Chat
|
Daily Search
|
My GenForum
|
Community Standards
|
Terms of Service
|
|
|
Good point! Under the primogeniture system still in use by the British free and upper class, the other children would be left out! Now, using Sir Winston Churchill as an example, his father was the 3rd child of the Duke of Marborough and he came into nothing except a "courtesy title" with no stipend or estates!(larer BUT the same) Even in Virginia in the 1700s, my Littler family from near Winchester saw the entire plantation go to the eldest son and the other six or so ended up as shoemakers and farmers in Ohio after failing in Tennessee on the way to their fates. 1200 acres, a tavern, two estate homes, sawmills, etc to one... the highway to the rest.. oh, they got some horses, etc... but not much!! ALL Brumfields would not have prospered from the position of SOME.. but they could have been helped depending on the benevolence of the family patriarch/s. The telling thing to me is that the "boye" James even went on the voyage; I am pretty sure this is not the most common name in England! SO-- using the logic of Occam's Razor--"the simplest solution is USUALLY the correct one" why the growth of this particular family in Virginia and why not a flood of them into PA, MD, etc. Now my feeling about the Mass. branch was that there is some connection with VA and it SEEMS to have been more commercial than anything! Now to James the "boye"-- and anyone from their own life or their children know the possibilities! 1.The agreement was that he go for the family for an allotted time and stake their place! 2. He was miserable and unhappy and went back home at the first opportunity 3. he moved into the back country and disappeared 4. he fell out of graces with the family 5. he was a out-of-the inheritance member who upon arriving back in England married and had our James who used the name and wrangled a way out of the misery of lower-middle class England 6. James (first in succession) heard his father or uncle James talk about his trip to America and wanted to start new 7. this line could only get there by transportation but hoped to better themselves as they heard others in the family had done.( you know this story.."go see your grandpa/uncle/cousin in the Va Co.; he could probably get you a postion or a better chance than you have now!") Remember the sizes of families and how many there would have been! There are a myriad of possibilities. ALL I was saying is that they could have been more than the transports that everyone seems rivoted to. Brumfields were on the first ship and Brumfields held prominent positions in the VA company--- and then they came in numbers. Marke Bromfield, Kath. Brumfield, Mary Bromfield, Tho. Bromfield, 2 Edward Bromfields, Ralph Brumfield were all transferred in the 1600s but it does not say much about what capacity they were tranferred in.. overseers, carpenters, tradesmen, clerks, ???? That does not always mean they were fieldhands!! For example Edward Bromfield is a witness in a Wakefield will in May, 1660... one Edward we know of arrived in 1658 and another was tranferred to Major Edward Brumfield in 1657.. that is a possibility of three Edwards there at the same time and one carries the title MAJOR Brumfield and is accepting in 1657 the transfer of 22 persons including an EDWARD Brumfield (same name and this doen't set off alarms) and his 1100 acres is a lot of land in the Jamestown area that early. More later!!! Best, Phil
Followups:No followups yet |
| http://genforum.genealogy.com/brumfield/messages/325.html | ||
 |
Agreement of Use Link to GenForum Add Forum |
|