was a rare custom among high born Englishwomen of this
period to use their maiden names after marriage. As the daughter of a
knight and a English baronet, Diana Skipwith was one of the highest
born English women ever to come to the New World. Due to her high
station then, we should not be surprised to see her using her maiden
name after marriage. As such, one must seek other evidence to prove or
disprove whether or not Diana was Katherine's mother. In this case,
there are no less than ten pieces of evidences which suggest that Diana
was Katherine's mother.
First, research indicates that Diana Skipwith was born in 1621, in
England. If she was still single in 1655, as claimed, she would have
contracted her marriage to Edward Dale after she had attained her 34th
year. This is highly unlikely. The vast majority of Englishwomen in
this period were married before their 30th birthday.
Second, statements in print suggest that Diana Skipwith's husband,
Edward Dale, and her brother, Sir Gray Skipwith, may have immigrated at
the same time to Virginia following the death of King Charles I in
1649. If so, it is entirely possible that Diana and Edward were
married in England, prior to their appearance in Virginia.
Third, Katherine (Dale) Carter had a large family which is well
documented in a Carter family prayer book. Among her children, we find
a child named Edward for her father, Diana for her mother, and Henry
Skipwith for her mother's father. Unless Katherine (Dale) Carter was
Diana Skipwith's daughter, it would be difficult to explain the
appearance of the name Henry Skipwith Carter among her children.
Fourth, the names of the godparents of Katherine (Dale) Carter's
children are recorded in the Carter family prayer book. In colonial
times, relatives were often employed to serve as godparents. In this
case, we find that Diana Skipwith herself served as a godmother as did
Diana's brother, Sir Gray Skipwith's widow, Anne Skipwith, of Middlesex
Co., Virginia. It would be odd to find Dame Skipwith as a sponsor for
Katherine (Dale) Carter's child, unless she had some connection to
Katherine (Dale) Carter herself. If Diana Skipwith was Katherine
(Dale) Carter's mother, then Dame Skipwith would have been Katherine
(Dale) Carter's aunt by marriage.
Fifth, there was an long epitaph of Edward Dale's life recorded in the
Carter family prayer book. The epitaph states clearly that Edward Dale
married Diana Skipwith "early in life" and presents her as his only
wife. Presumably the term "early in life" is prior to his 30th
birthday. If so, we must assume that Diana was also no more than 30
years old herself when she married Edward Dale. This suggests a
marriage in or before 1651.
Sixth, the death records of Edward Dale and his widow, Diana, are also
recorded in the same prayer book. No mention is made of any wife for
Edward Dale except Diana Skipwith.
Seventh, Edward Dale's will bequeathed his wife, Diana, a life interest
in certain property and named his daughter, Katherine, and two Carter
grandchildren as his executors. Had Diana been Katherine's step-
mother, the usual protocol would be for Diana to hold the executorship
to safeguard her interests against her step-children's rights. Since
Diana was not named executrix, one must presume that either Diana was
too ill to serve as executrix, or else that Diana was Katherine's own
mother and that Diana did not need to have her interests safeguarded.
Eighth, we find that Diana Skipwith joined her husband, Edward Dale, in
conveyances to two of their married daughters, Katherine and
Elizabeth. This shows that Diana had a strong interest in Katherine
and Elizabeth's future, which one would expect if Diana was their blood
mother.
Ninth, in one of these conveyances, Diana Skipwith names her son-in-
law, Daniel Harrison, who was evidently married to her daughter, Mary
Dale. This reference would suggest that Diana had at least one child
by Edward Dale. If so, under normal circumstances, we would normally
suppose that she married Edward Dale before her 30th birthday which
event took place in 1651. Inasmuch as Katherine Dale was born about
1652, Katherine's birth would appear to fall after Diana was likely to
have been married to Edward Dale.
Tenth, the theory is presented in Mr. Ward's article that Edward Dale
may have had an earlier wife before he married Diana Skipwith by whom
he had his daughters, Katherine and Mary. It is further suggested that
the unknown first wife may have been a relative of Vincent Stanford.
This theory is based on the fact that Vincent Stanford left a sizeable
bequest to Mary Dale in his will. However, it is doubtful that Vincent
Stanford had any blood tie to Mary Dale at all, as in his will, he
carefully referred to another legatee as his niece, whereas he made no
claim to kinship to Mary Dale. Had Mary Dale been related to the
testator, one would presume he would have stated that fact just as he
did for the other legatee who he identified as his niece. Since
Vincent Stanford did not refer to Mary Dale as his kinswoman, it is
inappropriate to conclude that Mary Dale's father might have had
earlier unknown first wife, or that the Dale and Stanford families were
related by blood or marriage.
Regarding the matter of women using their maiden names after marriage,
I've located two contemporary examples of women who used their maiden
names after marriage. One is widow Mary Kemp, of Gloucester Co.,
Virginia who signed two powers of attorney about 1700, one as Mary Kemp
and one as Mary Curtis. The editor of Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography who reported these powers of attorney stated that Curtis
was "doubtless" Mary's maiden name, suggesting that he was aware of the
custom for women to use their maiden name's after marriage. The second
example I've found is a Chancery suit dated about 1610 in England in
which Anne Clere, widow, was sued by the executor of her late husband,
William Gilbert's estate. Research shows that Clere was Anne's maiden
name. A second chancery suit states she remained a widow for three
years and then married (2nd) Okeover Crompton. Like Diana Skipwith,
Anne Clere was the daughter of a knight and came from a family with
high born relations. Anne (Clere) Gilbert is the maternal grandmother
of the colonial immigrant, Elizabeth (Alsop) Baldwin, of Milford,
Connecticut.
In closing, I wish to state that should anyone know of any other
examples of English women using their maiden names after marriage, I
would appreciate it greatly if they would forward those examples to me
for inclusion in an article I'm preparing on Diana Skipwith. Also, I
wish to thank MichaelAnne Guido for her invaluable contribution to the
history of the Skipwith and Dale families. When Ms. Guido learned of
my interest in Diana (Skipwith) Dale, she generously shared her
extensive research files with me. Her files clarified several points
discussed above. I'm most grateful for her assistance. I also wish to
thank Gary Boyd Roberts and Jerome Anderson, both of the New England
Historic Genealogical Society in Boston, and my co-author, Dr. David
Faris, with whom I consulted at length about the Diana Skipwith
problem.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
E-mail: royala...@msn.com
In article <20010103114758...@ng-cj1.aol.com>,
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
Joema...@aol.com
I would like to thank Douglas Richardson for the excellent submission on
Diana Skipwith and Major Edward Dale. I completely concur with his findings
as they are the same as mine after much research on this family on my part.
I have personally made numerous trips to both the Northumberland County, VA
courthouse and Northumberland County Historical Society and the Lancaster
County, VA courthouse. I have made photocopies of the deeds that Douglas
referred to between the Dales and Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale Carter,
and William Rogers and Elizabeth Dale Rogers. And yes, in Lancaster County
Deed Book 4, deed dated December 8, 1674, Diana Dale appoints her son-in-law,
Daniel Harrison to act as her attorney. When Daniel Harrison passed away,
his inventory names his wife as Mary Harrison.
Elizabeth Dale and William Rogers were my gggggg grandparents. They had
numerous children, among them my ancestor, Edward Rogers. Edward appears to
be the third youngest children of Elizabeth Dale and William Rogers.
Elizabeth and William's two youngest children, George and Joseph were named
in Lancaster County Order Book, 1713-21, page 62, August 11, 1714, when their
aunt, Elizabeth Rogers Keene Banks (sister of William Rogers) went to court
and informed the court that her brother left two small children, George and
Joseph which she was doubtful would have a suitable education. The court
ordered that Lazarus Conway and William Rogers, with whom the children were
living to appear at the next court. Lazarus Conway was the second husband of
Eleanor Rogers, daughter of William Rogers and Elizabeth Dale Rogers, and the
William Rogers named was the son of William Rogers and Elizabeth Dale Rogers.
If Elizabeth Dale and William Rogers had at least two small children on
August 11, 1714, then Elizabeth could not have been born before 1660. At
woman in her early 50's could not have had children. Medical science then
was not like it is today.
William Rogers married after Elizabeth's death. He married a Mary Stott
Pullen, widow of Henry Pullen. Mary was granted Administration of William's
estate on April 14, 1714, 4 months before Elizabeth Rogers Keene Banks went
to court on August 11, 1714, in reference to the education of the small
children. After carefully checking Mary Stott Pullen's will, dated 10 April
1727, I found NO ROGERS CHILDREN ARE LISTED. She names only her children by
Henry Pullen: Sons, Thomas, John, William and Brian Pullen and daughter
Frances Blackobe, and granddaughter Mary Eatchinson. Ex. was son Brian
Pullen, and Witnesses: John Stott, Jr. and Brian Stott. NOTHING ON THE
ROGERS FAMILY. This appears in Lancaster County, VA Will Book 12, page 206.
Also, from various information that I have found on Mary Stott Pullen Rogers,
she is believed to have been born in 1655, making her too old to have
children listed as small children in 1714. If any of the children of William
Rogers had been children of Mary Stott Pullen, they would have been listed in
her will, they would have lived with her and not with a son and daughter and
son in law of William and Elizabeth Dale Rogers, and their paternal aunt,
Elizabeth Rogers Keene Banks would not have had to go to court on their
behalf.
Also, of interest is an entry in the Carter Family Prayer Book in which
William and Daniel Carter are baptized. I believe that William Carter was
named in honor of William Rogers and Daniel Carter was named in honor of
Daniel Harrison, brothers-in-law of their mother, Katherine Dale Carter.
Again, thank you Douglas for setting the record straight.
Joan Burdyck
Kevan L. Barton
Hey, great recap! However, perhaps I missed some detail on point 10. Who
did Mary Dale marry? When was the bequest from Vincent Stanford made?
Surely, there must be some connection between the two to make some sense out
of the "sizeable bequest". Based on the information provided, there does
not seem to be any evidence that the Stanford connection comes through the
father. How about through a husband?
Cheers,
Kevan
CMW12635
Thank you for taking the time to post your comments regarding my TAG article.
Allow me to respond.
You wrote:
>>>
First, research indicates that Diana Skipwith was born in 1621, in
England. If she was still single in 1655, as claimed, she would have
contracted her marriage to Edward Dale after she had attained her 34th year.
This is highly unlikely. The vast majority of Englishwomen in this period were
married before their 30th birthday.
>>>
This is certainly true, the great majority of women during this period did
marry prior to their 30th birthday. That still leaves a slim minority who did
not. What possible reason could we cite for Diana Skipwith not marrying prior
to the age of 30? As Royalists, the Skipwiths suffered financially during
the English Civil War and the Commonwealth and would have been out of favor
politically. These are possible reasons why a daughter in that family didn't
marry at the normal age.
>>>
Second, statements in print suggest that Diana Skipwith's husband,
Edward Dale, and her brother, Sir Gray Skipwith, may have immigrated at the
same time to Virginia following the death of King Charles I in 1649. If so, it
is entirely possible that Diana and Edward were married in England, prior to
their appearance in Virginia.
>>>
This may well be true, but hasn't been proven.
>>>
Third, Katherine (Dale) Carter had a large family which is well
documented in a Carter family prayer book. Among her children, we find a child
named Edward for her father, Diana for her mother, and Henry Skipwith for her
mother's father. Unless Katherine (Dale) Carter was Diana Skipwith's daughter,
it would be difficult to explain the appearance of the name Henry Skipwith
Carter among her children.
>>>
I don't think the naming of a child "Diana" is a problem as I've found
instances where parents named a child after their own step-parent. You make
a good point with Henry Skipwith Carter. Ordinarily, one would assume such a
name would be indicative of a familial relationship. However, one might also
consider other possible motives for the child's name, such as the social
aspirations of the family, which might also account for obtaining Lady Ann
Skipwith as a godmother to the children.
>>>
Fifth, there was an long epitaph of Edward Dale's life recorded in the
Carter family prayer book. The epitaph states clearly that Edward Dale married
Diana Skipwith "early in life" and presents her as his only wife. Presumably
the term "early in life" is prior to his 30th
birthday. If so, we must assume that Diana was also no more than 30
years old herself when she married Edward Dale. This suggests a
marriage in or before 1651.
>>>
The abovementioned epitaph is found in the Carter prayer book and may have been
copied from a tombstone that no longer exists or for a tombstone that was
intended, but never placed on the burial site of Edward Dale. We know at the
earliest it would have been written shortly after the death of Edward Dale on
"2nd Feby. Anno Dom. 1695." It may have been written several years later.
It would have been composed long after Edward Dale's marriage took place and
it's difficult to infer the date from the epitaph alone.
Rather than state it "...presents her as his only wife" I would state Diana is
the only wife it lists. It would not have been all that uncommon for a first
wife to have been ignored while the second wife was still alive. I would
refer to the tombstone of Mrs. Lucy (Higginson) Burwell Bernard Ludwell, of
Virginia which completely ignores her second and third husbands and refers only
to her first marriage. When using tombstone data, it can often be flawed.
My transcript of the epitaph, which I have on hand, states that Dale "....in
early years Crownd his other accomplishments by a Felicitious Marriage Wth.
Diana ye daughter of Sr. Henry Skipwith...."
That may be open to wider interpretation and doesn't necessarily carry the same
connotation as "early in life."
>>>
Sixth, the death records of Edward Dale and his widow, Diana, are also recorded
in the same prayer book. No mention is made of any wife for Edward Dale except
Diana Skipwith.
>>>
As this is the Carter family prayer book and entries were apparently begun upon
the marriage of Thomas Carter to Katherine Dale, it would not be unusual for
an earlier wife of Edward Dale to not be mentioned. As a contemporary account
of this family, one would not expect to see the death of someone who died years
before to be recorded.
Conversely, one could use the same argument and refer to the Carter prayer book
and note the fact that it only refers to Katherine Dale as the "eldest daughter
of Edward Dale." It does not mention Diana being her mother.
I will have to consult my files, but I don't recall the Carter prayer book
providing the death date of Diana (Skipwith) Dale.
>>>
Seventh, Edward Dale's will bequeathed his wife, Diana, a life interest in
certain property and named his daughter, Katherine, and two Carter
grandchildren as his executors. Had Diana been Katherine's step-mother, the
usual protocol would be for Diana to hold the executorship to safeguard her
interests against her step-children's rights. Since Diana was not named
executrix, one must presume that either Diana was too ill to serve as
executrix, or else that Diana was Katherine's own mother and that Diana did not
need to have her interests safeguarded.
>>>
Edward Dale's epitaph states his widow, Diana, "....is left a little while to
Mourn Him." We can reasonably conclude that she was ill and certainly advanced
in years at her husband's death and the task of serving as executrix of his
will would have been a burden upon her. As Dale left a life interest in
certain property to Diana, it would appear that Dale himself (long the clerk of
Lancaster County) had taken measures to safeguard Diana's interests following
his death.
>>>
Eighth, we find that Diana Skipwith joined her husband, Edward Dale, in
conveyances to two of their married daughters, Katherine and
Elizabeth. This shows that Diana had a strong interest in Katherine
and Elizabeth's future, which one would expect if Diana was their blood mother.
>>>
Yes, but not necessarily. Diana could have a strong interest in their future
and still be a step-mother, rather than their blood mother. It is also worth
noting that Diana likely joined her husband in these conveyances due to legal
reasons, ie because of her dower right in the property.
I can find other examples where step-mothers joined with their husbands in land
conveyances with their step-children. A pre-Revolutionary War deed from King
George Co., VA from Robert Monday and wife, Catherine, to William Monday is
worth note. John and Catherine mention "their son" William in the deed. It
can be proven that Catherine was the step-mother of William Monday and not his
real mother. So, even obvious statements in deed records are not always
conclusive. (Granted, this particular example is not contemporary with the
Dale matter.)
>>>
Ninth, in one of these conveyances, Diana Skipwith names her son-in-
law, Daniel Harrison, who was evidently married to her daughter, Mary Dale.
This reference would suggest that Diana had at least one child by Edward Dale.
If so, under normal circumstances, we would normally suppose that she married
Edward Dale before her 30th birthday which event took place in 1651. Inasmuch
as Katherine Dale was born about 1652, Katherine's birth would appear to fall
after Diana was likely to have been married to Edward Dale.
>>>>
I would refer you to the above. Also, the term "son-in-law" had different
meanings during this time.
>>>
Tenth, the theory is presented in Mr. Ward's article that Edward Dale
may have had an earlier wife before he married Diana Skipwith by whom he had
his daughters, Katherine and Mary. It is further suggested that the unknown
first wife may have been a relative of Vincent Stanford. This theory is based
on the fact that Vincent Stanford left a sizeable bequest to Mary Dale in his
will. However, it is doubtful that Vincent Stanford had any blood tie to Mary
Dale at all, as in his will, he carefully referred to another legatee as his
niece, whereas he made no claim to kinship to Mary Dale. Had Mary Dale been
related to the testator, one would presume he would have stated that fact just
as he did for the other legatee who he identified as his niece. Since Vincent
Stanford did not refer to Mary Dale as his kinswoman, it is inappropriate to
conclude that Mary Dale's father might have had earlier unknown first wife, or
that the Dale and Stanford families were related by blood or marriage.
>>>>
I offer as one possible explanation that the first wife may have been related
to Vincent Stanford. My basis for theorizing Edward Dale had an earlier wife
is not based exclusively on the Stanford will. I would refer you to a previous
posting by Dr. David Greene regarding my TAG article in which he discusses this
bequest and why he feels it would appear likely that there would have been a
familial connection.
I quote Dr. David Greene, FASG, from his 11 Feb 2000 posting:
>>>>>>>>>
Let me add a further comment on the possibility that Mary Dale was a godchild
of Vincent Stanford or his wife. As Charles Ward points out, his article
indicates only that there must have been a connection and
does not specify that there was a relationship. This caution is highly
appropriate, but I think that there was probably a genealogical
relationship between Vincent Stanford or his wife and the unknown first wife
that Charles Ward postulates for Edward Dale. It is certainly true that
godchildren were sometimes mentioned in wills of this period and social rank.
But in such cases, they were usually left relatively small tokens. The only
exceptions that occur to me are when the testator had no relatives in the New
World (or at least in the colony). In this case, Stanford had a niece that he
mentions, and he left Mary Dale 800 acres--hardly a token. There was a strong
prejudice, beyond the laws of primogeniture, toward leaving land to family
members. I would argue that the probabilities--but not the certainties--are
that Mary Dale was related to the Stanfords, even though the relationship was
not specified. English research, especially into the Stanfords, might solve
several of the early Dale problems.
>>>>>>
Douglas, you also wrote:
>>>>>
Regarding the matter of women using their maiden names after marriage,
I've located two contemporary examples of women who used their maiden
names after marriage. One is widow Mary Kemp, of Gloucester Co.,
Virginia who signed two powers of attorney about 1700, one as Mary Kemp
and one as Mary Curtis. The editor of Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography who reported these powers of attorney stated that Curtis
was "doubtless" Mary's maiden name, suggesting that he was aware of the
custom for women to use their maiden name's after marriage. The second
example I've found is a Chancery suit dated about 1610 in England in
which Anne Clere, widow, was sued by the executor of her late husband,
William Gilbert's estate. Research shows that Clere was Anne's maiden
name. A second chancery suit states she remained a widow for three
years and then married (2nd) Okeover Crompton. Like Diana Skipwith,
Anne Clere was the daughter of a knight and came from a family with
high born relations. Anne (Clere) Gilbert is the maternal grandmother
of the colonial immigrant, Elizabeth (Alsop) Baldwin, of Milford,
Connecticut.
>>>>>
I would want confirmation of the conclusion that the widow Mary Kemp and Mary
Curtis were one and the same.
It is interesting, however, that both examples cited involve widows. This
suggests the possibility that highborn women may have reverted to the use of
their maiden names following the deaths of their husbands. No examples have
been offered of married ladies using their maiden names DURING the lifetime of
their husbands. Only AFTER their death.
Unless a contemporary record can be found which unquestionably states or
implies that Diana Skipwith was married to Edward Dale, dated around 1651, to
assume that she was married when she signed her name as "Diana Skipwith" is
presumptuous.
I would bring to your attention a letter I received from Mr. John Anderson
Brayton, of Memphis, TN. He advised me in a letter dated, 6 Feb 2000, of a
reference a now deceased friend had sent referring to a colonial VA record
whereby Nicholas Meriwether and Edward Dale refer to one another as "brother."
Unfortunately, he did not have a specific reference for the record. I made a
precursory attempt to locate this record, but have not had time to pursue it.
If found, it may yield more information regarding the Dale family and Dale's
probable/possible first wife, whose identity remains unknown.
At the very least, the identity of Katherine (Dale) Carter's mother remains
highly questionable, as indicated in my TAG article.
Kind regards,
Charles Ward
CMW1...@aol.com
CMW12635
At the time the bequest was made in the Vincent Stanford will, Mary Dale would
have been a very young child.
Charles Ward
CMW1...@aol.com
Tim Powys-Lybbe
cmw1...@aol.com (CMW12635) [Charles Ward] wrote:
>
> Douglas, you also wrote:
>
> >>>>>
> Regarding the matter of women using their maiden names after marriage,
> I've located two contemporary examples of women who used their maiden
> names after marriage.
> >>>>>
>
> I would want confirmation of the conclusion that the widow Mary Kemp and Mary
> Curtis were one and the same.
>
> It is interesting, however, that both examples cited involve widows. This
> suggests the possibility that highborn women may have reverted to the use of
> their maiden names following the deaths of their husbands. No examples have
> been offered of married ladies using their maiden names DURING the lifetime of
> their husbands. Only AFTER their death.
>
One curious practice I found in the late 16th century was that of a lady
retaining her first married (and barren) name through her second
marriage (this one was fruitful).
The lady was born Winifred Pole (c.1525-1601/2), she married c.1557 Sir
Thomas Hastings, who died within a year of that (1558), and finally she
married in 1559 Sir Thomas Barrington (d.1581). William Clayton, who
wrote a history of the Barringtons in 1870 odd, included:
Although married to Sir Thomas Barrington, the lady Winifred continued
to call herself Lady Hastings. Lady Barrington survived her husband
many years. The following letter to her from her nephew the earl of
Huntingdon, was written to her most probably on her widowhood--
To my very good Lady
and Aunte the La:
Winifred Hastings.
My very good Lady. I understand by Sr Henry Gate that he hath a graunt of
advowson of the Parsonage of Rowley in Yorkeshire, vnder yor
Lays hand and although he doubteth not of the contineance of
yor Lays goodwill, and likewise of his enioyinge the benefit thereof, at
the next Pr~entacon, yet hath he desired me to remember yor
Lap thereof, and to request you when it shall be voide, he may not be
prevented therein by any others, wherein I am the more willinge to
desire yor Laps favor, for that I am pr~suaded that he will present such
a man vnto it as shall both be honest and learned. Thus wth my hearty
commendacons I comytt yr good Lap vnto the tuicion of the Almighty.
At the Court the first of Mch, 1582.
Your louying Nephew
H. HUNTYNDON
In an agreement with her son Francis, dated 26th year of Elizabeth, she
is called "the lady Winifred Hastings, widow, lately wife of Sir Thomas
Barrington, Knight," and she signs her name "Winifriyd Hastyngs"; This
agreement was that she should resign and give up to her son, the leases
of the parsonages of Hatfield, and of some lands in Stanstead Park.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe t...@powys.org
For a patchwork of bygones: http://powys.org
Todd A. Farmerie
Greene's attempt to post a response, and so he has asked me to
forward his material to the list. What follows is his, not mine,
and all comments or question should be directed to him or the
list, not to me. I have taken the liberty of deleting the quoted
text of Douglas Richardson which Mr. Greene included, as I
suspect the length of post with the full quote is part of the
problem. For context, please refer directly to the earlier post
(I have left the first paragraph, to assist in searching the
archives or deja). - taf]
------------------------------
From David Greene - am...@alltel.net:
I am very intrigued to read Doug Richardson's defense of the
traditional
conclusion that Diana Skipwith was Edward Dale's only wife and
the
mother of Katherine (Dale) Carter, especially the evidence Doug
adduces.
Since I edited Charles Martin's article challenging this
conclusion for
TAG and since I collected the favorable comments of our outside
readers
before we published the article, I hope that it is appropriate
for me to
respond.
The basic issue is whether Diana (Skipwith) Dale was married when
she
used her maiden name to sign two documents as a witness in 1655.
I have
seen examples at this period of married women being called by
their
maiden names, but, as Doug points out, it was rare. I must
disagree,
however, that it was a custom--rare or not--for high-born
Englishwomen
AT THIS TIME to use their maiden names after marriage unless
there were
other reasons than prestige. It was occasionally a custom for a
several-times widowed woman in the middle-ages to assume the
surname
and/or title of her highest-born husband, but this was
considerably
earlier than mid-17th century. I have seen (very rare)
17th-century
examples of highborn widows (not married women) taking back their
maiden
names but
only if the marriage was of very short duration or unhappy. My
own
experience with records of the time is that we will find colonial
married Englishwomen referred to by their maiden names only in
the
following instances:
1. There is a legal reason for their doing so, usually when
property was
involved. In such instance, a woman would commonly--but not
always--use
both her married and maiden names joined with "alias."
2. There was some question about the legality of the marriage,
especially if the woman claimed that it was unconsummated.
3. The recorder made a mistake. I have occasionally found an
official
calling a woman by the name by which he had known her before she
had
married. This could even occur with the supposed copying of a
signature.
Of course, this was rare, but it did happen.
4. The reason given above--a very short marriage or an
incompatible one.
Of the two examples Doug gives, neither is really contemporary
with the
Dale-Skipwith marriage. The one from 1700 seems to be an example
of a
woman using different surnames for legal purposes involving
property; I
would be careful, however, in assuming that "Curtis" was
necessarily her
maiden name because the 1900 journal editor thought that it was.
In any
case, it does not appear to be an instance of a woman using her
maiden
name because it had higher social status. The 1610 Chancery case
is not
contemporary with the 1655 Virginia records and does not seem to
be
necessarily a case of a widow herself using her maiden name--note
that
she was called that by the person suing her, not that she called
herself
by that name. I suspect that we have here an example of the use
of a
maiden name for a legal rather than a sociological reason (or
possibly
because of no. 4 above), but it would not be possible to reach a
definite conclusion without examining the full records of the
Chancery
case, including Anne (Clere) Gilbert's answer(s) to the suit.
I don't want to conclude--it is always difficult to prove a
negative--that a high-born woman in 1655 would NEVER use her
maiden name
because of its social status, but--even if the 1610 chancery case
is
such an instance--it is so unlikely that we need to exclude it
without
explicit evidence, such as a marriage record.
Of the other possibilities, we have no evidence that the
Dale-Skipwith
marriage was incompatible and it was certainly not short-lived or
illegal. Since the 1655 documents show Diana Skipwith as a
witness, not
a principal, she would have had no legal reason to use her maiden
name.
The only possibility remaining, other than that she was not yet
married,
is that the recorder made a mistake and, knowing that she was the
sister
of Sir Grey Skipwith, gave her that surname in recording that
documents.
Seductive though that hypothesis may be, it is nearly impossible
to
accept because there are two separate documents involved. It is
conceivable that the recorder might have copied "Diana Dale" as
"Diana
Skipwith" once because he thought of her as a Skipwith; but he
would not
have done so in copying two separate documents.
Hence the only possible conclusion--the one that Occam's Razor
forces us
to accept--is that Diana Skipwith twice signed with her maiden
name in
1655 because that was indeed her name at the time and she had not
yet
married Edward Dale.
This must be the starting point in considering all the other
evidence
Doug adduces.
We must be very careful in applying custom absolutely to every
event.
Most of the points Doug raises would indeed point to Diana's
being the
mother of Katherine (Dale) Carter, but we have good evidence that
she
was unmarried in 1655, which makes her being Katherine's mother
chronologically impossible. So far as points 8 and 9 are
concerned, it
was common at the time for stepparents and children to ignore the
"step"
(or "in-law") terminology in legal documents. Presumably in point
8,
Diana was signing because of her dower right in the property, not
necessarily because of concern for her stepdaughters.
Point 7: Edward Dale was protecting his wife's rights by giving
her a
life interest and his children's by the executorship. The "usual
protocol" in the case of a stepmother would have been to make the
widow
and a child co-executors or to appoint overseers. The fact that
Dale
didn't follow protocol is probably significant a family situation
we
cannot fully recover (a guess might be the health of the widow).
The most important point in favor of Diana Skipwith's being
Edward
Dale's only wife is the prayer book. It should be noted that the
Dale's
"obituary" was written after his death and that its purpose was
clearly
to emphasize his high social status, as exemplified by the
Skipwith
marriage. It says that he married Diana Skipwith "in early
years," but
not, however, that he wasn't married before. The Skipwith names
found
among his children and grandchildren seem, like the "obituary,"
to
emphazise the high social prestige of the marriage (and possibly
the
fact that Diana was the only mother the
children would have known).
If it were not for the 1655 records, the other evidence
(especially the
prayer book) would probably be sufficient for us to accept that
Diana
was the only wife of Edward Dale. But nothing offered thus far
outweighs
the evidence--which seems conclusive--that Diana was unmarried in
1655
and that her "daughter" Katherine (Dale) Carter was born three
years
earlier.
DAVID L. GREENE, CG, FASG
Editor and publisher
The American Genealogist [TAG]
douglasr...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> Dear Charles:
>
> Thank you for post below regarding the colonial immigrant, Diana
> Skipwith, wife of Major Edward Dale, of Lancaster Co., Virginia. I'd
> be glad to share my comments on this matter.
[etc]
Claud...@aol.com
<< The only possibility remaining, other than that she was not yet
married,
is that the recorder made a mistake and, knowing that she was the
sister
of Sir Grey Skipwith, gave her that surname in recording that
documents.
Seductive though that hypothesis may be, it is nearly impossible
to
accept because there are two separate documents involved. >>
Dear David,
Both recorders knew very well that she was the sister of Grey Skipwith. The
first deed was recorded by Vincent Stanford. The second deed (this is really
a series of three deeds and the last one Diana Skipwith witnessed concludes
the transaction) was written in 1655 but recorded in 1658 by Edward Dale (her
husband). There is definitely a question of intent and legality here.
MichaelAnne
chapm...@gmail.com
Anent thi s Sir John Clifton, let us add a little bit of interesting
family history,accidentally discovered in the Colyton church Register,
as to his second marriage . We there read,dated 20 July,1579
“ John Cleftown,of Barrenton,in the Countye of Som’
sett,Knyghte,
was wedded unto the Ryghte Honora ble the Ladye Margerette
Taylboyes,of Collocombe,wydo.
”
This was the Lady Margaret Tailboys
’ “ third venter.
” She had been married twice previously,but the cautious recording scribe in the
Register must have had j ust ideas of precedency,forhe gives her the
superior title of her first husband.
She was the daughter of Sir Wm. Skipwith,Knight,and wife,first,
to George (the second Lord Tailboys) ,who died in 1540,and,secondly,
she wedded Sir Peter Carew, Knight, of Mohuns -Ottery, who died
in 1575.
Gale
Claude Brickell
Claude Brickell
Cindy H.
> I, too, have tried to research Katherine (Dale) Carter as I am her direct ancestor through my Carter line: grandmother Mollie Bratton (Carter) Brickell. And is why my first name is Carter. It appears to me that Katherine Dale had to have been born in England and was brought the Virginia by her parents Lady Diana (Skipwith) Dale and (Sir) Edward Dale when she was an infant. I have attempted to find marriage records of Edward Dale in Leicestershire County, England but have come up short. I have also attempted to fine birth records for Katherine Dale in the same county with no luck. Given that both parents were of prominent families, it is unlikely records for both marriage and birth would not turn up somewhere as no records exist in Virigina. It would also be worth mentioned that the two were from royalist families with connection to Charles I (beheaded by order of Oliver Cromwell) during the English Civil War. And I have read somewhere that Baronet William Henry Skipwith was forced to sell the Skipwith estate at a ridiculous depreciation to a Cromwell associate in London. Lady Diana's brother (3rd Baraonet of Skipwith), Edward Dale and the wife of his best friend Lady Diana, all left, together, for the Virginia Colony as many prominent royalists were doing during and after the Civil War. Critical to solving this genealogical mystery would be to find marriage and birth records for (Prestwould Manor) Coates, Leicestershire County, England and passenger lists for the ship they sailed on to the Colonies (which would give evidence to an among them on their journey to the New World.
Maybe you all have already seen these sites, but if not, there's interesting information about the House of Skipwith that you'll find if you google the historyofparliament website. It traces the line down with a lot of info about descendants who served in Parliament. Once on the site, just search Skipwith and go back to the earliest one listed. Especially interesting to me was Diana's g-grandfather Henry Skipwith (d. 1588), who served Queen Elizabeth I and played a role in the Duke of Norfolk's imprisonment in the Tower during the Mary Queen of Scots intrigue.
Also, you'll see a huge list of Diana's cousins (including Eleanor Roosevelt) if you google the website called "famous kin of diana skipwith." Lee Harvey Oswald was a direct descendant! If you click on any of the names, you'll see the path down to them and how they are related to her. It's a fun site and seems accurate.
~Cindy
Will Johnson
Cindy H.
Anyway, I recently had my line back to Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale confirmed by a professional genealogist, so now I'm even more interested in Katherine's maternity than before. I've been wondering where the name Katherine came from. As far as I can tell, and I could be wrong, you have to go back to Diana's g-grandmother Katherine FitzWilliam to find a candidate for the name. There's a blog at WordPress that has a purported line for Edward Dale showing a Katherine Legh/Leigh as Edward Dale's g-grandmother if that line is accurate. A long way back to a Katherine in either case. Another possibility: If Edward Dale did indeed have a first wife who was Katherine's mother, that wife might well have been named Katherine or have more recent Katherines in her line.
For what it's worth, I read about common naming patterns at this time. Katherine was Edward Dale's eldest daughter, and the 1st daughter was often named after the mother, the mother's mother or the father's mother, so Edward and Diana didn't follow the customary pattern, though that purported line for Edward indicates the name of his mother is unknown. Middle names were exceedingly rate at this time and still unusual in the 18th century. It wasn't until the 19th century that they became common.
~Cindy
Cindy H.
Cindy H.
~Cindy
Will Johnson
and then post those exact URLs instead of asking us to do the search
Will Johnson
> > ~Cindy
> Here's the link for the famous kin of Diana Skipwith site: https://famouskin.com/famous-kin-menu.php?name=9760+diana+skipwith
>
> ~Cindy
https://famouskin.com/about-me.php
It is no more an expert site than the thousands of family trees that exist on hundreds of other sites
I.E. it is not a reliable trustworthy site
Cindy H.
~Cindy
Will Johnson
Cindy H.
~Cindy
Cindy H.
Will Johnson
The members of this group are well acquainted with the HOP articles
I thought you were trying to make a specific point about something you had found
Cindy H.
~Cindy
Will Johnson
I think you need to find a *primary* document, where he signs his name in this exact fashion.
To prove that this was indeed his name in the first place and not a modern invention
Cindy H.
~Cindy
Cindy H.
~Cindy
Cindy H.
~Cindy
Will Johnson
http://files.usgwarchives.net/va/lancaster/bibles/carter1.txt
Leslie Mahler
http://www.countyhistorian.com/knol/4hmquk6fx4gu-1-will-johnson.html
The difference is that Rich Hall is an author, whose edited and published material
can be found in libraries across the country. The same cannot be said for Will Johnson.
Leslie
Will Johnson
This was the point I was making.
NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
None. Not one.
Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not either
Cindy H.
My brother said he wasn't fazed in the least by the Charles Ward piece I sent last night. He noted that he never signs documents using his middle name. In fact, very few people, primarily family members, even know his middle name. The same goes for me. The same may go for Henry Skipwith Carter. My brother's position is that we descend from Diana Skipwith unless primary sources are discovered that prove otherwise. I wonder if such sources will ever be found; given the turmoil of the Cromwell years, they may no longer exist.
~Cindy
Will Johnson
> On Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 1:59:44 PM UTC-4, wjhons...@gmail.com wrote:
> > I have never suggested that anyone should use my website as an authoritative guide
> > This was the point I was making.
> > NO website, by a single author, can be considered a reliable source.
> > None. Not one.
> >
> > Unless it's their own biography. And then maybe not either
> Thanks, Will, for sending the Carter Prayer Book extract. However, isn't it a bit unfair to call a site unreliable without even examining some of the info it contains? In my opinion, a site is unreliable if it contains errors. It should also not be the only site consulted but one of many, many, so that comparisons can be made and discrepancies spotted. So
It is tantamount to saying "Vitamin D *may* help with acne but there have been on peer-reviewed studies to show that". I.E. it's a unreliable claim.
When a single editor/author has full control over what is stated, that is an unreliable publication. It is *solely* through discussion, criticism, harassment, argument.... that a claim can come to a usable reliable state.
That is true of all claims, scientific, genealogical, other.
Cindy H.
~Cindy
Cindy H.
I sent a message to Rich Hall, drawing his attention to a DNA test which has proved that Thomas Carter (husband of Katherine Dale)) of Lancaster Co., John Carter (father of Robert "King" Carter) of Lancaster Co., and Thomas Carter (ancestor of President Jimmy Carter) of Isle of Wight Co. are not related to each other, so he can make changes in the cousins he lists.
I also let him know that June Carter (member of the famous singing Carter family and wife of country singer Johnny Cash) is a direct descendant of Thomas Carter and Katherine Dale, so he can add her. A much nicer cousin than Lee Harvey Oswald!
~Cindy
Will Johnson
One DNA test cannot confirm that two lines are not related to each other.
Cindy H.
Paulo Ricardo Canedo
Cindy H.
~Cindy
Paulo Ricardo Canedo
Cindy H.
What is the significance of both documents being signed before the death of her father Baronet Henry Skipwith? Does that make it more likely that she would have used her maiden name even after she was married?
~Cindy
Paulo Ricardo Canedo
Cindy H.
Johnny Brananas
Will Johnson
Not only did they have many Y-DNA kits, but they did show that the three clusters are both, within each cluster related to each other in genealogical time, *and* that none of the three clusters, are related to the other two, within genealogical time.
To me, this is conclusive proof that the three clusters are not closely related during the Colonial period in question.
Cindy H.
It might also be interesting to have a handwriting expert compare the handwriting of Thomas Carter and Edward Carter shown on that list of books in Edward Dale's library with the various handwritings in Thomas Carter's Prayerbook.
Will Johnson
This is because you would have to use autosomal DNA at lest for part of the line, not proved or disproved by Y-DNA
You can show that chunks of autosomal DNA as large as 50cms can descend from the 1700s, but it takes an awful lot of work to establish that proof, and dozens if not a hundred DNA kits to establish the lines clearly
Cindy H.
Will Johnson
Cindy H.
Will Johnson
For all you know your 8th great-grandmother lied, and had sex with the neighbor and that's your real line
Cindy H.
pj.ev...@gmail.com
Cindy H.
Johnny Brananas
Cindy H.
Johnny Brananas
Right, the perceived kingly claims of Henry VII were rather bolstered by his and wife's several descents from Edward III, but Henry and Elizabeth were both descended only through a mix of males and females, not in a strict male-line descent. The non-paternity event which caused the difference between Richard III and other royal scions or possible heirs would have been moot after a few years of successful Tudor rule, let alone sixty or seventy.
Cindy H.
lancast...@gmail.com
Johnny Brananas
Will Johnson
My implication was, that if you yourself have not proven your own lines autosomally with your own DNA (and your cousins, etc), that all of this work on "your" line is really just based on the misplaced belief that your own ancestors didn't dilly about. And yet they did.
Every day it seems I encounter people who have done "thirty years of research" before they realized their father wasn't their father, their grandfather wasn't their grandfather, and so on. From DNA.
joseph cook
> For all you know your 8th great-grandmother lied, and had sex with the neighbor and that's your real line
--Joe C
P.S. for what it is worth, this statement doesn't make any sense. paper lines can have errors and so can dna tests; it doesn't mean they are worthless. And whether or not the biological line is sound doens't mean that the paper parents didn't raise their non-biological children, pass down inheritnaces, and have family dynamics that are just as interesting as the dna doner.
Will Johnson
But my implication is that an NPE can occur at *any* generation.
It doesn't have to have occurred four hundred years ago.
It might have occurred 80 years ago as well
Johnny Brananas
Will Johnson
> Can an NPE with a closely-related male-line (agnate) cousin of the claimed/ believed father be detected by DNA methods?
What I do is plot out how each match is supposed to be related (by tree) and confirm whether or not that makes sense by the size of the centimorgan match.
If a person is supposed to be a first cousin, and only matches 30 cms (or does not match at all), then they are not a first cousin at all. Then you have to figure out whose tree has the NPE by using a third match that matches one but not both. Rinse and repeat.
It's a long process, but you *can* rebuild the correct tree using these methods.
Even to the point of determining who the missing line must be. That is, which family, has provided the missing biological piece. And thus, which family in the tree, is not biologically related.
You just need at least two tests, administered, and then the hundreds of matches they each generate, and their trees.
Jinny Wallerstedt/Girl 57
Will Johnson
I hope that you and your matches have also taken Autosomal DNA tests so you can at least figure out if you're related within twenty generations.
Jinny Wallerstedt/Girl 57
Will Johnson
> Yes, autosomal tests taken and used, as of course mtDNA on its own is not useful. It is useful, though, to make connections with others...Never can tell what might emerge. And I'm in it for the long haul.