DENNEY-L Archives

Archiver > DENNEY > 2013-01 > 1357257750


From: Steven Denney <>
Subject: Re: [DENNEY] Relationship between John, Benjamin, and Samuel Denny
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2013 16:02:30 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <1357230989.89518.YahooMailClassic@web111722.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>


Lets not assume that we have found our ancestor just yet.
 
 
 
I just went by the library to get a copy of the info from Cavaliers and Pioneers about the John Pigge importation of John Denney and I don't find it in the books.  I'm going through all of the books and there are some names of interest but that isn't one of them.  Does anyone have this reference in its entirety?
 
I also didn't notice the Cuthbert Potter reference from 1666.  Interesting.  I will check on it.  I see online that Potter was an individual of quite high office in Va.  Does anyone have the complete reference for this.  Although Potter is quite often listed in Cavaliers and Pioneers this headright doesn't seem to show either.
 
I do see from the Cavaliers and Pioneers vol 1 that a Thomas Stratton in Northhampton County received a grant for a John Denny in 1657.  That same John Denney appears on a second recording of the same list of servants also filed by Thomas Stratton a few pages later as John Densy.  Not sure which name is correct here.
 
I do find a listing for a grant to John Pigge in 1658 in New Kent county that includes transportation for 6 persons including Roger Denne, Jno. Younge, Wm. Bowyen, Tho. Hardwicke, James Spritt, and Rees Hughes.  I wonder if the Roger [Denne, Jno.] Younge, could have appeared in a search engine to look like Denne, Jno and it could have been taken for John Denney?
 
If we need proof that these headrights were traded as currency often for years before being turned in, we need no more proof than the Rees Hughes headright that John Pigge entered in 1658.  Rees Hughes was a soldier under the command of Cavalier Major General Manwaring Hammond during the English Civil War.  Supposedly he came to Virginia in 1649 with Hammond and is among the 63 persons who Hammond received headrights for March 15, 1649. 
 
Rees Hughes himself began receiving land grants in 1656-which is seven years after he would have arrived in 1649.  Interestingly he received this grant in New Kent County in 1657 (the year before he was on Pigge's list}  
 
REES HUGHES, 860 acs, new Kent Co., 1 Mar. 1657, p. 190, (279}.  410 acres on S. W. side of Yorke Riv. From Georg Smith’s N. corner tree, N. W. to Mr. Langstone’s line &c.  410 acs. By patent dated 2 Dec. 1656 & 450 acs. For trans. Of 9 pers:  ADAM DENNY, Robert Gray, Jno. Willins (or Willms.}, David Morgan, Mary, Morgan, Mary Martha, Ann Lerry, Robert Kiggs, Wm. Tiller.

So, here we have Rees Hughes patenting a headright for a Denny for land in New Kent County, one year before John Pigge entered a headright for Rees Hughes. 
 
I also find that although Manwaring Hammond entered  headrights for 63 people in 1649 and received over 3000 acres for it, none of the names for the individuals he transported were listed.  In 1654 Manwaring's son Francis patented 40 of them (they are named} including himself and his father Manwaring.  That leaves 23 headrights out there that Manwaring had previously received land for but were circulating in the colony.  John Pigg had gotten hold of at least one of those when he turned in the one for Rees Hughes in 1658, two years after Rees's indenture ended. 
 
Another interesting note is that Rees Hughes or a younger man of the same name, apparantly provided the land that the St. Peters Parish Church building was built on.
 
Steven 


--- On Thu, 1/3/13, Steven Denney <> wrote:


From: Steven Denney <>
Subject: Re: [DENNEY] Relationship between John, Benjamin, and Samuel Denny
To:
Date: Thursday, January 3, 2013, 11:36 AM


Well, I don't know whether I have done anything, as we don't even know if John Pigge kept the John Denney as an indentured servant.  He could have purchased that headright as well.  However, I think it is reasonable to think that one of those John Denney references is likely to be our ancestor, and the one connected to Pigge seems the most likely.  I don't know whether he is the same man as the 1702/1708 Denney.  Are Benjamin, John, and Samuel brothers?  If so, then the John Denney with Pigge would probably be the father of the John Denney from 1702 to 1708.  The researchers I see seem pretty well convinced that Samuel was born about 1710-1715.  I believe that both John and Benjamin are a little older.   Benjamin Denney seems very likely to have a family based on the Partridge store accounts from 1736.  John Denney had at least five children.  His son John may have been born before 1727.  Daughter Anna was definitely born by that time as she
is most likely married to her husband Mathew Henson before 1744.  The 1718 reference to a John Denney from the Vestry book could actually be for this John Denney.  But I think that the 1702 reference could not be.   That tells me that it is likely that I think it is more likely that he would name his firstborn after his father rather than after his brother. 
Steven


--- On Thu, 1/3/13, <> wrote:


From: <>
Subject: Re: [DENNEY] Relationship between John, Benjamin, and Samuel Denny
To:
Date: Thursday, January 3, 2013, 10:32 AM


Steven, you've done it again!  This is fantastic! I am now printing this out and adding it to my bulging notebook of our Denn(e)y ancestry. (I inherently don't trust cyber files.)

----- Original Message -----
From: Steven Denney <>
To:
Sent: Thu, 03 Jan 2013 02:54:30 -0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: [DENNEY] Relationship between John, Benjamin, and Samuel Denny

Thoughts on the immigrant Denney ancestor of this line.

I have looked up info on the three men mentioned who had headrights involving a John Denney.   Thomas Wellborne lived on the Eastern Bank, the section of Virginia that juts down from Maryland.   The grant for the land was in Accomack County, where he lived, and it is unlikely that if he did import John Denney, and John Denney was a servant to him that he is our ancestor.   If he did serve his indenture in the Eastern Bank, and if he survived, it is likely that he would have moved into the hinterlands after his term ended, and from there that would have meant Maryland.  Of course, Wellborne could have received the headright and then sold John's services, but if so it would have still been likely on the Eastern Bank.

The second man, William Poole, Jr., received his grant of land on Tigner's Creek, near Beaver Dam Creek alongside the Green Swamp in Middlesex County.  I haven't located where this is exactly now, but it seems that Middlesex County then and now are about the same area.  This area is drained by the Rappahanock River.  Probably the Western side of the Rappahanock.  Now in the day that we are speaking of, Middlesex and New Kent Counties were neighboring, though divided by two counties now.  Now if this John Denney served his indenture in the area that the land grant was for, and survived, he would certainly be in an area that is close to the New Kent John of 1702.

George Keeling's Militia Company was drawn from an area that was between the Pamunkey and Mattapony Rivers in what is now probably Louisa County or North Western Hanover County. 

Then I searched for information about John Pigge and WOW.  Now this is exciting.  John Pigge's grant for land for the John Dennie and others was in 1667 and it is on the Northern Bank of the Mattapony River, in what was then New Kent County and is now King and Queen County.  This area is only about 20 miles from where the John Kent of the 1702 to 1708 references are living! 

Ok, now lets look at demographics.

An estimated 120,000 people migrated to Virginia during the 17th century.  About 90,000 of them were indentured servants.  How many John Denney's can we expect to find in a random sampling of 90,000 names.  I am certain that three is possible, but are more likely?  Even these three may be samples may be too many, as these headrights were traded back and forth in circulation for years like money-as there was no reliable currency in the colony-and were often turned in more than once.  These can be three seperate men, or could all be the same headright traded again and again.  80 percent of the indentured servants arrived before 1675.  After that time African slavery replaced the indentured servant system.  According to Alan Taylor's tome about the American Colonies" in the 1660's the average York County, Virginia household had two indentured servants, by the 1690's the county averaged only two servants for every ten plantations."

According to statistics, indentured servants were overwhelmingly young, with 95 percent or more of them under 25.  Lets say John Dennie were 25 in 1667, if that is indeed the year he came.  That would mean he was born in 1642. If he were 15 in 1667 he would have been born in 1652.   In Seventeenth Century virginia men overwhelmingly outnumbered women and the average age for marriage was higher, especially for former indentured servants who were forbidden to marry during their term of service and would have needed time to establish himself before taking on a wife and family. 

Early on, indentured servants recieved a fifty acre land grant too at the end of their service.  By 1667 this had ended and a servant who came to Virginia could not expect to receive a grant of land.  They therefore had a much harder time establishing themselves and were thereby likely to remain tenants or move to marginal lands that had not been claimed by a large planter and squat.
After the end of Bacon's Rebellion, the frontier moved further into the back country beyond the fall line.  In the 1680's and 1690's squatters were settling on the ridge between the Pamunkey and Mattapony, exactly where we find John Denney in 1702.

If John were a squatter that could explain the wording of his 1708 vestry record.  "The lands of William Terrel Cornelius Tinsley Margery Pate William Hanes and John Denny lying adjacent to each Other, being made one Precinct, William Terrel and Cornelius Tinsley were appointed Overseers thereof, and made this return viz:  Nov 20th, 1708.  According to an Order of Vestry being dated Sept 24, 1708 I William Terrel and Cornelius Tinsley have given Notice to John Denny and William Hains and Margery Pate to come, and upon this day to Procession your lands;  the above said Denny and Hains, Saith they have no Land to Procession of their own, and yt Land they Live on, they know not the bounds of it;  Margery Pate Saith, also She would go round the bounds of her land, but she knew it not.  The above named Terrel & Tinsley met at the time appointed, and procession'd our lands according to Order Subscrib'd William Terrel & Cornelius Tinsley."

Clearly this is a man who is living on a plot of land, probably farming.  The processionals that the vestry required served three purposes.  First, they were to establish property lines to prevent disputes between neighbors-the chaotic land granting system of Virginia also left unclear ownership of tracts of land.  Secondly, it helped the Vestry ensure that they were getting the proper tax money from the settlement.  Thirdly, and potentially most important for Denney, if you processioned your land three successive times it established ownership, so it would help a squatter obtain legal title to his land. 

John is not a land owner now in 1708, and he is not even in the district in 1711 and 1716 and 1719 when these other land owners are processioning their land in subsequent years. 

So, lets see.  The John Denney who was potentially a migrant in 1667/8 was probably born 1642-1652 and potentially settled in this area.  He would have ended his servitude in 1675 or 1676.  It would have then taken him several years to establish himself enough to support a family-and if he was caught up in Bacon's Rebellion before his term finished he could have had additional years added to his service.  He could therefore easily have been having a family in the 1680s and 1690s or even the early 1700s.





--- On Mon, 12/24/12, wrote:


From:
Subject: Re: [DENNEY] Relationship between John, Benjamin, and Samuel Denny
To:
Date: Monday, December 24, 2012, 10:21 AM


In an email dated Feb 2, 1997, Bill Denney comments that "Quaker John Denny arrived in 1666."  Subsequently, Libbie Griffin posted that the Charles City County, VA Court Orders of 1658 - 1661 says that Howell Pryse (Price?) was given a land grant for importing John Denne. On March 19, 1997, Bill Denney comments that John Denny was born ca 1690 and died in 1755. Now, this couldn't be the same John Denny who arrived in the 1660's.  Bill also notes that most Surry County Denny researchers record that this latter John Denny's father was David, born ca. 1665.  Does this suggest that the 1660ish John was the father of David, i.e., the grandfather of John, b. ca 1690?  The time spans work, but this is only supposition on my part.

Sidebar:  The well-known Partridge Store was in Hanover County, VA ((Magazine of Virginia Genealogy, vol 24).  Hanover County was formed from New Kent County, so the John Denny in the militia of New Kent County ca 1704-1706 could well be the same John Denny who was purchasing goods at the Partridge Store in 1735, i.e., he would not have had to move.

(There is another great listing by Arthur R Denny on December 30, 2000 further connecting the dots between John, Benjamin and Samuel.  I won't attempt to replicate here.  Maybe you can retrieve it from the list.)

Fred Merrick in a post on July 7, 1998, niotes that the Suurry County VA office records that Robert Denny was transported in 1635 by George Keith.  In 1666, John Denny was transported by Cuthbert Potter (Virginia County Records, vol IX (1911) by Wm. Corzier.

On June 12, 1997, Mary Denney says that "Cavaliers and Pioneers" by Nugent, viols I, II and III, says tha John Pigge rec'd land for transport of John Dennie in 1668 and that Thomas Welborne transported Jno. Denny, 1690, and that Wm. Poole, Jr. transported John Denny in 1690. 

Now all this seems very confusing.  Were there several "John Dennys" who had their transportation paid by different individuals at different times?  I have been told that the transports were tradeable contracts (which makes sense since they involved fairly good tracts of land) and that, for example, John Denny's contract for transport in the 1660's could have been traded several times.  This would explain some of these, but not all.  I believe that an indenture obligation was for only seven years.  In other words, the obligation of the transportee to the transporter was to work for only seven years.  At that time, the practice was then that the owner of the contract released the one transported.  Thus, the obligation of John transported in the 1660s was long over before 1690. 

Where is Perry Mason, when we need him?

----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 17:39:38 -0000 (UTC)
Subject: [DENNEY] Relationship between John, Benjamin, and Samuel Denny

Is the following the current thinking about the relationship between these 4 men?

(1) John Denny of the 1702 New Kent, Va militia. He was present at the "processioning" of land in St. Paul's Parish in New Kent Co, Va in 1708 and 1719. He probably was indentured from England or Ireland (in 1688 Wm Poole received a land patent for transporting a John Denny et al to Va). If he were 25 in 1702 (after finishing his indenture) then he would be born in 1677 or earlier. Is this the father of the following 3 men?

(2) John Denny purchased 350 acres on Byrd Creek in 1734. By 1745 John had moved to Halifax Co on the Staunton River (land was in Bedford Co after it was formed) died in Bedford Co, Va in 1755. Will mentions sons John and Zachariah Denney (born between 1732 and 1736 based on ages of sons of Zachariah; This suggests that John Denny was born about 1715 or so and was not John number 1). Sons of Zachariah (Benjamin and Claiborne) moved to Smith Co, Tenn.

(3) Benjamin Denny on the Partridge Store Account in 1736-41 (buying items that a family needs which implies that he was married and thus born by 1715) and titheable in Goochland Co, Va in 1748 and 1753. In 1756 acquired 143 acres on Rivana River in Albemarle Co, Va.

(4) Samuel Denny who had land (on Hat creek) and twins baptized in 1750 in Albemarle (now Amherst) Co, Va. Several sons had land in Albemarle Co, Va (Benjamin granted 94 acres on Ruckers Run in 1760). Samuel was on the 1771-2 Surry County, NC tax lists (as were his sons) and 1790 census. Had a son and 2 grandsons named Lazarus Denny (all 3 lived in Grayson Co, Va area on New River; one grandson was son of older Lazarus Denny and other Lazarus grand son was son of William Denny). Other sons were Samuel Jr (born about 1745 and moved to Wayne Co, Ky), John, William, Azariah, Henry, and Charles (in 1778 had 150 acres on Tarrart River at mouth of Pilot Creek in Surry Co, NC; born between 1760 and 1765 per Wayne Co Ky 1810, 1820 and 1830 censuses).

No other Denny men are known to be in New Kent, Hanover or Goochland during this early time frame.


Vist the new Denney DNA Results Project Page
http://www.bdgonline.com/DNA/
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Vist the new Denney DNA Results Project Page
http://www.bdgonline.com/DNA/
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Vist the new Denney DNA Results Project Page
http://www.bdgonline.com/DNA/
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Vist the new Denney DNA Results Project Page
http://www.bdgonline.com/DNA/
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Vist the new Denney DNA Results Project Page
http://www.bdgonline.com/DNA/
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message



This thread: