Virginia, vol. 3, pp 25-31 - Nuckolls Worldwide



OUR NUCKOLS STORYByMARDINE PRUIETT CAMPBELLSeveral years ago when the Fuller Story was written, we learned the father of Benjamin Clay Fuller was Jonathon Fuller who married Mourning Nuckols. We were able to trace the Fuller family back to the 1660s. So—who were Mourning Nuckols family? Were they as well-known and prosperous as the Fullers? Where did they come from? Were they merchants or planters? The story will encompass only the direct Nuckols ancestry of Mourning. This is only one of many branches of a large and scattered family.It is possible to establish a direct line to Mourning’s ancestors, however within the Nuckols family some mystery arises. Some questions will be resolved, others only partially answered, and a few will remain a mystery. Much is known about the Nuckols but important information such as the names of wives and mothers are missing. Even the father of an important ancestor is unknown, although DNA has helped narrow the possibilities.While the author did a lot of research, much is owed the Nucholls Worldwide Kindred Society (NWKS) and Sandi Koscak, its administrator. The Society’s database is a collection of the current knowledge of all of the Nucholls, not just the Virginia line. Note the Nuckols name is spelled many ways: Nucholls, Nuckolls, Nuckols, and Knuckles (yes, some people actually spell it that way). Mourning’s family spelled it Nuckols and that will be explained later. NWKS provided a resource to verify information collected. Sometimes information from the database was used and that is noted herein. My thanks to Sandi for all she did.Repetitious use of family names further complicates the pursuit of the Nuckols family genealogy. James, John, William, Samuel and Charles were often used from generation to generation as well as multiple times within a generation. Common practice throughout the 18th and 19th centuries was to use a family name like James as the first name with a middle name by which the individual was known. Complicating that of course is the use of the first name in records. That is why Roman numerals are used sometimes following a name.This story is as factual as possible given today’s level of information and knowledge. Most quotes are as they appear in records and have not been corrected to today’s grammar and spelling. Some information about Milley Weatherford’s family is included as well, since Milley was Mourning’s mother.My special thanks to Paul Heinegg for granting permission to quote him liberally. And thank you to Janet Schoel for proofreading the story. Without her, this story would have more errors than it does. Her questions helped me to clarify ambiguous statements or paragraphs. Any errors of fact are my own however. For these I apologize.Although the parentage of James I and his origins are uncertain, the author has used the accepted lineage of the Nucholls Worldwide Kindred Society, starting with James the first and his brothers, John and William. James the first, hereafter written as James I, had four sons, one of whom, James II was Mourning’s ancestor. The line flows like this: James I (the immigrant) to James II whose daughter, Susannah Nucholls, had a son, William Nuckolls. William’s son, Thomas, had a son, Josiah, the father of Mourning Nuchols who married Jonathon Fuller. They had a son, Benjamin Clay Fuller who had a daughter, Dell Ray, whose daughter was Eliza Smith Tate. This is our Nuckols story. Mardine Pruiett CampbellORIGINSThe Nuckolls came to Virginia from either York, England or Scotland. No verification of their antecedents or their actual place of birth has been found. Everything is speculation. Based upon family tradition (and quite probably some elaboration and wishful thinking), some researchers believe the Nuckolls came from Glasgow, Scotland, where James Nuckolls was a shipbuilder. His name, they say, was spelled Niccol and may have been preceded by Mc as in McNiccol. However, according to Scottish histories, Glasgow shipbuilders did not acquire the expertise to build seagoing vessels until the 18th century. Since the Nuckolls arrived in America in the mid-17th century, it is unlikely they were from shipbuilders from Scotland. The more likely theory is James Nuckolls and his brothers, John and William, were merchants from York. This theory is more plausible as James seems to have brought some wealth with him. Further, James did not work as a shipbuilder in Virginia but was a planter. Also, there were Nuckolls families residing in York at the time. James’s brothers, John and William, did not settle in New Kent County with James, adding credence to the theory they were merchants. William went to south near the North Carolina border. This would still have been primitive country in the mid-1600s so perhaps he was a trader with the Indians or settlers there. No records have been located for him. John Nuckolls received a headright (50 acres) in York County, Virginia in 1667. To further confuse the genealogy, a Thomas Nuckolls moved to St. Peter’s Parish, New Kent County, in 1689. This is the same parish in which James I resided. Was he another brother? Or a cousin? No one knows but he was probably a relative of James’s. In 1672 George Nuccles was transported to Virginia by John Page. George Nuccles also moved to New Kent County so may have been another relative of James. Transporting was a common practice in colonial Virginia used to increase immigration. John Page and other landowners received 50 acres of free land as an incentive for transporting, i.e., paying the passage for immigrants. The immigrant also received 50 acres. It was a lucrative business for the transporter who sometimes received two or three payments for the same individual by sending him to different ports of entry. Immigrants who could not pay their own passage or reimburse the transporter often entered into contracts with the transporter to provide work services for a period of time, i.e., they “bound” themselves for a period of five to ten years. When their service was complete, they received their 50 acres.The Nuckolls must have been adventurous. They moved to new land in North and South Carolina, and later into Georgia. Other Nuckolls went west to Kentucky, Ohio and Texas. Land records show they received land throughout the West. They intermarried with the Cherokee, Creek and other tribes of the region. At least seven Nuckolls appear on the Dawes Rolls, the government’s lists compiled around 1900 to determine which individuals qualified as true Native Americans to receive federal support.Delilah Corbin was the aunt by marriage of Elzira Corbin Fuller. Her children applied for inclusion to the Dawes list. Delilah was known to dress in buckskins and to wear moccasins. She occasionally did “Indian dances” and cooked over open fires. All applications were denied. Delilah was eccentric and of German extraction but not Native American. Still some Nuckolls were accepted as Cherokee, meaning they were accepted by the tribal government as well as meeting other legal requirements.GEOGRAPHY and HISTORY On May 13, 1607, one hundred English colonists arrived along the west bank of the James River. The next day they founded “James Fort”, the first permanent English settlement in what is now the United States. The first women arrived in 1608. By 1612 a tobacco crop raised in Virginia by John Rolfe was on its way to England. Two years later John Rolfe married Pocahontas. Tobacco soon became the main export for Virginia. Prices were controlled by the Virginia Company of London. In 1624 the Crown assumed direct control of the colony because of mismanagement by the Company and the growing anger of the colonists against the Company. Later, the Crown allowed church parishes to set the price for tobacco. The first African slaves arrived in 1619, traded for food by the Portugese ship’s captain. Slavery would make tobacco and cotton more lucrative for the planters in the future.As can be seen from the map, New Kent County is very near Jamestown. As more immigrants arrived, they moved inland to settle. As they did so, they pushed the Native Americans further west. This exacerbated relations with the Indians which led to Chief Powhatan and affected tribes attacking Jamestown and other English settlements.New Kent County where the Nuckolls settled was originally part of Charles River County, one of the eight original shires or counties of Virginia. Charles River County was renamed York County during the Cromwellian period after Charles I was executed. New Kent was later divided to create Hanover, Goochland, and Louisa Counties, placing the Nuckolls in a new county without moving. The soil of the Piedmont was perfect for tobacco growing. Older sons usually moved to new locations to find land for planting. Mourning Nuckols’ father, Josiah, moved from Goochland to Buckingham and Amelia Counties before finally settling in Pittsylvania County where the Weatherfords and Fullers lived. Local governing was provided through church parishes. Blissland parish was established in 1654 in York County and St. Peter’s Church parish in New Kent in 1678. St. Paul’s parish was created in 1704 and was first in New Kent then in Hanover County when that county was formed.Hanover County lay in the east-central Piedmont and Coastal Plain between the Chickahominy and Pamunkey Rivers, a part of the greater Richmond metropolitan area today. Tobacco barges came up the Pamunkey River to Hanovertown to load and unload goods in an area which had been home to the Chickahominy and Pamunkey Indians. As tobacco exhausted the soil, plantation owners either moved or turned to raising wheat and other soil enriching crops, still utilizing slave labor as they had with tobacco.JAMES NUCKOLLS IJames Nucholls, known hereafter as James I to distinguish him from the many Jameses that followed, was born in 1637, probably in York. He received a land grant in York County (later New Kent) in 1657. The land he received was some distance from Jamestown and travel to his land was by boat. In fact, because of the forest density, there were few roads. Travel was usually by boat for years to come. Even decades after the settlement of Jamestown, New Kent was wild and remote. Some wags say James’s nearest neighbor was Chief Powhatan, not the friendliest neighbor.Some researchers think his wife’s name was Elizabeth but that is speculation. What is known is that he had four sons: James II, Samuel, William and John. He may have had another son, Edward, who was baptized 7 November 1686. His birth was recorded in the St. Peter’s Parish (where James I resided) and his parents’ names given as James Nich and Elizabeth. It is on this information James’s wife is thought to be Elizabeth. There are no further records of Edward. Almost nothing is known about James I’s sons, William and John. William is thought to have migrated to North Carolina, following his uncle. The NWKS states he was in Warren County, North Carolina in 1715 when he served as a juror. This is the only mention of William found so far. However descendants of his have had their DNA tested and it matches other descendants of James I.John owned land on Taylor Creek in St. Martin’s Parish, Hanover County, Virginia. He may have married Mary Womack but there is no verification. He witnessed wills and sold land for which records remain. No information has been found regarding his children, if he had any. More is known about James’s son, Samuel. He was granted 150 acres according to the Virginia State Land Office Grants. And, in the Virginia Colonial Abstracts, Vol. 16, Richmond County, Records: “Attachment issued to Sam’ll Nuckolls, Merchant of London against the estate of John Bennett for 919 lb of Tobacco by Bill. Returned attached in the hands of John Henderson, 772 of Tobacco being the proper estate of John Bennett this 10th day of 10’br [October?] 1699 per James Phillips” This would indicate not all the Nuckolls were planters. It seems Samuel became a merchant as well as acquiring land. He is mentioned in other records too and was a neighbor of John Bunch of whom we will learn more later.James I was a tobacco farmer in York County, Virginia. At this time, the Blissland church parish was setting the price of tobacco. Many parish priests became wealthy and powerful because of their ability to manipulate the prices. James I and Roger Pouncie signed the Blissland Complaint on 2 April 1677, protesting the low prices paid for tobacco crops. This is the earliest recorded mention of James I. Raising tobacco was hard work. James I and family members planted and harvested the crop. If he was lucky, he had indentured servants to help. In some cases, Indian slaves were used. Although the first Negro slaves were acquired in 1619, James I probably did not own any. In 1677 transporting the crops to Jamestown for shipping to England would have taken several days, even by river, increasing James’s expenses. He had reason to protest the price for his costs were high.James I is mentioned several times in orders issued by his new church parish, St Peter’s, in its capacity as the governmental authority. St Peter’s was the only parish in New Kent County in the 1600s. Whenever land required surveying because it was sold or was being divided between heirs or the former boundary markers, like slashed trees, had disappeared, owners of adjoining land were required to be present to ensure they all had access to roads and water. This was called processioning.This entry in St Peter’s Parish records is an example of the call for processioning.“A return of the processioning in ye Precincts of the Subscriber, viz, President Mr. William Meriwether, Mr. George Raine, Mr. William Terrel, John Cricket, Thomas Butler, John Blalack, Mr. Richard. Harris, John Snead, Ambrose Hundly, James Nuckles and Ralph Hunt, the land of Col. Bird no back Line to be found, James Nuckles processed: Colonel Page processed: and Carr’s Orphans nobody Appeared, and John Mitchel no appearance: and Mr. William Meriwether processed, John Blalack processed, Mr. George Raine processed, Mr. Terel processed, John Smith processed, Thomas Butler Processed, Mr. Richard Harris processed, Madam Littlepage nobody Appeard, Mr. Hickman no Appearance, John Garland, Elizabeth Garland & Peter Garland Processed. Testament: Peter Garland, John Garland.” WILL OF JAMES INo will for James I has been found. There are no records regarding the disposition of his estate nor who were his heirs.JAMES NUCKOLLS IIJames II, the son of James I, was born in 1670 in New Kent County. He married Susannah Pouncey, daughter of Roger Pouncie who signed the Blissland Complaint with James I. The Pounceys and the Nuckolls were neighbors. Roger Pouncey’s family probably came from Dorcester, England where some Pounceys were butchers and a Roger Pouncey and his son, another Roger Pouncey, were sheriff’s baileys. They were also Loyalist during the Cromwellian era which created conflicts for them. When Charles the II became king, they were honored for their loyalty.A petition to St Peter’s Parish requesting a new parish be created was signed by James II and others. It reads:“New Kent County, Sct. At a vestry held for St. Peter's parish at the house of Mr. John Park, Ju'r, the 23rd Sept, 1702Upon the petition of the upper inhabitants of this parish presented by John Kimburrow, James nuckols [sic] and Richard Corley Laying down that they are very remote from the Church, it is ordered that a new Church or Chapell be built upon the upper Side of mechamps Creeke adjoining to the Kings Roade forty feet Long and twenty feet wyde, framed and planked in Every respect like to the upper Church: Mr. John Kimburrow assuming to this vestry that he will Give two acres of Land Conventlent to the Saide roade and a Spring and Likewise all maner of Timbers for building the Said Church, and maj'r [major] Nicholas Meriwether and Mr. Henrey Chilles are requested and impowered to agree with any workman or workmen that shall offer themselves to undertake all or any part of the said worke.” This "upper church" became St Paul's with the formation of Hanover County in 1720. James II is mentioned in a number of records of processioning, in which James Nuckolls and Nicholas Meriwether were appointed overseers. Nicholas Meriwether’s land adjoined that of James. Both Nicholas Meriwether Sr. and his son, Nicholas Jr. were Majors in the militia. One Nicholas Meriwether represented Hanover County in the Virginia House of Burgesses. Nicolas Meriwether Sr. was the great great grandfather of Captain Meriwether Lewis of the Lewis and Clark Expedition.James II was also asked by St Peter’s, and later St. Paul’s, parish to house and care for widows and orphans. He was paid by the requesting parish. Also, as this record from the Vestry book of St. Paul's Parish states "...Ordered, that James Nuckols keep Frederick Jones, Bastard son of Sarah Tyler, until he be 21 years of Age..." In one Vestry entry, James was paid for building the coffin of Benjamin Billingsley.James Nuckolls was patentee of 1000 acres of land on both sides of Overton's Fork of Elk's River, Hanover County on March 24, 1724. This land was in Louisa County after that county's formation in 1742. This was not his only parcel of land however. James II was a prosperous landowner and definitely an influential man within the county.James II and Susannah’s children were: Susannah born 1693, James L. 1695, Isabel 1697, John 1700 and Samuel 1702. Their names are given in James’s will.Will of James NUCKOLLS [II]Note: This copy was obtained from the Nucholls Worldwide Kindred Society. It came with the following note. “This will was found in A Loyalist Claim: The Will of James Nuckolls of Hanover County and Other Papers in the Library of Virginia and was abstracted by Susan B Chiarello”.“In the name Of God Amen, I James Nuckolls of Hanover County thanks be to God being of sound and perfect memory have thought fitt to constitute and ordain this my last Will and Testament in manner and form following--lmprimis I give my Soul in the hands of almighty, god my heavenly maker in hopes through the meritorious death and passion of my blessed Saviour Jesus Christ to Receive free pardon and remission of all my Sins and my Body I commit to the ground to be buried at the discretion of my executrix hearin after named and as to at Real [tear in document] personal effects which God hath been pleased to bless me with I give and bequeath in manner and Form f?llowing-Item -I give and bequeath to my Son John Nuckolls and his heirs forever the plantation whereon he now Lives and all the Land belonging to it from my upper Line down to a Run Commonly known by the name of Basseds Run-Item - I give and bequeath to my Daughter Susannah Nuckols the plantation whereon I now Live and all the land belonging to it from the aforesaid Basseds Run down to the Lower end of my land which joyneth on M’ Ralph Hunts Land to be and Remain to the us[e] of my Sd [said] daughter during her natural life and after her decease to her son William Nuckols and his heirs foreverItem -I give and bequeath to my son Sam' Nuckolls one Shilling Item - I give and bequeath to my son James Nuckolls one Shilling Item - I give and bequeath to my daughter Isbel Rattlef one ShillingItem - I give and bequeath to my daughter Susannah Nuckolls all my household goods and all my stock of Cattle and hoggs and all the Remainder of my Estate be it what nature or Quality forever I give to her and her heirs forever-Lastly I appoint my daughter Susannah Nuckolls Executrix of this my Last Will and Testament us witness my hand and seal this 21 day of December 1730James } Nuckols SealPhill JoynerElizabeth JoynerAt a court held for I Hanover County the fifth day of February 1730This last Will and Testament James Nuckolls dec’d was this day proved in open Court by the oaths of Phillip Joyner and, Elizabeth Joyner the witnesses hereto and admitted to recordTeste Arth'r. Clayton CCCopia Test Bartelot AndersonHenry Robinson ClerkBy the time of his death, his wife, Susannah Pouncey Nuckolls, was deceased so no provisions were necessary for her. The unusual part of this document is that Susannah, his daughter, was appointed executor instead of her brothers. Wives sometimes acted as executors but rarely were daughters appointed in lieu of sons or brothers. In addition to that, he left land and all his household goods and animals to her to be passed to her son, William.NOTE: A 1730 shilling is worth 6.51 British pounds in 2015. In U. S. dollars, James, Charles and Isabel were left approximately $10 each. Everything else was given to Susannah and William. Ten dollars would have been a substantial sum in 1730.SUSANNAH NUCKOLLS Susannah was named for her mother, Susannah Pouncey. Researchers think she was her father’s favorite child and perhaps that was true. However, other circumstances of Susannah’s life may have required James to protect her.When she was sixteen, Susannah had an affair with a man who is now believed to be John Bunch. She became pregnant with his child but they never married. Because John Bunch was African, it is likely that James refused to let her marry him. She and her son, William, lived in her father’s home until his death, at which time James’s home became her property. Considering how quickly women could marry at that time, it is hard to believe that a wealthy woman would remain unmarried. Whatever the cause of Susannah’s single marital state, she remained in her own home for all of her life. Susannah was called to Processioning in 1731 and 1744. William, her son, often represented her at these proceedings. Another record from the Parish required her to assist in the building of a road but there is no date for this action. Her uncle, Anthony Pouncey, appears in the same records so it is likely he too provided assistance when, and if, she needed it. Susannah died about 1751. Her son, William, sold her land May 6, 1752 to Thomas Jones. In the recorded transfer, William stated that Susannah was deceased. He cited the transfer of the land to Susannah by her father’s will and in that same will it was to be his forever upon his mother’s demise. This record further states the land had been acquired by James II from John Chiles, a family influential in the local politics of New Kent.JOHN BUNCHLiving near the Nuckolls was a family by the name of Bunch. John Bunch Sr. appears in a few documents from that period. On August 16, 1705 either he or possibly his son, John Bunch Jr., filed a petition with the Royal Council for an order to the Blissland Parish minister to publish banns between him and Sarah Slayden, she being a white woman and he being a mulatto. He contended he was not a mulatto but a mustee having only one-eighth African blood. While there was no law a mulatto or a mustee could not marry a white woman, neither the Council nor the Attorney General could decide what to do. The matter was referred to another day. Their final decision has not been found in any record. [A printed copy of petition and its transcription are in the Addendum.]For years William was the presumed son of James II. When James II’s will was found, it clearly showed Susannah Nuckols was his daughter, not his wife, and states William as Susannah’s son. Several direct descendants of William Nuckolls have been DNA tested as have the descendants of John Bunch. DNA from both families have the same E1b1a gene which indicates African blood. John Bunch Jr. could have been William’s father but Bunch family researchers think he is unlikely, primarily because of his youth. A third possibility is Paul Bunch, brother of John Bunch Sr., for Paul too was living in close proximity to the Nuckolls. Until firm evidence is found there will be questions regarding William’s paternity. At the present, however, John Bunch Sr. is considered the most likely candidate.Paul Heinegg, the recognized authority on African American origins in Virginia and the Carolinas, explains the mixing of white women and African males thus: “…When they arrived in Virginia, Africans joined a society that was divided between master and white servant, a society with such contempt for white servants that masters were not punished for beating them to death. They joined the same households with white servants–working, eating, sleeping, getting drunk, and running away together. Some of these first African slaves became free…”“…As the percentage of African Americans in the population increased, so did tension between free African Americans and slaveholders. And as more and more slaves replaced white servants, the legislature passed a series of laws between 1670 and 1723 designating slavery as the appropriate condition for people of African descent. In 1670 free African Americans and Indians were forbidden to own white servants. In 1691 the manumission of slaves was prohibited unless they were transported out of the colony. In addition, interracial marriage was prohibited and the illegitimate, mixed-race children of white women were to be bound out for thirty years. In 1705 church wardens were allowed to seize and sell the farm stock of slaves to support the poor of the parish. And in 1723 the manumission of slaves was prohibited unless they had rendered some public service……Despite the efforts of the legislature, white servant women continued to bear children by African American fathers through the late seventeenth century and well into the eighteenth century. It appears that they were the primary source of the increase in the free African American population for this period. Over two hundred African American families in Virginia descended from white women. Many of these women may have been the common-law wives of slaves since they had several mixed-race children…”…Racial contempt for African Americans did not fully develop as long as there were white servants in similar circumstances. It was during this period, as late as the end of the eighteenth century, that free African Americans were accepted in some white communities. Since so many free African Americans were light skinned, many observers assume that they were the offspring of white slave owners who took advantage of their female slaves. Only three of the approximately 570 families in Virginia and the Carolinas were proven to descend from a white slave owner. They were the children of South Carolina planters, and like their fathers, they were wealthy slave owners who were accepted in white society…” Based on Heinegg’s work, we can assume the Bunches passed as white or near white and were accepted into the local society. We know this was the case in other states where the Bunches emigrated, for example, South Carolina. This liaison of Susannah’s would have been a serious breach of societal boundaries extant at the time and illegal based on the information above. If Susannah had married John Bunch, their child, William, would have been bound out for 30 years. It may have been for these reasons, James II would have forbidden Susannah to marry John Bunch, if he indeed forbid her. This is only conjecture because we simply do not know what happened.John Bunch I, the father of John Bunch Sr., received a land patent for 450 acres on March 18, 1662 in New Kent County. John Bunch I’s father may have been John Punch who was the first African in Virginia condemned to a lifetime of slavery for trying to escape his bound service. John Bunch I’s sons were John, Paul, and Henry.The John Bunches continued to live in Hanover County and Louisa County where they prospered. John Bunch Sr. lived there until his death. John Jr. received land patents for land adjacent to the land he purchased. Paul Bunch, remained in Hanover County until the 1720s when he moved to North Carolina. The Virginia racial laws may have become too onerous.One of John Bunch Sr.’s grandnephews, named William, appears in a land sale in the following record. [Paul Heinegg, ]“... William, born say 1740, an over sixteen-year-old taxable in his father's household in the 1762 list for Fishing Creek District: "Son William." A 7 November 1763 Granville County [North Carolina] deed of sale for land from Henry Fuller to William?Chavers?refers to land on the north side of Tar River adjoining?Chavis?and William Bunch, and in 1764 he was a "Black" taxable in Henry Fuller's household in the Granville County list of Samuel Benton. He may have been the William Bunch who witnessed Gideon Bunch's sale of land in Halifax County on 15 March 1763 and owned land in St. Matthew's, Berkeley County, South Carolina, on 2 June 1772 [Colonial Plats, 13:425].”The Henry Fuller mentioned in this record was the grandson of Ezekiel Fuller I of Isle of Wight. Henry’s father, Ezekiel Fuller Jr, moved to Granville County, North Carolina, following the death of his father, Ezekiel Fuller I. Henry Fuller married his cousin, Judith Spivey, whose father was Littleton Spivey, brother of Deborah Spivey, wife of Ezekiel Fuller I.An interesting aside, a few years ago, researched the family tree of Barak Obama. They determined John Bunch I was Obama’s ancestor through his mother. So, although distantly, the Tate family is related to Barak Obama as well.WILLIAM NUCKOLLSWilliam had a son, Thomas, born in July 26, 1731. William was only 21 at the time. The Nucholls Worldwide Kindred Society states Thomas’s mother was named Sarah, because she was the mother of his other children. However she would have been about 11 years old at the time, if her birthdate is correct. If she was the birth mother of Thomas, there were no more children for thirteen years, an unlikely scenario, as she later had nine children closely spaced. Therefore Thomas probably had a different mother. William could have been married at the time of Thomas’s birth but more likely not. Nor has any record of a first wife been found. The author’s conjecture is that Thomas was probably illegitimate but was recognized and raised by William and his mother, Susannah. If this is so, William and his mother certainly led unconventional lives in the eighteenth century.Sarah was the mother of William’s other children though. She is mentioned in land transactions. Without her maiden name, almost everything about her is an assumption. Whether she was a first or second wife, Sarah and William had at least nine children. The first was a daughter, Ann, who was born in 1744. Ann married Richard Johnson and had six children.Besides Ann, the other children were: Pouncey born in 1746; Sarah and Elizabeth “Betty” were born in 1747 and were probably twins; William Knight Nucholls born 1749; Frances 1750; Charles 1753; Mary 1754 and Samuel 1756. The inclusion of Knight in William’s name may be a clue to the name of his mother, Sarah. Common practice in that century was to use the mother’s maiden name in one child’s name. Also several men in William’s line married Knight women so there was a close association with the family.Pouncey remained in Goochland. He married Susanna Knight and had ten children. His son, Pouncey Jr., moved Kentucky. William’s sons, Charles, Samuel, and William Knight remained in Goochland.After Sarah’s death, William married Elizabeth (Widow) Duke sometime after 1756. There were no children of this marriage.At this point, William’s land was in Goochland, not because he moved but because of county boundary changes. He had acquired land of his own while Susannah was living and become a wealthy man. In 1766 William sold 150 acres lying in Goochland County on the Tuckahoe River to his son, Thomas, where Thomas was living. Final payment was received from Thomas in 1776. This 150 acres was part of a larger parcel of 567 acres owned by William. In 1777, William sold 102 acres that lay next to where William was living, to his son, Pouncey. In 1776 William sold 116 acres on the Tuckahoe next to Pouncey’s land to his son, Charles. No record has been found of a sale to his son, Samuel, but there probably was one. Religion was important to William. One researcher writes: “He [William] was an early Virginia Baptist. His brothers and half-brothers conformed to the Church of England which eventually became the Episcopal Church. We have suggested that William wanted to distinguish his children from their conforming cousins by using the NUCKOLS spelling. He did use the 2LL spelling on legal documents but the children seem to have been consistent in their use of the one L. William was responsible for dropping one "L" in order to distinguish himself and descendants from cousins he "left behind" when converting from Church of England to Baptists…” Becoming a Baptist in Virginia under the rule of England often led to persecution. The Church of England was the established church. Colonists were legally required to attend its services and, through taxes, to financially support its ministers. The Reverend John Weatherford, cousin at several times removes of Milley Weatherford [previously believed to be her father], was jailed for his Baptist beliefs. Reverend Weatherford was married to Martha Sublette whose family was allied to the Chastains. The Chastains and Subletttes were Huguenots who settled in Manakin Town in Goochland County. The Chastains were influential Baptist preachers in America from 1700 onward and were frequently hounded out of several areas in Virginia and Tennessee for their preaching and efforts to establish Baptist churches. It is entirely possible that William became a Baptist because of the influence of the Huguenots. William Nuckols seems not to have experienced any religious persecution. In fact, he raised his children as Baptists. “The Goochland Baptist Church was well attended by the family of William Nuckols…the Patriot. One Sunday the pulpit was filled by a visiting minister who gave an inspiring talk. At the end he said, Now I would like to ask Brother Nuckols to lead us in prayer. Without hesitation 15 men stood, ready to be of service. The Goochland Baptist Church is a lively and prosperous place that was known for many years as the Nuckols Meeting House.” (Doris Dell on NWKS)While William did not fight in the Revolutionary War, he furnished beef and other supplies to the Continental Army. He even sold the Army a gun. For this he is given the title of Patriot. These actions also prevented harassment by the local Committee of Safety who looked unkindly on those who supported the king’s cause. Arthur Fuller, grandfather of Jonathon Fuller, also was termed a Patriot for the same reasons. William’s name is almost always written as “William the Patriot” in genealogical records to distinguish him from the multitude of Williams in the Nuckolls family.The following is William’s will which was posted on Nucholls Worldwide Kindred Society. It conforms to other transcriptions of it. WILL OF WILLIAM NUCKOLS In the name of God amen. I William Nuckols of the County of Goochland & Parish of St. James Northam being in health of body and of a sound mind and memory thanks be to almighty God do make and ordain this to be my last Will and Testament in manner and form.First, I commit my Soul to God and my body to be decently buried at the Discretion of my Executors hereafter mentioned. I give and bequeath to my Daughter Mary Harlow Twenty Five shillings to her and her Heirs forever. Item. I give and bequeath to my Daughter Francis Williams a negro Girl named Sue and her increase, the said Girl she has in her possession, to her and her Heirs forever. Item. I give and bequeath to my daughter Betty Childress Four Negroes named Edy, Amery, Daniel and Clary, all of which she has in her possession, with their increase to her and her Heirs forever. Item. I give and bequeath to my daughter Ann Johnson one negro Girl, which she has in possession, with her increase to her and her Heirs forever. Item. I give and bequeath to my Daughter Sarah Gilbert one negro wench named Sue which she has in possession with her increase to her and her Heirs forever. Item. I give and bequeath to my son Pouncy Nuckols one negro man named Will, to him and his Heirs forever, the such Will he has in possession. Item. I give and bequeath to my son William Nuckols a negro Woman named Hannah and her following children named Molley, Lucy, Harry, Stephen, Antony and Robin, which has in possession, with their increase to him and his Heirs forever. Item. I give and bequeath to my son Thomas Nuckols Fifteen Pounds, to him and his Heirs forever. Item. I give and bequeath to my son Samuel Nuckols one negro Boy named Jesse, which he has in possession, also the sum of Ten Pounds to him and his Heirs forever. Item. I give and bequeath to my son Charles Nuckols the sum of Fifteen Pounds, to him and his Heirs forever. Item. My Will is that my Daughter Mary Harlow be offered out of my Estate the annual sum of Eight Pounds during her life to be applied to her use only. My Will and desire is that all the rest of my Estate consisting of the following Negroes, Dick, Ben, Easter, Aggy, Sam Tom, Lylla, Candess, Phil & Mary, their future increase be sold, together with my shacks of all sorts, all my household & kitchen furniture, and all my plantation tools to be sold, and the money arising therefrom, after paying my just Debts and the legacies before mentioned, be equally divided between my following children, namely Frances Williams, Betty Childress, Ann Johnson, Sarah Gilbert, Pouncy Nuckols, William Nuckols, Thomas Nuckols, Samuel Nuckols & Charles Nuckols to them and their Heirs forever. Lastly, I appoint my two sons Pouncy Nuckols & William Nuckols Executors of this my last Will and Testament. In witness hereof I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 26th day of January one thousand seven hundred and ninety three. Reuben Ford Benj, Hughes William Nuckols seal William Webber John Wade At a court held for Goochland County… the 17th day of June 1793 this last Will and Testament of William Nuckols deceased was presented in court and proven by the oath of Benjamin Hughes which was continued for further proof and then on the motion of Pouncy Nuckols and William Nuckols the Executors in said Will. They making oath according to Law and entering into bond with William Gathright and Joseph Watkins their securities on penalty of One Thousand Pounds probate thereof was granted thus in due form. Teste Wm Miller and At a court held for Goochland County on the 21st day of March 1796. This last Will and Testament of William Nuckols deceased was presented in Court and further fully proven by the oaths of Reuben Ford, Wm Webber & John Wade which was decreed to be recorded. Teste Wm MillerNOTE: Thomas and Charles received 15 pounds which if converted to today’s dollars would be $41. Samuel received 1 Negro and 10 pounds or $27. While these seem paltry amounts today, in the 1700s they would have been significant amounts.THOMAS NUCKOLSThomas Nuckols, the son of William the Patriot, was a tobacco planter like his father. He purchased 150 acres from his father in 1766. [A copy of this purchase is in the Addendum.] He also was bequeathed fifteen pounds by his father. As stated above, his mother’s name is unknown. And the same can be said for his wife, the mother of Thomas’s first family. Mourning’s father, Josiah, was of this first family.Thomas’s children from his first wife were Eldora, John, Elisha, Josiah Joseph, and Charles. Eldora was born in 1754 and died before 1815. She married Isaiah Inger in June 1775 in Henrico County (Richmond), Virginia. John was born in 1755 in Goochland, Virginia and died in 1821 in Tazewell County, Virginia. John married Ann Hardy in Pittsylvania County in 1774. They had five known children: Lavisa born 1774, John Jr. 1775, Lavina, known as Vina, 1776, Nancy 1777, Rhoda 1780. Jennie 1782 and William 1785, were probably the children of Nancy Garland since he married Nancy in Tazewell after 1780. Census records show John and his children were in Tazewell County, Virginia by 1800, but probably before. Evidently Ann died prior to the move.In the 1820 census in Tazewell, John has in his household 1 male under 10, 1 male 10-15, 1 male 45 and over, 2 females 10-15, 2 females 16-25 and 1 female 45 and over. It is unknown if these were their children or hers from a previous marriage. No marriage records have been found for Livisa or Jennie but they would be too old to be any of the females in John’s household in 1820. The female 45 and over would be Nancy. John’s daughter, Livina, married John Coleman in Botetourt County, Virginia. John Jr. married Martha Prosize in Pittsylvania before moving to Tazewell. They had six children. Nancy married George Webb in Botetourt County but she only had one son, George Webb Jr. Rhoda married Henry Schrader in Tazewell County in 1802. They had eleven children. Some say William married Lucy Slaughter but this has not been accepted by the Nucholls Society. What is known is that he had at least six children and lived and died in Tazewell County.Elisha, son of Thomas, was born in 1760 and died in 1796 at the age of 36. He married Rozanna Slinker in Bedford County in October 1785. He and Rozanna were in Pittsylvania County in 1787 according to tax records. After he died, Rozanna married Bartholomew Curry. She died in Green County, Kentucky in 1854. Whether they had children or not is unknown.Charles, son of Thomas, was born in 1763 in Goochland, Virginia and died in 1840. At this time, there is no other information about him. Again the name Charles makes research difficult.Josiah Joseph, the father of Mourning, will be discussed below.When the mother of his five children died, Thomas married Nancy Reddy in February 1778 and produced a second family. His children from this marriage were: Martha “Patsy” born in 1781 (the year the Revolutionary War ended); Thomas Jr. born in 1785, Frances “Frank” born in 1789 (Frances was a daughter despite her name), Mary “Polly” born in the 1790s, William Henry born 1801 and Nancy born in 1803. Thomas died in 1815 in Goochland. Only a few records have been found for Thomas. The author does not have a copy of his will but the Nucholls Worldwide Kindred Association states its location is in Goochland. The will mentions his children’s names. Nancy Reddy Nuchols was head of household in 1820 with two of her sons living with her. No names were given on the 1820 census except the head of household.Only a few of Thomas’s children remained in Goochland County. The rest scattered throughout Virginia and one daughter, Nancy, went to Kentucky. JOSIAH JOSEPH NUCKOLS and MILLEY WEATHERFORDJosiah Joseph was born in 1762 in Goochland, Virginia. He died in 1819 in Pittsylvania. He was known as Joseph during his years in Goochland, however in Pittsylvania he used the name Josiah.According to the book, “First Virginia Nuckolls and Kindred” by Bertha Nuckolls, Josiah was the first Nuckols in Pittsylvania County. He moved there from Buckingham County, Virginia, which was near Goochland County. His brother, John, also migrated to Pittsylvania prior to the Revolutionary War.When the Continental Congress enacted the Articles of Association, Pittsylvania’s Committee of Safety enthusiastically enforced them and ruthlessly rooted out pro-Loyalist sentiments. Residents of Pittsylvania were required to sign the Oath of Allegiance, declaring their support of the War of Independence. Josiah and his brother, John, signed the Oath of Allegiance in Pittsylvania County in 1777. How much support they gave the Cause is undocumented but neither of them fought in the war.Several Nuckolls from other branches of the family did fight in the Revolutionary War. Records have been found for Captain William Nuckolls of South Carolina who later became a member of Congress. Creed, Benjamin and Starling Nuckolls also served. These men were all cousins to Josiah and John. However it seems no one of Thomas’s line actually served in the army or navy.Both John and Josiah appear on the 1782 Continental census which was taken while the United States was still governed by the Articles of the Confederation. When the Constitution was ratified, the first national census was taken in 1790.THE WEATHERFORDSJosiah married Milley Weatherford December 12, 1792 in Pittsylvania County. She was the daughter of John Weatherford. John Weatherford, was a landowner in Pittsylvania. His father was Major John Weatherford who was born in the same St Peter’s Parish in New Kent County where James Nuckolls I and II had lived.John Weatherford’s wife, Elizabeth Hardy, was the daughter of Thomas Hardy Sr. of Pittsylvania. Thomas may have been the grandfather of Ann Hardy who married John Nuckols, brother of Josiah. Thomas Hardy Jr., was a farmer who appears on the 1767 Pittsylvania List of Tithables. Thomas Hardy, John Weatherford and Josiah Nuckols appear on the same page as Heads of Families in the 1785 census. The 1790 census was burned by the British in the War of 1812 when they invaded Virginia and burned the White House. The 1785 census is a compiled census gleaned from various tax records which survived the British.John and Elizabeth Weatherford had six children: John Jr born in 1767; David 1753; Hardin 1754, Archibald 1756, Money born 1769 and Milley who was born in 1762. On the 1782 census, John had five white people in his household but no slaves. As well, John sold property for money to keep Archibald out of the Continental Army. “Pittsylvania Co. Deeds, Deed 4, pg. 415, made on Sept. 8, 1777, recorded on Oct. 23, 1777: John and wife Elizabeth Weatherford land to Joshua Welch on order to clear up my son Archibald Weatherford from going to the war for the space of 3 years. Land on South side Great Cherry Stone Creek adjoining Thomas Hardie Jr. (Hardy), John Knuckholes (Nuckols) and Thomas Hardy. 248A.” Probably John Weatherford paid someone else to fight in Archibald’s place. This was a common practice even into the Civil War era.His son, John Jr, did fight in the Continental Army. He served on the Holston River in Kentucky, fighting Indians. He further served in Virginia, North Carolina and was present at the Battle of Guildford Court House in North Carolina. He applied for a pension in 1832 but was denied in 1845. He was too infirm to establish his case in open court, as required by the Review Board. He died without receiving his pension.John Sr.’s son, Money Weatherford and his wife, Frances Spragen, moved to Bedford County, Tennessee. Some sources say he and his son, Money Jr., moved first to Greenville, Texas and then to Dallas. Money’s son, Jefferson, must have moved with them as he became a Texas state legislator in the 1850s and 1860s. Weatherford, Texas was named for him.JOSIAH AND MILLEY AGAINMilley Weatherford and Josiah Nuckols had six children: Levi born 1794; Martha born 1797; John born 1802; Mourning born 1804; Catherine born 1804 and Elizabeth born 1811. Catherine and Mourning may have been twins unless Catherine’s date of birth is inaccurate. In 1795, according to the state census, Josiah had two white souls in his household. The two white souls refers to the adults in the household.Josiah died in 1819 when his youngest child was only eight. The following is his will which also gives the names of his children. WILL OF JOSIAH NUCKOLSPittsylvania Records. D & W II, Pg. 5i8: Will of Josiah Nuckols Made: June 2, 1819 Recorded Oct. 20,1819 In the Name of God Amen I Josiah Nuckols of Pittsylvania County, Virginia being sick and weak of body but of perfect mind and memory thanks be unto God, Calling to mind the mortality of my sistem knowing that it is appointed of all men Once to die do make Constitute and ordain this to be my Last Will and Testament That is to say principally and first of all I give and recommend my Soul unto the hands of Almighty God and my body to the dust not doubting but at the resurrection I shall receive this Clay Cold body and privally rejoice in the arms of Jesus. And our Touching my earthly Estate wherewith it has pleased God to bestow to me. I dispose of give and bequeath in the following manner. Vitz. To my beloved wife Milley Nuckols I give and bequeath my whole Estate real and personal (that is) Lands and everything I posess during her natural life time, And at the death of my beloved wife I give and at that time bequeath all my lands to my two Sons Levi Nuckols and John Nuckols to be equally divided aimong them both in quantity and quality also at the death of my beloved widow Milley Nuckols, I give and bequeath a equal share (Land excepted) of all my property on each of my children Namely Levi Nuckols, Catherine Nuckols, Elizabeth Nuckols, John Nuckols, Martha Nuckols and Morning Nuckols. I also do appoint my beloved wife Executrix and my son Levi Executor of this my last Will and Testament. I also give and bequeath to my Son John Nuckols a Horse bridle and saddle. I do hereby utterly disallow and disannul all other wills gifts or Legacies made by me declaring ratifying and Confirming this to be my Only Will first and Last made by me and no other in Testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and fist my seal this the 2' Day of June in The Year of Our Lord Christ eighteen hundred and nineteen. Jas. H. Eanes his Wm. Dunn Josiah X Nuckols Seal Richard Dunn mark Josiah’s son, Levi, married Catey, last name unknown. They had at least two sons, names also unknown. Although Levi appears in the 1830, 1840 and 1850 censuses, little else is known about him. He and Catey had two female slaves in 1850. He had $300 in real property. Levi served as a Private in the 3rd Virginia Regiment during the War of 1812. The author could find no record of him ever receiving a pension for his service.John, another of Josiah’s sons, married Borintha “Brinthy” Grubb July 10, 1826 in Pittsylvania County. He and Borintha had thirteen children. They were: Martha born 1824; Mary C born 1827; Joseph Josiah born 1830; Jesse born 1831; Brintha Everline born 1832; Catherine born 1833; Rita born 1835; John Edward born 1837; David R born 1838; James Albert born 1841; Susan Virginia born 1842; Mildred D “Milley” born 1846; and Nancy Labinda born 1847. Based on the year of Martha’s birth 1824, two years before John and Borintha married, it is likely she was the child of a first marriage for Borintha.John lived his entire life in Pittsylvania County. He appears on the 1840, 1850 and 1860 censuses. The 1830 census has not been found. In 1850 he had $689 in real property but in 1860 he had $3000 in real property and $800 in personal property. He did not own any slaves. John could read and write but Borintha could not. All of the children at home attended school in 1860. John died in March 1876 and Borintha died in December 1876.Martha, Elizabeth and Mourning Nuckols all married Fullers. Martha married Isaac Fuller, son of Joseph Britain Fuller, the son of Arthur, on January 15, 1828 in Pittsylvania. They had four children: Lousiana born 1833; Almia born 1838; Mildred “Milley” born 1840; and Ralph C. Goggin Fuller born 1845.Elizabeth Nuckols married Zachariah Fuller II, the son of Britain Fuller [not the Joseph Britain above] the son of Arthur on December 4, 1829. They had five children: Clarissa Ann born 1830; Henry Britain 1833; Josiah E born 1839; Mary Jane 1841 and Sarah Frances born 1844. Mourning Nuckols married Jonathon Fuller, son of Arthur’s son Zachariah, January 26, 1827 in Pittsylvania. They had seven children, all born in Virginia: Susan born 1829; Benjamin Clay 1831; Jesse T 1834; Thomas Oliver b 1837; Vinson Winston 1838; Catherine Paulina 1844; and Zachary Taylor 1846. Then the Fullers moved to Cherokee County, Georgia to raise tobacco and establish the colony of “Little Virginia.”There is no information available for Susan or Thomas Oliver. Benjamin Clay, of course, was the father of Dell Ray who married Joel Killis Smith. Jesse T. fought in the Confederate Army with the 23rd Georgia Infantry with his brothers, Benjamin and Vinson. Jesse died in a hospital in Lynchburg, Virginia, in 1862. Near the end of the war, Vinson Winston was wounded in action in Olustee, Florida. He went home to recuperate. When he tried to return to his regiment, Sherman’s army was between him and his regiment. Vinson then joined the 1st Georgia Cavalry, continuing to fight until the surrender. Vinson returned home, married Nancy Bohler, raised nine children and became a successful farmer in Gordon County, Georgia. Catherine Paulina married William P Martin. Her name is given as Polina Catherine on her headstone. Her application for the war pension benefits for William’s service gives her name as Polina. Zachariah Taylor did not go to war as he was only fifteen. He married Amanda Catherine Talley in 1874. He was in Georgia on censuses through the 1880s but by 1900 he moved to Indian Territory. He seems to have had no interaction with his niece, Dell Ray Fuller Smith. David Fuller, his great grandson, says Zachariah T. moved first to Texas before 1882. They then moved to Oklahoma before 1892 before Douglass Con was born. David also said Douglass Con left home at 14 because of his father's violence toward him. Other descendants have confirmed Z. T.’s rages and violence.CONCLUSIONThis Nuckols story ends here for the Tates. It has followed the Nuckols from the immigrant, James I, through the generations to Josiah Nuckols who moved Goochland County to Pittsylvania County. His daughter, Mourning’s, marriage to Jonathan Fuller moved her and her family to Georgia. As the reader can see, a lot of data about the Nuckols family is missing. Still it is plain, the Nuckols were residents in Virginia almost from its initial colonization. We have encountered the questions of William the Patriot’s father and Thomas’s mother and received no definitive answer. The Thomas Nuckols line were tobacco planters, like Thomas’s ancestors. While the Nuckols weren’t particularly adventurous, they were of solid citizens. Most were successful materially, living a life of reasonable comfort. They also were ardent Baptists, defying the Church of England before the Revolution to follow their consciences. They are ancestors to be proud of, being men and women of character who formed the foundation for a great nation.ADDENDUMTHE BLISSLAND COMPLAINTThe list of 87 or 88 signatures from Blisland Parish appears page xliv - xlvii of The Vestry Book of Blisland (Blissland) Parish, New Kent and James City Co. VA 1721-1786 by Chamberlayne. Chamberlayne notes that 21 of the 88 men who signed were later listed as processioners in St. Peter's Parish -- that's not counting the ones located on Pamunkey Neck which became King and Queen Co. James Nuccol was an active member and leader of the Church. St. Paul's Parish was created in 1706 in that portion of New Kent County that became Hanover County in 1721"We whose names are hereunto subscribed having heard and read of his Majesty's (Charles II) gracious and most surpassing acts of pardon and Mercy.....do with all humility and earnestness implore and lay hold on his Majesty's most gracious act of Pardon aforesaid....and in comformity to his Majesty's royal instructions (pray imposed upon us yearly, especially the sixty pounds per poll which for two years together was levied upon the Countrie, over and beside all ordenaries and legall (-----?) for the publique, Counties and parishe.Wee present as a most Heavie Greivance the late frequent Horrid and barbarous Murthers Committed and perpetuated upon our ffellow Subjects by the perfidious Indians, the Manifould Rapes and depredations by them Committeed upon our stocks and estates, and still Expectinge releife, but no order was taken but only that wee should drawe together at Least tenne able men to one house, Whereupon ensued the Lamentable burninge of Houses, and Several Kild per the Indians, in adventuringe to goe to there plantation to make some Corne.We present as a greivance the Greate exactions of shirriffes, althoughe the Compleate Sallarie of Tenn in the Hundred be raised with the Leavie, yet in Case a man hath not tobacco readie at his owne house, he will not receive it at any other place w'thout the alowance of Tenn pounds more for every hundred more.We present as a greivance, the sellinge of strong drinke at any place where the Countie Courte is kept during the Courte day or what time the Courte shall sitt or Continue, it breeding Matter of protraction in the Countie afayres, to the great expence and Losse of time to those that live remote.We present as a maniffest Greevance the fort Duties Mentioned in the printed booke of Acts of Assemblie Levied upon the ships for and towards a Magazeene, it being as we Conceive for the use of the publique, notw'hstandinge when we are at any time Called fourth by publicke authoritie upon any Millitarie occation, we are forced to find our selves Amunition upon our private Charge, nor canne we understand, who have, or to what use imployed the sayd Amunition soe raysed to soe Nessesarie and good intent.We present as a great greevance the imposition of two shillinges the Hogshead, we humbly Conceive if Narrowly Looked into, and imploy'd accordinge to the true intent and Meaninge of the express words of the acte, it would Lessen the Leavie and give Mutch Creaditt to the publicke Dated the 2nd day of Aprill 1677 we the subscribers have sett our names or markesREES HUGHES JOSEPH PEASEWILLIAM ADKINS (JOHN) HILLJOHN LUCERIE (DUCERIE)DAVID CRAFFORDJAMES BLACKWELL GEORGE PHILLIPSLEWIS WILLIAMS JOHN LONGWORTHIEJOHN MACKOY JOHN ROENICHOLAS BARNHOUSE THOMAS TILSLEYROBERT HARMAN PETER MASSIEJEFFERY DAVIS EDWARD GRAYFRANCIS LITTLE JAMES PERRINEEDWARD BURTONJOHN FLEMINGROBERT ANDERSONEANDREW SPRAGLINGECHARLES MILLSFORDTHOMAS PAGETHOMAS GITTINSMARTIN MIDDLTONTHOMAS GLASSEJOHN DAWESCHARLES LOVALLGILES ANDREWESHENRY SNEADROBERT HUGHESRICH CORLEYROWLAND HORSLEY JAMES AUSTIN WILLIAM DANIELL THOMAS GEEVESJAMES MOOREWILL WRIGHTEEDWARD DORRELLROGER POUNCIEWILLIAM GARNATIS(?)EDWARD HARRISONTHOMAS MIMSRICHARD SIDWELLROBERT SPEAREHENRY GREENEJOHN WADELLWM FALCONERANDREW SHARPEDWARD WALTONHENRY WINIFRIDESAM WRIGHTEWILL ROSSELUKE HAWARDCHARLES BOSTIKE (BOSTWICK)THOMAS MOOREMANJAMES GARRETTTHOMAS LOWNELLJOHN BAUGHANJAMES NUCCOL NICHOLS LAWSONEEDWARD JOHNSONEDWARD MORGANEDMUND PRICEWTLLIAM CARTERHENRY TURNERWILL MOSSEJOHN WAKEFEILDHENRY STRANGEJOSI ADDISONROGER BURGISJOHN BARNETTJOHN VAUGHANGREGORY BARNATTRICHMOND TERRELLJOHN BLOMEFIELDWM PLANTJOHN BRIGHTGEORGE COXETHO STUBSGEO SMITHJOHN ROPERJOHN LANEJohn Bunch’s petition to marry Sarah Slayton. The transcription is below this.Found on and sent to the author by Richard Dale James, a fellow researcher.Virginia, vol. 3, pp 25-31Transcription of the above document.The Petition of John Bunch to marry Sarah Slayton:August 16th 1705PresentHis Excellency Edwd Nott Esqr &cEdmund Jenings Robert CarterJn° Lightfoot James Blair CommissaryDudley Diggs Philip Ludwell &Benjn Harrison Wm Churchhill EsqrsRobert Carter Esqr took ye Oath appointed by act of Parliament…::The Petition of John Bunch and Sarah Slayden praying that the minister of Blissland Parish may be ordered to publish the Banns between the Petrs in order to their marriage, wch he hath hitherto refused on pretence of the sd Bunch's being a Mulatto, was read, and referred to Mr Attorney General to report his opinion whether the Petitioners case be within the intent of the Law to prevent Negros & White Persons intermarrying to ye next meeting of the Council.The proceedings of the Council yesterday and this day was read over and approved.ResolvedThat a Council be held here on the fourth day of September next and that notice be given to ye Gentlemen of ye Council that are now absent, to give their attendance.At a Council held at her Majesty's Royal Capitolthe 4th day of September 1705PresentHis Excellency Edwd Nott Esqr &cEdmund Jenings Mr Commissary BlairJohn Lightfoot Philip LudwellDudley Diggs Henry Duke &Benjn Harrison Wm Churchhill EsqrsRobt CarterUpon reading a Lettr from the Governor of Maryland…::In obedience to an order of this Board dated the 16th of August last, Mr Attorney Genll reported his opinion on the Petition of Jno Bunch & Sarah Slayden as followethSeptember ye 4th 1705“ Upon perusal of a Petition of John Bunch & Sarah Slayden to his “Excellcy Edwd Nott Esqr &c and upon perusal of an Act of Assembly of “this Colony entituled an Act for suppressing Outlying Slaves; I am of “opinion & do conceive that ye sd Act being Penal is Coercive or “restrictive no further then the very letter thereof, and being wholly “unacquainted with the Appellations given to ye issue of such mixtures, “cannot resolve whether the issue begotten on a White woman by a “Mulatto man can properly be called a Mulatto, that name as I conceive “being only appropriated to the Child of a Negro man begotten upon a “white woman, or by a white man upon a negro woman, and as I am told “the issue of a Mulatto by or upon a white Person has another name viz “that of, Mustee; wch if so, I conceive it wholly out of the Letter (tho it “may be conjectured to be within ye intent) of the sd act, The which (as “abovesd being Penal) is, as I conceive not to be construed beyond ye “letter thereof.S. Thomson, A GUpon consideration of which Report, and that the Petitionrs Case is matter of Law, It is therefore ordered that the Petition of the said Bunch and Slayden be referred till next General Court for Mr Attorney to argue the reasons of his opinion before his Excellcy and ye Council.The Council adjourned till tomorrow morning 9 oclock.DNAMark Bunch explained the DNA results for the Bunches and the Nuckolls. This was obtained from the Nucholls Worldwide Kindred Society and has been left as it appears on the website.DNA Results Explainedby Mark BunchThere have been many discussions over the discovery of E1b1a DNA in the Nuckolls lineage which proves an African lineage. Because the Nuckolls tested are all caucasian with distinctive european features, this discovery has proven to be a challenge. Following are some recent discussions with Mark Bunch who carries the same E1b1a DNA. Continued testing with other male Nuckolls descendants can help us narrow down the "adoptee" into this family._________________________________________________There are two popular tests in genetic genealogy, and the reason they're popular is that they allow a person to directly trace a particular family lineage. Y-chromosome testing applies only to males (only males have a y-chromosome), and it allows a test subject to trace their patrilineage (father, father's father, father's father's father, etc.). Basically, the y-chromosome is the part of the genome that makes males male, and every male receives his y-chromosome directly from his father. As it happens, this is also the path that, generally speaking, family names follow (the main difference being that females generally acquire their father's surname at birth and change it at marriage, whereas they never acquire a y-chromosome at all), soy-chromosome testing is useful for tracing the history of a family name. [The other popular test applies to mitochondrial DNA, or mt-DNA. A person's mitochondrial DNA is passed to them from their mother by way of their mother's ova or eggs. Both males and females have mitochondrial DNA, but only females pass theirs on to their offspring. So mt-DNA testing allows a person to trace their matrilineage (mother, mother's mother, mother's mother's mother, etc.). Since there is generally a surname change at every step in a matrilineage, mt-DNA testing is less useful for tracing a family name, but can be extremely useful in fleshing out what is typically the most under-represented component of a person's pedigree.]When a male submits a sample for y-chromosome testing, what they get back is a y-chromosome haplotype and "fingerprint." Roughly speaking, haplotypes provide "general category" information and can help place the historic geographic source of a person's y-chromosome over time ranges on the order of tens of thousands of years. The fingerprint within a haplotype can provide a much finer picture of familial relationship.Since males receive their y-chromosome (and so their y-chromosome haplotype) directly from their father, if two individuals have different y-chromosome haplotypes they can't have the same father. By extension, their two patrilineages can't match up at any point (at least, not over time ranges on the order of tens of thousands of years!). Two sons of the same father?can?have different "fingerprints" within a haplotype, but they will only be very slightly different if at all. Between these two pieces of information, you essentially have a slow clock (y-chromosome haplotype) and a fast clock (haplotype fingerprint) for tracking how far back in time two (male) individuals had a common patrilineal ancestor.The same applies to what follows.:The R1b** y-chromosome haplotype class (or haplogroup) is common in the British isles (and western Europe generally, I believe), and has been there many thousands of years. I haven't researched R1b** as much as I probably should, but my impression is that it's common among Celtic lines (but do your own research online -- type "r1b haplogroup wiki" in your favorite web search engine and read the Wikipedia article on the subject). The E1b1a haplotype (which is my own as well as some lines of the Nucholls family) comes pretty much exclusively from sub-Saharan Africa, although it has been spread around quite a bit in the last 500 years by the slave trade that went on from the 1490's to the 1860's. Since that Nucholls line passed into Virginia some time in the 1600's to 1700's, it's very likely that the patriarch of that line was a slave (or possibly a free African-American if he arrived early in that time range) transported directly from Africa, possibly via a slave "training camp" somewhere in the West Indies. It's also possible that the African line may have come to Britain first, perhaps spending an unknown number of generations there before being transhipped to the colonies. Black Africans were something of a rarity in Britain at the time, although not altogether unknown, so this seems to me to be a much less likely possibility. It may be worth noting that there are Roman records of an African contingent manning Hadrian's wall during the Roman occupation of Britain, although I think these were probably Ethiopians (not sub-Saharan), and the possiblity of a connection with them is, in any case, extremely remote.A male?can?have male descendents with a different kind y-chromosome, but there will always be at least one female in the line between them. If there is an unbroken, all-male line of descent between two males, then they?must?have the same y-chromosome haplotype (assuming timeframes less than ten thousand years or so).Although a baby boy?always?receives his biological father's y-chromosome, and usually his father's surname as well, there are circumstances where the surname comes from somewhere else. One of those circumstances is adoption. Adopted children usually change their last name to the last name of the family or individual that's adopting them. Another circumstance occurs when an unmarried female has a child by a partner she can't or won't identify (this situation can occur with a married woman as well!). In that case, the child typically takes the last name of the mother (I have a female first cousin with a son born out of wedlock who is in this situation -- he carries the last name but not the y-chromosome of his Bunch grandfather). A slight twist on this appears to have happened fairly often in early colonial America. White servant girls would have children by black slaves or servants, and the offspring would take the mother's surname because the father didn't?have?a surname. This is what I think most likely happened in my family. In the early years of the English colonies (before about 1670? in Virginia), these mixed race offspring would be free. In later years, white women who had children by slave fathers would owe a large fine, they might be physically punished, and their children would be considered slaves.I'm not an expert on the subject by any means, but I think it was only at the end of slavery, after the Civil War, that freed slaves commonly took the last name of their former masters. Actually, I think the former slaves had some choice in the matter and a number chose different, distinctive surnames like "Africa".But to tell the truth, I think any question about slaves taking their masters' name is beside the point in this case. I think the Nucholls E1b1a's most probably descend from free African-Americans, not slaves. Remember, there are actually 2 mysteries we're working on here. One regards the question of how an E1b1a line "acquired" the Nucholls name. The second one has to do with the queston of why the Nucholls E1b1a's are so closely related to the Bunch E1b1a's.Members of the E1b1a Nucholls line have a fingerprint that is a fairly close match with my own (and other members of my Bunch clan). We are pretty likely (roughly 75% chance?) to have had a common ancestor some time in the last 12 to 16 generations. Since both lines came through Louisa County, Virginia (which at the time was part of New Kent County), my guess is that that's where our common ancestor lived (although it may be that is was sons or grandsons of our common ancestor that first lived in Virginia). Since I've mentioned Louisa County, I should probably also mention, at least in passing, the Melungeon connection (type "melungeon wiki" in your favorite web search engine).If you may be wondering how these groups (E, R, whatever) Y-DNA haplogroups get named as such. Well, the understanding is that everything started with "Adam" in northeast Africa at least 6,000 years ago. Adam, coincidentally, was the start of haplogroup "A". Eventually, one of his descendants had enough mutations to separate himself enough from that original "A" that his Y-DNA could now be called in the "B" haplogroup. Over time, these groups spread and individual Y-DNA mutated over time (several thousand years). One, for instance, migrated north through the middle East and Persia/Kazakhstan, then made a left into southern Europe. Another group turned right into Asia and another group headed southeastward onto the Indian subcontinent. Many of who we call the native North/Central/South American peoples actually have Asian haplotypes! The speculation is that they moved across the land which is now under the Bering Strait from Russia and made their way southward and eastward. It's all fascinating stuff. It combines genetic science, genealogy, sociology, and probably whatever other science ending in "ology". Anyway, R1b became the prevalent Y-DNA haplogroup through western Europe including the Iberian peninsula, Gaul (France), and the Celtic regions. "I" is the prominent haplogroup of Scandanavia and extreme northern Europe. Back to "R1b"--the reason that R1b seems to be so prevalent through the British Isles is that most men that have so far been tested for Y-DNA are around the Isles or here in the "west". Naturally, we're going to have more sub-haplogroups than some of the other haplogroups.Sometimes children are adopted and never know their natural parents or heritage. Reading more, the G haplogroup is very prominent in Georgia and North Ossetia (Russia). Georgia contains South Ossetia. North and south are separated basically by the Caucasus Mountains. There is a G subgroup that is prominent in Iran, as well. Our "G" member's ancestor is one that never migrated over the mountains and eventually to western Europe. That family must have stayed in that region for several centuries.The Bunches trace their line back to John Bunch who appears to have come to Virginia about 1651 (or at least some time before 1656). The records don't indicate where he came from, but the assumption at that early date would be that he came from somewhere in Britain (family tradition holds that he came from Scotland). There's no indication in the records that this first John Bunch was black, although a later John Bunch was referred to as a "mustee" (one-eighth black) in a response to his petition to the Virginia Council to be allowed to marry a white woman. Because there's no mention of the earlier John Bunch being black, I'm suspicious that the arrival record may apply to an unrelated individual (there wasn't much cause to be suspicious of this before genetic testing came along). There was another early Bunch in Virginia, a woman name Elizabeth, who was "transported" out of London in 1635 aboard the ship Alice (reading between the lines, I think she was a criminal or undesirable shipped out at the Crown's expense). I suspect that one of her illegitimate offspring by an African male she met in Virginia carried her surname and became the patriarch of our line. I'm searching for information to support or discredit these theories, and would naturally be very interested in anything turned up by Nucholls researchers.1705 - John Bunch, "a Mulatto," and Sarah Slayden, a white woman, petitioned the Council of Virginia on 16 August 1705 to allow them to be married because the Minister of Blisland Parish had refused to marry them (McIlwaine, Executive Journals of the Council, III:28). The Council was undecided on the issue since "the intent of the Law was to prevent Negros and White Persons intermarrying," and John Bunch was a "Mulatto." The matter was referred to the Court to decide (Ibid., 31).The Bunches and Nuckolls have a fair bit in common. Both lines have a branch that came to America through Louisa County, Virginia. Also, both lines at least traditionally trace themselves back to Scotland (although the actual origin from across the Atlantic of my earliest identified ancestor isn't actually known, in contrast to James Nucholls, the Dunfermline shipbuilder).Another commonality, of course, is the E1b1a y-chromosomes of certain Bunch and Nucholls lines. My reason for writing you is to ask a queston on that particular point: Have you arrived at any conclusion as to the location where the African E1b1a y-chromosome joined the Scottish Nucholls surname? There appear to be two Nucholls lines that claim Dunfermline James as an ancestor, but one line is R1b** haplotype and the other is E1b1a -- they can't both be correct, can they? It seems most likely to me, given Virginia's history, that an E1b1a line took on the Nucholls surname there, just as probably occurred in my Bunch line. But if there's a confirmed Scottish E1b1a source, I would be extremely interested to hear of it (especially an E1b1a line that looks so closely related to my own).Individuals in the US with an E1b1a Y haplotype and a European surname are generally going to find they are descended from slaves. In the case of my family (Bunch), our traditionally identified patriarch apparently came to Virginia about 1650 which was somewhat before Virginia's slave society became established. There is a record of his arrival in Virgina (a land patent in 1656 by a gentleman named Gervase Dodson included John Bunch's name among the headrights claimed by Dodson; 50 acre "headrights" of land were granted to individuals paying for passage of immigrants to Virginia; headrights were supposed to take 3 years to prove, and generally patented roughly 3-5 years after arrival). Although I have yet to come across a particular indication of his point of origin, the assumption from the time frame would be that he came from somewhere in Britain (family tradition has it that he came from the Perthshire area of Scotland, but I think that's based on fairly recent guesswork after the fact rather than a handed-down oral tradition). He probably came over as an indentured servant. Terms of indenture typically ran about 5 years, which agrees fairly well with a 1662 land transfer of 450 acres to John Bunch from a Philip Freeman -- the inference being that John had served out his indenture and had somehow managed to acquire a sizeable chunk of land. There is no indication in either of the land transactions that John Bunch was either negro or mulatto. However there was a 1705 petition to the Virginia Council by a later John Bunch (usually identified as the elder John's grandson) to be allowed to marry a white woman named Sarah Slayden. In the attorney general's response, the petitioner is identified as a mustee (normally meaning one-eighth black) and it's recognized that although his petition should have been allowed by the letter of the law barring marriages between mulattos (half-black) and whites, it may have violated the intent of the law -- the attorney general punted the matter to the courts, where it appears it was never taken up (the younger John later married Rebecca Harrison, if I remember the name correctly). Tying the two John Bunches together (besides just their names) is a plantation just north and east a piece from Charlottsville that remained in family hands until 1996 (and may still be in the family, I just don't know the connection of the current owners).The question we are looking to answer is: When and where in my family line did the European surname of Bunch get combined with the African E1b1a Y-haplotype? From what's known, there are a number of tantalizing clues, but nothing really definite. My current favorite theory harkens to an Elizabeth Bunch transported to Virginia in 1635, and supposes that she had offspring by an African or African-American slave/indentured servant. One of those offspring would have been the John Bunch who obtained 450 acres in 1662 (and who may not have been the same John Bunch in the 1656 headright list). This is a beautiful theory almost totally unsupported by any documentation that I currently have at hand.Another fairly good possibility is that the John Bunch in the headright list really is my ancestor and that he really did arrive from Britain. In that case, the question becomes, how many generations did the E1b1a line spend in Britain between the time it arrived from Africa and the time it was transshipped to America? Did the E1b1a line arrive in Britain recently, or had it been there awhile?Hopefully, you can see now why I'm troubling the Nucholls family with all of this. Larry Nuckels and Zenas Knuckles have identical E1b1a fingerprints to mine on 12 markers, and W.D. (Dell?) Nuckols is at genetic distance 2 on 25 markers. I am evidently fairly closely related to that line (as close or closer than some Bunch relatives I'm linked to by pedigree). According to Sandi, either Larry or Zenas (or both) trace back to James Nuccol, the Dunfermline shipbuilder who is also in your pedigree. Dunfermline is in Fife, bordering on the old district of Perthshire (now Perthshire and Kinross). This looks very promising, or at least very interesting to me and my search. The problem is that James Nuccol couldn't possibly have begotten both an R1b and an E1b1a line of descendants, so it appears that somebody's pedigree must be off. I would bet on your R1b line being the authentic descendants of James Nuccol, but it would be worth examining the actual evidence before jumping to conclusions.As far as slaves owning property -- I don't think they could at all, except for maybe a few personal items which could probably be confiscated at any time by their owners anyway. I think even emancipated slaves (emancipated by their owners before the end of the Civil War, that is) couldn't own property -- they had to move north. But there are a number of early immigrants ("importees" might be a more accurate word) of African-American descent who came into the southern states early on and either avoided slavery altogether or may have been enslaved for only a generation or part of a generation. The situation for some of the early blacks may have been more like indentured servitude than the form of slavery that developed later. That appears to be the case for my line of the Bunch family. There's an excellent online source on this subject at? <;?(it's a free site despite the .com domain -- they make a very minimal effort to sell you the book that the site is based on).As for William the Patriot, it's beginning to look like either he's the source of the E1b1a in the Nucholls line, or his sons (meaning, either William the Patriot may have been adopted or his sons may have been).I took a look at the other Nucholls family members who've been tested to see if their lineages could shed some light. Unfortunately, the lines for Charles Raymond Nuckles and Thomas Scott Nuchols come to a dead end before reaching James Nuccol. There does appear to be a missing generation or two in Charles Raymond's pedigree -- it shows John Nuckles born 1750 as the father of James H. Nuckols born 1823. Interestingly, there was mention in the notes on John Nuckles born 1750 (brother of Sylvester) of two "free girls of color" named Sarah Nuckols and Eliza Nuckols. That might be worth following up on later. (Is the Charles Nuckles that might be the forefather of these two lines actually Charles Nuckols born 1753? That would really be a curve ball if so -- see below.)That leaves only four other family members to shed some light on the matter: The three E1b1a's (Larry, Zenas and W.D.) and Steven. Steven's 6th great grandfather was James Nucholls born 1695. That James Nucholls had a brother, William the Patriot Nuckols. The three E1b1a's all descend from William the Patriot. At first brush, it looks like either William was E1b1a and was adopted into the line, or else William was R1b and at least two of William's sons (Pouncey Nuckols, Sr. and Charles Nuckols born 1753) were E1b1a and were adopted into the line. I don't have my notes on William here in front of me, but if he had any other sons it would help for their male Nucholls descendants to be tested. Also, if James Nuckolls born 1670 (father of William) had any other sons besides James born 1695 and William, it would help for?their?male Nucholls descendants to be tested. My guess? Well you know the family lines and histories far better than I do, but the simplest scenario would have William the Patriot as the adoptee.I went back to FTDNA to run my matches again and came up with a new Nuckols E1b1a. He's listed at FTDNA as Ryan Nuckols with e-mail address?jrn_coldsmoke@ <mailto:jrn_coldsmoke@>. I haven't contacted him (and may leave that up to you if you want). If he's the Ryan Andrew Nuckols listed on the Nucholls Kindred site, then he's a descendant of William the Patriot through his son David Knight Nuckols. It's beginning to look pretty well confirmed that William the Patriot was E1b1a.I should point out that in what I said in the previous paragraph, I'm assuming that James the Immigrant was R1b since he came from Britain, but that may not be the case. If James the Immigrant was E1b1a (unlikely but kind of what I'm hoping for, to tell the truth), then Steve's 6th great grandfather James Nucholls born 1695 would have been an adoptee, or?his?son James born 1720. In that case, it would help for other male Nucholls descendants of those lines to be tested.The situation is that you have male line descendants of two sons of James Nuckolls (1670-1727) who test differently: A male line descendant of James Nuckolls (1695-1751) tests R1b, while 4 male line descendants of William the Patriot (1710-1793) test E1b1a. The greatest uncertainty, at this point, lies in determining which, between the younger James and William the Patriot, is the "odd man out". So I think the highest priority would be to encourage male line descendants of other sons of the elder James (1670-1727) to be tested. Of those other sons, it appears that only Samuel Nuckolls (1702-1757) has known descendants. So my top priority would be to encourage male line descendants of Samuel to be tested.Another way to go about determining who is the "odd man out" between the younger James and William the Patriot would be to have male line descendants of their uncles tested (that is, male line descendants of brothers of the elder James (1670-1727)). Unfortunately, it doesn't appear that there are any known descendants of these gentleman, so that isn't an option.The next priority would be to seek confirmation of Steve's results. You have four nice results on male line descendants of three of William the Patriot's sons, confirming that William was E1b1a. It would be nice to get that kind of confirmation for the younger James (1695-1751). It would be nice to have as much distance in the family tree as possible from Steve, so my second priority would be to encourage male line descendants of the younger James' other sons to be tested. Of his three other sons, it appears that only Charles Nuckolls (1725-1767) and John N. Nuckolls (1732-1780) had known descendants.The third priority would be to get results for other male line descendants of Steve's 5th great grandfather (James Nuckolls (1720-1810)), with as much distance in the family tree as possible from Steve. That would come from male line descendants of Charles Nuckolls (1745-1820), Nathaniel Nuckolls (1753-1823), Samuel Nuckolls (1757-1822) or Thomas A. Nuckolls (1760-1823).The fourth priority would be any other results at all. Among those, it would be interesting (but wouldn't help as much in pinning down the mystery) to see how descendants of William the Patriots' other two sons tested out: Thomas Nuckols (1734-1815) and William K. Nuckosl (1749-1814). I would guesstimate the odds are about a 95% that they'll test E1b1a.It looks like the only lines we can check are those of William the Patriot and his brother James II. William already looks to be pretty strongly confirmed as E1b1a (African) and I would be surprised to get a different result on that line. Getting more results from James II's line that match Steve's R1b* (European) haplotype would confirm that James II and William really did have different y-chromosome haplotypes. By getting results from cousins as distant as possible from Steve (but still descended from James II), we can be more sure of a diagnostic result -- for example, we would expect Steve's brothers to match Steve, but a confirmed match there wouldn't rule out a mismatched pedigree further back.On the question of deeds, I think it's possible that both James and William could have had African heritage and still have owned a lot of land in colonial Virginia. The children of John Bunch III appear to have been considered essentially white, and somewhere down the line the Bunches became slaveholders themselves (John III must have felt pretty secure in his status as "almost white" to have petitioned the Virginia Council in the matter of Sarah Slayden, though I can't say how well advised that was). I think the early Bunches kept moving to the next frontier from one generation to the next partly to pursue new opportunities but partly to hide their mixed racial background in a society that was becoming ever more stratified between whites and non-whites, with harsher and harsher consequences of being non-white. If the Nuckolls were in the same boat as the Bunches (and I suppose that turn of phrase could be taken quite literally!), then it wouldn't be surprising to find them out on the frontier too.At one point I would have bet that the Nuckolls E1b1a's were the "odd men out", but the preponderance of E1b1a results makes me wonder now if James I wasn't actually E1b1a with Steve's R1b* results being the anomoly. If James II (and by inference, James I) was E1b1a, then there would be the question of whether the Nuckolls actually did come from Scotland or somewhere else, despite family tradition. The same situation holds for the Bunch family who have long held that John Bunch I came from Perthshire in Scotland. The possibility of a submerged African bloodline living in Scotland then emigrating to America seems pretty unlikely, but the notion becomes more believable with the repetition of the story across our two lines. I have to say that if the evidence turns out to indicate James the Immigrant was E1b1a, it would take some pretty strong evidence to convince me that he came from Scotland (it seems much more likely that the Nuckolls and Bunches are linked by events in Virginia rather than in Britain). From my own perspective, I would be pretty happy if the evidence for a Scottish link exists, but at this point I just don't expect it to...Those who have already submitted DNA should seriously consider doing additional testing for additional markers. This will help us determine which generation is the R1B1a fellow.The R1b1b2 haplogroup is an R1b subgroup which itself is most heavily concentrated in the British Isles and the northern seacoasts of Spain and France. I think historically it represents the progenitors of the Celts who migrated from Spain northward into France, Britain and Ireland before written history. Anyway, assuming the gentlemen with these haplogroups trace their ancestry back to the English colonies, I would guess their y-chromosome ancestors came from England, Scotland, Wales or Ireland, and had resided there for a long time. (Line from Sylvester Nuchols)The G haplogroup is a little more ambiguous. At face value G's are the quintessential "Caucasians" as they are most heavily concentrated in the Caucasus, but even there they're a relative minority. There are various G subgroups that are associated with parts of Iran (for example), or with Sephardic Jews. The gentleman in the G y-haplogroup might want to consider a deeper analysis (more markers) to possibly get a better idea of his y-chromosome origins. If he traces his ancestry back to the English colonies, it's likely that his y-chromosome ancestors came from further east but may have migrated to Britain and resided there for some time before hopping the Atlantic. (not Nuckols, illegitimate child of Mary, d/o Obediah)I would be interested to know where these fellows place themselves in the Nuckolls family tree. Do they all trace back to James the Immigrant?-MarkEMAIL MESSAGE:An email from Sandi Koscak, administrator of the Nucholls Worldwide Kindred Society, in answer to the author’s query about whether John Bunch Sr. or Jr. was the father of William Nuckolls, dated April 13, 2015. The answer is from Mark Bunch who prepared the DNA Explanation above. John Bunch III is John Jr.Sandi KoscakHere is what Mark said:I'm rather inclined to believe that John?Bunch III was NOT William's father (but he MAY have been).? I'm also NOT inclined to believe that Paul Bunch's son John was William's father (but he, too, may have been), mainly because he seems to have been too young.? My own chief suspects for William's father are?John Bunch II and (John II's brother) Paul?Bunch himself.? Similarly, I don't believe it?was?John Bunch III who petitioned to marry Sarah Slayden (but it may have been him),?rather, I'm inclined to believe it was John II.? There may, indeed, be other suspects?in both cases (that is, in the question of Willam's father, and in the question of Sarah Slayden's potential husband) -- hopefully someday we'll have the smoking?gun to prove?who it was in both cases.? In the meantime, while I may lean one way or another, I try to remain open-minded.LAND SALE TO THOMAS BY WILLIAMObtained from the Nucholls Society.“Book Eleven, pages 82 through 85. Goochland County Courthouse. This Indenture made the Eighth day of February in the year of our Lord One thousand seven hundred and sixty six between William Nuckolls, Senior of the County of Goochland of the one part, and his son Thomas Nuckolls of the said County of the other part witnesseth that the said William Nuckolls for and in consideration of the sum of One hundred pounds current money of Virginia to him in hand paid before the ensealing and delivery of these presents the receipt of whereof he doth hereby Acknowledge ha th given granted Bargained , aliened , en______d , confirmed, and made over, and by these presents for himself his heirs and Successors, doth give, grant, Bargain, sell en____, Confirm & make over unto the said Thomas Nuckolls his son and to his heirs, One certain tract or parcel of Land, lying and being in the County aforesaid on the Branches of Tuckahoe Creek containing one hundred and fifty Acres (which said tract is part of a greater tract containing five hundred and sixty seven Acres) and the land whereon the said Thomas Nuckolls now lives, and is bounded as followeth Viz. Beginning at a white Oak in John Farrers line and Wm. Nuckolls his Brother's corner and running thence North three hundred and one poles to a Hicory then thirty two degrees East forty poles to a white Oak then North Eighty six degrees West seventy Eight poles to a Hicory in Childer's line, Then South three hundred and twenty four poles to a red Oak in Wm. Nuckol ls his Brothers line then South eighty East along the said line fifty six poles to the beginning , with all houses, Orchards, gardens, fences, and all the Estate, right, title, use & property of me Wm. Nuckolls my heirs and assigns of or on to the premises and the reversion and reversions Remainder & Remainders of or unto the premises with their and every of the ir appurtenances to have and to hold, posses and enjoy the said tract or parcel of land be the same more or less according to the bounds aforesaid and all other granted premise, with their and every of their appurtenances unto the said Thomas Nuckolls his Heirs & assigns to the only use and behoof of him the said Thomas Nuckolls his heirs & assigns forever, provided never the less and it is hereby to be understood as the plain meaning & true interpretation of this Testament of writing as an Indentureth at the said William Nuckolls is to have free liberty to occupy and use the said one hundred and fifteen acres of land before granted for and during the term of my natural life and from and after my decease the same to desend to the only use of my said Son Thomas Nuckolls and to his heirs forever, and I the said William Nuckolls, doth hereby Covenant for myself, my heirs my executors & administrators., that I will warrant the said Land and every part thereof and all of the before granted premises, with all and singular the appurtenances thereunto belonging unto the said Thom as Nuckolls and his heirs & assigns against me the said William Nuckolls and my Heirs, and all claiming or to claim, right by from or under me them or any of them have or shall pretend to have I will warrant and forever defend by virtue of these presents. In Witness where of I have hereun to set my hand and Seal the day and year above Written. Sign Sealed and delivered William Nuckolls. Seal in the presence of . . . . . . } John Martin William Nuckolls Samuel Nuckols Memorandum that quiet and peaceable possession of the land and premises within mentioned was given by William Nuckolls the father one of the parties within mentioned unto Thomas Nuckolls the Son and the other party with in mentioned the day and year within written In Witness whereof the said William Nuckolls hath hereunto set his hand and Seal. Sign Sealed and delivered William Nuckolls. Seal in the presence of . . . . . . } John Martin William Nuckolls Samuel Nuckols Received February the Eighth one thousand seven hundred and seventy Six of my Son Thomas Nuckolls one hundred pounds Current money of Virginia being the consideration money within I say received by me. William Nuckolls John Martin William Nuckolls Samuel Nuckols At a Court held for Goochland County February the 19th 1776 William Nuckolls acknowledged this deed, with the livery of seizin? And receipts endorsed to be his acts & deeds which were ordered to be recorded. Test Val Wood, Clerk”(Transcribed to the best of my ability by Clarence C. Nuckols, July 2, 1999) (Question marks placed in and after words I could not make out or was unsure of & spelling and caps done as they were written.) [Author’s note: I have left the spelling as written but have removed some glaring errors to make it more readable.]Samuel Nuckolls who witnessed the deed was an uncle to William. The other William Nuckolls has not been identified but was probably William’s uncle too.From Paul Heinregg FAMILY GENEALOGY1.???John1?Bunch, born say 1632, was granted a non-suit in York County court on 17 November 1658 [Deeds, Orders, Wills, 1657-1662, 41]. He received a patent for 450 acres on both sides of Rickahock path adjoining Richard Barnhouse's land in New Kent County on 18 March 1662 [Patents 5:152]. The DNA of his descendants is the E1b1a8a haplotype which indicates they descend from a West African man, so he was probably the son of a white woman by a slave. The DNA testing also indicates that his mixed-race descendants in Virginia and the Carolinas were related [Anastasia Harman, Lead Family Historian, Natalie D. Cottrill, Paul C. Reed and Joseph Shumway, Obama Bunch Descendancy, 13 ( also??(Y-DNA Results)]. He was apparently the ancestor of2??????? i. Paul1, born say 1658.3??????? ii. John2. born say 1660.4??????? iii. Henry1, born say 1690.?2.??? Paul1?Bunch, born say 1658, bought 150 acres in King William County near Sweet Hall Road from John Caliborne on 29 July 1695. He purchased a "Mulatto Servant Man" named John?Russell?from John West, Gentleman, of St. John's Parish, King William County, on 27 January 1700/1 and on the same day assigned his rights to?Russell?unto Eliza?Bunch. He witnessed (making his mark "P") the St. John's Parish, King William County deed of John Claiborne on 20 May 1704. A "Mullatto" boy named Thomas?Russell?was valued at 5 pounds in the 17 January 1706/7 inventory of the estate of William Claiborne, Gentleman [Record Book 1, 1702-7, 129-30, 172-5, 402; Book 2, 1702-6, 109]. Paul Bunch was taxed on 150 acres in the King William County, Virginia Quit Rent Roll in 1704 [des Cognets,?English Duplicates of Lost Virginia Records, 157]. On 11 July 1719 he was living in the part of New Kent County that later became Hanover County when Gilbert?Gibson?patented land adjoining his [Patents 10:437]. He received a patent for 400 acres on both sides of Black Haw Swamp in Hanover County on 9 July 1724 [Patents 12:28-9]. He patented 265 acres in North Carolina on the south side of the Roanoke River adjoining Quankey Pocosin and Gideon?Gibson?on 1 January 1725/6, and he bought a further 300 acres adjoining this land from Thomas?Wilkins?[Halifax County DB 8:283].He left a Chowan County will (making his mark) on 16 November 1726 which was probated on 10 March 1726/7. He left his son John Bunch the land that they were both then living on as well as slave Dick; left Fortune Holdbee, apparently his common-law wife, his land (adjoining John Bunch) and slave Frank during her lifetime as long as she remained single, to descend to her daughters Keziah and Jemima after her death or marriage. And he gave "Eliza?Bunch one Shilling Sterling and my Daughter Russell I give one Shilling Sterling" (apparently identical to his daughter Elizabeth?Russell). He left Keziah Holdbee a "Mullatto" slave named Peg in the care of her mother until she reached age eighteen and left slave Betty to Jemima Holdbee in the care of her mother until she reached age eighteen. He gave Joseph?Meacham?the land on the Roanoke River (in Halifax County, North Carolina) he had purchased from Thomas?Wilkins?as well as slaves named Moll, Fortune and Rose. He gave 100 acres and two cows and calves to Thomas Holdbee. He divided his household goods, livestock and slave Daw between Joseph?Meacham?and Fortune Holdbee and appointed Fortune and?Meacham?as his executors [Secretary of State Record of Wills, 1722-1735, SS 876, 3:138-9]. (A Joseph and a PaulMicham?were heads of "other free" Halifax County, North Carolina households. She the?Micham/?Mitcham?family history).The May 1734 Bertie court minutes referred to Keziah as "an orphan Child Entitled to a considerable Estate...(by the will of Paul Bunch) bound to Capt. Thos. Bryant till the age of Thirty one contrary to law," and the August 1735 Bertie County court Minutes referred to the estate of "a Mulatto woman,?Keziah Holdebee, and three children [Haun,?Bertie County Court Minutes,?I:135, 154]. Paul1?Bunch had the following children:5??????? i. John4, born say 1692.ii. Elizabeth?Russell, a daughter, received 1 shilling by her father's will.iii. ?Keziah Holdebee.iv. ?Jemima Holdebee.?3.??? John2?Bunch, born say 1660, was taxed on 100 acres in New Kent County in 1704 [des Cognets,?English Duplicates of Lost Virginia Records, 164]. A runaway "Mallatto Man Slave" named Jack, who belonged to Samuel Harwood, Jr., of Charles City County, apparently knew of John Bunch since he went by his name when he was living in South Carolina. George Rives, who had lived on Harwood's plantation, stated in a deposition recorded in Prince George County court on 8 September 1719 that he had met Jack while trading in South Carolina in April 1719 and that Jack had been in the company of a trader from Prince George County named Robert Hix [Deeds, Wills, Etc. 1713-28, 350]. John was probably the father of6??????? i. John3, born say 1684.?4.??? Henry1?Bunch Sr., probably born about 1690, was a resident of Chowan County on 18 December 1727 when he purchased 200 acres in Bertie County on Reedy Branch. On 30 May 1729 he purchased 640 acres in Bertie on Conaritsat Swamp from Thomas Pollock [DB C:21, 266]. He was taxed on himself and 2 slaves in the 1750 Bertie County summary tax list and was a "Free Mulatto" taxable on 2 slaves in Bertie County from 1763 to 1766 [C.R. 10.702.1, Box 1]. Henry made a will in Bertie on 21 April 1775, proved in August 1775. He had already deeded 840 acres of land on Conaritsat and Mulberry to his grandson Jeremiah Bunch, Jr., in 1765, and in his will left most of the remainder of his land to his grandson Cader?Bass?[WB B:34-7]. He named as heirs the following children:7??????? i. Jeremiah1, Sr., born say 1715.ii. Tamerson, married Thomas?Bass.iii. Susannah, married Lazarus?Summerlin.iv. Rachel, married Joseph?Collins.v. Nancy, married Isaac?Bass.8??????? vi. Embrey, born say 1730/35.?5.??? John4?Bunch, born say 1692, owned land adjoining Gideon?Gibson's land, and he probably named his son Gideon for him. He sold the land that "my father Paul Bunch bought of James Kelly on Occaneche" on 28 August 1728 and purchased 100 acres in Bertie County on the south side of the Roanoke River near Tuckahoe Marsh on 12 May 1729. He purchased 270 acres in Bertie on the south side of the river on 8 February 1728/9, and another 50 acres on the south side of the river, and sold these two plots as one parcel of 320 acres on 4 November 1732 [Bertie DB C:21, 142, 146, 288; Edgecombe DB 1:19]. Like the?Gibsons he moved to Berkeley County, South Carolina, where he recorded a Plat for 350 acres northeast of the Santee River and lot 177 in Amelia Township on 15 November 1735 [Colonial Plats 13:425]. He recorded a plat for a further 100 acres on the Santee River and a half-acre town lot in Amelia Township a month later on 13 December 1735 [Colonial Plats 2:461]. On 15 December 1755 he and his wife Mary made a deed of gift of half this land to their son John, Junior [Charleston DB Q-Q:193-4]. Their children were9??????? i. Gideon, born say 1713.ii. John6, Jr., received half his father's land on 15 December 1755.iii. ?Jacob, who recorded a plat for 200 acres in St. Matthew's Parish on 2 June 1772 which was land adjoining Gideon and John Bunch [Colonial Plats 13:425].iv. ?James, who lived on land adjoining John Bunch in St. Matthew's Parish, Berkeley County [Colonial Plats 13:425].v. ?Naomy, married John Joyner, Junr., 23 December 1754 (both of Amelia Township) [History of Orangeburg, S.C., 137].?6.??? John3?Bunch, born say 1684, "a Mulatto," and Sarah Slayden, a white woman, petitioned the Council of Virginia on 16 August 1705 to allow them to marry because the Minister of Blisland Parish (in New Kent and James City counties) had refused to marry them. The Attorney General was undecided whether the petition came within the intent of the Law to prevent Negros and White Persons intermarrying" because he could not resolve "Whether the issue begotten on a White woman by a Mulatto man can properly be called a Mulatto, that name as I conceive being only appropriated to the Child of a Negro man begotten upon a white woman or a white man upon a negro woman, and as I am told the issue of a Mulatto by or upon a white person has another name viz. that of Mustee; wch?if so, I conceive it wholly out of the Letter (tho it may be conjectured to be within ye intent) of the sd?act, to which (as abovesd?being Penal) is, as I conceive, not to be construed beyond ye letter thereof." The matter was referred to the court to decide [McIlwaine,?Executive Journals of the Council,?III:28, 31]. He was called John Bunch, Jr., when he received a patent for 400 acres in Hanover County on the upper side of Taylor's Creek on 18 February 1722 and called John Bunch on 2 July 1724 when he received a patent for another 400 acres adjoining his land. He patented another 400 acres adjoining his land on 17 August 1725 and another 400 acres on both sides of the Southana River on 28 September 1728 [Patents 11:162; 343; 12:244; 14:3]. His land on the Southana River became part of Louisa County in 1742. He was the father of the members of the Bunch family who received his land by a will which did not survive:i. John5, born say 1710, purchased 100 acres of land in Fredericksville Parish, Louisa County, from William and Henry Bunch on 14 March 1742/3, explaining in the deed that it was part of 400 acres which John Bunch, deceased, had left by his last will to his sons. John Bunch, the purchaser, received 100 acres by the will and the remaining was divided among the decedent's sons William, Henry, David and James Bunch [DB A:48]. He left a 8 August 1774 Louisa County will (signing), proved 13 January 1777, by which he left 15 pounds currency to his sister Lucretia Meredith, ten pounds to William Bunch's daughter Winnie Bunch and divided the remainder of his estate between his three brothers and executors Samuel, David and James Bunch [WB 2:243].ii. William, born say 1715, received a patent for 400 acres in Hanover County adjoining land of George Webb on 1 February 1738/9 [Patents 18:175]. He was taxable in Orange County, Virginia, on 2 tithes in 1739 [Little,?Orange County, Virginia Tithables, 1734-1782, 15]. He was sued for a debt of 2,335 pounds of tobacco in Orange County by Joseph Morton, Gentleman, on 24 June 1741. Morton called him "Mr. William Bunch" on his account for items purchased at his store which included a silk handkerchief. Merchant Charles Dick also called him "Mr. William Bunch" on his account from 1743-1744 for items which included paper and ink, a tea kettle and an ivory knife and fork. He was security for (his brother) Henry Bunch when he was sued by George Taylor, Gentleman, for 7 pounds currency on 23 May 1742. William's handwriting on his promissory notes was excellent, indicating he was probably well educated [Judgments, February-March 1742, LVA microfilm reel no. 84, frames 644-9; July 1742-February 1742, reel no. 86, frames 427-32; September 1742-March 1743, reel no. 88, frames 369-371; June-December 1743, reel no. 90, frames 532-5; Judgments May (K-Z)-July 1744, frames 283-6]. He and his brother Henry sold 100 acres the land they received by their father's will in Louisa County to their brother John Bunch on 14 March 1742/3 [DB A:48].iii. Henry3, born say 1717.iv. Samuel, born say 1720, living in Louisa County on 28 May 1745 when he, Thomas?Collins, Samuel?Collins, William?Collins, George?Gibson, Thomas?Gibson, William?Donathan, and BenjaminBranham?were presented by the court for failing to list a tithable (probably their wives). They pled not guilty the following month and the case was continued until 28 May 1746 when their attorney objected to the evidence of Joseph Fox and Andrew Rea because they were their fellow parishioners and would gain from their conviction. Richmond Terrell was also an evidence against them and was paid for travelling 80 miles round-trip to his home. Samuel Bunch and Thomas?Collins?were also called as witnesses and were fined for failing to appear in May 1746, but their fine was remitted the following month because they had not been summoned. The final ruling was not recorded [Orders 1742-8, 152, 157, 172, 175, 179, 183, 194, 195, 212]. He received a patent for 400 acres in Louisa County on the Newfound Branch of Camp Creek on 8 April 1767 [Patents 36:1037]. John Payne, Gent., sued him for 7 pounds on 13 February 1768, and on 11 February 1771 he was one of the freeholders ordered to work on the "Three Chopt Road" [Judgments, 1769-1770, frames 861-3, 867; Orders 1766-72, 437]. He left a 30 January 1782 Louisa County will (signing), proved 9 June 1783, by which he left 675 acres and currency to his children: Samuel, George, Charles, Judith, Mary, James, John and Ann Bunch and Rebecca Meredith [WB 2:474].v. David, presented by the Louisa County court on 12 November 1770 for failing to list his land as taxable. On 8 March 1773 the court appointed him surveyor of a road in place of Charles Moreman, and the court added James and Pouncey Bunch's tithables to the list of freeholders who were to work on the road [Orders 1766-72, 418; 1773, 11]. He and his wife Mary (making her mark) sold 100 acres on both sides of Sycamore Fork Creek to Charles Moorman, Sr., for 80 pounds on 16 April 1774 [DB D:201-3]. He left a 3 January 1776 Louisa County will (signing), proved 14 October 1776, by which he named his wife Mary and left 376 acres of land and 40 pounds currency to his children: Jane, Mary, Lucretia, Winney, Joseph, David, Thomas, Nathaniel, and Anthony Bunch [WB 2:272-5].vi.James, born say 1725. Agnes?Going?bound her son Joseph and daughter Sarah?Going?to him by 28 November 1759 Fredericksville Parish, Louisa County indenture [Davis,?Fredericksville Parish Vestry Book, 29]. He was called "Mr. James Bunch" by a Louisa County merchant in 1773 [Judgments 1773-April 1774, LVA microfilm no. 72, frame 501]. On 24 July 1773 he sold 250 acres on the South Anna River in Louisa County to James Burnett for 200 pounds, explaining in the deed that part of the land had been "Devised to him by the Last will and Testament of his father John Bunch, Deceased" [DB D-1/2:532]. He and his wife Mary (both signing), sold 14-1/2 acres between the South Anna River and Hudson's Creek adjoining land of Pouncey Bunch to Joseph Bunch for 12 pounds on 11 July 1774 [DB D:207-8]. He (signing), James Meredith (making his mark), Sarah Bunch (signing), Joseph and Pouncey Bunch witnessed the 7 September 1776 Louisa County will of John T. Taylor [WB 2:270].?7.??? Jeremiah1?Bunch, Sr., born say 1715, was a "free Mulatto" taxable in Bertie County from 1763 to 1766: listed with Henry Bunch, Jr., Jeremiah Bunch, Jr., and Nehemiah Bunch in 1763; with "sons" Jeremiah and Nehemiah Bunch in 1764; "sons" Nehemiah and Frederick Bunch in 1766 [C.R. 10.702.1, Box 1]. He made a will in Bertie on 8 March 1797, proved a few days later. It did not identify his wife, who predeceased him, but named his children:??? i. William, probably born about 1740, but did not marry until middle age, bond 23 December 1785 Mary Bunch, with Frederick Bunch bondsman. He left a will in Bertie in 1816.10??????? ii. Henry3, born say 1743.iii. Jeremiah2, born about 1745, married, bond 14 January 1765 Judah Hill, Micajah Bunch bondsman. He died intestate in Bertie in 1809.iv. Nehemiah, left a will in Bertie County in 1815.v. Frederick, born about 1745/8, left a will in Bertie County in 1810.vi. Nanny, married?Collins.?8.??? Embrey Bunch, born say 1730/35, was a "free Mulatto" taxable on a slave in Bertie County in 1764, listed as white from 1765 to 1767 and a "free Mulatto" in 1768 [C.R. 10.702.1, Box 1, 2]. He made a will in Bertie County on 20 July 1780, proved May 1789. He left a wife Elizabeth and children:i. Micajah2?Sr., born circa 1760/65, married bond 8 April 1791 Levinia Holder, with Elisha Holder bondsman, and secondly, bond 17 November 1801 Teletha Smith, with Micajah Bunch Jr. bondsman. He moved to Christian County, Kentucky about 1803.ii. Mary, married _____ Williams.iii. Zadock, born before 1775. Unmarried, made his will 30 January 1801, proved May 1801.iv. Nanny, married Rigdon?Pritchard, 29 February 1792 Bertie County bond.v. Milley, unmarried in 1801.?9.??? Gideon Bunch, born say 1713, was probably John Bunch's son since he sold the land John inherited. He was living in Brunswick County, Virginia, in 1740 [Orders 1732-41, 253; 1737-44, 41, 64]. He was a defendant in a June 1747 Lunenburg County, Virginia court case [Orders 1746-48, 209] and was taxable in Lunenburg County on himself and Cage Bunch (his son Micajah?) in 1749 [Bell,?Sunlight on the Southside, 114]. He was taxed as "Gibion" Bunch on 2 polls in the 1750 Granville County, North Carolina tax list of Samuel Henderson [CR 44.701.19]. He was taxable on 1 black poll in 1755 in Orange County, North Carolina:Bunch, Gideon a Molata 0/1?[T&C Box 1, p.4].Members of the?Gibson?family were also taxed as "Molatas" in Orange County in 1755. He was indebted to Samuel Benton of Orange County for 3 pounds, 11 shillings in June 1756 [Haun,?Orange County Court Minutes, I:171]. He recorded a plat for 100 acres on the northeast side of Four Hole Swamp in Berkeley County, South Carolina on 5 December 1758 [Colonial Plats 8:30], and he was listed with (son?) Ephraim Bunch in the Berkeley County Detachment under command of Captain Benjamin Elliot: drafted 8 November 1759 and discharged 8 January 1760 [Clark,?Colonial Soldiers of the South, 938]. He and his son William were "Black" taxables in Fishing Creek District, Granville County, in 1761 and in 1762 with the notation, "Ref(use)s. to list his wife &c.On 15 March 1763 while a resident of Berkeley County he sold 565 acres in Halifax County, North Carolina, of which 265 acres had been patented to Paul Bunch on 1 Jan 1725/6, the remaining acreage having been purchased by Paul Bunch from Thomas?Wilkins?on the south side of the Roanoke River joining Quankey Pocoson, Sims, and Gideon?Gibson. William and Temperance Bunch were witnesses to the deed [DB 8:283].On 26 June 1765 he recorded a memorial for 100 acres on Four Hole Swamp in Berkeley County [S.C. Archives series S111001, vol. 6:455]. He was the plaintiff in a suit in Granville County, North Carolina, on 11 August 1765 in which he accused William Bowling of trespass, but Gideon did not appear [Minutes 1754-70, 138]. On 2 March 1773 he recorded a plat for 200 acres in St. Matthew's Parish, Berkeley County on a branch of Four Holes called Target, adjoining Jacob and John Bunch [Colonial Plats, 13:424]. Perhaps he was the Gidian Bunch whose 17 March 1804 St. James, Goose Creek, Charleston County, South Carolina will was proved 7 May the same year [WB 29:629]. His children were11???????i. Micajah1, born say 1733.ii. ?Ephraim, born say 1738, in the Berkeley County, South Carolina detachment under command of Captain Benjamin Elliot: drafted 8 November 1759, discharged 8 January 1760 [Clark,?Colonial Soldiers of the South, 938]. He married Lydia Crier, daughter of Thomas Crier/ Cryer and Elizabeth Powell. Ephraim and Lydia had three children according to testimony in Charleston District on 26 August 1813:?Elizabeth Powell married Thomas Crier and they Begat a Daughter by name Lydia Crier who married Ephraim Bunch and they begat two daughters and a son, that is now living by name Martha, Deborah and Elisha Bunch, the deponents say that Elizabeth Powell before mentioned and all their family were white people clear of any mixt blood and that neither of them ever heard any reflections Cast on their Colour or Blood, William (X) Kennedy, Jesse Joyner?[South Carolina Archives, Miscellaneous Records (Main Series), Volume 4-G, p. 207, cited by?The South Carolina Magazine of Ancestral Research?XVI:27].iii. William, born say 1740, an over sixteen-year-old taxable in his father's household in the 1762 list for Fishing Creek District: "Son William." A 7 November 1763 Granville County deed of sale for land from Henry Fuller to William?Chavers?refers to land on the north side of Tar River adjoining?Chavis?and William Bunch, and in 1764 he was a "Black" taxable in Henry Fuller's household in the Granville County list of Samuel Benton. He may have been the William Bunch who witnessed Gideon Bunch's sale of land in Halifax County on 15 March 1763 and owned land in St. Matthew's, Berkeley County, South Carolina, on 2 June 1772 [Colonial Plats, 13:425].iv. ?Liddy, born before 1743, taxable in the 1754 Granville County tax list of Gideon Macon with (her brother?) Micajah Bunch in John Stroud's household.v. ?Fanny, born about 1745-49, a 12-16 year-old taxable in the Fishing Creek District, Granville County household of John?Griffin?and his wife Miles?Griffin?in 1761.?Gideon's children named in the South Carolina will werei. Jeremiah, who purchased land from John Bunch by deed recorded in Charleston District between 1800 and 1801 [Lucas,?Index to Deeds of South Carolina, D-7:224].ii. Hester Chern.iii. Mary Chamberlain.iv. Daniel, head of a white Charleston County household of 10 persons in 1800 [SC:60].v. David.?10.??? Henry3?Bunch, born say 1743, was taxed as a "Free Mulatto" in his father's Bertie County household in the 1763 list of John Hill [C.R. 10.702.1, Box 1]. He married Eleanor Bayson, 29 February 1764 Bertie County bond with Thomas?Bass?bondsman. In 1764 he was taxed on himself in his own household in Jonathan Standley's list, in 1767 on a slave, and he was taxed for the last time in Bertie County in 1769 in the household of Abraham Moses [C.R. 10.702.1, Box 1, 2]. He moved to Orange County by 1780 when he was taxable on a 2,179 pounds assessment in St. Mary's District [CR 073.701.1 by?NCGSJ?XI:155]. He was head of an Orange County household of 3 "other free," 1 white woman, and 3 slaves in 1800 [NC:550] and 5 "other free" and 1 slave in 1810 [NC:953]. He may have been the father ofi. Thomas, head of an Orange County household of 3 "other free" and 1 white woman in 1800 [NC:550].ii. Eleanor, married John Perry on 2 March 1797, (her brother?) Thomas Bunch bondsman. She obtained a divorce from the General Assembly in December 1798. In her petition she claimed that John Perry took to card playing, wasting his property, and abusing her soon after they married. She and her child moved to her father's house [NCGSJ?XVII:206].?11.??? Micajah1?Bunch, born say 1733, was probably identical to Cage Bunch who was taxable in Gideon Bunch's Lunenburg County household in 1749 [Bell,?Sunlight on the Southside, 114]. He was taxable in 1754 in the Granville County list of Gideon Macon in John Stroud's household [CR 44.702.19]. He was called "Micager Bunch Molata" when he was taxed on 1 "Black" tithe in Orange County in 1755 [T&C Box, p.19]. He was a defendant for debt in Halifax County, Virginia, in June 1764, and in June 1769 the Halifax County court ordered that an attachment against his estate be dismissed [Pleas 4:312; 6:341]. He may have been the Micajah Bunch who was a delinquent taxpayer on "Indian Land" in Fincastle County, Virginia, in 1773. This meant that he was living in present-day Tennessee [Magazine of Virginia Genealogy34:10]. He was taxable on an estate of 42 pounds in present-day Ashe County in 1778 [NCGSJ?X:15-18]. He may have been the father ofi. Clement, born say 1770, an orphan boy bound to Anthony Cozart by the Orange County court on 25 November 1777. He was surrendered to the Granville County court by his bondsman, John Wilburn, on 1 November 1790 [Minutes 1789-91]. In December 1798 he posted a bastardy bond in Granville County for a child he had by Mildred?Bass?[Camin,?N.C. Bastardy Bonds, 87].?Others in South Carolinai. Lovet, head of a South Orangeburg District household of 8 "other free" in 1790 [SC:99]. He lived for a while in Robeson County, North Carolina, since "Lovec Bunches old field" was mentioned in the 1 March 1811 will of John?Hammons?[WB 1:125].ii. Gib., a taxable "free negro" in the District between Broad and Catawba River, South Carolina, in 1784 [South Carolina Tax List 1783-1800, frame 37].iii. Paul2, head of a Union District, South Carolina household of 6 "other free" in 1800 [SC:241].iv. Henry4, head of a Newberry District, South Carolina household of 2 "other free" in 1800 [SC:66].v. Ralph J., Nobel Peace Prize winner in 1950, probably descended from the South Carolina branch of the family, but this has not been proved. He was born in Detroit, Michigan, on 7 August 1904, son of Fred and Olive Bunche. The 1900 and 1910 census for Detroit lists several members of the Bunch family who were born in South Carolina, but Fred Bunch was not among them.?Members of the family in Indiana werei. Julius, born before 1776, head of a Greene County household of 2 "free colored" in 1830.ii. Clayborn, head of a Greene County household of 10 "free colored" in 1830.?Endnotes:1.??? Fortune Holdebee sold her land, "plantation where I now live ... formerly Paul Bunches," on 5 July 1727 [Bertie DB B:276] and received a patent for 640 acres in New Hanover County in August 1735 [Saunders,?Colonial Records of North Carolina, III:52].TOBACCO BARNSJosiah Nuckols raised tobacco, like most Virginians. Amazingly some of the tobacco barns are extant today. The Preservation Virginia’s 2014 Tobacco Barn Project was restoring the Nuckols Barn in Pittsylvania owned by A. J. Nuckols of White Fall Farm in Gretna. The fifth barn chosen for a grant belongs to A.J. Nuckols in the Mt. Airy community.? Mr. Nuckols’ barn is one of the oldest tobacco barns in Pittsylvania County and dates to at least the 1820s. It is highly unusual in that it is not a log barn but was built of frame construction using mortise and tenon joints and wooden pegs.? The barn was originally a curing barn but was also used as a pack house in later years.PRESERVATION VIRGINIATHURSDAY, JUNE 6, 2013Some Very Old Tobacco BarnsAs the tobacco barns survey winds down we were able to survey what we believe are two of the oldest tobacco barns in Pittsylvania County.?Both barns are owned by Jay Nuckols, who lives in a nearby house built in 1828.Most of the approximately 260??tobacco barns surveyed have been of log construction, but one of Mr. Nuckols’ barns is a timber-framed barn joined together with?mortise and tenon joints?? the only tobacco barn we have seen during the survey of this type of construction.?Mr. Nuckols's timber-framed tobacco barn with mortise and tenon jointsThis timber-framed barn is also much larger than typical tobacco barns and has six “rooms” while most tobacco barns have either 4 or 5 rooms.?“Rooms” are the spaces between the tier poles where tobacco was hung on sticks to be cured.This barn was originally a curing barn but was later converted into a pack house.??A pack house is a barn where tobacco is stored,?stripped and graded?after it is cured before it is sent to the market.?Pack houses typically have a pit beneath them where tobacco could be transferred to make it more pliable before it was graded. A pit was at some point?excavated under this barn for this purpose.?Interior of log tobacco barn showing roomsMr. Nuckols’ log barn was constructed of hand-hewn logs and appears to have been built slightly later than the timber-framed barn.??It is very large and also has six rooms.??The logs are massive with most measuring over a foot in width.?Interior of log barn showing the massive logs used to construct itMr. Nuckols recalled that his Grandfather referred to this barn as the “prize barn.”?Prizing?is a term used to describe packing cured tobacco into hogsheads or other containers for transport.??A prize was a huge wooden screw used to tightly compress the tobacco.?Mr. Nuckols is uncertain if the barn served as a curing barn first and later as a prizery; or if another, now gone, adjacent structure existed where the prizing took place.Nuckols’ and his family’s residence, known as Whitefalls or Stonewold, was built by Edmund Fitzgerald, Jr. in 1828. The house is a one and a half story frame house sitting on a full English basement. Much of the interior woodwork is marbleized.?Stonewold, the Nuckols' residenceWhile the exact dates of construction of the tobacco barns are unknown; given their unusual characteristics and the nearby 1830s house, they most likely date to the early 19th?century.BIBLIOGRAPHY"First VA Nuckolls and Kindred", Bertha Frances Nuckolls, printed by Thomas Todd Company, Boston, MA“Free African Americans of North Carolina, Virginia and South Carolina, Volume 1” by Paul Heinegg. “The History of Pittsylvania County”; Maude Carter Clement. Published in Lynchburg, Virginia 1929. Reprinted Janaway Publishing, Inc. 2004, 2011.“Ezekiel Fuller, Isle of Wight County, Virginia: his descendants of 300 years to the 21st century”, 2nd Edition, compiled by John B Fuller. 2009Nucholls Worldwide Kindred Society GENWEB Project Web PagePreservation Virginia WebsiteVarious other websites for historical background, particularly for Virginia history, and Paul Heinegg’s blogs on Free African Americans ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download