8/10/2019 Ragland Raglin
7/13
58
T I M E L IN E OF A M ER I CA N H I ST O RY
1607 The establishment of the first permanent English colony inA
m e r i c a J ames town
1620 The establishment of the Plymouth Colonyby the Pilgrims1630
The establishment of the Massachusetts Bay Colony by the
P u r i t a n s
1640-1660 The English Civil War the establishment of Oliver
Cromw e l l s C o m m o nw e a l th
1632-1682 The establishment of the English Middle Colonies
(betweenMassachusetts and Virginia)
1662 Issue of thecharter for the establishment of the Carolina
Colony by Charl es II
1732 The establishmentofthe Colony of Georgia, lastofthe
originalt h i r te e n c o l o ni e s
1755-1763 The French and Indian War which resulted in driving
theFrench from N o r th A m e ri c a
1775-1783 The American Revolution which resulted in the
independenceof t h e A m e ri c a n c o l on i e s
1789 Adoption of the Constitution of the United States a
federalsystem of government
1790-1797 The administration of George Washington1801-1809 The
administration of Thomas Jefferson1803 The Louisiana Purchase
extensionof the western boundary
of the United States from the Mississippi River to the RockyM o
u n t a i n s
1812-1815 The War of 1812 Second war with Great Britain1829-1837
The administration of Andrew Jackson1846-1848 The Mexican War
acquisition of Texas and the Southwest1861-1865 Th e American Civil
Wa r
1865-1890 American settlement of the Great Plains1898 The
Spanish-American War acquisition of territories out
s id e t he U ni te d S ta t es
)
Chapter 1 AMERICAN ROOTS
The progenitor of the Ragland family in America was Evan
Raglandlived inSt. Peter s parish, New Kent County, Virginia during
thelatter pof the seventeenth century. Prior to May of 1689, no
records in Amepertaining to Evan Ragland have been located,
although an extensivesearch in several colonies was conducted.
Nevertheless, sufficientdocumentaryand circumstantial evidencedoes
exist to reconstruct withframework ofhistorical conjecture,a broad,
but probably accuratepicturehis early life. The evidence strongly
indicates that he was the eldest soThomas Ragland and Jane Morgan
ofSt. Decuman s parish, Somerset, Eland, and that he was born in
that parish in 1656. The facts andcumstances surrounding the
arrival of Evan Ragland in America are, at b
AIcnglliy undbroadsearchofscvcnlecnlh ccnliiryBritishand
Americanrecords revealed thatpiior to
1700onRnglandsareknowntohavebeenconnectedinanywaywiththe
AmericanColonies,lliey were: JohnRsigliind.wchildless in Boston.
M.ass.in 1691(see footnotes 59and65.1 nrt I. this book); Thonitts
RoBland.who sailedfromEngland, boond for Marylandin 1680bot whodocs
not appear tohaveanived sec footnote30, Part I. this boEvan
Ragland,whowaslivingin New KentCounty, Virginiaasearly as
1689,hutwhoprobably hadbeeninAmsometime.That EvanRaglandofNew
KentCounty wastheearliestRaglandinAmerica knowntohave
leftdescenirrefutable. Oftheoverone hundred branches reconstructed
bythe author about ninety-five percent lead backRagland, andofthose
which remain, most can beproven tohave originatedinVirginia(ejcept
for thcoasiajefootnote 16ofthe Introductionofthis book).
Considering thesefacts, the author feels that there canbe little
orndial nVattRaglandofNew KentCountywas not only the fiist
RaglandtoleavedescendantsinAmerica butthatalso thecommon ancestor
ofthe various branchesnowliving in America, immigration recordsand
listsof immigAmericaprior to 1850werealsosearchedfor the
possibility that laterRaglandsmighthave cometoAmerica. Nf o u n
d
In colonial America,asin England, the research and
reconstnictionofa familydepends primarily uponinfocontained
withinthe parish records (registerand vestry minutes)and tiie
county records (probates,deeds, anminutes). In working withmanyof
the early families of colonial Virginia,however, one runs into
several iobstacles. To begin with, theparish recordsof
.seventeenthand early eighteenthcentury Virginia aie
notoriouslyplete andwere, atbest, very haphawrrdlykept.
Whileindifference playeda part, otherfactorswere morerespon
this condition. Unlike theparishesof England,or for tlrat matter
evenNew England, the Virginia parishes covareas which containedfew
roadsandwidely scattered rural populations.*Asa result, ntany of
the births,marriadeaths which tookplace some distance from the
parish church went unrecorded. One noted historian estimperhaps
halforbelterof hebirths,marriages,middeathsinseventeenth
centuryVirginia
wereunrecorded.Anaproblemwhichmostassuredlycontributed to the
poorcondition of the parishrecords was the generalshorministers
througboulmostof the colonial period. Wiorto the establishmentof
Williamand MatyCollege Inseventeenthcentury, all of tlic
Virginiaministas luid tocome from Englandand very fewpicfciTcda
parishintheof Virginiat o o n e inEitgland. Hats,most
Virginiapiursheshud no resilient ministerfor yeiuslit a timeand
h:id,tupona layleaderandoccasional circuitministerswho
mightapiwarlatheparishnomorethanonceortwiceinhycounty records, the
other source of information for the researcher, presents on the
other hand, ancycn liiorproblemin the case ofVirginia.TheCivilWar
tooka heavylollandmanyofthecountyrecords, including thoKent and
Hanover,were destroyed. Thus, neglectand wiir have deprivedthe
reseurcherof much of the docuproof whichhe needs. Not
withstandingthese losses, however, theresearcher is able
sometimesto overcoobstacleslliiou^ a diligentsearch of those
coloniii]recordswhichhave survival ami such povnle
documenaBibles,papers, etc., as can be unearthed. Withsuch
frngrnents and the fainily legends or stories whicharevealing,the
researcher canthroughthe useofhistorical possibilityand probability
sometimes reconstructa fthecase of the Raglandsuch hasbeen
theapproach..St. Peter s parish. New Kent County, Virginia was
formedin 1655.At that time, the parish consistedofov
siiuare miles(approximately mileswideimd 80miles lung) witha
total popirlalionof260families und ntThisconclusion is based upon a
coilcclivc boily of lioth factual nod circunistanlial
evidencewhich, wliencoindividually means little, but whenjoined
together becomeshighlysignificant. Ihe knownanil suggested facf o l
l o w s
8/10/2019 Ragland Raglin
10/13
64
1680. Her nameisnot known forcertain, however, it is
possiblethat it mayhave been Susanna. From 1689 when Evan Ragland
first appears in thevestry minutes ofSt. Peter s parish. New Kent
County, until his death, hisname reappears at irregular intervals
in the rent rolls of New Kent and the
BVoilaWc.And,Ihirdly. andpeihapt Ihemost Idlingofall. Ihcfuel
lhal hewasa greal grandsonofPcllui Ragland.Sr.(rcfcrrcd io In his
sialcmcnl) and undoubtedlyknewpersons who hadknownhim and. perhaps,
someof Ihe othergrandchildrenofEvan
Ragland.Allpoinlseonsidcredonemusteoncludethat Mr. Brockisa
rdiable.competent,andhighly authoritative sourcegiven Ihelimein
which he lived.
In the absenceof the eoiinly records ofNew Ken
andHanoverwhichondoiibledlycould have providedabsolute proof,the
author isof ihe opidoo lisU ll* availablefactual and eiraauslantlal
evidence Is siinicieni lo coiKlode lliat StephenPellus wasIbe
benefactor and father-in-lawof Evan Ragland.
Tlie amountof andownedby Evan Raglandanda closeapproaimaiionasto
itslocationcan be determinedby using thefollowingsources.a. The
rent rolls ofNew KentCountyreveals that Evanheld acres In NewKent
(held In pait byhis twoolder sons In
I7(M). A
b. n>e vestry niinulesofSt. Peter s parish. New KentCounty,
providesInfarmBtiunwhich placed Evan s land adjacent tothe land
ofone Edward Tony, whose land can,by patent, be dcnnllcly
locatedonthe aiickahominy River.
c. Meade s fWi/Oiiri-hrj. Afinisler. andFamilies of Virsinia
proved tobe Ibe mostimportant sourceof information in
pinpointingthe landofEvan Ragland. AccordingtoMcadeand
anelghteenihcenturymap.Ibesoorthernboundaryof New KentCountywasthe
Chickahominy River. Evan s land, therefore,was locatedonthe
northernsideofthe river.In t6IMNew KentCountywasdivided into two
parishes; Blisslandwhich contained theeastern
two-thirdsofpresentday NewKent, and St. Peter s which includedthe
western thirdofpresent day New Kent andall of whatis todayHanover
andIjtuisa Counties. In 1704the parish ofSt. Peter s was again
divided withthatarea which would becomeHanoverand l^tuisa
Countiesbeingmade intoSt. Paul s parish while thewestern thirdof
New KentCounty remainedSt. Peter s parish. Thefactthat Evan s land
remainedinSt. Peter s parish throughouthis lifetimeand ihe
lifetimesofhis older sons means thatit was located within an
identifiablefive mile strip along the northern sideofthe
Chickahominy which was from twentyto twenty-five miles abovethe
mouthof the river.Withoutdoubt, both tlie landofEvan Ragland and
Stephen Pettuslay within thisstripand were more than likely
oneandthe same. The rent rolls of New Kent County provided the
acreage contained inthe property of Stephen Ragland and his
brotherJohn. Tlievestry minutes ofSt. Paul s parish and AHapof
the Virginia Colony, published in (.ondon in1767providedthe
informationneeded for locating this propeily.Thefactthat tlie
landofStephen and Johnadjoinedis based upon an entry in the vestry
minutesfor26 February 1711which states, the land of John Raglin
andStephen Raglin areto be made intothe 27th preeint. A second
entry dated7 February 1716 fiinher states, Stephen Raglinistoassist
inClearinga road fromStony Rundown to half sink road. Acheck
ofthecolonial mapof Virginiashows that StonyBun isa branchof the
Chickahominy River whichjoins it alongthe northern edgeofthe
ChickahominySwamp and that half sink road was located about three
miles tothe southwest of the junction
running along the northern edge ofChickahominy Swamp(comparing
the older map with a tnodern map it wouldappear thatIheroad
tobecleared was that part ofSlate Road626 whichruns fromStony Runto
BrookRunand islocated nearthe Hanover-llenrico County line). The
conclusionis inescapable Stephenand John Ragland livedonor near
bythe diickahominyRiver, just northoftheCliickahominySwampinwhat
wouldbeafter 17201lanovcrCounty. This land was more than likely (he
same asthat granted to Stephen Pettusin 1667.
Tliere canbeno question that when Evan Raglandfirst appeared
inthe vestry minutesofSt. Peter s in 1689hewasalreadymarried
andhadat leastthree children.To begin with,his
daughterCatherinemarried In 1696. Assuming thatshe marriedat tlie
averageage for younggills inseventeenth century Virginia 16)she
would have beenborn in 1680.She mighthavebeena yearortwo
younger,hutatanyrate would
havebeenbomwellbefore1689.InaddiliuntoCatherineatleasttwoofUvun s
suns canheproven tohave been born before1689.Evan, Jr.
andThomaswere listed as property holdersinthe1704New Kent rent
rollswhich means that priorto that time they would have had to
reach the legal age of sixteen.Tliercfure. neither could have been
bumalter 1688and.inall llkelihoad. were probably bora several years
before Hal dote.Dr.O. Donald Davidsonof DeSota.Texas,a deseendant
of Evan, Jr.,has done considerable researchonhis branch
ofthefamilyand ina letter to the author gave 1683as Ihc birth date
of Evan, Jr. Althoughhe furnishedno authority, this datewouldappear
tobe entirely possibleand even probable. Cunsidetingthe
knownbirthdate ofEvan. Sr. 1636)andthe factthat he did not likely
obtain bis freedom untilafter 1675.the dale 1680.ifnot exact,
certainly shouldbe within a year ort wo o f t h e actual marriage
dateRobert IJpscomh Ragland of Halifax County. Virginia, wunitfully
assomal in his familv research duringIhc I870 s tlmtJohn Raglandof
Hanover County,Virginia, was inarricira second time toone Susanna
Pettus. This error was probablyduetothe fact thatatthat time it was
generallyheld that John Ragland wasthe immigrant. Undoubtedlyhe
Inul receivedfrom what is nowan unknown source, infoiiniiliontothe
effect thata Susanna Pettus wasthe wife ofthe RaglandImmigrant,
and. thus. Incorrectly assumed thatshewas John s wife rather than
his mother. R.A. Brock, incideotly, wasalso workingonthe family at
this timeand believed that Joliowasthe immigrant.It was not until
sometimeafter 1900thatMr. Brock discovered thetruthbutby thatlime,
however, Mr. Ragland hadbeendeadfor a numberof years (1893).
6
vestry minutes and register of St. Peter s. These records, aside
from thpatent records, are the only documents which have survived
from thperiod. The last known mention of Evan Ragland is a simple
notation in thregister, Evan Raglin Departed this Life may ye 30th
1717. Although threcords tell very little about his life a few
facts can be established andcertain assumptions made which shed
some light on his activities andcondition. To begin
with,hedoesnotappearto have acquired any additionland in New Kent
beyond the 500acres probably inherited from his father-in-law and
already inhispossession in 1689. While heand hissons obviouslworked
their own plantation Ihe register reveals that he owned slaves,
altl\ough in what number is not known. Nowhere in the records was
heaccorded the title of gentleman nordoes it appear that he ever
servedonthe vestry board or inany important county office. These
facts would seemto inferthat socially he wasof the middle class.
The death of his wifenot recorded in the register; however, he is
known to have leftat least foursons and a daughter who are as
follows.I. Catherine Ragland, only daughter and probably eldest
child of Evan
Ragland, Sr. and Susanna Pettus, was born in New Kent
County,Virginia about 1681. In 1696 she married John Davis, a
landed propr ietor of Middlesex County, Virginia. They are known to
have had a
Althoughan attempt wasmade fromthe very first to superimpose the
Engtish social system on Americait was doomedfailure furthe simple
reasonthatsucha systemwas workable onlywherelandand upponunity was
limited and wh birth, breeding, and education had formed natural
baniersfor generations. In America, landand opportunity walmost
unlimited and birth, breeding, and education had little meaning to
a peoplewhose background and socstandingwas similar. Fromthe very
first in America, ambition,ability, andhard work wasthe yardstick
by which mmenwere measured. In seventeenth century
Virginiatherewere, perltaps, threebroad but identifiableclassesof
men.TheKnes between eachclass, aixJ lliiswas porticulaily trueas
one moved closerto tlie frontier, wereoften Murrcd. The uppclass,or
gentry, were considered to bethe better sort whose obvious
successwas reflected byttieirlarge plantatihomes,thousandsof acres,
andmanyservants. Inacknowledgement of theirsuccess they were
accordedthe titleof
gentleman andelectedyearafteryeartothe more important
localpositionsof leadership, servingas county lieutenanvestry board
members, membersofthe House of Burgesses, the higher militia
officers, and justices ofthe peace, andinfewcasesas a memberof
thegovernor scouncil.Includedin thisgroupmoreor lessas honorary
memberswereIhcfew higherrankingoiTiciolssentfrom England to
administer the colonies. Tliesecondclasswasthe middle class
althounever identified byany particular titleor name.Tliisgroup
consisted ofthe planterswhowere moderately successfulindicated by
their ownership ofa fewhundredacresand. pethaps,a
fewservants.Mostofthe professional
men,i.edoctors,lawyers,ministers,etc., as wellasthe moreprosperous
shopkeepersandcraftsmenwere included inthisgrouAltliough not
gentlemen, they were accorded the same political rights usthe upper
cbss, associated freely with tupperclass,andoftenservedaslocal
leaders inIheless important positionssuchasroadgang foremen,
countyclerkjunior militia officers, etc. Tlie thirdclassor
thelowerlevel consisted ofthe indentured servants andtlie
landlessshopworkerswhobboredfortheirkeep.Asmostofthe Virginia
settlersbeganatthis levelnoreal stigma wasattachedtitanditwas
looked uponbymostasonlya temporary condition. However,ifa
manstayedinthisgroupforverylongaftercompleting his indenture he was
considered shifUess. Needless tosay, those in thisclass were
non-voters anon office holders
See footnote 8, t fi is chapter
Thisinformation wasfurnishedby MissEucillePayneofUliveBranch,
Mississippiand Mrs.ITieronBrattonofOxford,Mississippi.
Descendantsofthe Ragland/Davis family,^tli ladies havespent
yearsinthe reconstructionof these famiandhave inthe course of their
work used a number of family records notavailable inIhc general
public.T his informatialsofoundinUncageliooks2and 3of
TlieOaughtersofthe Amerit on Colonists,cites private family
papersasits sourcof autliorily. 17ie lineage booksstatein addition
thatJohn Davis wasborninGreat Uiitain. Inthe opinion
oftheauthoJohnDavismaywellhavebeen the othertioy whocameto
AiiiciicawithEvan Ragland (seefootnote3. thischaptei)John isknown
to have hadseveralchildrenbut only oneby Catherine Ragland.1
hiswould seem toindicatelhal hewasawidower whenhemarried Catherine
Ragland in 1696 and undoubtedlya numberofyearsolderthanshe. *
