| Notes |
- Battle Honours - Interesting citation of the ship Culpeper as winning
battle
honors with the English fleet against the Dutch in at the Battle of
Gabbard 2-3 June 1653. I would make this was one of the Culpeper
family
merchant ships, not a Royal Navy warship. It was probably owned by
John the Merchant.
John Culpeper, born in 1606, could be the ancestor of most American
Culpeppers. And yet little is known about him for certain. Other than
this John, and his brother Thomas, there are no known Culpepers with
ties to Virginia, old enough to have been the father of the first
Henry Culpeper of early Lower Norfolk County, VA. From the research of
Fairfax Harrison (see below), we know that although John was trained
as a lawyer, he took up the career of a merchant instead, and that he
was involved in trade between England and the American colonies. And
so hereafter, I'll refer to him as John Culpeper the Merchant.
Those who think that John the Merchant was the one who died in 1674
offer various logical reasons why his land might have escheated back
to Virginia, even though they think he did indeed leave descendants.
Merchants in colonial America left few records which have survived
until today, and our knowledge of John Culpeper the Merchant suffers
as a result. But from what little we do know, it seems possible that
John the Merchant and his sons may have worked as a agents, or
"factors" in colonial trade. The following description of this sort of
work is excerpted from Perry of London by Jacob M. Price, page 30:
"There were hardly any towns in the seventeenth century Chesapeake
except the capitals' of Jamestown and St. Mary's City, and they were
places of little commercial importance. Early trading ventures to the
Chesapeake had often been entrusted to captains and supercargoes who
could travel about and seek out business where settlers were to be
found. The practice, however, was inefficient in its utilization of
ship time and by mid-century had largely yielded to the factor system.
The English merchant desiring to trade to the Chesapeake would either
by himself or as part of an ad hoc syndicate or adventure' send out
an agent, usually known as a factor, who would sell goods and buy
tobacco on the account of his principals, the metropolitan merchants,
and receive in return a salary or a commission of ten percent (five
percent for selling the trading goods and five percent for buying
tobacco). The factor normally rented a room from a planter at a place
convenient for keeping his goods; most of his time, however, was spent
traveling about, meeting planters, arranging sales and purchases, and
related details. He might be at his "store" as seldom as ne day a
week. Most of the factors appear to have remained in the colony only a
few months... or at most a few years. But some settled permanently. As
members of this last group accumulated capital of their own, they
became the peddlers, country traders and even merchants of the
colony...."
John Culpeper the Merchant's work may have taken him to Barbados,
Virginia, Maryland, New England, and perhaps elsewhere. Much research
remains to be done in order to construct a more accurate and complete
picture of John's life and activities.
The following account of John Culpeper the Merchant is taken from "The
Proprietors of the Northern Neck, Chapters of Culpeper Genealogy" by
Fairfax Harrison:
"He was baptised in Harrietsham, October 26, 1606, as Johannes,
filius Johannis Culpeper, arm.;' and on May 7, 1621, was admitted
'specially' to the Middle Temple as Mr. John, second son of John
Culpeper of Astwood, Worc. esq.' (Hopwood, ii, 662). He did not pursue
the law, but before 1633 had embarked in the Virginia trade, being
recorded that year as part owner, with his elder brother, of a new
ship, the Thomas and John, which was equipped with ordnance from the
public stores in order to voyage to Virginia (Cal. State Papers, Dom.,
1633-34, p. 223, and Hotten, Original Lists, p. 83). He was named in
his father's will (1635) as 'my son John C.;' on his father's MI. in
Hollingbourne as 'Johannem' the third child; and in the will of Sir
Alexander as 'my nephew John C. her (i. e., Cicely's) brother.'
"His legacy under his father's will was a 'rent charge of £30, payable
by Sir John [afterwards first Lord] Culpeper during my said son John's
life.' When, in 1651, the Commonwealth was hearing claims upon the
forfeited estate of Lord Culpeper, a John C. appeared and, describing
himself as a merchant who had been 'beyond seas' during the Troubles,
asserted his title to this rent charge, claiming that since 1645 he
had received only £75 (Cal. Com. Compounding, 1643-60. v, 3277). That
this was John there can be no doubt."
.
There is some evidence that this John was the father of Henry
Culpepper, of Norfolk County, VA. Henry Culpepper appears in records
of Lancaster County, VA prior to his arrival in Norfolk County, and a
John Culpepper can be placed in Lancaster County about the same time.
"Lancaster Co VA Deeds & Wills 1654-1661," Page 173 -- The P:sents
Winesseth that I HENRY COLEPEPPER, Planter, in ye County of Lancaster
in Virginia doe assigne unto JOHN EDWARDS, Surgeon, in ye same County
his heirs or assignes one Cow Cale being brown ye right ear a peice
taken out behind & a nick in ye forepart of ye sd ear ye left ear
cropt & underkeeled with a nick in ye forepart thereof & do warrant ye
sd Calfe from any p:son whatsoever unto him ye sd EDWARDS or his
assignes forever, as Witnes my hand this 7th
day of December 1658. Witnes LEONARD CACOTT, HEN: COLEPEPPER p sig,
THO: WILLIAMSON p sig (Edwards then assigns his interest in the heifer
to Leonard Cacott.)
Neither John nor Henry Colepeper or Culpeper appear in early Lancaster
County, VA tithable records, indicating that they were not being taxed
as landowners in Lancaster County, even though Henry, above, was
described as a "planter."
.
"Lancaster Co VA Deeds & Wills 1661-1702," Page 374 -- WHEREAS there
was a meeting by the Parishoners of Lancaster Parish & the Parishoners
of PIEANKITANCK for to the final ordering of all difference betwixt
lhe 2 Pshes: oncerning the bounds of the sd Pshes: and it was then
mutually agreed for the time to come that the bounds of thc Pshers:
should be & extend according to an Order of the County Court bearing
date the 10th day of Sept 1657, Provided the levys due from the LADY
LUNSFORDs plantacon & other plantacons for the time past be paid to
the use of the sd Lancastr: Psh: & this Agreemt. not to make invallid
any Order of Court for the recovery of the sd Levys. In witnes whereof
I HENRY CORBYN on behalfe of the Psh of Lancastr: set to my hand &
seale this l4th of Sept: 1659 This Agreemt. to take place from this
day JOHN COLEPEPER, HEN: CORBYN, JOHN RYNES, CUTH: POTTER. Recognit In
Cur 9d Maii 1660 et record xxd p EDWD. DALE, Cl Cur
The area of discussion at the above meeting is the part of
Lancaster County across the Rappahannock River in what is now
Middlesex County. Middlesex County was originally part of Lancaster
County. The Pianketank River divides present Middlesex County from
Mathews County. Middlesex County has excellent records, including the
Christ Church Parish records, which should be checked.
Also, a John and Henry were traveling on the same ship in 1664: "The
Complete Book of Emigrants 1661-1699," by Peter Wilson Coldham, page
64, the year 1664: "10 May - 30 June. Shippers by the Defence, Mr.
John Webber, bound from London for New England:
Benjamin Hewling, John Newell, Humphrey Hodges, Thomas Parris, James
Fassett, John Fullerton, Sir William Peake, Robert Davies, Robert
Knight, John Winder, HENRY CULPEPPER, JOHN CULPEPPER. (PRO: E190/50/1,
50/2)
From Bill Rusell, May 2000, comes the following useful summary of John
Culpeper, the Merchant:
First, John was clearly a ship owner with business interests
throughtout the colonies. He had been away from England for some time
when he returned to protect his brothers estate in 1651. Their
interests were probably more entangled than just their common
ownership of the _Thomas and John_. It would appear that they may have
owned a trading company with points of presence in England, Barbados,
New England, and Virginia. Indeed, John probably had sons or
sons-in-law in those places to carry out their trading business. I
suspect that Hannah who married Edward Frisbie and Susannah who
married Francis Lindley were both daughters. Edward Frisbie was from
another prominent merchant trading family in Norfolk County, VA and
removed to New England. Francis Lindley ended up in New Jersey after
having lived in New England. I also believe the John Culpeper "the
Carolina Rebel" was a son of John the merchant.
Second, John the Merchant was also John the lawyer, a fact we
sometimes overlook and which may go some ways to unraveling some of
the confusion over the various Johns. John the merchant was at the
Middle Temple as was his brother Thomas. More importantly, he was
there at the same time as Gov. Sir William Berkeley. I believe that it
was John the merchant who represented the legal interests of Frances
Culpeper Stephens Berkeley before the courts in North Carolina and who
attested to Berkeley's signature on the deed to
Roanoke Island in New England. Who better to entrust to such a job
than the Governor's wife's uncle, a lawyer who ownd a ship able to
travle to North Carolina and New England on short notice and who
personally knew the Governor. He makes a more logical candidate for
the job than the relative young "Carolina Rebel" who had no legal
training and may not have even reached North Carolina by the time in
question.
Third, John the merchant had known trading interests and presence in
New England and Barbados. Charleston, SC was settled originally by
groups from both places and it is possible the John the Rebel was his
father's representative in those areas. Culpeper's Rebellion in North
Carolina - really Albemarle -, was fomented by New England merchant
traders. If John the merchant handled the sale of Roanoke Island for
Governor Berkeley, it is clear that the Lamb family who purchased it
were friends of Sarah Mayo, John the Rebel's wife. From the records it
would appear that John the Rebel arrived in Albemarle after the John
Culpeper who was in court in the sale of the property, yet the later
buyers were well familiar with John the Rebel's family. The Lamb
family who bought Roanoke Island were also New England
merchant traders who mainained a family presence in the Albemarle
region of North Carolina.
.
|
Bef 1606 - Abt 1674 (> 67 years)