Arthur Ginn of Kent Island, Maryland, British America died 1676

 Arthur here is the first recorded Ginn in America.  So 2023 is a remarkable year in that he has been found.  The return of the prodigal perhaps.  More American discoveries will follow.

He seems clearly to be one of the numerous Arthurs in my Study (a possible connection to Devon having been ruled out) but I have no idea as to which one though have a suspicion. Twelve of the fifteen recorded Arthur Ginn references before 1837 come from this Hertfordshire family.

The third settlement in British America (after Jamestown in 1607 and Plymouth in 1620) was on the Island of Kent (shortly after Kent County in Maryland) in Chesapeake Bay.  Kent Fort was built in 1631 and a small settlement of about 120 English souls was established in 1642.

The Crown granted the proprietorship (right to receive the income) of Kent to Lord Baltimore of the Calvert family.  If there were no settlers then there was no income, so Baltimore devised a way of luring colonists from England.  The government supported the move as they wanted England to settle America as quickly as possible as a buffer against any French plans to do so.

The scheme devised was the "head-rights" system, whereby any man (or woman apparently) who could pay for their own passage to America (cost about £20 - a substantial sum) would be  granted 100 acres of land in America shortly after arrival, more if he brought wife, children and servants - ie rights "by head".  The rights attached to the people who were brought our or "transported" so a man who had paid the passage of another could claim the  extra land.  And these rights were assignable, so effectively a settler could acquire a fair chunk of land if he could afford to buy the rights attaching to a person who was brought out there.

The scheme worked - people began arriving from England in greater numbers (early settlers seem to have been almost exclusively English) and by the 1660s or so it is estimated that there were some 600 English settler on Kent, more spreading along small settlements along the Bay on the mainland.

For Kent was an island of sorts, a small strip of land joins it to Maryland proper  as can be seen from the 1866 map above.  

We cannot be entirely certain of the date because the evidence is circumstantial (court records) but Arthur seems to have arrived in

Kent in 1666/7.  He was certainly there by 1668.  His voyage from England (likely from London) would have been very hard and taken two to three months.

What we know of Arthur is that he was certainly English, he was literate and he must have come from the Yeoman class or similar, as he paid his own passage out (cost about £20) and was prepared for a very tough life working on the land.

The Kent County court (there was no actual Court House until after Arthur's death) likely met in taverns and alehouses as it often did in England.  It dealt with business matters, debts etc and Arthur is mentioned both as a juror and as a party to legal proceedings.  I was surprised to discover that English coinage was in short supply in all of the American colonies, so tobacco was used as the barter currency of choice.

                         Land Patent to Arthur 1672 (Maryland State Archives)

Arthur made an application for the 100 land grant that, as a free settler, Baltimore had promised him - and so in 1670 he obtained a Warrant acknowledging his claim.  In 1671 the land was surveyed, and in 1672 he received the formal grant of the land.  The 100 acres were to be called Cony or Conny Hall (the alternative spellings were still used later) and the land was adjacent to the head of  Great Thickett Creek the name of which is no longer used and it took me some months to track this down.  The boundaries were marked on the corners by marked (apparently notches were cut in each tree in a pattern unique to each owner to mark them out) pock hickory trees.  The terms "pock hickory" was the English phonetic rendering of an Indian word, the trees now known as Hickory of course and still common on Kent.

Conny Hall would, of course have been a wilderness that Arthur was obliged to clear before he could farm or grow tobacco, the principal crop.  Kent was pockmarked by creeks and it was somewhat damp and marshy.  For this reason the various native tribes who inhabited it and Maryland generally (they were very friendly to the English) chose to use the waterways and fish, rather than make any attempt to live off of the land.

At some point Arthur married a lady called Alice.  There is  no evidence that he married in England so America is the more likely, particularly given that  at this time the head right was 100 acres per person who came over to the Eastern Shore.  But although a sort of Anglican church was established at Back Creek from 1652, there are scant records and no mention of Arthur.  So the marriage remains a mystery.

So Arthur and Alice would have been working hard to clear the land, build a rudimentary cabin (nothing fancy) and make a living. He seems to have employed the odd indentured servant or two to help him  There is evidence (a set of cooper's tools in his inventory) that he took up that trade as a side line.  From what I can see this was the most popular and numerous trade in early colonial America as barrels were needed for everything, from tobacco to beer and numerous other liquids.  There is also evidence he also went in for fishing, a major food source for the native tribes and, obviously, hunting.  There were a few essential farm animals and he was growing tobacco.

To my astonishment, I found out where Arthur's plantation was and I think I know where he lived.  A researcher of the Eastern Shore of Maryland, Cindi Schmidt,  has mapped the plantations granted on Kent Island in the 1600s.  And the Upper Shore Genealogical Society have helped me a great deal.  Combine this with my own research and we have a story.

Cindi produced a map, superimposed on a 1862 map of the landmarks of the 1600s, and I have in turn superimposed on that shown by the hatching the rough location of Conny Hall.

It is apparent that at some point in the late 1600s Conny Hall or at least much of it reverted to Lord Baltimore, the Lord of the Manor.  This was not freehold or leasehold land, but copyhold of the manor (which concept is now extinct in English law) and my suspicion is that it reverted back for want of a surviving male heir of Arthur and Alice.

But, in any event, the land of Conny Hall was subsequently to a large degree incorporated in the Plantation (later farm) called Barnstable Hill, which survives.  By the mid 1700s both Conny Hall and Barnstable Hill were in the ownership of the Gardner family.  Both passed down through that family and in 1866 (see map above) Richard Gardner was the owner (he died in 1870) and you will see mention of R Gardner, he was living in Conny Hall and I know that the Gardner family had their own family cemetery there, containing grave markers and stones from the 1700s to 1900 or so apparently.  The cemetery was allegedly illegally bulldozed about 20 years ago because it obscured the view of an advertising hoarding from the road.  I think it likely that the Gardners occupied the site of the cottage that Arthur had originally built in 1670 or so !

Kent, like much of the Chesapeake Bay coastline was obviously damp, marshy with a lot of creeks and whilst very cold in winter, damp hot and humid in the summer.  There are 59 species of mosquitoes in Maryland and in Arthur's day the freshly arrived English settlers got malaria and died like flies if you forgive the pun.  Many did not even last long enough to receive their land grant.  It was only the constant replenishment of new arrivals and the second and third generations building some resistance to the disease that kept the colony going.

So it is perhaps no surprise that in July 1676 Arthur got ill, he had perhaps been on the island for ten years - it was almost certainly malaria.  He and Alice seem to have lived in rural simplicity.  If he is who I think he is, he was about 41.

Arthur left Letters of Administration to Alice and she produced an Inventory of his goods to the Court.  Alice would have taken an interest in Conny Hall for life, but if she died without a male heir then it would have reverted to the Manor, which it clearly did as widows apart, most manorial courts did not recognize women as heirs.

Arthur had led a simple life, he had his cooper's tools, his fishing equipment, a fur coat for the winter, a knot or ball of tobacco at his death (some weighed 100 lbs before being placed into barrels - which he likely made himself)) some farm animals and, perhaps the greatest comfort to him, "an old bible".  I am very glad to have found him.

                     Arthur's Inventory (Maryland State Archives)

Post script

Conny Hall and Barnstable Hill have been absorbed into Barnstable Hill Wildlife Reserve.  The land that Arthur broke his back trying to clear has gone back to nature.  I doubt he would mind.

Acknowledgement

I am indebted to Jennifer Abbott of Maryland State Archives and particularly David Baker of the Upper Shore Genealogical Society of Maryland for their help and assistance

Mary Ginn and the Bownest family - a mystery

As I type this post the research is fresh and the mystery here like that in a Michael Connelly novel (a favourite author and like me born in 1956).

In my last post, I referenced an indirect link between the Ginn family and the Bownest family of Little Hormead in Hertfordshire - there is another, but in this case a direct link - it is one of the mysteries that intrigue me.

The pertinent year was 1614.  William Shakespeare was 50 and living and working in London.  He had less than two years to live.  In that same year the Globe Theatre (destroyed by fire - a common occurrence in wooden and thatched London) was rebuilt.

The Bownest family were established in Little Hormead and were  there in the early 1500s.  Their origins seem to be obscure.  They were a minor gentry family that acquired a property called Stonebury (it no longer stands) which like Bandons in Anstey, was what we would see as a large farmhouse.

A Thomas Bownest died at Stonebury in  Little Hormead in 1577 leaving a will (PCC)  He had a second son John and it is was clearly this John who  married and moved up the road to Buntingford (a small market town - not a parish in itself but forming part of Layston, Wyddial, Aspenden and Buckland parishes) in the year that his father died.

Now the John who interests us married a Mercy Cook in 1577.  No marriage entry survives, but a Marriage Licence does, and we know that Mercy came from Great Chishill in Essex, just over the Hertfordshire border and not too far away.  John is described as of Little Hormead.

Mercy came from the family of Cooks in Great and Little Chishill that were minor gentry, owning land there (they had a lease of the Parsonage of Great Chishill ) and owned a house called "Osbornes" but also (including the Manor of Bottisham) owning land in Cambridgeshire, the Chishills being on the Herts, Essex and Cambridgeshire borders.  Her parents were Thomas and Margery and she had many siblings namely, William (the heir) Samuel and sisters Anne (wife of Thomas Meade) Katherine (Rowley) Elizabeth (wife of Robert Wallis) and Grace, the latter was unmarried in 1584 when Thomas Cook died (Will - PCC).   Her father modestly called himself a Yeoman, but he was a little more than that !  He bought Bottisham Manor in Cambridgeshire the year that he died (sold by son William in 1592) and had a lease of Chishill Hall Manor that eventually found its way to son Samuel.  It seems likely that the Elizabeth Cook who married Robert Ginn in 1559 (see post of 7th July 2012 ) came from this family and may even have been Tom's sister and thus Mercy's aunt. The Ginns had had a connection with Great Chishill since 1554 and the Cooks back to at least 1560 or so.  We are hampered in knowing more, because the Chishill registers do not survive for this early period.

There is sadly a great deal of nonsense about the family and Mercy's origins on Ancestry.  It looks like an American researcher or two had made claims that have been replicated in publicly available trees so many times that they have been accepted as fact.  The truth is a little more mundane, but fascinating nonetheless.

There is some evidence that the Cooks did not view the Bownests with quite the affection that the Bownests viewed the Cook family.

Thomas Cook's heir was a William who had married an Alice. By his death Willian owned the manor of Chishill outright. They had several children including two sons, but the children were young when William died too soon in 1597.  His will (PCC) was made in the presence of several witnesses including his brothers in law John Bownest and Thomas Mead.  But in the background was Will's younger brother Samuel, and, in 1612 there was a land dealing that  involved Alice Cook the widow, her eldest son Thomas Cook Esq (now in Cambridge) Samuel Cook and John Bownest. Alice had sold the manor of Chishill to Samuel Cook, her eldest son Tom entering into a quitclaim (it having been his birth right). The Cooks by the time were calling themselves gentlemen, which they were of course, William taking that title in 1597.  But in the 1612 Deed (Ref 4008 Herts Archives) they described John Bownest as a yeoman - ouch - he was far more prosperous than that.

After John Bownest married Mercy the baptisms of their children were entered into the Layston (Buntingford) parish registers.  At this point John was indeed mentioned as a Yeoman and there is some evidence that he owned the White Hart Inn in Buntingford which is still there, now a refurbished house.

But in 1612 John Bownest amassed the monies to buy Popes Hall in Buckland, slightly to the north of Buntingford.  This came with manorial lands and thereafter John referred to himself as a gentleman.

The Popes Hall of John's time is long gone - it was probably thatched and of wattle and daub on a timber frame.  It may have been destroyed by fire as a lot of these buildings were - but the reconstruction of the 1700s is there still (below).  I drive past quite often.

John acquired land in several parishes around and forming part of Buntingford and he also had land in Great and Little Chishill, which I assume came to him on marriage from his father in law.

John and Mercy had several children, including three sons who survived, in order of age these were Thomas, George and Samuel.  There were several daughters, including Mercy jnr who married William Faucet at Layston in 1611 and of whom nothing more is known, Alice who married William Norton of Bishops Stortford at Layston in 1604 (more of her later) and Frances, who was unmarried in 1615 but seems to have married subsequently.

John Bownest died in 1615 leaving a will (PCC)  As he had some manorial land in Buckland there was an Inquisition Post Mortem.

By rights his eldest son Thomas was the heir.  But Tom as we shall see had done very well for himself in London, so John, who clearly knows that Tom has other fish to fry in London and does not need, let alone want his inheritance, makes provision in his will for his lands to be divided up between his sons if "God forbid" says John, Tom turns them down.

What Tom did was to enter into  an agreement with his brothers in 1616, this was to divide the lands up as to who got what, and that deed ( ref:4009 ) survives, is at the Hertfordshire Archives and is shown below and then in subsequent detail.

The gist of this was that Tom effectively gave up most of the land.  His brother George Bownest, Gentleman got the lands in the Chishills and never married dying in 1650 (will PCC).  George also seems to have ended up with the Parsonage and thus the advowson in Thunderley (not Thundersley in Essex as seems to be reported) in Saffron Walden in Essex.  Their brother Samuel Bownest, Gentleman (who marrieed Helen Stapleton in London in 1617) settled at Wyddial where he took lands.  Nothing much further is known of him as the registers for Wyddial do not survive for this period - but George mentions the couple in 1650.

But it is Tom we are concerned with.

Thomas Bownest was apprenticed into the Grocers Company in London in about 1592, he became a Member of the Company and consequently Citizen of London in about 1600.

Now Grocers were not what we think of, they were wholesalers dealing directly with the merchants whose ships had come into port bearing foodstuffs from everywhere.  And it is clear that Tom intended to make his fortune cutting out the middle man.

The East India Company (a joint stock company) was born in 1600 to trade with India and the Orient.  The Levant (Turkey and Persia) and the Virginia (eastern America) |Companies soon followed.  These were exciting times for the English merchants, they were now trading in areas of the world that had been newly discovered or closed to them before, English ships were sailing the world and the roots of the British Empire (no apologies for that on this blog!) were beginning to grow.

And they were exciting times for Bownest too, because in 1614 he was introduced by another Grocer to the East India Company, he seems to have become involved in quartering and furnishing the ships.  Soon after he was a member of the Levant and Virginia Companies.

He married Mary Ginn in London, most likely the daughter of Robert Ginn and his cousin through the Cook family as I say (see post of 7th July 2012) that same year, ie 1614, and my suspicion is that it was a marriage of convenience, for appearances,  Bownest needing a wife to help him further his ambitions in trade.  And it was that that made Bownest somewhat distanced from his father's wish he take up his inheritance in 1615, in truth Tom had no need of it.

Thomas Bownest's sister Alice Norton lost her husband.  And she and two sons ended up in Virginia, British America, soon after - one of her sons was a Church of England Minister, but somewhat Puritan. Now Tom Bownest was not only a member of the Virginia Company, but he knew a certain Abraham Jennens, a Merchant and Ship owner of Bristol, who was also a member of that Company, heavily involved with trade in Virginia and elsewhere and a member of the Council of New England, caught up in the colonisation of British America.  Bownest must have know the guy quite well because he took Jennens' son Ambrose (Jennens had a ship "The Little Ambrose|") as apprenctice.  It is my guess that Jennens or his sons had some involvement in getting the Nortons to America, perhaps also other Bownest relations.

Bownest's rise was meteroric.  By the 1630s he was a Director of the East India Company.  I know that in that decade he explored the possibility of the English trading with Japan as well as China, but turned it down as the original involvement of the English in Japan (think the book and TV series "Shogun" based on a true story) had not turned out well "they [the Japanese] do not like foreigners" said Tom, and they were fickle, the English had to plan their woollen cloth exports in advance and "one year the Japanese favoured one colour, another the next".

By 1628 Thomas Bownest had moved out of the City of London and across the Thames into Putney. there are various surviving Certificates of Settlement (National Archives) that tells us that, but he still retained property in Hertfordshire.  Putnry was a boat ride from London and the disease and squalor  I am sure that Mary was dead before 1630, though I cannot find a burial entry.  They never had any children so far as I know.

Now something intriguing happened during the English Civil War.  Because the Mary Ginn who I think married Tom if I am correct came from the Ginn/Genn families connected to Huntingdon and Ely, and the men of those families I have proved were acquainted with Oliver Cromwell.

The first English Civil War ended with a victory for Parliament.  And in 1647 the officers and many men of that army came to Putney Church for what are known as the Putney Debates - to discuss democracy, its nature and the future of England.  Some great words were spoken "the poorest hee that is in England hath as much a life to live as the greatest hee" (Thomas Rainsborough) words that proved an inspiration to the Americans in 1776.

The men were quartered on local residents or lived in tents, the senior officers stayed with local gentry for a month or so.  Oliver Cromwell was Second in Command of the Army in 1647 - he stayed at the house of Thomas Bownest !  Did Tom know him through the Ginn connection ?

Thomas Bownest Esquire died in 1658 -  he is buried in Putney Church, where the Debates were held.  He was quoted as being 80 which indeed he was, the move to Putney had likely added decades  to his life.  His will (PCC) is very informative and taken with the will of his brother George gives an insight into the lives of numerous cousins and relations.  The guy may not have descendants, but his was a fascinating life.......

Mary Ginn nee Gill of Anstey died 1728

 I am conscious of the fact that the blog is comprised of 186 posts and counting and, well, every one of them has a title concerning a male Ginn.  Now it is not that I am a misogynist, and, obviously, in my defence the blog is about the proliferation of the Ginn family and that is in the male line - but I am conscious of it.

It is also true that in the past (widows excepted) women had no property rights, so they are almost invisible in the records and little can be known, but there are a few I do know quite a lot about, and Mary Gill here is one of them - she married John Ginn of Anstey in my post of   12th |September 2012  and is the ancestor of many Ginns and others.  I have always been fond of Mary, and intending to put her on the blog for the last few years.

Mary was born in 1641, just before the start of the English Civil War. She was born at the Manor House of Bandons Manor in Anstey, at what was Pains and is now Paynes End in that parish.  Her parents were Edward and Ann Gill (nee Swann) the Gills being a prominent gentry family on the Hertfordshire and Cambridgeshire borders.  How a gentry girl came to marry the son of a yeoman is the subject of this post.

The first Gill is known to have been a landowner in southern Cambridgeshire near Royston in the 1270s.  They survived the Black Death in the mid 1300s, and  by the 1400s were clearly prospering and there are various deeds that relate to the family.

A John Gill, Mary's ancestor, married a Joan, daughter of William Horne (some say Sir William) of Buckland in Hertfordshire near Buntingford, and the couple reputedly had six sons and six daughters.  John Gill settled in and died at Buckland in 1499/1500 leaving a will (National Archives) and a Memorial Brass at Buckland survives purporting to show the whole family - the six sons are below.

Some say the next heir was William, I am sure it was Richard, but in any event the heir married a daughter of Leonard Hyde of Throcking in Hertfordshire which is also near Buntingford.  The Gill family were consolidating their lands in the area as the Hydes go back a long way in Throcking.  In 1395 the Manor of Throcking was granted to William Hyde, Citizen and Grocer of London.

Richard Gill died in 1502 leaving a will (National Archives) it mentions his sons John, Richard and Leonard.

John Gill was his father's heir and he did very well, being described as "John Gill of Buckland and Wyddial" .  He married Margaret Cannon or Canon who was the daughter and heiress of George Cannon of Cambridgeshire in 1508.    George Cannon owned a half share of the Manor of Wyddial in Hertfordshire, the other half was apparently owned by the Royal family and from 1509 (when he took the throne) by none other than King Henry the 8th who at this point was the  young, athletic man we see below and not the obese chap we imagine.

It appears that John Gill had acquired some clerical role at the King's court, obviously for a salary, but also in hope of catching the eye of the King and eliciting favours, and at some point King Henry duly obliged and gave John the other half of Wyddial Manor.

John Gill and George Cannon had Wyddial Hall built.  It must have cost a great deal of money.  The Hall that you see below is the original, from an illustration by Drapentier in about 1700.  This burned down in the 18th century and was rebuilt on the same site and almost to the same design,  That still stands.

John Gill also purchased Bandons Manor in Anstey in the 1530s.  This is crucial to our story and it will turn up again.

John Gill died in 1547,  A brass (below) was commissioned to

commemorate him, his wife and children at Wyddial Church but, as it happens, Margaret remarried a John Wrengham that same year and is not buried with John.

John's Gill's heir was his son George.  He held, and likely improved, Wyddial Hall.

In 1535 George married Gertrude Perient, daughter and co-heir of Sir Perient of Hatfied in Hertfordshire.  The Perient family connection gave Mary some interesting ancestors, and my research on the Perient family will be in a post later this year.

George and Gertrude had seven children who survived infancy, the first two of whom were John the heir and Edward.  Mary Ginn (nee Gill) is descended from Edward.  Gertrude died on 15th March 1545.  And in 1547 George remarried an Ann Whethill, daughter of Robert Whethill in Calais in France, in 1545 Calais was still held by the English, the Tudors claiming the throne of France.  George had a further family by Ann.

George died in 1568 - he has a memorial in Wyddial Church with his ancestors, in which he is described as "Lorde of this Towne" below.  He was 57.

George as I say had a number of sons, of whom John was the heir and the second son Edward the ancestor of Mary Ginn nee Gill.

Now, there is an interesting thing here, because we know that there is a surviving portrait of one of the brothers, but there is some conjecture as to who it is.

                                      Queen Elizabeth 1st

Queen Elizabeth had a number of court painters, ie men who served at her Court in London.  Some of these men were permanent like Nicholas Hilliard, but some were visitors, itinerants who only stayed there a few years.  Many of these were foreign and they included Cornelis Ketel, a Dutchman, who was active in London, mostly as a portrait painter, from 1573-1581.

Cornelis painted one of the brothers.  The portrait below was once attributed to Edward Gill, but it cannot be, he did not have the money to purchase this.  And it has, wrongly, also been attributed to a Sir George Gill of Wyddial Hall who did not exist - the portrait is dated,  it was painted in 1578.  No, this must be John Gill of Wyddial Hall, a man of wealth as we shall see.  It is a splendid portrait I think you will agree.

John Gill, though not Mary's ancestor, deserves a mention here as he had a secondary residence built at Buntingford, a place called Littlecourt.  It apparently cost him a great deal of money and is shown below.  It survives, but the grounds have gone and the house is much reduced.

So we will call John - "John Gill of Wyddial and Littlecourt".  He was close to Edward, Mary's ancestor, and reputedly both of them became Calvinists, Puritans if you will, in later life.  And at this point or thereabouts - about 1570  (whether by John or his father George seems unclear) a long lease of Bandons Manor in Anstey was granted to Edward Gill.

Now John Gill of Wyddial and Littlecourt died in 1600 - he has a splendid brass at Wyddial, and his second son (Sir John Gill of Somerset we will call him - he had married a Somerset heiress) had made himself busy at the Royal Court of Charles the 1st, being an Equerry to the King, Member of Parliament, Justice of the Peace etc doing pretty well until the English Civil War.  More of him later.

And so to Edward Gill (referred to as of "Bandons and Littlecourt" in the records) Mary's ancestor.

Well he was a Barrister in London, in American terms an Attorney.  He entered St John's College in  Cambridge University in his teens in 1557, getting his degree in 1561, three years after Queen Elizabeth 1st ascended the throne.  He joined the Bar in 1564.

In February 1574, Edward married Margaret Brograve, widow of Henry Brograve of Buntingford, her maiden name was Campion.  There is a suggestion (originally discounted by me but apparently true) that she was related to the Campions of Anstey in Hertfordshire and those of Witham in Essex, they in turn giving rise to Thomas Campion, the Poet and Musician at Elizabeth's court, and to the Edmund Campion, the Catholic who the same Elizabeth had hung, drawn and quartered for being a traitor in 1581.  Interesting times!

In 1600, upon his brother's death, Edward Gill appears to have taken occupation of Littlecourt as well as having Bandons.  He did not inherit it, it simply appears he lived there - the sons of John Gill of Wyddial and Littlecourt having left Hertfordshire, we do not know the full story.

Neither Edward Gill nor Margaret were that young when they married, and only had two sons.  Margaret died in February 1605, and Edward remarried the widow "the lady" Barbara Fludd (nee Bradbury) in London in 1607.  Barbara had already buried two husbands, both knights.

Edward Gill died in 1616, supposedly at Littlecourt.  Barbara was a widow for the third time.  She died in 1618.  Edward (will National Archives) left his son Thomas £800 (not a great sum - but Edward was from a cadet family - ie a younger son and not the heir) and his son Edward junior the lease of Bandons Manor "for divers years yet to come".  Thomas died unmarried in 1625, so Ted junior likely had everything.

Now Edward junior here, Mary's grandfather, married Mary Smartfoot, widow of Richard Smartfoot of Puckeridge.  You will notice that marrying widows was popular, they could bring money and property to the marriage ! Mary was actually the daughter of Edward Mitchell of Standon.

The couple lived at Bandons Manor House, drew their income (which would not have been much) from the rents and fines that the tenants of that manor paid.  They had five children, three sons, the eldest of which was another Edward Gill, Mary's father.

Edward Gill died in 1642, the English Civil War was just beginning.  His will (National Archives) reflects the diminishing fortunes of the family.  His daughter Susan was given £100, son George £250 and, crucially, the lease of Bandons Manor was given to his widow for life, and only then to Edward, Mary's father.  And the widow did not die until 1675.

Edward Gill, Mary's father, entered Trinity College, Cambridge University in 1631, he did not finish his degree, not uncommon at this time, the gentry need only show a pretence of education.  And in 1638 he married Ann Swann, daughter of Robert Swann of Newton/Foxton in Cambridgeshire, a minor gentry family.

Now Edward of course did not have the lease of Bandons Manor in his own right until his mother's death.  Though she clearly let him live there, presumably she was there too, maybe also other members of the family.

Edward and Ann had two daughters, Ann 1639 and our Mary in 1641.  Both were born at Bandons.  Ann Gill snr then died, likely in childbirth, she is buried at Barkway.  Mary  scarcely knew her mother.

Edward Gill then remarried, a Lucy Bolnest of the Bolnest/Bownest family of Great Hormead,  In time, they had five more children.  But Edward died in 1658 (there is no will) and Mary was an orphan and Lucy left alone with a good number of young children and little or no income given that Bandons was not hers.  In fact there is evidence (Hearth Tax) that Ted's brother George took it, Lucy was penniless. She could not remarry and died herself in 1664.

Now the Gills had not had a great time generally since 1642.  Sir John Gill of Somerset tried to sit on the fence but was accounted a Royalist by Parliament who made moves to punish him by taking his Somerset estates, and he died impoverished in 1651, having himself at some point occupied Littlecourt which was sold after his death.

Now, if you have managed to not be too bored and got to this point, you will recall that Mary Gill was born at Bandons.  What I have not told you is that the Manor House survives.  It is true that the majority was rebuilt in brick in the 19th century, but it is a historical building, and the 15th century (no less) cross wing, a major thing, survives in its entirety - you can see it below.  Every Gill, every Ginn of Anstey would know it, Mary would know it today.

So, it was a combination of matters-  family impoverishment, 

timing, and I am sure a good deal of love, which led to Mary Gill marrying John Ginn, a yeoman's son in 1661.  The marriage is entered on the Gill pedigree.

Mary had obviously retained the family connection with Buntingford, because although their marriage is entered in both the registers of Layston (a parish of Buntingford) and Anstey (so it was considered a significant marriage) they actually married at Buntingford Chapel, built in the Puritan style in 1614.  I have wondered if the Gills had retained their Puritan ways.  Buntingford Chapel (extended but otherwise unaltered) is still there below.  For the rest of Mary's story see my post of 12th September 2012.

David Gynn of Stratford and Buckinhamshire died 1883

 David Gynn jnr here was son of  David Ginn/Gynn snr mentioned in my post of  16th November 2014.  He adopted the spelling Gynn as had his father.  In 1842 he married Mary Perridge at Hackney. I confess I know more of their children than of this couple.

By 1846 he had become a Coachman and the couple were living in Shoreditch, but David had other ambitions and shortly afterwards he set himself up as a Pork Butcher in Church Row in Stratford, West Ham next to  "The Angel" Public House.  This was a substantial pub built in 1838 (the brewers were Charringtons) which was rebuilt in 1910 as below (the pub like so many has now gone)

David had retired to Buckinghamshire by 1881 and died in Romford district in 1883.  Mary died in Wandsworth district in 1908 aged 76.

The couple had some eight children and there are some interesting stories here

Sarah -  married John Quye at West Ham in 1866

Mary - married Henry Mason at West Ham  in 1868

David - this part of the post is not suitable for vegetarians, so if you are one please look away - now.

David married Julia Avard at West Ham (they lived in Stratford) in 1873 and Dave took up his father's occupation as a Butcher, his father had likely given him some early training, this was a more skilled occupation than might be thought.

By 1878 (Trade Directories) David had set himself up on his own account with a shop at 35 Chapel Street in Stratford, near the High Street. Much of this area was obliterated by German bombs in the Blitz of 1940, but we can see (below) Chapel Street in 1910.  It was a quiet day (note the steamroller) as the road was obviously being resurfaced

Normally the road would have reflected the throng of people in the nearby High Street, shown below in 1906

When I was a boy, in the 1960s.butcher's shops were still pretty much what they were in David Gynn's day - carcasses hanging inside the shop and out, sawdust on the floor and portly butchers in long aprons, sharpening knives  and hefting heavy cleavers for lamb and pork chops.  I used to peer over the counter with grisly fascination, face to face with the pig's heads that sat there.  So it was with Dave.

But David was perhaps not the hearty butcher we think of and my suspicion is that he was unwell at an early age, as there were only two children and he died, likely of consumption in 1885, aged just 34.  Julia lived on beyond 1901 having never remarried, but the Trade Directories show that the shop was sold shortly afterwards.

Edward - some of the broader "Farnham" Ginn family were a bit like Bilbo Baggins in the Lord of the Rings stories, they occasionally went on adventures - journeyed "there and back again" as the story goes.  Ted was one of those - though he never fought a Dragon.

In the 1871 census Edward is given as a journeyman baker.  Then he disappeared.  In 2009, it was discovered than an E. Gynn from West Ham, a baker, went out to Sydney, Australia on the "Star of India" in 1876.  He was an unassisted immigrant.

Now the "Star of India" to my amazement survives.  She was built in 1863, but is still by some miracle seaworthy and is in San Diego in California in a Maritime Museum- see below.  A wonderful ship.

 I knew that Edward had returned to England, but it was not until 2022 that I found out part of what happened before he did.  My friend Jennifer Clark(nee Ginn) in New Zealand and not too distant cousin of his "turned him up" on the Trove (Australian Newspapers) website.  Ted joined the New South Wales Artillery in Sydney upon his arrival, but things did not work out as in 1880 he deserted.  See below

I had already discovered that he had returned to England in the early 1880s, now we know why. The guy went around the world - he came back into Britain via a ship from New York !

You might have thought that he had learned his lesson and would find another occupation (perhaps he could not), but in May 1886 he joined the Royal Artillery over here ! He took a risk that the record would be linked and he would be arrested - but partially to offset this he claimed to be a good deal younger than he was.

Edward Gynn married Sarah Jones at Mile End in 1890.  They had a number of children.  Ted left the army in 1898 and in 1901 the couple were back in Stratford in West Ham (where the story started) with Ted as a carman - ie he drove a cart.  He died in Surrey in 1942 - he had lived a long life.

Joseph - originally this guy was helping out Dad and was a Butcher in 1881 having married Mary Ann Newman in 1878.  Then after his father's death he joined the Merchant Navy as a Cook ans sailed the London - Australia route.  The family had a number of children, but Joe was obviously away a lot and although there is some evidence that in for a short while all of the family were in Australia, Mary quite clearly seems to have returned with the children and Jos stayed in Australia.  So they separated, whether divorced is unclear.  Joe's brother (see below) had also settled in Australia, and it is likely the brothers lived together for a time.

In 1905, Joe is mentioned as a "Land Cook" as opposed to a "Sea Cook"( who was also in an article) in the "Australian Star" - the two of them went to the Hunters Hotel" in Sydney for drinks where an alleged crime took place.  At some point he moved to Gosford on the Coast  which has stunning sea views and died there in 1934 with a short announcement of his death in the Sydney Morning Herald.

William - for reasons best known his himself (it may have been a middle name) this guy called himself Richard.  It is definitely the same man,  He joined the Merchant Navy, was a cook and sailed the London-Sydney Australia with his brother. He never married.  He also settled in Australia and died there in 1913 of peritonitis.

John - was alive in 1861 but not traced in 1871 - so likely died young

Jane - married George Illett in 1905

Thomas Ginn of Hertford died 1857

 Thomas Ginn here astonished me - he was born in 1784 yet there is a surviving photograph of him, notwithstanding the fact that photography did not really come in until the 1850s.

Tom here was the second surviving son of Benjamin Ginn of Ware in my last post.  It is clear that Benjamin Ginn had his eldest two sons educated to at least some extent and in the case of Tom put out to a trade.  Because Tom was a Plumber, later (when sanitation became an issue again, some 1500 years after the Romans !) a Sanitary Engineer and Glazier.

I researched Thomas Ginn years ago, even though he was not a descendant of the Aston Ginns.  He has turned up once or twice since when I have been digging in wider records.

Tom was born as I say in 1784.  He was baptized at the Old Meeting House in Ware, but you will not find the record online- it is recorded in manuscript returns at Herts Archives reference NR6/1/1 (page 405)  

In 1803, Tom was 19 and  Britain and France, after a short peace, were locked once again in the Napoleonic Wars.  For Britain, it was a dangerous time, as Napoleon was preparing the Grand Armee to invade.  In the end it was only (in 1805) when Nelson defeated the French and Spanish navies at Trafalgar, that denied Napoleon completely.

But in 1803 the British needed troops.  We did not (unlike the Continent) have conscription.  We relied on a volunteer regular army, a county full time militia and, in these most dangerous times, there was a call for volunteers for home defence.  

Raising volunteer forces had been tried before and these irregular part time units for home service had been seen rather like the Home Guard ("Dad's Army") in WW2 - ie the subject of affectionate ridicule.

Tom Ginn answered the call.  When I was turning up Napoleonic Ware records nearly thirty years ago now I turned up Tom - none of this, even now, is online or even indexed.  Thomas Ginn volunteered for the 2nd Hertford Volunteer Foot Regiment.

The Napoleonic Wars ended in June 1815 when Wellington (aided by Marshal Blucher of Prussia) beat Napoleon at the Battle Of Waterloo.  Three months before, in March 1815, Thomas Ginn had married Sarah Heasler at St James Piccadilly in London, they made a thing of it because Sarah was clearly a Hertfordshire girl, she said she was born in Great Amwell and though I have never found a baptism entry,  she was likely born to William.

Thomas and Sarah first went to live in Great Amwell,  For those not familiar with Hertfordshire (I have lived in Hoddesdon) Hertford, Ware, the Amwells (little and Great) and Hoddesdon merge together in the area, you can cross parish boundaries without really knowing that you have left or arrived.  We do not know where they lived, only that they used Great Amwell Church.  They soon moved into Hertford and over the years had a good number of children.

Thomas Ginn was an innovative chap.  There is evidence that he collaborated on some projects with his brother Benjamin the surveyor, perhaps designer/architect.  This will be discussed later. But Tom has a lighthearted distinction unique in the blog - in 1840 he registered a copyright to his design for a water closet, ie a "w.c" or a flush toilet !  For those fascinated by the history of the "u-bend" (and who isn't ?) the flush toilet was not a Victorian invention.  It had been around for centuries before the wonderfully named Thomas Crapper who is often credited with it. for obvious reasons. 

But in early Victorian times the increasing population and enlarging towns led to more and more disease, cholera epidemics and the like

Thomas Ginn

and our ancestors gradually came to realize that there was a connection (pun intended) between sanitation and disease.  A decade or two remained before towns had a proper sewage system, Tom's flush toilet went to a cesspit or tank in the garden - but it was a start.

Thomas Ginn's business as a Plumber, Glazier and sometime painter flourished and he became modestly prosperous.  It has been said, wrongly, that he became Mayor of Hertford.  His son, grandson and gt grandson certainly did, but not Tom.  In fact I cannot find any evidence that he played any part in civic  life in the Borough of Hertford, but he may have done.

The surviving photo of Tom dates from the early 1850s, he was about 67.  It is at the H'ford Museum who claim the copyright, so please do not reproduce it. My feeling is that when you look at the man you are looking at a product of the 1700s, rather than a man of Victorian England, the photo is reminiscent of a portrait of George Washington.

Thomas Ginn died in 1857 - he was 71.  Sarah lived on and we have a photo of her too - but she (below) had embraced the Victorian age.

Sarah died in 1876 - she was 83.

Thomas and Sarah Ginn had nine children

George Heasler - was the heir.  He went to Surrey. He married twice, first a Harriet Renshaw in London in 1840 and then an Annie in middle age.  There was  a child from both marriages.  He was in Managerial, Clerical work in various areas of work.  He later changed the spelling of his name to Ginne, for reasons best known to himself.  He died in 1900.

Richard - succeeded his father in the family business in Hertford.  He built up a very successful building  firm in Hertford.  Married Elizabeth Frances Hancock in 1855.  There were issue

In 1891 he was Mayor (as were later a son and grandson) and we see him below in his regalia when he was about 73.  He died in 1896.

Mary - was the eldest daughter.  She married James William Brown in London in 1846 and there were issue.  We see her below in a colourized photo.

Ann - married John Arthur Purkiss of London in 1841.  The marriage is announced in the "Reformer" of October 2nd that year.  This was the entry of the Purkiss family into the Ginn line - the name Purkiss later came to be of significance in the family, in the same way they had incorporated the name Heasler.  Family alliances were at work here.

Sarah Heasler - married Thomas Hancock in 1846.  There were issue

Emily - never apparently married and died in 1910

Benjamin - named after Tom's surveyor brother.  There were two, the first died in infancy.  The second, born in 1831 also sadly died, aged 16 in 1847.  There is an announcement in the "Hertfordshire Mercury".

Ellen - married William Heasler in 1858