Once a Knight is Enough

Knight Genealogy

by Laura Knight

 

Jerome Hawley and James Hawley

Here I want to discuss an associate of Leonard Calvert, Jerome Hawley, a relative of James Hawley, the father-in-law of Capt. Peter Knight of Northumberland VA. That is, anyone descended from Capt. Peter is also descended from James Hawley via Peter's wife, Anne Hawley. I must warn you that the accepted sources of information on this family are somewhat confusing and I want to try to make some sense of it all. The official Encyclopedia of Virginia Bio tells us:

Burke's "Peerage and Baronetage" gives the pedigree of the present baronet of the name of Hawley, tracing to an ancestor in Somersetshire, from whose eldest son the extinct Lords Hawley were descended, and whose second son, Jeremy Hawley, of Boston, near Brentford, Middlesex, England, was the father of (1) James Hawley, Esq., of Brentford'; (2) John Hawley, who married Amy, daughter of Thomas Studley, possibly the first "Cape Merchant" of Virginia; and (3) Capt. Henry Hawley. John Hawley and Amy (Studley) Hawley had issue: (1) Jerome, of Virginia and Maryland; (2) Capt. Henry, governor of Barbadoes; (3) Dr. Richard, of London, ancestor of the present baronet; (4) James, who was also interested in the colonies and perhaps lived in Northumberland county, Virginia; (5) William, who came from Barbadoes to Maryland after the death of his brother Jerome, and was a signer of the Protestant Declaration of 1650. There were two other sons, who were probably Gabriel, who died in Virginia while holding the office of surveyor-general, and John, who came to Virginia in 1619.

Jerome Hawley was a councillor of Maryland in 1634, and returned to England in the summer of 1635. On Jan. 5, 1637, the King appointed him treasurer of Virginia and a member of the council there. At this time he was "one of the gentlemen servers to Queen Henrietta Maria. He came to Virginia in march, but soon returned to Maryland, where he had large interests. He died about Aug., 1638, deeply in debt, an on the 14th of that month the Maryland authorities, who spoke of him as "late of St. Maries," appointed Thomas Cornwallis administrator of his estate.  Source

Unfortunately, when one compares the information above to the information provided in the book of Oxford Alumni  a serious problem can be seen.  Here are the four entries from the Oxford Alumni Volume II, 1500-1714, p. 678 that highlight the issue.

John Hawley,  of Middlesex, Balliol Coll., matric. entry under date 2 May 1581, aged 15; fellow St. Joh’s Coll. 1583, B>C.L. 1588, D.C.L. 13 Oct., 1614, principal of Gloucester Hall 1593-1626; 2nd s of Jeremy, of Boston, near Brentford; will at Oxford proved 6 June 1626; brother of Henry same date.  See Fasti, I, 357.

Henry Hawley, of Middlesex, arm. Balliol Coll., matric. entry under date 2 May, 1581, aged 12; 3rd son of Jeremy of Boston, near Brentford; a merchant in London; brother of John same date.

Jerome Hawley of Middlesex, arm., fil. nat. max. Gloucester Hall, matric. 22 June 1604, aged 15; student of Middle Temple 1609, as 2nd son of James, of Burston, Middlesex, esq.; brother of Richard 1608. See Foster’s Inns of Court Reg.

Richard Hawley, B.A. from Gloucester Hall, 10 Jun 1608; fellow Merton Coll. 1611, M.A. 27 June 1615; incorporated D. Med. from Leyden 11 July 1627; fellow college of physicians 1630; died 30 April 1636; brother of Jerome and perhaps father of Henry 1646. See O.H.S. iv. 279; Fasti, i. 434; & Munk’s Roll, i. 201.

So, Richard Hawley and Jerome Hawley are said to be sons of James, according to the Oxford records, yet the Encyclopedia of Virginia, based on Burke's tell us that Jerome and Richard the doctor, were sons of John Hawley and Amy (Studley) Hawley! Oxford records say that John, who married Amy, was the son of Jeremy and brother of Henry. So, based on the dates, it seems to me that Jeremy of Boston and James of “Burston” must certainly have been brothers.  Let’s see what Debrett’s says:

John Hawley (son of William and grandson of John who d. about 1502) was of Auler, co. Somerset, and first of the family who settled in that county; m. Dorothy, sister of William Walnot, of Shapwick, and had issue, two sons:

1. William of Auler. (this line goes on a bit and then goes extinct)
2. Jeremy.

Jeremy Hawley, 2nd son of John, was of Boston, near Brentford, co. Middlesex, and d. 1593; m. Kynburgh, da. of Valentine Saunders of Sutton Court, co. Middlesex, by whom (who d. Feb 1575) he had issue, besides several children, who d. infants,

1. James
2. William, d. unm.
3. John, D.D., principal of Gloucester Hall, Oxford, m. Amy, da. of Thomas Studley, and had issue,
4. Henry, a merchant, d. unm.
5. Francis.
6. Mary, m. John Gaynsford, of Carshalton, co. Surrey.
7. Kynburgh, m. Richard Wroth.

And there, certainly, is the James who is the father of Jerome and Richard the doctor listed as the first son! In the above Debrett entry, we notice that John is the 3rd son of Jeremy when Oxford says he was the 2nd son.  The Oxford entry gives us his age in 1581, i.e. 15, thus born 1566.  Henry is given as the 4th son, when Oxford gives him as the 3rd son and clues to his birth year, i.e. 1569. Obviously, the William who died unm. is the one that sort of messes up the count.  John and Henry, sons of Jeremy, both matriculated from Oxford in 1581. There is a William Hawley listed in the Oxford Alumni as follows:  B.A. 18 Dec., 1579.  And that’s it.  No further information.  We don’t know if it is William, son of Jeremy, and he died before making any kind of mark in the world, but it is possible.  Now, what about James Hawley listed by Debrett’s as the eldest son of Jeremy?

James, son and heir of Jeremy, was also of Brentford, b. 1558, d. Sept. 1622, having m. 1st, Susanna, da. of Richard Tothill of Amersham, by whom (who d. 1602) he had issue,

1. Jeremy, d. in Maryland, without male issue.
2. William, d. unm.
3. Richard. M.D.
4. James, m. but d. s.p. 1667.
5. Gabriel, d. unm.
6. Henry, of Barbadoes, m. and had issue.
7 Johanna, m. George Dethick, esq., son of Sir William Dethick, knt., garter king of arms.
8. Catharine, m. William Thornborough.
9. Susanna, m. Sir Richard Piers, of Barbadoes.
James Hawley, esq., son and heir of Jeremy, m., 2ndly, Elizabeth Burnell, by whom (who d. 1621) he had issue,
10. Henry, a Spanish merchant, d. unm. 1675
11. Valentine, of Barbadoes.
12. Thomas, of London, merchant, twice m., but d. s.p. 1680.

There is further information about the above James, son of Jeremy, found on History of Parliament as follows:

James Hawley, (d.c. 1624), of Burston, nr. Brentford, Mdx. Son of Jerome [Jeremy] Hawley of Burston by Kynbery, da. of one Saunders.  educ. M. Temple 1585, called ? by 1586. m. more than once, 4 s. 2 da. The short bio states:

Hawley was the grandson of a Somerset gentleman and a first cousin of Francis Hawley. His father left Somerset to study at the Middle Temple, and later settled at Burston, becoming a clerk of the petty bag in Chancery and a Middlesex j.p. It is not clear how Hawley came to be returned at Andover, recently enfranchised through the influence of the Earl of Leicester. No connexion between Hawley and Leicester is known, and the Earl was in the Netherlands at the time of the election. Hawley may have secured the nomination through an intermediary, possibly William Fleetwood I, who knew his father, or an acquaintance at the Middle Temple, perhaps Edwin Sandys.

Hawley, ‘sick in body’, made his will 2 Sept. 1622, leaving £150 to his son William, £200 each to his daughters Katherine and Susan, and £50 each to the three children of his ‘last wife’. The residue he left to his eldest son and sole executor, Jerome. He appointed as overseers his cousin Valentine Saunders, and his brothers William and Henry Hawley. The will was proved 4 May 1624. Source

The obvious problem here is the name “Jeremy” and “Jerome” seem to be somewhat interchangeable. That makes sense since we have already noted that there is a “Jeremy” listed as dying in Maryland with no issue, when we know him as Jerome Hawley, and Jerome is the reason for this entire discussion!

Now, continuing with the entry from Debrett’s:

Richard, 3rd, but eldest surviving son of James, was of London, M.D., b. 1592, m. Dorothy, da. of Henry Ashworth, of Oxford, M.D., and by her (who d. 1672 had issue, besides one son and three das. who d. infants,

1. Henry.
2. John, of London, surgeon, b. 1631, d. unm. 1658.
3. Richard, drowned at sea, a minor and unm.
4. Dorothy, m., 1st Samuel Torshell, and 2dly, Richard Price.

The next entry is the eldest son of Richard, Henry, and we aren’t interested in him, so we stop here.  Debrett’s makes more sense except that it seems that Jeremy who died in Maryland is really Jerome.  But, just to complete the line as far back as we can, let me include the following from History of Parliament we find first of all:

Sir Thomas Hawley (d. 1419/20) of Grisby and Utterby, Lincolnshire.  He was the son and heir of Sir William Hawley of the same place.  He married twice: 1) Margaret, daughter of Sir John Brewse of Stinton, Norfolk; 2) Dulcie, daughter of Sir John Massey of Tatton, Cheshire.  He was knighted sometime between 1388 and 1390. The bio tells us:

The Hawleys settled at Grisby in or before the very beginning of the 14th century, and soon came to enjoy considerable influence in Lincolnshire. Sir Thomas’s grandfather twice represented the county in Parliament and also served as sheriff continuously between 1363 and 1368, while his father, Sir William Hawley was chief steward of the north parts of the duchy of Lancaster for some seven years. Sir William was indeed a loyal retainer of John of Gaunt, and drew up his will at Bayonne, in 1386, having gone there as a member of the expeditionary force with which Gaunt hoped to secure the throne of Castile. His executors included both Thomas and his friend, Sir Henry Retford (another of Gaunt’s followers), although when probate was awarded, in November 1387, power of execution was reserved to Sir Henry alone. Thomas’s inheritance appears to have been more than ample [skip list of manors and villages, etc]

By the time of his father’s death, Thomas Hawley was already quite well known. During Sir William’s lifetime he lived at Somercotes in Lincolnshire … A settlement of the manor of Utterby made by Hawley in May 1390 reveals that he had by then married his first wife, Margaret, the daughter of Sir John Brewse. The latter owned extensive estates in Norfolk, Suffolk and Lincolnshire, although he does not seem to have granted any of them to the couple. Hawley did, however, acquire some land in the Lincolnshire village of Harpswell by purchase in the autumn of 1392. Margaret died young, of an illness which had become so debilitating by January 1396 that Bishop Buckingham of Lincoln then granted her a special licence to hear mass in a private chapel at Grisby. Her death may have prompted Hawley to found a chantry of three chaplains at the parish church of Wyham…

The Lancastrian usurpation of 1399 marks a turning point in Hawley’s life, after which he became a far more important and active figure in the local community. His election to the first Parliament of Henry IV’s reign suggests that he was a recognized supporter of the new regime. Certainly, by May 1401, he had attained the rank of a ‘King’s knight’, being rewarded with an annual fee of £40 payable for life, in return for his part in the Scottish expedition of the previous year. A few days later his administrative career began with the award of a commission of the peace in Lindsey; and it is interesting to see how popular he suddenly became as a trustee and witness to deeds because of this growing influence.

From 1403 onwards, for example, he was closely involved in the property transactions of John Skipwith, whose younger son, Patrick†, married his daughter, Agnes, and thus eventually acquired the manor of Utterby. He also enjoyed cordial relations with (Sir) John Pouger and William, Lord Willoughby of Eresby; but one of his closest friends was Richard Brugge, Lancaster king of arms, to whom, in November 1402, he offered securities of 80 marks. In the following year Brugge made him a trustee; and much later, in 1415, he conveyed to him all his effects for the performance of his will. Another of his intimates was the Lincolnshire landowner, Sir John Copledyke, who had been his father’s ward during the 1370s. Copledyke’s marriage to a Hawley widow further strengthened the ties between their two families, which were formally united when Sir Thomas’s other daughter, Eleanor, became the wife of one of Copledyke’s younger sons.

Sir Thomas may, meanwhile, have taken part in the battle of Shrewsbury (July 1403), which saw the defeat of a combined force of Henry IV’s enemies led by the Percys. One of the casualties on the losing side was the Cheshire knight, Sir John Massey, whose daughter, Dulcie, became Hawley’s second wife. She had previously been married to Peter Warburton, a local landowner, but in April 1402 the latter agreed to pay Sir John 300 marks in return for an unopposed divorce. Within a month of Massey’s death, Henry IV decided that Dulcie herself should receive this money notwithstanding her father’s forfeiture for treason—so it looks as if Hawley had already made clear his intention of marrying her. In April 1404 Warburton offered Dulcie a recognizance for a second, far greater sum of 550 marks, the first instalment of which was paid to her and Hawley exactly eight months later.

Although Hawley sat in Parliament for the last time in October 1404 (when his friend and fellow shire knight, Sir Henry Retford, was elected Speaker), his career as a loyal servant of the house of Lancaster had in some senses only just begun. He served a term as sheriff of Lincolnshire one year later, and continued to attend Henry IV until the latter’s death, when his appointment as a ‘King’s knight’ was confirmed by Henry V. A dispute between him and John Skipwith then threatened to disrupt a friendship of many years’ standing, but in July 1414 the two men and their associates exchanged mutual securities of £200 as an earnest of their willingness to submit to arbitration. Their quarrel, which concerned the ownership of the manor of Healing, involved Skipwith as an executor of the late Thomas Missenden, so his own interests were not directly at stake. Despite his advancing years, Hawley was anxious to accompany Henry V on his first invasion of France in 1415, so on 19 Apr. he indented to serve for one year with a man-at-arms and six mounted archers. Letters of protection were accorded to him shortly after; and, as security for a first quarter’s wages of £12 8s.½d., he received various pledges, including ‘a pair of gold spurs with red tyssers ... and a sword garnished with ostrich feathers, which was the King’s sword when prince of Wales’. These were not redeemed until about 1430, when his executors dealt with the transaction.

Sir Thomas drew up his will at Grisby on 29 June 1419, and died at some point before 20 May 1420. He made elaborate provision for the welfare of his five sons, the eldest of whom, named John, succeeded him. He wished to be buried at the parish church of Burgh on Bain, to which he left a bequest of £5, but his primary concern was to see that each of his children was assured of an annual income sufficient to support them for life. John Hawley’s immediate inheritance was thus considerably depleted by settlements upon his younger brothers. Source

This brings us back to Debrett’s opening statement “John Hawley (son of William and grandson of John, who d. about 1502)… “ Thus we go from Sir William Hawley, d. 1387, to Sir Thomas Hawley, d. 1420, to John Hawley, d. 1502, to William Hawley (grandson of John),  and then John Hawley “of Auler, co. Somerset, the first of the family who settled in that county…” and was the father of William and Jeremy.  Of course, we notice that the Hist. of Parliament article does mention a grandfather of Sir Thomas Hawley, but never gives him a first name.  “ Sir Thomas’s grandfather twice represented the county in Parliament and also served as sheriff continuously between 1363 and 1368”.  Unfortunately, records that far back are not yet online.

Now, let’s take a closer look at the family of James Hawley, son of Jeremy; I’ve added in corrections and dates, mostly estimated.

James, son and heir of Jeremy, was also of Brentford, b. 1558, d. Sept. 1622, having m. 1st, Susanna, da. of Richard Tothill of Amersham, by whom (who d. 1602) he had issue,

1. Jeremy [JEROME!],b. 1589 and “brother of Richard” acc to Ox Alum.   d. in Maryland, without male issue.
2. William, d. unm.
3. Richard. M.D.  b.c. 1593; “brother of Jerome” according to Ox Alum.
4. James, b. c. 1595; m. but d. w/o issue 1667.
5. Gabriel, b. c. 1597 ; d. unm.
6. Henry, of Barbadoes, b. c. 1599; m. and had issue.
7 Johanna b. c. 1601, m. George Dethick, esq., son of Sir William Dethick, knt., garter king of arms.
8. Catharine, m. William Thornborough.
9. Susanna, m. Sir Richard Piers, of Barbadoes.

James Hawley, esq., son and heir of Jeremy, m., 2ndly, Elizabeth Burnell, by whom (who d. 1621) he had issue,

10. Henry, a Spanish merchant, d. unm. 1675
11. Valentine, of Barbadoes.
12. Thomas, of London, merchant, twice m., but d. w/o issue1680.

Knowing the birth year of Jerome/Jeremy above, and that his brother Richard, graduated from Oxford 4 years after him, and thus would logically be 4 years younger, I put down an estimate y.o.b. of 1593 for Richard; that leaves William to divide the difference, i.e. b. c. 1591.  Continuing that pattern leads to the conclusion that you just can’t fit the children in at 2 year intervals if the mother died in 1602 unless the last two daughters were twins or some of the births were closer together.

Looking at the 4th son, James Hawley, said to have died without issue in 1667, I wonder where that information came from and why the source is not included?  We know that the Encyclopedia of Virginia Biography is rather jumbled up because they seem to have confused things, but still, think back to what was written when they erroneously assigned the children of James Hawley, to his brother John, “principal of Gloucester Hall”.  The remarks in the bio paragraph beside each name, even though displaced from the correct parent, might reflect actual data. Here's what it said, and we understand they used Burke's:

John Hawley and Amy (Studley) Hawley had issue: <- Don't forget this is wrong parents!

1.  Jerome, of Virginia and Maryland; (At least they got the name right!)
2.  Capt. Henry, governor of Barbadoes;
3.  Dr. Richard, of London, ancestor of the present baronet;
4.  James, who was also interested in the colonies and perhaps lived in Northumberland county, Virginia;
5.  William, who came from Barbadoes to Maryland after the death of his brother Jerome, and was a signer of the Protestant Declaration of 1650.
6.  Gabriel, who died in Virginia while holding the office of surveyor-general,
7. John, who came to Virginia in 1619.

Next, I put the names from each account in columns, side-by- side:

Debrett: James & 1st wife: Susanna

VA Ency/Burke's: John & Amy

Jeremy, d. Maryland, no issue  b. 1589

Jerome, of Virginia & Maryland

William, d. unm.

William of Barbados & Maryland

Richard, M.D. b. c. 1593

Dr. Richard of London

James, m. d. w/o issue 1667

James of Northumberland VA

Gabriel, d. unm

Gabriel of VA

Henry # 1 of Barbados, had issue ??

Capt. Henry, gov of Barbados ???

Johanna, m. George Dethick

 

Catharine, m. Wm. Thornborough

 

Susanna, m. Richard Piers of Barbados

 

2nd Wife: Elizabeth Burnell

 

Henry #2, Spanish merchant, d. unm ??

??

Valentine of Barbados

 

Thomas of London, merchant

 

 

John of VA (1619) ???

It is clear that VA Ency of Bio has given James’ and Susanna’s children to John and Amy, and obviously there are problems with both lists.  The Debrett list gives us two Henrys, one “of Barbados” who had issue, and another who was a “Spanish merchant” who died without issue.  VA Ency gives us a single Henry who is a Capt and a governor of Barbados, as though attempting to combine the two roles into one which, for all we know, is the correct reading: one Henry who was both!

Another problem is the Debrett James who married, but died without issue vs the James of VA Ency who was sighted in Northumberland County, VA.  VA Ency doesn’t seem as sure of Gabriel as Debrett does, but the former places him in VA while the latter just says he died unmarried.

Finally, VA Ency has a John that isn’t present on Debrett’s list, while Debrett has 3 daughters and 2 sons not on the former list (not to forget the second Henry of Barbados who makes 3 extra sons!) So, it seems to me that those individuals who left England and about whom nothing further was known, were simply written off in Debrett’s with “died without issue” or something along that line; not always, but often enough.  Notice that Debrett does not even refer to Jerome Hawley of Maryland as “Jerome”, but rather as “Jeremy” which reminds us of Hist of Parliament referring to Jeremy as “Jerome”.

While thinking about this James of Northumberland who Debrett doesn’t seem to know much about, I noted the name of the second wife of James: Elizabeth Burnell. Debrett’s doesn’t tell us anything about her, but the children born to them are a bit confusing: a 2nd Henry “Spanish merchant”, a Valentine “of Barbados” and a Thomas of London!  They were all over the place! Well, forget about that and let’s look at this Elizabeth Burnell for just a moment.  As it happens, a name very similar to Burnell turns up in some VA records of James Hawley and Capt. Peter Knight; not exactly the same name, but now that you’ve seen the very “fluid” spelling of the time, and when you see the prestidigitation of names that follows, you’ll understand why I make a connection.  Here are the records in question beginning with an earlier record of James Hawley from Isle of Wight county:

1642 - Apr 22 - VA Isle of Wight - Admin - James Hawley - Land patent for 300 acs. . … Upon the head of the Lower Baye Cr., adj. John Rowe. Due for the per. Adv. Of himself, Ann, his wife, & trans. Of 4 pers: Francis Ann & Alice, his children, John Foster & Richard Darling. Patent renewed Sept. 27, 1643. (Nugent I, p. 125)

1654 - Oct 2 VA Northumberland – Admin - Peter Knight – Land patent for 1200 acs.  on the S. of great Wicocomoco Riv….. On the head of the Swd. Branch of sd. River, E.S.E upon land of Thomas Coggen &c Trans. Of 24 pers: Robert Burrell his wife & 3 children out of Holland; James Hawley (Haly), Ann his wife; Fra. Ann & Alice, their children; John Foster, Ruth Darling, James Hill, James Lloyd, Deborah Come, James Jones, John Jerrell, William Bradly, William Slinton, John Waddington. (Nugent I, p. 295)
It’s obvious that James “Haly” is the same as James Hawley.

1656 – Oct 9 – VA Northumberland – Admin – Mr. Peter Knight – Land patent for 925 acs., in Petowmack Riv. adj. Chappawansicke Cr.  Moiety of patent for 1850 acs. Renewal. Retaken up by new rights & trans. Of 19 pers: John Waddington, Andrew Cockerin, William Ballingall, Edward Meeres, William Mundy, Richard Wall & 1 servt. name Thomas, James Hawley (Hawly), Ann his wife, 3 children, John Foster, Ruth Darlinge, James Hill, James Lloyd (Loyd), John Seaman, William Seaman, Gilbert Seaman. (Nugent I, p. 340)
Again, it is obvious that James “Hawly” is the same as James Hawley.

1657 Mar 30 – VA Northumberland – Admin - Mr. Peter Knight -  Land patent for 500 acs. … On S. side of great Wiccocomico Riv., N.N.E. upon another seate belonging to him, formerly Mr. Flints, & S.E. upon a lyne dividing this from land of Gervase Dodson. Trans. Of 10 pers: Robert Burwell, & his wife, 3 children, William Bradby, Deborah Conne, James Jones, John Gerrell, William Flinton.  (Nugent I, p. 343)

If you are paying attention, you will have noticed some very interesting headright duplications in these land patent records for very different tracts of land.  Just to make it clear, let’s look at those headrights in columns.

1642 Apr 22 James Hawley Patent

1654 Oct 2 Peter Knight Patent

1656 Oct 9 Peter Knight Patent

1657 Mar 30 Peter Knight Patent

James Hawley

James Hawley

James Hawley

 

Ann Hawley

wife of James Hawley - no name

Ann Hawley

 

Francis Ann Hawley

Fra. Hawley

on of “3 children”

 

 

Ann Hawley

one of “3 children”

 

Alice Hawley

Alice Hawley

one of “3 children”

 

John Foster

John Foster

John Foster

 

Richard Darling

RUTH Darling

RUTH Darling

 

 

Robert Burrell, wife & 3 children

 

Robert Burwell, wife & 3 children

 

James Hill

James Hill

 

 

James Lloyd

James Lloyd (Loyd)

 

 

Deborah Come

 

Deborah Conne

 

James Jones

 

James Jones

 

John Jerrell

 

John Gerrell

 

William Bradley

 

William Bradby

 

William Slinton

 

William Flinton

 

John Waddington

John Waddington

 

 In 1642, James Hawley used John Foster & Richard Darling as headrights. In 1654 and 1656 Peter Knight used not only the Hawleys, but John Foster, Ruth Darling. And that is in addition to several other duplicate names on his lists. In the 1654 Oct 2 patent, Peter used Robert "Burrell", his wife and 3 children "out of Holland". In 1657, they have become "Burwell". Who knows which name is correct? He also used William Bradly in 1654 and in 1657 is using William Bradby; Deborah Come in the1654 patent, Deborah Conne in 1657; James Jones same in both. All of the name mess-ups could be due to the “fluid spelling” of the scribes of the time, or errors of the transcribers of our day, or both; but the bottom line is that Peter Knight was re-using many of the same people over and over again for his land patents, and many of them were relatives, friends, or children of friends and relatives. And he wasn’t the only person doing it.

Now, consider the name of the second wife of James Hawley the elder: Elizabeth Burnell.  Could Robert Burrell/Burwell actually be Burnell, or vice versa, was Burnell actually Burrell or Burwell? And are we seeing here a family connection between the James Hawley of Northumberland County VA and the James Hawley, father of Jerome, Richard M.D., and the rest of the gang when, in 1654, Capt. Peter Knight first uses the Hawleys – his future in-laws – together with the Burrells/Burwells/Burnells? There’s the whole Hawley family and the whole Burrell/etc family coming into Northumberland County together. Could the Robert Burrell/Burwell/Burnell have been a cousin of James Hawley, or a half-brother?   

Here’s the next thing: we have the birth record of Anne Hawley, Peter's wife, born 1635 and baptized at St Giles Cripplegate in London, and her father listed as “James Hawley, grocer” i.e. merchant;  and there is testimony in the records that James Hawley, her father, was born in 1605. Therefore, if the connection is valid – and I think it is – James Hawley might have been born later than Debrett’s assumes, or he might be the second of that name born to James Hawley the elder, because the earlier one died young, and therefore the son of Elizabeth Burnell/Burrell/Burwell.  Perhaps this is reflected in the fact the Debrett’s confusingly gives two Henrys when it was actually two Jameses that were actually born, though one of them died young. Debrett’s says that the first James died in 1667 and the fact is, James Hawley of Northumberland Co VA does pretty much disappear from the records about 1667.  I don’t think we should forget that earlier genealogists were also working with scraps of information now and again and we ought not to hold them to such rigid standards that we cannot make adjustments when additional data is collected that adds to the story.

I would speculate that there was a first James born to James and Susannah who died young. Obviously, James the Elder wanted a son named after himself and so there was a second James, born to James and Elizabeth Burnell/Burrell/Burwell, his second wife. It was the second James who actually died c. 1667, and the two Jameses were conflated, by Debrett’s, while a second Henry was added. For all we know, a second Henry was legitimately added because of the death of the first one by the first wife.  In any event, the list might be modified as follows, combining the information of the two lists:

Debrett modified: James & 1st wife: Susanna d. 1602

Jeremy, d. Maryland, no issue

William, of Barbados and Maryland d. no issue

Richard, M.D.

James #1,  d. young

Gabriel, d. unm in VA

Henry 1599 - 1675 of Barbados, gov and merchant, had issue

Johanna, m. George Dethick

Catharine, m. Wm. Thornborough

Susanna, m. Richard Piers of Barbados

2nd Wife: Elizabeth Burnell

James #2, b. 1605, m., had issue d. 1667, Northumberland, VA,

Valentine of Barbados

Thomas of London, merchant

I haven’t done anything with the John Hawley that the VA Ency claims came to VA in 1619. I find no such person in Coldham so until some better evidence turns up, I’m omitting him; after all, the VA Ency didn’t include the named daughters and their husbands either.

Back to Jerome

Now, let’s come back to the fellow who helped kick this discursus off, Jerome Hawley, friend and supporter of the Calverts:

Jerome Hawley was a councillor of Maryland in 1634, and returned to England in the summer of 1635. On Jan. 5, 1637, the King appointed him treasurer of Virginia and a member of the council there. At this time he was "one of the gentlemen servers to Queen Henrietta Maria. He came to Virginia in March, but soon returned to Maryland, where he had large interests. He died about Aug., 1638, deeply in debt, and on the 14th of that month the Maryland authorities, who spoke of him as "late of St. Maries," appointed Thomas Cornwallis administrator of his estate. Source

Here I want to bring to your attention what appears to be a serious error in the research of Harry Wright Newman who wrote the rather pretentious book  “The Flowering of the Maryland Palatinate”.  He says about Jerome Hawley:

“Jerome Hawley, of an excellent family of Middlesex, who invested quite heavily in the undertaking [the colonizing of Maryland]…  Hawley, who in his youth had been seduced by the notorious Countess of Somerset, had shed some wild oats and was involved in the Countess’ attempt to poison Sir Thomas Oberbury (sic), Knt., who apparently knew too much.” He cites his source as “Chancery case 1637, Public Record Office, London.”

Obviously, that remark was too intriguing to let pass, so I did a little digging with the following results: First of all, it was “Overbury”, not “Oberbury”.  Second, it was Sir Gervase Helwys , not a Hawley involved. It is an interesting story but the end of the tale cannot support what Newman has stated: Sir Gervase Helwys was executed in 1615 so could not possibly have been “Jerome Hawley” who died in 1638.  An interesting sidenote is the fact that Gervase’ cousin, Thomas Helwys (1575–1616), was one of the joint founders, with John Smyth, of the Baptist denomination, and was thrown into Newgate Prison by the king for libel, where he died in 1616.

Finally, we come to the end of this discussion with the following results:   We have found the likely family of James Hawley, father-in-law of Capt. Peter Knight, and he was the brother of Jerome Hawley, supporter of Lord Baltimore. We know that Capt. Peter Knight was a fire-breathing Puritan, and yet, some years after the Rebellion, he married Anne Hawley, niece of one of the supporters of his sworn enemy, a Catholic Lord. We know that James Hawley showed up in Virginia in 1642, just before the initiation of the armed conflict of the English Civil War; that he came to Virginia and not to Maryland may be telling; religion was not only dividing the nation, it was dividing families.

I suspect very strongly that the people involved in the Claiborne-Ingle rebellion were quite aware of family connections and that makes the whole drama all the more bizarre; but then, we can’t forget that religion was a burning issue of the time in more ways than one; not only was it burning in people’s hearts, some of those people were literally being burned, and some others were fire-breathing fanatics willing to do anything for their religious beliefs; it appears that Capt. Peter Knight was just such a person.


Courthope, William, Ed (1835) Debrett’s Baronetage of England; 7th edition; London:  J. G. & F. Rivington,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gervase_Helwys

Confirmed executions at the Tower of London: http://www.capitalpunishmentuk.org/tower.html

 

Back to Index