In the very early period of the colony, the grief of the widow was of short duration, for a suitor usually stood at her doorstep almost as the funeral procession ended. The most generally known, of such incidents, was the pursuit of Cicely Jordan, upon the death of her husband Samuel. Within two days Reverend Greville Pooley pressed his suit. The widow tentatively agreeing, but evidently pregnant with the unborn child of her deceased husband, insisted that she would marry no man until she was "delivered." In the meantime, William Farrar, named administrator of her deceased husband's estate, also pressed his suit and gained favor; whereupon, the cleric entered in the Court a suit for breach of promise. The contest over the widow finally was referred to the authorities in London, who declined to pass upon "so delicate a matter." Mr. Pooley, probably then finding his cause hopeless, withdrew his case in Court, and by 1625, the charming widow had married William Farrar.

Custom frowned upon the ladies of the seventeenth century going into Court. While the law required that they sign or give assent to their husbands' deeds for sale of land or property, when the time arrived that the deed must be acknowledged in Court, the wife requested some male friend to represent her and acknowledge the deed. Mrs. Elizabeth Sheppard, in 1654, wrote a note asking her "dear brother Cockerham" to represent her in Court. The same year, Daniel Llewellyn acknowledged a deed in Charles City Court, for his stepdaughters Sara Woodward and Anne Gundry.

Notwithstanding the limitations put upon women of the seventeenth century, both by custom and by law, their husbands evidently had complete confidence in their discretion and their abilities to direct wisely the disposition of estates, which came into their hands. Their business experience was confined to household management and plantation activities, but these were enterprises of no mean proportions, and the successful handling of such matters by the women impelled the men, very frequently, to name in their wills their wives as executrices. At the same time, overseers were also named to assist in handling the details. Colonel Bridger named his wife Hester as executrix to dispose of his large landed estate and his extensive mercantile business, but directed that her brother and their mutual friend Arthur Smith assist her, which they did very ably.

Perhaps, there is no more outstanding example of an astute woman of the seventeenth century and her courage than that which the experiences of Sarah Bland set forth. She was the wife of John Bland of England, and the daughter-in-law of the well known merchant of the same name, who, as an active member of the Virginia Company of London, developed large plantation interests in Virginia, and a thriving mercantile business. Sarah Bland's only surviving son Giles had come to Virginia about the time of the untimely death of Theodorick Bland, who had managed the Bland interests in Virginia. Giles was a young "hot head," joined with the Bacon forces, and upon the collapse of that abortive revolution in the Colony, was apprehended, promptly condemned by Governor Berkeley's Court held at "Greenspring" and executed. Two years after her son's untimely death, and when some of the drastic measures confiscating the holdings of the deceased rebels had been lifted, Mrs. Sarah Bland, armed with power-of-attorney from her husband, crossed the seas alone to look into and settle the huge Bland estate. While she was in Virginia, her husband died in England, and Thomas Povey, who was named joint executor with her of her husband's estate, also conveyed to her power-of-attorney. She gathered the loose ends of the Bland holdings in Virginia and divided them among the heirs. An entry in the Isle of Wight County Court records, listing ten Bland plantations, indicates the proportions of her task.

Divorce in Virginia rarely occurred. There was no Ecclesiastical Court and, therefore, no source of authority to which dissatisfied couples might turn. The Governor and Council were vested with the power to grant separations, which were seldom sought. One of the very few cases of separation and remarriage was that of Elizabeth, sister of Colonel William Underwood and ex-wife of Doctor James Taylor. After petitioning the Governor and Council for a separation, she married as her second husband Francis Slaughter, merchant and planter of Rappahannock County, who was deceased by 1656, his will naming his wife and mother-in-law. Incidently, Elizabeth had, in all, four husbands before her death in 1673.

Lest conclusion be drawn that all women in Virginia were ladies, women whose husbands had large plantations and who were to the manner born, acknowledgement must be made that there were some who were not gentlewomen. Some quarrelled outrageously with one another, some gossiped endlessly, and a few went to the extremes of dragging their husbands into Court to settle disputes with one another, thus, cluttering up the busy calendar of the County Justices.

The Court sitting at Westover in Charles City County, 3 August 1664, arrived at a means of disposing of these cases and silencing, perhaps, public display of temper. The ducking stool on Herring Creek had just been equipped, the year before, with new irons and so was in good repair. Whereupon, the Justices ordered that "Goody" Spencer and "Goody" Goodale for their "scurrilous brawls and frivilous litigations" be each ducked three times at the public place prepared for that purpose, at or near the next full tide, and that "each bear his own particular costs and charges."

The costs levied, the discomfort of being immersed, not to speak of the ridicule that such an event aroused on the part of the people assembled to witness the punishment, no doubt had a very sobering effect on tempers. There was also a ducking stool on Wormeley's Creek in York County, and another at Lynnhaven in Lower Norfolk. It would thus seem that these and similar cases were not altogether rare in the Colony.

SERVANTS

To interpret accurately the meaning of the frequently used term servant is a difficult matter. It appears to have covered a wide range of classifications in seventeenth-century Virginia. The designation was often used in the modern sense of employee and, occasionally, members of a family are listed in an enrollment as servants with the obvious meaning of dependents. This was the case in the muster of William Gany, 1625, whose child Anna heads the list of his "servants." Also, with Thomas Palmer and his family, Richard English, aged eleven years, was living in 1625, but is listed as a "servant." Abraham Wood, aged ten years, is listed in 1625 as a "servant" of Captain Samuel Mathews. These children obviously do not come within the twentieth century meaning of the word.

Also, when individuals or groups of individuals sought to establish large settlements in Virginia, they sent over a company of men, and these men are listed as "servants," a term used in our modern sense of employee. The musters of Edward Bennett, Daniel Gookin and others present such lists. In the Bennett muster, Christopher Reynolds, evidently a head man in overseeing the creation of a plantation, comes under the designation. Also, Adam Thoroughgood, who later was named a member of the Council, is first mentioned in the colony under a list of "servants."



True it is that many young men bound themselves, by written agreement before departing from England to serve seven years in the colony, in return for passage and other considerations, granted at the conclusion of their terms. However, apprenticeship was the customary means, by which young men acquired knowledge, and some degree of skill from their elders. Young Robert Hallom, about 1640, was sent to England to live with relatives and receive some training. He, forthwith, was apprenticed to his cousin to learn the trade of a salter, and was described by the family as a "prettie wittie boy." When Doctor Pott came to Virginia, in 1620, he brought as apprentices to learn the art of apothecary, young Randall Holt and young Richard Townshend. Both youths became dissatisfied, and sought to break their agreements through petitions to the General Court, contending that Doctor Pott was not instructing them. However, the Court held the young men to their agreements. Later, Randall Holt married the heiress Mary Bayly, and became possessed of the large plantation, Hog Island on the James River. Townshend rose to prominence in the colony, also, having been named later a member of the Council. Often such young men were third or fourth sons in a family, and influence from overseas, as in Townshend's case, helped establish them in places of honor and authority in the colony.

Youths, who agreed by indenture to serve in Virginia, were the main source of help to the planters in the first half of the century. There was never a sufficient number to fill the needs in the Colony, and planters pleaded with the Company or with friends in England to send them "servants." In letters sent to authorities in England, 1622, the Rev. Richard Buck urgently requested that "servants" be sent to assist him in carrying on the work of his 750 acre plantation.

Letters from Kathryne Hunlock of England to her daughter and son by a prior marriage, Margaret and John Edwards, recorded in Northampton County, indicate the class of young people who often bound themselves to come to Virginia. Apparently, mother, son and daughter were educated, for the mother refers to the correspondence with them. In 1648, Kathryne Hunlock lists supplies she had sent to her daughter: eight yards of snuff colored silk mohair, an ell of taffeta, silver lace, four pairs of gloves, thread, hose, two taffeta hoods and two lace hoods with taffeta handkerchiefs, four pairs of shoes, one hundred needles, 5000 pins and "one green scarf for your husband." As the last entry shows, young Margaret did not long remain an apprentice, for she was redeemed from that status by a planter named Stephen Taylor, who, her mother wrote, she understood, was an "honest man and gave a great price" for her.

Later, Kathryne Hunlock wrote her daughter and her son regarding the daughter's inheritance from her deceased father. The son, incidentally, served out his time. The correspondence indicates that these were substantial folks, and the young people, probably having little to anticipate in an improved status in England, sought both adventure and a brighter future in Virginia.

Young orphans in the Colony, with no one to look to for support, were bound out, this responsibility being accorded the vestry of the parish church. In 1646, the York records note that Ann Snoden, an orphan seven years of age, had no means left for her maintenance. Thereupon, she was bound out to Captain Nicolas Martiau for nine years, with the provision that he supply her with food, clothing, shelter, and give her a cow and a calf and maintain both during her apprenticeship, rendering an account annually to the court. In 1686, little William Hickman, a year old infant, was bound out to William Dods of Isle of Wight County to be in his care and service until he was twenty-one years of age.

Fewer than two score Negroes are listed in Virginia in 1625; they were not present in numbers in the Colony until about 1660. By then, they began to supplant white labor and were particularly useful in the tobacco fields, the latter an ever increasing source of revenue to the planter. Not all Negroes worked in the fields, however. In the inventory of Mrs. Elizabeth Digges' estate filed in York County, 1691, three sets of quarters for Negroes are listed: the home quarters where the house servants lived, the Indian field quarters where those working in tobacco lived, and the new ground quarters where were housed the Negroes doing the heavy work of clearing new ground, a constant operation in Virginia as the cultivation of tobacco quickly exhausted the soil.

As the Negroes took their places in the Colony as field-hands, house-servants and craftsmen, the white indentured servant vanished from the scene. As heretofore noted, the supply was never enough in the Colony to fill the demand. Moreover, young men, at the conclusion of their five or seven-year terms, received their allotment of clothing and supplies, usually a barrel of corn, agreed upon in the indenture, and joined the small-planter class in the Colony. Especially was this true when the indenture included a clause granting fifty acres upon completion of service.

Since Negroes were taught trades on the plantations and some of them became highly skilled in handiwork, the white artisan had a difficult time in establishing himself in Virginia. There was practically no white artisan class. Small planters and their families acquired skills needed in their daily living, the Negroes becoming the craftsmen on the larger plantations.

THE HOUSEHOLD

The winters in Virginia, mild except for occasional freezes, with now and then snowfall during the three winter months, proved less arduous to the Englishmen than the two months of midsummer, when the mercury reaching into the nineties brought discomfort, especially since the men and women were clothed in the bunglesome garments, necessary in a cool zone frequently overhung with fog. The many open, pleasant months in the Colony made life out of doors a continuing pleasurable experience, when hunting, fishing, horse-racing and games could be indulged in freely.

Yet, living indoors in Virginia in the coldest weather was always cheerful. The land, heavily forested, yielded an ample supply of firewood of all sorts, and the necessity of clearing the ground, for the plantation homes and agricultural areas, kept heaps of wood at hand at all times. The earliest open fires of the primitive shelters as well as the great brick fireplaces later in the century, and the smaller hearths in every room of the affluent planters' homes, always diffused that glow of comfort instinctively sought, when the sun retreats. Before the burning logs of hickory and oak the families gathered. There could be no extravagance in the use of the abundant supply of wood, contrasting with the necessity to preserve fuel in England, as the forests there, even in the seventeenth century, were disappearing. Often, there were generous pots of walnuts and hickory nuts to crack on the hearth, as family and friends sipped from their pewter mugs the aging cider, pressed from apples gathered in nearby orchards.

In addition to the flaming hearth, the soft glow of the candle, used for illumination in the seventeenth century, lent charm to the evening scene, as wanton shadows stood off in the room. Moreover, there was an elusive aroma from the candles, often made from the wax of berries, taken from the prolific growth of myrtle bushes about the Virginia waterways. This redolence, together with the clear light which the myrtle wax gave forth, made that candle popular in the evening; notwithstanding, both beef and deer suet were in use for candle making, and some candles were imported. All were held in candlesticks, made of wire, brass, pewter, copper, or iron, the more elegant, of silver, with snuffers of the same metals. In the very modest homes, the pine-knot served as a means of illumination, the turpentine in the wood fibers causing it to burn brightly until consumed.



Various house furnishings have been listed in the inventories or are listed hereafter. During the latter part of the century, particularly, it will be seen that these furnishings were as elaborate or as simple as in the comparable home in England.

Next to the fireplace, perhaps, the table adds more good feeling among family and friends than any other item of the household. To "gather around the board" was not merely a figurative expression in the early seventeenth century when the first tables were boards laid on trestles and set aside after meals. Table frames and planks were mentioned in a Lower Norfolk County inventory in 1643. Later, permanent legs were attached to the boards, and stretchers, fastened to them with pegs, kept the table steady. However, as the English began to fashion fine pieces of furniture, the table of various types found its way to Virginia and, by the middle and late seventeenth century, there were serving-tables, tea-tables as well as dining-tables. The four-times married Mrs. Amory Butler owned a rare item in an extension table.



Even the planter with a modest household owned table-linen. As heretofore noted, Joseph Ham possessed, before 1638, a dozen napkins and a table-cloth. The well-to-do planters, especially after 1650, brought with them, or sent for, a wide variety of table-linen, and both Mrs. Butler and Mrs. Digges owned napkin-presses, that of the former listed in 1673, and that of the latter in 1692.

Wooden trenchers and wooden spoons were the earliest tableware in Virginia. Later, pewter-ware supplanted wood and while earthen-ware trays and pots were mentioned, in a few inventories, and were used in the dairy, and while earthen-ware was produced in the Colony by 1675, it did not come into general use for dining during the seventeenth century. Table-knives were not plentiful, nevertheless, various types of such knives are mentioned in inventories by the latter part of the century, black-handled, white-handled and ivory-hafted knives. The one rare item was the table-fork, which was not common even in England during the period. "Eating with the knife," a step beyond the use of the fingers, gradually became an established custom, and the practice has survived among the homely folks, despite the many varieties of forks available and in general use today.

The bed was a prominent item and the ticking of the best beds was filled with feathers, which assured a soft, comfortable, cosy resting place, especially in winter. There were no springs. The flock bed so often mentioned was less downy but comfortable, being filled with bits of wool, rags, milkweed or cattail-fluff, the latter in abundant growth near the fresh waterways. This was the "next best bed" which was a sufficiently important item to be left to heirs. Thomas Gibson, in 1652, bequeathed to his daughter his "best flock bed, with rug (used for covering), bolster, pillow and fine pair of Holland sheets." Sheets, variously mentioned, were of canvas or of Holland, generally, the latter, being an unbleached coarse linen. By the middle of the century, valances and curtains around the beds "to shut out the night air" were in general use. As soon as practicable, the English were bringing over their brass warming-pans with long handles. These perforated pans filled with warm embers were run in the beds just before the retiring hour. As the antecedent of the modern American electric blanket, they enticed the drowsy to bed. Retreating from the cheerful hearth, the would-be sleeper, then as now, had no fear of being aroused by the clammy chill of frigid bed-linen.

All colonists appear to have possessed chests of one kind or another, some plain, some carved. When the early planter obtained sufficient credit from his tobacco crop to indulge in a luxury, he acquired an innovation in a chest-of-drawers, where was kept the family clothing and the supply of materials on hand. Since dress was an important matter in the Colony, the looking-glass was indispensable. Occasionally, there was "a great looking-glass," but for the most part, the mirrors were small and stood on chests or chests-of-drawers.

Stools and benches were in use generally. Chairs, rare in England until the early part of the seventeenth century, nevertheless, found their way to Virginia about the time they came into use in England. However, chairs were scarce, and only the master of the house or his distinguished guest was accorded the privilege of being seated in them. The earliest chairs were cumbersome, being fashioned of oak with solid square backs, often panelled, and thus were known as "wainscot chairs." The seat was of wood and the bracing beneath made this article of furniture exceedingly substantial. Later in the century, a variety of chairs found their way to Virginia, caned chairs, leather chairs and Turkey-work chairs. The latter were those upholstered in hand-woven material imported into England from the Orient and then exported to Virginia. By the middle of the century, couches were listed and they were for the most part of the same construction as the chairs.



Lord De La Warr, who came to Virginia in 1610, sat in the Jamestown church in a green velvet chair. This is the first known mention of a chair in the Colony. In 1623, a wainscot-chair, owned by John Atkins of Jamestown, was bequeathed to his friend Christopher Davison, Secretary of the Colony.

In addition to the standard pieces of furniture aforementioned, luxury articles were imported during the latter part of the century. Mrs. Elizabeth Digges owned five Spanish tables, two green carpets and a Turkey-work carpet; Mrs. Elizabeth (Mason) Thelaball, of Lower Norfolk County, had among her possessions a small desk and a writing-slate. In the goods consigned, 1694, by Perry and Lane of London to Mrs. Elizabeth Woory, of Isle of Wight County, was a drugget.

The size of the homes varied from the simple one-room structures characteristic of the early part of the century to the Bridger home previously described, and Mrs. Digges' home of six rooms, hall, cellar, garret and detached kitchen.

In looking over the inventories of the seventeenth century planters, observation is inevitable that the kitchen area alone maintained its distinct character. Even among the well-to-do, beds were everywhere, irrespective of the number of rooms in use. Guns, swords, pistols, saddles, bridles, steelyards (scales) cluttered up the hall in the Bridger home.

Bathing facilities were meager. Copper and pewter basins were in general daily use, and also were employed for sponge baths occasionally taken in winter before the open fires. The chamber pots, frequently listed, served other necessary functions.

In the summer months, much of the cooking was done out-of-doors in huge pots slung from a tripod. The food for the servants went into a single pot, and their fare in "pap" was eaten in the open also, when the weather permitted. In the winter and during the cooler months, cooking was done on the hearth of an ample fireplace which customarily took up the greater part of the end of a room. If the family was of modest means, the kitchen area was the heart of the house. Here, in winter, was warmth, food and companionship. As the planter acquired numerous servants and preparation of food became an all-day matter, every day, the kitchen with its companion room, the buttery, was divorced from the house. Under this arrangement, the mistress of the household merely directed the preparation of food, the care of the dairy products, the salting of the meat, and the rendering of the lard.

Before the fire on the great hearth, meat on joints and fowl were trussed on spits, and to some small boy fell the task of keeping the spit turning. A drip-pan placed beneath caught the juices. Bakestones, griddles and clay ovens were at hand to stand on the hot embers, and later, ovens were built into the fireplaces. From cranes, simple at first and later with convenient arrangements for tipping, hung the pots for boiling. Bellows were at hand to enliven dying embers. On a rough table stood the brass mortar and iron pestle for mixing, the flesh-hook for handling meats, brass skimmer, rolling-pin, and other handy cooking utensils. Besides, in an adjoining space, there were pans, butter-pots, tubs and trays for the milk and milk products.



Water, which had to be drawn by hand from wells, except for an occasional windmill, was not a plentiful commodity. Therefore, the washing of clothes was not the semi-weekly operation carried on today with labor-saving devices. For the most part, it was carried on out-of-doors in clear weather, either at a nearby stream, or in the huge pots or tubs possessed by every family. Soap was brought into the Colony, and also was compounded from the animal fats available and the soap-ashes, which were plentiful. After soaking, the clothes were laid on boards and the grime driven out with "beetles" or paddles; then, the garments were hung up or laid out to dry or bleach in the sun. The few housewives, who owned napkin-presses, had the table-linen carefully folded, and placed, when damp, in the press in a pile. The board, screwed down firmly, eliminated the wrinkles, and the linen in some hours was smooth and ready for use. Also, various smoothing-irons and goffering (crimping)-irons, heated on the hearth were applied to garments. In all, however, laundering was a laborious process. Perfume, therefore, was a popular item in milady's toilet.



HOSPITALITY

From time immemorial, the traveller, in sparsely settled areas in need of food and shelter at the end of the day, has always been made welcome, whether he was known or unknown. Moreover, there were no questions asked. Famed Virginia hospitality had its roots in this age-old custom, particularly as the early seventeenth-century traveller, often from overseas, could be sheltered nowhere else save at the homes of the planters. Although there were few inns, some taverns and ordinaries by the middle of the century, accommodations were poor and the well-to-do gentlemen preferred the warmth of the planters' hospitable homes to meager public accommodations. Nor was the entertainment of the unexpected guest a one-sided proposition, for visitors broke the daily routine of plantation life, bringing news from beyond and reports of what was happening in other parts of the Colony or overseas. Upon departure, the guest was sped on his way by his host or some member of the family, who accompanied him part way on his journey. In case he came by water, he was bade a final farewell from the planter's wharf.

Peter deVries, the Dutch sea-captain and trader, has left some early accounts of hospitality in Virginia. Although he recorded that the Englishmen in Virginia drove a close bargain in trade, and their acumen in that respect could not be surpassed, he was ever warm in praise of their hospitality. On his arrival in Virginia, 1633, he anchored off Newport News and visited there the Gookins. Later, when his ship sailed up the James River, he recorded that he stopped at "Littletown," the plantation of George Menefie, an early Virginia attorney, a prosperous planter and, said deVries, "a great merchant, who kept us to dinner and treated us very well."

When young Christopher Calthrope, aged sixteen years, came to Virginia in 1622, George Sandys, Treasurer of the Colony, proffered him the entertainment of his home and offered him his own room to lodge in. Although the young man declined, having other friends, Sandys saw to it that he was adequately cared for in the Colony.

The hospitality of Captain Samuel Mathews of "Denbigh" was widely known, even in England, where several, who had visited in Virginia, recorded the welcome they had received at his extensive plantation at the mouth of the Warwick River. In 1648, a writer, who signed himself Beauchamp Plantagenet, recounted his visit to Virginia where, upon arrival at Newport News, a few miles below "Denbigh," he was welcomed at the home of Captain Samuel Mathews and given "free quarter everywhere."

Virginia proved a haven to numerous Royalists as previously mentioned. Many who found it expedient to flee from England, about 1649, sought refuge in Virginia. Their coming was often kept secret, but they were accorded a warm welcome. Furthermore, when it was safe to make their presence generally known, they were received into official life in the Colony.

Among those who came and received welcome on the Eastern Shore at the home of Stephen Charlton were Colonel Henry Norwood, Major Richard Fox and Major Francis Moryson. Later they joined Colonel Mainwaring Hammond, Sir Henry Chicheley, Sir Thomas Lunsford and Colonel Philip Honeywood at Captain Ralph Wormeley's, on the Rappahannock River, and joined in the "feasting and carousing."



Governor Berkeley, a staunch Royalist, made the Cavaliers from across the seas particularly welcome, and as Colonel Norwood recorded, "house and purse were open to all such." Incidently, the term Cavalier loosely applied at times to all gentlemen who came to Virginia in the seventeenth century, irrespective of date, was a designation strictly applicable to those of a political party, loyal to the cause of Charles I, and it came into use during the Civil Wars in England nearly thirty-five years after Jamestown was settled.

Not only were guests from far-away places accorded the utmost in hospitality and given every indication that they were welcome, but visitors from neighboring plantations were often honored guests and they were ever the first consideration of their host. On 3 August 1658, Henry Perry of "Buckland" in Charles City County had been subpoenaed to appear in Court as a witness. On that day he had guests, so he addressed a polite note to the Court stating that he had a "company of friends" and therefore could not be present to testify as summoned to do. His courteous note was recorded in the County Court records.

The custom, occasionally adhered to, in the present time, of laying an extra place at the table for the possible coming of an unexpected guest from near or far, had its American origin in the seventeenth century in Virginia. More often then than now the extra place was filled at meal time.

FAMILY TRAVEL

Since all the early Virginia plantations, both large and small, were located either on the rivers or their estuaries, travel was almost entirely by sloop for distances, and by shallop or skiff for brief journeys. The families used such craft to attend church, and the planters to attend Court, the Council or sessions of the Assembly. In the latter half of the century, travel by horseback to the centers, or to attend funerals, or to visit friends, if not too far distant, became popular, especially as horses bred in the Colony had multiplied. The more affluent planters owned numerous horses mentioned in wills and, also, in inventories along with bridles, bits, stirrups and saddles.

In 1679, the Justices of Warwick County noted that a great number of small horses were running wild on "every man's land" and, in consequence, issued an order requiring that horses be penned, in order that the breed in the County "might not be crossed unfavorably." The same year, young Thomas Harris, son of Major William Harris of Henrico County, bequeathed to "my cousin Richard Ligon all my horses, mares or foals that can be proved to be mine ... they not being given by my grandfather into the hands of the overseers." His grandfather, deceased about 1657, was, prior to that time, in possession of horses as the aforesaid entry shows. Colonel Joseph Bridger, of Isle of Wight County, owned fourteen horses at the time of his death. These are shown in the inventory of his estate entered, 1686. Thomas Cocke of Henrico County, who died in 1696, disposed of a large estate in his will, including his horses.

The absence of vehicles, except for a coach, a calash and carts, was due perhaps not so much to cost and the necessity for importing them as to the complete lack of passable roads in the Colony. Cartways, which were the worn and widened Indian trails, over which oxen hauled heavy loads, were the open ways over which travel by land could be undertaken. The bodies of the carts were made in the Colony usually and attached to wheels imported from England. Both the pillion and the side-saddle, the latter an item listed in the inventory of Mrs. Elizabeth Digges, 1692, were used by the women in accompanying the men on journeys. A pillion and a pillion cloth were bequeathed in 1652, by Captain John Upton, of Isle of Wight County, to his stepdaughter.

Notwithstanding the almost complete lack of highways, two Virginians are known to have owned vehicles for travel in the seventeenth century. The commission sent over from England to look into conditions which brought about Bacon's Rebellion complained, 1677, that Governor Berkeley had sent them from his plantation "Greenspring" to Jamestown, a distance of three miles, in his coach with the common hangman as a postillion. William Fitzhugh, a well-to-do planter of Stafford County, owned a calash, a sort of a cab imported from England.

Those who did not own horses considered it no hardship to walk miles to their destinations. Even so, the horse eventually became indispensable to Virginians of all classes, who became very skilled riders at an early age. Their adeptness in this as well as their knowledge in breeding, training and handling horses passed from generation to generation until the twentieth century. When the automobile supplanted the family surrey, and the network of hard surfaced highways succeeded to the shady, "woodsy," dirt roads, Virginia horses were retired from their long and noteworthy service to Colony and to State.

THE FASHIONS

The earliest reference to a garment maker in Virginia is a petition entered in the General Court, 1626, through which Alice Boyse, widow, sought to reserve for herself and family indefinitely the services of young Joseph Royall, who had been brought to the colony by her late husband to make apparel for the family and such servants as Boyse retained under him.

The costumes of the seventeenth century followed precisely the prevailing styles in England though dress, through necessity, often was less elaborate. Travel, by the colonials back and forth to England, and the arrival of ships ladened with merchandise of all sorts, kept the planters and their wives abreast of the changing modes in dress. There were three major styles in the seventeenth century: the Jacobean, the Puritan and the elaborate dress of the Restoration.

These styles when reviewed today seem much too elaborate for a wilderness; however, news, circulated in England about the Colony, gave only encouraging accounts of an opulent land; thus, the men and women, who came, brought with them the essentials for a normal home life, and dress was an important aspect of ordinary living in England. Nevertheless, the authorities in Virginia took cognizance of the emphasis on dress, and, in order to encourage expenditures for necessities rather than the luxuries in clothing, the Assembly of 1619 enacted a provision taxing an unmarried man according to his apparel, and a married man according to the clothing possessed by himself and members of his family.



During the first quarter of the seventeenth century, men wore less elaborate costumes than the puffed, slashed modes of the Renaissance. The breeches were loose but covered the knee where they were fastened with buttons or a sash of ribbon, which often also decorated the instep of the high-heeled shoe. The doublet had fewer slashes and more padding. A stiff beaver hat, decorated with a white plume, rested on the head, with locks falling around the neck and often over the shoulders. The women as well as the men discarded the huge ruff, replacing it with a flaring collar known as the "falling band." The bodices of the women remained cylindrical in shape with sleeves tight from shoulder to elbow, falling loosely to the wrist where they were often finished with turned back cuffs. The farthingale gave way to the skirt, open from waist to hem in front, to show an elaborate petticoat. Both skirts were short enough to expose the instep and rosette or buckle on the shoe. The women forsook the caps formerly in vogue and adopted also the stiff beaver hats with feathers.



With the coming of Charles I to the throne, decorative features were added to the fashions. Colored ribbons, displayed in bunches at the knees, on doublets and as ties to hold back flowing locks, came into vogue along with flaring boots elaborately trimmed on the inner side of the flare, which was turned back. The women's costumes also underwent similar elaborations. Gloves appeared, also muffs, and the long circular cape was used as a wrap.

The severity of the regime, as established under the Commonwealth, 1649, was reflected in the dress of both men and women when all finery was discarded. Fabrics became somber in color and unpretentious in texture. Men had their locks shorn close to the head, and women returned to the simple caps or hoods, which held the hair close to the head. Virginia authorities took cognizance of England's turn towards simplicity in dress, and enacted a law prohibiting the introduction of clothing containing silk, or of silk goods in pieces, except for scarfs, silver and gold lace or ribbons interwoven with silver or gold. The law further provided for confiscation of silk articles brought into the colony against the law.



After ten years of this severity in dress, the populace in Virginia was ready for the change, which Charles II brought to England with his restoration as monarch. Having spent his exile in France at the brilliant court of Louis XIV, he brought with him, on his return to England, fashions which the colonials sought to adopt, although they were restricted somewhat because of the limited importations of silks and satins, elaborate colored ribbons, fine linen, beruffled shirts, and jeweled garters for the men.

The antecedent of the present-day coat worn by men was introduced in England by Charles II, having been patterned after a Persian coat brought to his attention. This coat, straight and collarless, was buttoned from neck to knees where it ended. The close sleeves were short, and finished with a deep turned back cuff, below which extended the lace ruffles of the shirt sleeve. In cold weather, a greatcoat of frieze (a shaggy-piled woolen fabric) was worn over the costume.

As the century wore on, women's dress became increasingly elaborate also. The skirts were looped high at the sides over trailing petticoats, the fronts of which were covered with fancy aprons of silk, linen or lace. The bodice was usually laced across the front with ribbons. Red-heeled shoes added a note of interest to milady's outfit.

Children's dress was patterned identically after that of their elders and, as may be imagined, very little freedom of movement was afforded.

The inventory of Philip Felgate, Gentleman, of Lower Norfolk County, entered on the records, 1646, shows that some of the more elegant styling in dress had been brought to the Colony at that time. He possessed a black cloth suit, two buff suits and a buff doublet, a short cloth coat and a coat of squirrel skins. To complete his costume there were two pairs of silk stockings, a pair of silk stirrup hose and black silk garters, five pairs of shoes, a beaver hat, a silver hatband. Evidently, Felgate was of the military service, for he had brought with him, to the colonies, a suit of black armor with a headpiece of white armor and a sword with a gold hilt. He owned also a musket and a rest for it, and was outfitted with a "suite of bandoleers," the latter, seldom listed in inventories, was a belt arrangement with loops, usually twelve, in which were fitted small pierced metal cases for carrying the slow matches (actually fuses), by which the charge for firing the gun was ignited. Three Monmouth caps, customarily worn by soldiers and sailors of the period, were among his possessions.

Major Croshaw's stepdaughter, upon the eve of departure from England, 1661, for Virginia, had been furnished with a scarf, a white sarcenet and a ducape hood, a white flannel petticoat, two green aprons, three pairs of gloves, along with a riding-scarf, a mask and a pair of shoes. Mrs. Sarah Willoughby of Lower Norfolk County, who died 1673, left a wardrobe valued at 14 pounds, 19 shillings. It included five petticoats, a red silk, a blue silk and a black silk, another of India silk and worsted prunella and a fifth of linen and calico. Also, the lady left a black silk gown, a scarlet waistcoat, a sky-colored satin bodice, a pair of red paragon bodices, a worsted mantle, two hoods, a striped-stuff jacket, seven handkerchiefs, six aprons, three of fine and three of coarse Holland.

Daniel Hopkinson, merchant, who died in Virginia, 1636, bequeathed to relatives and friends beaver hats, which had become very much the vogue during the reign of James I. Similarly, Robert Nickolson of London, who died on a voyage to Virginia, bequeathed to relatives in the Colony and to several of his associates, kid gloves, buckskin gloves and cordovan gloves.

In the seventeenth century clothes were not discarded as they are today for the garments, particularly for "Sunday wear" were carefully made. The more affluent planters had clothes made in England, William Fitzhugh having ordered from London, 1697, two suits, one for winter and one for summer.

It was not uncommon to find clothing bequeathed in wills. In 1676, James Crewes, ill-fated associate of Nathaniel Bacon in the Rebellion, bequeathed to young Daniel Llewellyn, his "best suit and coat."

JEWELRY

The reader may wonder when and where jewels could be worn in seventeenth-century Virginia when, even at the close of the century, there were no centers, other than church at which a lady might attend to display her ornaments. Yet, the feminine frailty to covet the beautiful, whether in gems, in fine household furnishings, linens or silver, was perhaps even stronger than it is today. Possession of jewels was a mark of distinction, and, even though the precious baubles could be shown at functions but rarely, there was satisfaction in ownership and compensation in the admiration they elicited when worn.

The colonials possessed a great deal more jewelry than might be imagined. The opulence of the English merchants, trading in all parts of the world, in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, had enabled many to invest their surpluses in jewels, which fluctuated less than the unsteady values in the media of exchange, and, therefore, were an investment rarely decreasing in value. Moreover, jewels could be transported more readily than either gold or silver and, since the goldsmiths in England and Holland were the early bankers, they often advised their customers, particularly those about to embark upon a voyage to Virginia, to invest their profits in gems, easy to carry, not likely to fluctuate and always desirable.

The unusual purposes, to which jewels might be put, is recounted in a record of the sale of Mrs. Moseley's jewels to Colonel Francis Yeardley, who desired them as a gift to his wife, Sarah (Offley), widow successively of John Gookin and Adam Thoroughgood. William Moseley, his wife Susan and two sons Arthur and William arrived in Virginia, 1649, from Holland and settled in Lower Norfolk County. By reason of the family's "great want of cattle," Mrs. Moseley, the following year, sold some of her jewels: a gold hat band enameled and set with diamonds, a jewel of gold (probably a pendant) enameled and set with diamonds, and a diamond ring. In a letter to the purchaser, she stated that they were genuine, having been examined by a goldsmith in The Hague, and were worth L11 4s. In exchange, the Moseleys received five cows and four oxen. Having still in her possession a ruby ring, a sapphire and an emerald ring, Mrs. Moseley could be gracious in parting with her gems and wrote Colonel Yeardley, she had rather his wife wear them than any gentlewoman she yet knew in the country, and wished her "health and prosperity" in her display of them.

At the same time, Mrs. Sarah Yeardley, the daughter of a well-to-do English merchant, and the spouse successively of three prosperous husbands, possessed other jewels. Her will dated, 1657, directed that her "best diamond necklace and jewell" should be sent to England to purchase six diamond rings and two black tombstones, the latter to be placed over her grave and that of her second husband, at the churchyard at Lynnhaven. Since all things ornamental were under a ban during the Commonwealth in England, it is not surprising that Mrs. Yeardley's necklace did not bring even the price of the two tombstones, which cost L19 7s., while the diamond ornament brought only L15. Yet, the tombstones, the inscriptions on which are extant, have left to posterity a permanent record of Mrs. Yeardley and her three husbands. After all, values are relative, and could Mrs. Sarah (Offley-Thoroughgood-Gookin) Yeardley view today the position she enjoys in the romance of Virginia's seventeenth century, she likely would not regret having traded diamonds for tombstones.

One of the earliest records of jewelry in Virginia is in the will of Mrs. Elizabeth Draper of London, dated 1625, in which she bequeathed to her granddaughters, Elizabeth and Mary Peirsey, daughters of the cape-merchant Abraham Peirsey, each, a diamond ring, Mary's set "after the Dutch fashion." Arthur Smith I of Isle of Wight County made a bequest, 1645, of his "seal ring of gold," to his son Thomas. This much worn ring has passed from generation to generation, and remains today in possession of a descendent in the county in which the testator died. He also bequeathed mourning rings to the overseers of his will. Such bequests, as the latter, were frequently made and were inscribed, or carried a locket in which hair or some other memento could be placed. Mrs. Elizabeth Digges' inventory listed among her possessions: eight gold mourning rings, probably bequeathed to her by deceased relatives, a diamond ring, a small stone ring, a parcel of sea-pearls and a bodkin, the latter an ornamental hairpin.

In 1651, Robert Nickolson of London, merchant, dying on a voyage to Virginia, made en route a will with numerous bequests, among them, a diamond ring and a gold ring to Mistress Beheathland Bernard, daughter of Mrs. Mary Bernard and granddaughter of Robert Beheathland, who had come to Virginia with the first settlers in 1607.

In 1673, Mrs. Amory Butler, nee Elizabeth Underwood (Taylor-Slaughter-Catlett) left to legatees a collection of jewelry probably assembled, in part, during her four ventures in matrimony. These jewels included her wedding ring—to which husband is not known—two big stone rings, a blue enameled ring, two mourning rings, a small diamond ring and a large diamond ring, a small pearl necklace and a necklace with large pearls, a silver bodkin and a gilded bodkin, a pair of silver buttons, and a pair of silver buckles. The year following, Mrs. Rose Gerrard, widow, of Westmoreland County, made several gifts to her eldest daughter, Sarah, wife of William Fitzhugh, and among them were "one necklace of pearls."

Colonel Thomas Pitt, of Isle of Wight County, had the forethought, before he died in 1687, to leave to his wife her wedding ring along with her wearing apparel, and also title to her two diamond rings, an enameled ring, and a necklace of pearls. These items, otherwise, could have been accounted in his estate for division among heirs, for the law gave a woman no title to her possessions during the life of husband. Colonel Bridger also left to his wife, 1683, all "her apparel, rings and jewels."

Although clocks are listed in seventeenth century inventories, one of the earliest mentions of a watch was in 1697, when Richard Aubrey of Essex County, bequeathed two silver seals and his "pendilum watch."

FESTIVITIES, RECREATION AND SPORTS

That Christmas was an occasion to be enjoyed, both with comfort and merriment in the Colony, is indicated in an account, recorded in 1608, when a group of the first settlers in two ships undertook to visit Powhatan at his seat Werowocomoco on the Pamunkey (York) River. Setting sail from Jamestown they encountered rough weather and were forced to put in at Kecoughtan (now Hampton), where they spent Christmas with the Indians. Their scribes recorded that they were "never more merry, nor never had better fires in England than in the dry, warm, smoky houses of Kecoughtan."



Christmas in the seventeenth century was celebrated on the day known to the present as "Old Christmas," that is the sixth of January.

The dry, smoky houses of the Indians were long, arched structures with a framework of bent saplings, over which was secured a close covering of bark, while the roof was covered with mats or reeds. A fire built in the middle of the habitation, with smoke curling through an opening above, afforded both warmth and fuel for cooking. Mats and skins, hung at the entrance and exit, kept in the heat and also some of the smoke, but shut out the rough weather. Several families slept, ate and carried on their indoor activities in these ample shelters.

And, here, it was that the colonists, with only the Indian maids to provide feminine company, celebrated the first Christmas, of which there is a record in the new world. After the feasting and the passing of the pipes, as a token of friendship, there was probably a customary Indian oration of welcome. Then, the Indian dancers appeared with their rattles, and beating time to the tom-toms with their feet, they gestured wildly with their arms. As a participant became weary, another took his place and this exhibition, first stimulating in its activity, then soothing in its cadence, carried far into the night, as, one by one, the audience of white men and natives drifted off to the hurdles that served as beds, and to sleep.

When the weather broke, and before the colonists resumed their journey, they likely were entertained by their hosts in a deer-hunt staged according to the Indian custom. Several Indian runners left, early in the morning, to drive up the deer and herd them on a narrow peninsula, of which there are many between the James and the York Rivers and elsewhere in Tidewater Virginia. Canoes, with native hunters and their white men guests, awaited in the waters nearby, and when the drivers, pursuing the deer, forced them into the water, the frightened animals were slaughtered in numbers. Ladened with the spoils, hosts and guests returned to the bark houses to cook and feast upon their game.

Firearms played an important part in all celebrations in the seventeenth century as every planter possessed one or more "pieces" which were used to give dash to the frolics. A proclamation, issued in 1627, warns against "spending powder at meetings, drinkings, marriages and entertainments." Thus, it is certain that the colonists were wont to assemble and celebrate as occasions warranted.

One of the most colorful of these occasions took place at Middle Plantation (later Williamsburg) in 1677; Sir Herbert Jeffreys, having been sent over with 1000 English soldiers to look into the state of affairs in Virginia and to put an end to the Rebellion led by Nathaniel Bacon, found Bacon dead and the Rebellion over. Shortly thereafter, Governor Sir William Berkeley, who had caused so much grief by hanging Bacon's chief associates, was summoned back to England, whereupon Jeffreys ordered a celebration. The King's birthday provided the occasion which he promoted, not only to honor the Sovereign but to assemble the people, to heal the wounds and promote peace with the Indians. Not only the colonists and the English troops gathered, but all the leading Indian chieftains and queens of Tidewater and their retinues were invited, and attended in ceremonial regalia. That there was not only formal recognition of the important day, but much firing of arms, drinking and hilarity on the side may be certain.

The planters of the Northern Neck, living in widely separated plantations, took steps in 1670, to bring together the families and promote sociability in the section. An agreement was entered into by Mr. Corbin, Mr. Gerrard, Mr. Lee and Mr. Allerton to build a banqueting house "for the continuance of a good neighborhood." Each man or his heirs in turn then would make "an honorable treatment fit to entertain the undertakers thereof, their wives, mistresses and friends, yearly and every year." This appears to be the antecedent of the modern country club.

In hunting, fishing, and fowling there was always ample out-of-door recreation at hand. In addition to the deer-hunts, there were often bear-hunts, and 'possum and 'coon-hunts were popular nighttime sports. On the latter occasions a party of men set out, preferably on a moonlight night, with their dogs. Having entered the woods, the dogs shortly took up the trail of their intended victim, while the men on foot followed the yelping dogs through the rough terrain. Finally the exhausted animal was "treed" and there the sport reached a climax. If the dogs were unable to reach their victim the tree was hastily felled, whereupon the pack of dogs made short work of the creature. In case the 'possum sought refuge in a hollow log, he was smoked out and the end was the same.

There was less excitement in hunting rabbits and squirrels, and the pursuit of the fox had certainly not attained in the seventeenth century the social status that it enjoys in sections of Virginia today.

In fishing, many of the colonists acquired from the natives a skill in spearing fish, though netting them was far more general in the Colony.

Horse-racing as a regular sport was inaugurated in the latter half of the seventeenth century, although it does not appear that horses were bred and kept especially for racing in that period as they were during the eighteenth century. At the "race-paths" at "Malvern Hill," the Cocke plantation in Henrico, running the quarter of a mile was a popular contest.

Elsewhere, similar races were engaged in. In 1674, James Bullock, a tailor, was fined 100 pounds of tobacco in York County for racing his horse against Mr. Mathew Slader's horse, the decree reciting that it was "contrary to law for a laborer to make a race, being a sport only for gentlemen." Yet, Mr. Slader's intent to cheat at the race brought him a sentence of an "hour in the stocks."

On 10 May, 1676, Samuel Morris aged 27 years, deposed in Court about a horse-race run at Rappahannock Church.

Richard Ligon, to whom his cousin Thomas Harris bequeathed his "mares and foals" in 1679, was one of the racing enthusiasts of the Colony. He engaged in a horse-race and a controversy over it in 1678, and the following year he ran his horse against that of Alexander Womack, the wager being 300 pounds of tobacco. In 1683, Andrew Martin and Edward Hatcher put their horses in a contest in which the loser's horse was the stake to be won.

The colonists often were quarrelsome over their racing, and not infrequently, bets on horses were put in writing and recorded in the County records, that there might be no mistake in regard to the terms. These races elicited a great deal of interest on the part of the people in the countryside where they were staged.

For active recreation, bowling and tenpins; and card games of various sorts were engaged in, often at the ordinaries, and, since wagers on the games of which there are a record, were usual, they will be dealt with elsewhere.

MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS

Although existing records do not convey information, as to the part music played in the life of the Virginia planter of the seventeenth century, they do provide clues that music was enjoyed, and that a number of instruments were in the colony. Josias Mode, host at the French Ordinary in York County, whose widow, before 1679, married Charles Hansford, of York, owned two violins. It is reasonable to conclude, therefore, that guests at his hostelry were frequently entertained with music from that instrument. The virginal (a small rectangular spinet without legs) was the most common of instruments known to have been in possession of the colonists, while they also owned and played the fiddle, both small and large, the cornet, the recorder (a flageolet or old type of flute), the flute and the hautboy. These instruments in the hands of music lovers, frequently self-taught for the most part, entertained the planters' families and enlivened gatherings assembled for weddings and birthday celebrations. The hand lyre also was known in Virginia.

DRINKING HABITS

In their drinking habits the Englishmen in Virginia were no different from the Englishmen "at home." Accustomed to the use of "strong waters," they brought their tastes and their habits to the Colony. Hence, it is not surprising that the idea arose in England that the excessive sickness in Virginia was due to the substitution of water for beer in Virginia. This notion may have had substance at the time, since there were no sanitary precautions in the area of the shallow wells at Jamestown. Polluted water, no doubt, contributed to the prevalent sickness in the summer months, whereas the fermented and distilled waters disposed of impurities before they were ready for consumption and, thus, assured to imbibers a degree of safety from germ-bred diseases.

As early as 1609, the Virginia Company advertised for two brewers available to go to Virginia, and, in plans for the third and largest expedition sent under Sir Thomas Gates and Sir George Somers in 1609, provision was made to include experienced men, so that malt liquors could be brewed in the Colony and thus, the necessity of crowding the ships with such supplies generally in demand, could be avoided.

Prior to 1625, two brewhouses were being operated in Virginia, and twenty years later there were six. Also, the Virginia Assembly recommended that all immigrants should bring in their own supply of malt to be used in brewing, thus avoiding the use of drinking water, at least until they had become accustomed to the climate. At the same time, various products in the colony were found adaptable for producing drinks—persimmons for beer, sassafras for wine, and both barley and Indian corn were cultivated for brewing purposes.

Many of the planters developed their own facilities of one kind or another. Colonel Bridger had a malt-mill, and John Fisher a still. Cider was the established drink for family use and, as is known, gathered a good deal of strength as it aged. In addition, as trade between the Colony and the West Indies became brisk, quantities of rum (made from molasses) was brought in from that source. It became a common drink, was distributed especially for the use of servants, and was generally available in taverns, as was brandy distilled from peaches and apples.

The well-to-do planters were able to purchase the imported liquors and wines of a finer grade, sack and "aquavite" being the most popular in the early part of the century, while later, madeira, claret, and Rhenish wine became available. Some of the finest wines were to be had at the taverns, including sherry, malaga, canary, and claret.

At meetings of public bodies, a supply of liquor was always provided for, ahead of time; Charles Hansford, of York County, agreed, in 1677, to supply the Justices meeting at the leased home of his deceased brother, a gallon of brandy at each session of the Court. One of the duties of the Auditor General of Virginia was to arrange for the supply of wines and liquors, which the august body of the Governor's Council of State expected to be on hand, while they were in session. While William Byrd I held that office, in the latter part of the seventeenth century, he ordered for their use, twenty dozen bottles of claret, six dozen of canary, sherry, and Rhenish wines, and a quarter of a cask of brandy.

Excessive use of liquors became the concern of the first Assembly sitting in 1619, who ordered that persons guilty of a first offense be privately reproved by the minister. In 1624, the churchwardens of every parish were ordered to report to the Commander of the plantations, in which the Parish lay, all persons who had imbibed too freely. By 1632, a fine of five shillings was set to discourage intoxication, and by the middle of the century, heavier fines were imposed.

The colonists were aware of the excessive use of liquor, particularly in gatherings. The will, of Edmund Watts of York County, dated 20 February 1675, forbade the serving of drinks at his funeral, the testator reciting that, inasmuch as he had observed "the debauched drinking used at burials, tending to the dishonor of God and religion, my will is that no strong drink be provided or spent at my burial."

In 1676, while Nathaniel Bacon held sway in the colony, efforts were made to suppress many long-standing abuses, among them, excessive drinking encouraged by the many taverns and ordinaries in existence. Laws were enacted, at that time, revoking the licenses of all inns, alehouses and drinking establishments, except those at James City, and two at the ferries on the York River, where only beer and cider could be sold. This was the first recorded attempt at prohibition in Virginia. After the Rebellion was over, the enactment was modified, permitting the operation of two ordinaries in each county. Jamestown, the seat of government, was excepted from the limitation.

THE MINT JULEP

Just when the famous drink of the Virginia gentleman, the mint julep, was first mixed is not known, but the Colony possessed all the requisites during the seventeenth century. As heretofore mentioned, there was an ice house at Jamestown about the middle of the century. The fragrant mint grown in the planters' gardens, along with other herbs, has been known from time immemorial for its cooling refreshment, especially on a hot summer day. Brewed in a tea, mint was used both for a drink and, as a medicine, to induce mild perspiration and so bring down fever. The leaves, at times, made into a poultice, soothed inflammation.

Added to "strong waters" and ice, the mint with its delicate flavor, its cooling, soothing qualities, made the perfect drink for Virginia gentlemen during the humid midsummer. It was a favorite all-year-around, and three times a day. A julep before breakfast was usual, and grew into a custom, which lingered into the early twentieth century, in areas where the plantation manners persisted.

Although pewter was in general use for tableware during the period, glass was made in the colony, as early as 1609, and imported glasses not infrequently are mentioned in inventories. Mrs. Elizabeth Digges, of the "E D Plantation" in York County, left an estate in 1691 that included both earthenware and glasses.

With all the requisites at hand, it seems probable that the mint julep had its origin in the latter half of the century. If there was a company of friends, chilling the glasses ahead probably fell to a servant, who also was trained in the art of crushing the mint leaves with a bit of sugar, in each glass. Into this, at the proper moment was added the crushed ice to the brim and, as a jigger or two of liquor flowed over the ingredients, the glasses frosted and were topped with a sprig of mint. The pleasantness of the drink was not deemed its single virtue, for there was a very sincere belief in the efficacy of this refreshment in the promotion of good health and, particularly, in warding off the current fevers that plagued the lowlands.

GAMING

The inherent human trait of taking a chance for possible gain led the colonists to amuse themselves at games and sports, in which they invariably added a wager to lend zest to the occasion. This practice, generally prevalent in England, quite naturally was extended to the Colony, as the English established themselves with all their customs and habits in the new land. Betting was general at games and in sports, including horse-racing, heretofore dealt with, and cockfights.

Efforts to halt gambling apparently had little effect as most of it was carried on semi-privately. However, in 1646, Richard Smyth and John Bradshaw were fined 100 pounds of tobacco in Lower Norfolk County for "unlawful gaming at cards."

Unfortunately, knowledge of games played in the seventeenth century is available largely through the bets placed and subsequent accounts of these in the Court records. Doubtless many games were played among families on the plantations, as they are today, among friends, without wagers, but there was no occasion to record them. Thus, the fact predominates that cards, dice and ninepins were generally sources of amusement—for stakes.

Playing ninepins at the ordinary was part of the gentleman's day, when he came to the centers in the Colony, where these public places were established in numbers, after the middle of the century. At Varina, in Henrico County, Richard Cocke of "Bremo" operated the ferry and also the ordinary there, where in 1681, his nephew young Thomas Cocke, Jr. is recorded as having been playing at ninepins for stakes with Richard Rathbone and Robert Sharpe. In 1685, in Henrico also, possibly at the ordinary, Giles Carter won 500 pounds of tobacco at dice from Charles Stewart. A card game called "putt" (put) and a game known as cross and pile (probably similar to "heads and tails") also were the media for bets, the bets no doubt affording the main interest in the game.

Luke Thornton and Peter Evans of Richmond County, "having agreed to play at cards at the game of 'putt'," had their arrangements with one another recorded, 7 February 1695, together with the consideration stipulated for the winner. The records do not reveal the outcome of the game nor any provision for enforcing by law the terms agreed upon. Nevertheless, the likelihood is that the winner collected, for, otherwise, the loser could be held up to public scorn.

FUNERAL CUSTOMS

When Abraham Peirsey, affluent cape-merchant, directed in his will, 1628, that he be buried "without any pomp or vainglory," he probably was protesting the tendency towards elaborate funerals, even in the early days of the Colony. It is not known whether or not his wishes in this respect were carried out; however, he was, no doubt, buried in his garden near his new frame house, as he requested.

On the other hand, Daniel Hopkinson, English merchant, who died on a voyage to Virginia, requested that he be "decently" buried at the Kecoughtan (Hampton) church, in accordance with the customs prevailing in the area. The amount spent on his funeral is an item in the accounts of the Tristram and Jane, on which he had crossed the seas as supercargo.

Arthur Smith of Isle of Wight County, in his will dated 1645, directed that he be "buried by my late beloved wife," and Richard Cocke, of "Bremo" on the lower James River, requested in his will, dated 1665, that he be "interred in the orchard near my first wife." Doubtless, the second wife, mother of several of his younger children, carried out her husband's wishes and permitted her deceased mate whatever comfort there might be in the forethought of resting in the cold, dark ground beside the lovely lady he had first chosen to be his bride.



At every plantation there was a family burying ground, not far distant from the house, and usually in or near the garden, where the blossoms carefully nurtured, brightened the last resting places of deceased members of the family. The plantation burying-ground originated through necessity rather than in sentiment. In the seventeenth century a real problem would have been posed by any attempt to transport the deceased and the funeral procession to the distant churchyard.

The Swann family, living across from Jamestown at "Swann's Point," buried deceased members on the plantation and, for almost three centuries, their graves could be identified. The Travis family living on Jamestown Island and near the church there, nevertheless, interred their dead in the family burying-ground at the lower end of the island, and some of the later marked graves may still be identified.

Markers in the Jamestown church, some over unknown graves, indicate the practice of burying persons, probably those of importance, within the church, as was often done in England. The Knight's tomb in the Jamestown churchyard is believed to be that of Sir George Yeardley, appointed Governor of Virginia, 1618, and deceased, 1627. Colonel John Page, who gave the land on which Bruton Parish Church in Williamsburg is built, was buried in its churchyard, as were his wife and son Francis. The stone, placed in memory of Colonel Page, was later removed and placed within the Church.

While funerals in seventeenth-century Virginia were solemn occasions, there was an inescapable social aspect to the gatherings of family and friends, who assembled from the countryside, both to comfort the bereaved and attend the departed on his last journey. When a planter or a member of his family died, messengers were sent out at once by sloop or shallop up and down the rivers or later, overland, on horseback. If the family bore arms, the hatchment, emblazoned with this emblem, was hung upon the door. Incidentally, the only known hatchment, that has survived in Virginia, is in possession of the Carter family at "Shirley" in Charles City County.

At once, preparations were begun to accommodate the relatives and friends who were sure to assemble for the last rites. Coming from a distance, they would be hungry upon arrival, and not only was a great amount of food prepared but the cellar was explored for its contents of drink, which the company expected to be brought forth. Occasionally, a man, in making his will, directed what should be spent for the "funeral meats" and drink, although Edmund Watts of York County, in 1675, forbade the serving of drinks at his funeral.

At the final rites for John Smalcomb in 1645, the company consumed a steer and a barrel of strong beer, the cost of which amounted to 960 pounds of tobacco, while the coffin cost only 250 pounds. The gathering assembled in 1678, for the funeral of Mrs. Elizabeth (Worsham) Epes, widow successively of William Worsham and Francis Epes of Henrico County, consumed a steer, three sheep, five gallons of wine, two gallons of brandy, ten pounds of butter and eight pounds of sugar.

The firing of guns was accepted as a regular feature of a funeral, and at the Smalcomb rites the powder spent amounted to twenty-four pounds of tobacco. In order to curb the waste of ammunition at entertainments, the Assembly, in 1655, passed an act forbidding its use on occasions except at "marriages and funerals."

In addition to expenditures as aforesaid and for the coffin, the latter usually made by some local carpenter, there were costs for notifying the countryside, costs for mourning bands, sitting up with the corpse, and the fee for the funeral sermon. If burial was in the churchyard, there was the cost of digging and filling the grave. The cost of a winding sheet of Holland (coarse unbleached linen), in 1652, was 100 pounds of tobacco. The cost of the funeral sermon in two instances in York County in 1667, was two pounds sterling each and in 1690, five pounds sterling.

As there were no undertakers, the laying out of the corpse was a tender ministration for which some close friend of the family volunteered. The technique for this service was passed from generation to generation and only in comparatively recent years has that custom been abandoned altogether.

The company of relatives and friends, who gathered for the funeral occasion, remained for several days and were, of course, fed and housed at the expense of the deceased's estate.

The law required that servants be buried in public cemeteries established for the purpose. This decree issued in the seventeenth century followed several scandals, occasioned by private funerals of deceased servants. In order to remove all possibility of suspicion, prior to burial, several neighbors were summoned to view the corpse, if death occurred under extraordinary circumstances, and to accompany the body to the grave. That such precautions were taken as early as 1629, so that possible murder would not go undetected, is shown in testimony before the General Court at Jamestown after the newly-born bastard child of a servant girl was found dead. Several persons were called as witnesses, and when evidence was produced that the child might have been born alive, the serving maid's master was required to give bond for her appearance at a higher court.

TOMBSTONES

The well-to-do planters or their families invariably saw that appropriate tombstones with proper inscriptions—lengthy ones, characteristic of the day—were duly placed. Some of these stones remain with barely legible inscriptions; others, the inscriptions on which, fortunately, were copied in a past era, have disappeared altogether. The oldest tombstone in Virginia with a legible inscription is that of Mrs. Alice Jordan at "Four Mile Tree" in Surry County. The inscription, reciting that she was the wife of George Jordan, gives praise in verse to her virtues.



Tombstones in the seventeenth century were real memorials, often giving parentage of the deceased, the name of wife or husband and the number of children. Furthermore, there was, as aforesaid, a eulogy of the deceased and, for men, an account of public service rendered.

With a great deal of pride in family background, those Englishmen in Virginia, whose families were entitled to bear arms, invariably had these cut upon the stones along with the lengthy inscriptions. The stones were ordered from England. As previously mentioned, Mrs. Sarah Yeardley, in 1657, directed that her executor sell her jewels and purchase in England stones for herself and her second husband. Her son, by the first husband, Adam Thoroughgood II of Lower Norfolk County, was equally zealous that proper memorials be placed and directed his executrix (wife), in his will, dated 1679, to have his body interred in the Church at Lynnhaven, and "cause a tombstone of marble to be sent for, with coat of arms of Sir George Yeardley [his wife's father] and myself." Unfortunately, these tombs together with the site of the old Lynnhaven Church, have been washed beneath the waters of Lynnhaven Bay.

The tombstones bearing coats of arms of George Read deceased, 1671 and his wife Elizabeth, daughter of Nicolas Martiau, uncovered during excavations at Yorktown in 1931 were removed to the graveyard surrounding Christ Church. The inscriptions, badly worn, were recut with information then in hand; however, the dates since have been found to be slightly in error. The tombstone of William Cole II, Secretary of State for the Colony, 1690, erected after his death, 1694, at "Bolthrope," bore the Cole coat of arms, accompanied by a lengthy inscription, reciting in part that the deceased was "unspotted on the bench, untainted at the bar." Unfortunately, when the graveyard lay neglected for many years and overgrown with vines, other ancient stones, placed there, were broken and portions of them, from time to time, carried away by fishermen to be used as mooring stones for their boats.

Theodorick Bland, deceased, 1671, was buried in the old churchyard now adjacent to the garden at "Westover." The inscription in Latin on his tombstone recites that it was erected "by his most disconsolate widow, a daughter of Richard Bennett Esq." Lewis Burwell, deceased 1653, was buried at his plantation, "Fairfield," in Gloucester County, and the tombstone erected to his memory, bearing arms, recited that he was descended from the ancient family of Burwell of Bedford and Northampton, England.

The tomb of Alice (Lukin) Page, wife of Colonel John Page, stands facing the west entrance to Bruton Parish Church in Williamsburg and is unique in that it bears the Lukin arms alone, indicating that the deceased was the sole heir of her father and thus entitled to his arms. Otherwise, the arms cut upon her stone would have been quartered with those of her husband.

The inscription on the tombstone of Edward Digges, buried on the "E D Plantation" (later, "Bellefield"), 1676, recited that he was the father of six sons and seven daughters. The broken tomb of Major Miles Cary I in a secluded spot in the area of his former plantation, "Windmill Point," in Warwick, was restored some years ago. The inscription relates, in part, that he was killed by the Dutch, during a foray which they made into Hampton Roads in 1667.



BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bruce, Philip A. Economic History of Virginia in the Seventeenth Century. New York, Macmillan, 1895. 2 vols.

Hening, W. W. Statutes at Large of Virginia, 1619-1792. 13 vols.

Jester, Annie Lash, and Martha Woodroof Hiden. Adventurers of Purse and Person, Virginia, 1607-1625. Printed by Princeton University Press. 1956.

Smith, John. Travels and Works. Edited by Edward Arber. Introduction by A. G. Bradley. Edinburgh, 1910. 2 vols.

Stanard, Mary N. The Story of Virginia's First Century. Philadelphia. 1928.

Strachey, William. The Historie of Travell into Virginia Britannia. Edited by Louis B. Wright and Virginia Freund. London. 1953.

Virginia, Colony. Council and General Court Minutes, 1622-32, 1670-1676. Edited by H. R. McIlwaine. Richmond. 1924.

Virginia Company of London. Records. Edited by Susan Myra Kingsbury. Washington, 1906-1935. 4 vols.

Virginia County Court Records. Manuscript volumes in Archives Division, Virginia State Library, passim.



INDEX

Accawmack, 19

Allen, Arthur, 24; John, 30

Allerton, Mr., 70

America, 20

Anne and Mary, 41

Apooke (tobacco), 5

Appomattox River, 19

Archer's Hope, 22

Armor, 16, 64

Arms, 16, 33, 38, 55, 64; see also Firearms

Artisans, 29, 30, 50, 51

Assembly 1619, 61

Atkins, John, 55

Aubrey, Richard, 68

Back River, 19; Northwest Branch of, 19

Bacon, Nathaniel, 65, 69, 74

"Bacon's Castle," 24

Bacon's Rebellion, 24, 35, 46, 60, 69, 70, 75

Bandoleers, 17, 64

Barker, William, 20

Bates, John, 28

Bathing facilities, 55

Bayly, Mary, 48

Beds and bedding, 27, 33, 37, 40, 53, 54

Beheathland, Dorothy, 9; Mary, 9; Robert, 9, 67

"Bellefield," 82; see also "E D Plantation"

Bennett, Edward, 48; Richard, 23, 82

Berkeley, Governor Sir William, 11, 23, 35, 46, 58, 60, 69

Berkeley Hundred, 11; settlement of, 12-14

Bermuda Islands, 4, 6, 30

Bernard, Mistress Beheathland, 67; Mrs. Mary, 67; Captain Thomas, 22

Biggs, Richard, 8

Blakeney, Norfolk, England, 31

Bland, Giles, 46; John, 46; Mrs. Sarah, 45, 46; Theodorick, 46, 82

Blaney's, Mr., 16

Blessing, 6

Blount, Humphrey, 26

Blount Point, 23

Boats: barks, shallops, skiffs, sloops, 17, 36, 59, 79

"Bolthrope," 42, 81

Boyse, Alice, 61

Bradshaw, John, 76

Branch, Benjamin, 24

Bray, Arthur of London, 43

"Bremo," 77, 78

Brew houses, 73

Brick, earliest mention of, 7, 21

Bridger, Elizabeth, 41; Hester (Pitt), 35, 45; Colonel Joseph, 34-41, 45, 55, 60, 68, 73; Joseph Jr., 35; Martha 41; Mary, 41

British Public Record Office, 15

Brocas, Captain, 23

Bruton Parish Church, 78, 82

Buck, Rev. Richard, 4, 20, 49

"Buckland," 59

Bullock, James, 71

Burden, Mary, 43

Burras, Ann, 1

Burwell, Lewis, 82

Bush, John, 16, 21

Butler, Mrs. Amory, 52, 53, 67; see also Underwood, Elizabeth

Byrd, William I, 34, 36

Cahan, John, 36

Calthrope, Anne, 32; Christopher, 19, 31-34, 57; Elinor, 32; James, 33

Candia, 18

Carter, Giles, 77

Carter family, 79

Cary, Major Miles I, 82

Cattle, trade jewels for, 66

Cavaliers, 58

Chamberlaine, Major Thomas, 24

Champion, John, 37

Charles I, King, 2, 17, 58, 62

Charles II, King, 63

Charles City: Corporation, 8, 10, 16; County, 34, 45, 47, 59, 79

Charles River Parish, 31, 43

Charlton, Stephen, 58

Chesapeake Bay, 15, 18, 19, 31

Chew, John, 20, 42

Chicheley, Sir Henry, 58

Chickahominy Indians, 26

Chickahominy River, 21

Chiskiacke Indians, 26

Chisman, Edward, 16; Lieutenant John, 16

Chisman's Creek, 32

Christ Church (Yorktown), 81

Christmas 1608, 68, 69

Chuckatuck, 28, 29

Chuckatuck Creek, 19

Claiborne, William, 20

Cocke, Richard, 76, 78; Thomas, 29, 60; Thomas Jr., 77

Cockerham, William, 45

Cole, Colonel William II, 23, 81

College projected, 7

Collins, John, 8; Susan, 8

Colonization, reasons for, 1

Commonwealth (England), 62, 66

Constable, Mrs. Rachel, 42

Coopey, Anthony, 14; Elizabeth, 14; Joane, 14

Copeland, Joseph, 29

Corbin, Mr., 70

Costumes, 61-65

Crete, oil from, 18

Crewes, James, 65

Criollo, 25

Croshaw, Major Joseph, 44, 64

Crowder's, Mr., 16

Culpeper, Frances, 42

"Curowoak," 36

Cutlery, 53

Dade, Captain Francis, 34

Dale, Sir Thomas, 7

Davis, Captain James, 8; Rachel, 8; Thomas, 8

Davison, Christopher, 55

De La Warr, Lord, 6, 13, 54

De Vries, Peter, 22, 57

Deliverance, 6

"Denbigh," 14, 23, 28, 58

Digges, Edward, 82; Mrs. Elizabeth, 50, 53, 55, 60, 67, 75

Divorce, 46

Dods, William, 50

Draper, Mrs. Elizabeth, 66

Drinking Habits, 72-76

Ducking stool, 47

Dunthorne, Thomas, 4, 20

Dutch foray, 82

Dutch Gap canal, 7

Dutch traders, 15

Eastern Shore, 12, 15, 19, 29, 43

"E D Plantation," 75, 82

Edwards, John, 49; Margaret, 49

Elizabeth City: Church, 18; Corporation, 3, 8, 10, 15, 16, 26, 31; County, 32

English, Richard, 48

Epes, Mrs. Elizabeth (Worsham), 79; Francis, 79

Essex County, 68

Evans, Peter, 77

Fairfax, William, 20

"Fairfield," Gloucester County, 82

Falcon, 4

Farrar, William, 4, 44, 45

Farrar's Island, 7

Fashions, 61-65

Felgate, Philip, 63

Felgate's Creek, 30

Festivities, 68-72

Finch, Frances, 14; William, 14

Firearms, 69, 79; see also Arms

Fisher, John, 29, 73; Philip, 29; Thomas, 29

Fishing, 71

Fitzhugh, Sarah, 67; William, 60, 64, 67

Fleete, Mrs. Sarah, 43

Flint, Mary, 8; Captain Thomas, 8

Flinton, Pharoah, 16

Flood, Captain John, 14

Flowerdieu, Temperance, 4

Flowerdew Hundred, 22

Food, preparation of, 55, 56

Forest, Mrs. Lucy, 1, 3; Thomas, 1

Forest Primeval, 25-27

Fort Henry, 31

"Four Mile Tree," 81

Fox, Major Richard, 58

French Ordinary, 72

Funeral Customs, 77-80

Furniture, 53-55

Gaming, 76, 77

Gany, Anna, 47; William, 47

Gates, Sir Thomas, 6, 7, 73

George, 8, 15

Gerrard, Mr., 70; Mrs. Rose, 67

Gibson, Thomas, 53

Gifford, Isabel, 14

Glassmaking, 4

Gloves: buckskin, cordovan, kid, 64

Godwin, Thomas, 41, 42; Martha (Bridger), 41

Goldsmiths, 65, 66

Goodale, "Goody," 47

Gookin, Daniel, 19, 22, 48, 57; John, 19, 22, 57, 65

Gorsuch, Mrs. Anne, 34

Greene, Joane, 13

"Greenspring," 23, 29, 35, 46, 60

Greville, Frances, 13

Gundry, Anne, 45

Hair Dressing, 62

Hallom, Robert, 48; William, 34

Ham, Joseph, 26, 27, 52

Hammond, Colonel Mainwaring, 58

Hamor, Ralph, 20

Hampton, 18, 68, 77; see also Kecoughtan

Hampton Roads, 15

Hansford, Charles, 72, 74; Mrs. Elizabeth, 44; family, 30

Hatcher, Edward, 71

Hatchments, 79

Harris, Thomas, 59, 71; Major William, 59

Harvey, Captain John, 15, 20; also Governor Sir John, 21

Hay, William, 43

Henrico: Corporation, 10, 15, 16; County, 24, 25, 59, 60, 71, 77, 79; Town, 7

Headrights, 8

Heating facilities, 51

Herring Creek, 47

Hickman, William, 50

Hobson, William, 30

Hog Island, 48

Holland, goldsmiths in, 65

Holt, Randall, 48

Homes, 3, 6, 7, 20-25, 55