Susan Lord of the Calderdale Family History Society (Yorkshire) wrote on 30 August 2019, "The source of our St. Thomas' records is from a transcription done by the Hebden Bridge Transcription Society (an arm of the HB local History Society). Hebden Bridge is the town at the bottom of the hill from the village of Heptonstall. They transcribed from the actual Parish registers. A John Uttley married Ann Longworth there on 30th July 1616. Uttley/Utley is a common name in the area. No one called Utie can be found. The entry is shown as 'doubtful.'"
I've uploaded a copy of the scan into FamilySearch's Memories. It's easy to see why the transcription is labeled doubtful. First, the line attributed to this marriage appears to be both squeezed in and crossed out (the 30 at the end is evidently the day of the month). Other than "ann," the entry is virtually unreadable. The husband's name is definitely not John, which is the name in the entry below it. But I'll leave it to others to arrive at individual conclusions.
A permanent URL is at https://imgur.com/a/nR19b5T
It's possible, I'm told, that there might be a second copy of the register. But even if the transcription is one day shown to be authentic, the case isn't proven. After all, there's also a 1618 marriage for a John Utie and Ellen Whale in Essex, and a marriage between John Otley and Mary Myster at Hampshire in 1615, and certainly others not discovered. What do these records tell us? Nothing at this point. But for all we know, Mary Ann could just as easily have been Mary Myster as Ann Longworth. It comes down to this: We should be vested in the maiden name of a 400 year-old ancestor only to the extent that we're interested in the truth.
There is a fabricated transcription of a baptismal record for John Utie, Jr. (There is no surname on the original, as shown in the image below.) A fabricated assertion that Mary Ann was the daughter of George and Margaret Longworth is proved false by the 1567 Visitation of Lancashire. (There's a link below for that, too.) And other falsehoods about Mary Ann are propagated throughout the internet, including that she died 11 Nov 1687 at Cecil County, Maryland. (That was her daughter, Anna Bennett Bland Codd.) Indeed, there are a host of unsubstantiated myths surrounding both Utie and Bennett (Mary Ann's second husband). It's time to start over by looking at the records that actually exist.
There are only four known records that mention Mary Ann Utie Bennett:
1) John Bennett Boddie wrote in Colonial Surry that "John Utie, Jr., died before 15th of December, 1642, for on that date the County Court of Lower Norfolk commanded on, Richard Foster, to carry out the previous order dated October 4, 1641 and 'pay unto Mrs. Marian Utie, now the wife of Richard Bennett, Esq., 114 lbs. tobacco.'" Boddie lists the source as item 17 in Book 1637-46 of the records of the county court of Lower Norfolk.[1]
2) We learn from the "List of the Living and the Dead in Virginia," taken on 16 February 1623, that the Utie family lived at Hogg Island. They are listed as "John Utie, Mrs Utie, John Utie, infant."[2]
3) In 1624, King James I commissioned the 1624/1625 muster of Virginia. The searchable database at Virtual Jamestown for "Hog Iland" states that John Uty, the head of the household, arrived on the Francis Bonaventure, date not given, and that his wife, Ann Uty, and son John arrived on the Seafloure (Seaflower), date not given.[3]
4) Deed of sale from Richard Bennett and Mary Ann Bennett of Nansamum [sic] River to John Carter. It's dated 20 May 1658. Carter would become the father-in-law of Mary Ann's son, Nathaniel Utie.[4]
In short, the whole of the documentary record informs us that the Uties arrived in Virginia by February 1623, and that John came on a different ship from his wife and child. The natural inference is that they were all born in England (of course) and that John Jr was probably born not long before the voyage — possibly during or right after. Both ships made multiple voyages in the early years of Jamestown. It's impossible to infer which manifest they belonged on. We also know from the record that Mary Ann's first husband died by July 1637 and that she married Richard Bennett before October 1641. Finally, we can infer, honestly and with a degree of certainty, that Mary Ann is not mentioned on Richard Bennett's will because she had died by the date of its signing in 1674.
Dispelling myths
That's all we know about Mary Ann. We don't know to whom or where and when she and other members of her family were born, although we can guess that she was born after 1600 by virtue of the fact that she and Richard Bennett were having children well into the 1640s. The 1567 Visitation of Lancaster disproves she was the daughter of George Longworth and Margaret Trafford by reason that the couple was listed with grandchildren that year, and that they were old enough to have been her second great-grandparents. (Traditional, yet unsubstantiated, genealogies for the Longworth family state that George Longworth was born in 1525.) And the original parish records for Holy Trinity The Less Church on Knightrider Street in London for the date of 28 June 1619 could not have been for their son, John Jr, for the simple reason that no surname is listed, neither for the newborn nor for his parents. The images that prove the false nature of the earlier claims are:
https://i.imgur.com/sSMOI8Z.png
https://i.imgur.com/XfS7Roi.jpg
But there's more. The 1667 will of Mary Ann's son, Richard Bennett, bequeaths 400 acres of his Maryland property to his cousin, John Langley. Although a cousinship can be connected to either side of the family, none have been found among the Bennetts. Langleys were present in Jamestown: a Captain John Langley was master (navigator) of the "Margaret and John." It was a common name at the time in Somersetshire. I believe the names Langley and Longworth were conflated by researchers.[5]
Richard Bennett's birth is well documented in contemporaneous records. (See sources and notes for him.) However, there is only speculation in regard to the Uties. The best case scenario is finding wills for their parents that includes enough identifying information.
More information can be found at http://ancestraldata.com/ahnentafel/3755/
Notes
1. John Bennett Boddie, Colonial Surry (PA: Clearfield Printing, 1948), reprinted by Genealogical Printing Company, 1989.
2. http://www.jamestowne.org/1623-lists-of-living--dead.html. The original is in the Public Record Office, London, England.
3. http://www.virtualjamestown.org/Muster/muster24.html. The original is in the Public Record Office, London, England.
4. Old Rappahannock Co Va Deed Book 1, Part I - 1656-1662, (Antient Press), 33.
5. "Will of Richard Bennett, Jr.," Maryland Historical Magazine I (Baltimore: 1906), 73-74.
I've uploaded a copy of the scan into FamilySearch's Memories. It's easy to see why the transcription is labeled doubtful. First, the line attributed to this marriage appears to be both squeezed in and crossed out (the 30 at the end is evidently the day of the month). Other than "ann," the entry is virtually unreadable. The husband's name is definitely not John, which is the name in the entry below it. But I'll leave it to others to arrive at individual conclusions.
A permanent URL is at https://imgur.com/a/nR19b5T
It's possible, I'm told, that there might be a second copy of the register. But even if the transcription is one day shown to be authentic, the case isn't proven. After all, there's also a 1618 marriage for a John Utie and Ellen Whale in Essex, and a marriage between John Otley and Mary Myster at Hampshire in 1615, and certainly others not discovered. What do these records tell us? Nothing at this point. But for all we know, Mary Ann could just as easily have been Mary Myster as Ann Longworth. It comes down to this: We should be vested in the maiden name of a 400 year-old ancestor only to the extent that we're interested in the truth.
There is a fabricated transcription of a baptismal record for John Utie, Jr. (There is no surname on the original, as shown in the image below.) A fabricated assertion that Mary Ann was the daughter of George and Margaret Longworth is proved false by the 1567 Visitation of Lancashire. (There's a link below for that, too.) And other falsehoods about Mary Ann are propagated throughout the internet, including that she died 11 Nov 1687 at Cecil County, Maryland. (That was her daughter, Anna Bennett Bland Codd.) Indeed, there are a host of unsubstantiated myths surrounding both Utie and Bennett (Mary Ann's second husband). It's time to start over by looking at the records that actually exist.
There are only four known records that mention Mary Ann Utie Bennett:
1) John Bennett Boddie wrote in Colonial Surry that "John Utie, Jr., died before 15th of December, 1642, for on that date the County Court of Lower Norfolk commanded on, Richard Foster, to carry out the previous order dated October 4, 1641 and 'pay unto Mrs. Marian Utie, now the wife of Richard Bennett, Esq., 114 lbs. tobacco.'" Boddie lists the source as item 17 in Book 1637-46 of the records of the county court of Lower Norfolk.[1]
2) We learn from the "List of the Living and the Dead in Virginia," taken on 16 February 1623, that the Utie family lived at Hogg Island. They are listed as "John Utie, Mrs Utie, John Utie, infant."[2]
3) In 1624, King James I commissioned the 1624/1625 muster of Virginia. The searchable database at Virtual Jamestown for "Hog Iland" states that John Uty, the head of the household, arrived on the Francis Bonaventure, date not given, and that his wife, Ann Uty, and son John arrived on the Seafloure (Seaflower), date not given.[3]
4) Deed of sale from Richard Bennett and Mary Ann Bennett of Nansamum [sic] River to John Carter. It's dated 20 May 1658. Carter would become the father-in-law of Mary Ann's son, Nathaniel Utie.[4]
In short, the whole of the documentary record informs us that the Uties arrived in Virginia by February 1623, and that John came on a different ship from his wife and child. The natural inference is that they were all born in England (of course) and that John Jr was probably born not long before the voyage — possibly during or right after. Both ships made multiple voyages in the early years of Jamestown. It's impossible to infer which manifest they belonged on. We also know from the record that Mary Ann's first husband died by July 1637 and that she married Richard Bennett before October 1641. Finally, we can infer, honestly and with a degree of certainty, that Mary Ann is not mentioned on Richard Bennett's will because she had died by the date of its signing in 1674.
Dispelling myths
That's all we know about Mary Ann. We don't know to whom or where and when she and other members of her family were born, although we can guess that she was born after 1600 by virtue of the fact that she and Richard Bennett were having children well into the 1640s. The 1567 Visitation of Lancaster disproves she was the daughter of George Longworth and Margaret Trafford by reason that the couple was listed with grandchildren that year, and that they were old enough to have been her second great-grandparents. (Traditional, yet unsubstantiated, genealogies for the Longworth family state that George Longworth was born in 1525.) And the original parish records for Holy Trinity The Less Church on Knightrider Street in London for the date of 28 June 1619 could not have been for their son, John Jr, for the simple reason that no surname is listed, neither for the newborn nor for his parents. The images that prove the false nature of the earlier claims are:
https://i.imgur.com/sSMOI8Z.png
https://i.imgur.com/XfS7Roi.jpg
But there's more. The 1667 will of Mary Ann's son, Richard Bennett, bequeaths 400 acres of his Maryland property to his cousin, John Langley. Although a cousinship can be connected to either side of the family, none have been found among the Bennetts. Langleys were present in Jamestown: a Captain John Langley was master (navigator) of the "Margaret and John." It was a common name at the time in Somersetshire. I believe the names Langley and Longworth were conflated by researchers.[5]
Richard Bennett's birth is well documented in contemporaneous records. (See sources and notes for him.) However, there is only speculation in regard to the Uties. The best case scenario is finding wills for their parents that includes enough identifying information.
More information can be found at http://ancestraldata.com/ahnentafel/3755/
Notes
1. John Bennett Boddie, Colonial Surry (PA: Clearfield Printing, 1948), reprinted by Genealogical Printing Company, 1989.
2. http://www.jamestowne.org/1623-lists-of-living--dead.html. The original is in the Public Record Office, London, England.
3. http://www.virtualjamestown.org/Muster/muster24.html. The original is in the Public Record Office, London, England.
4. Old Rappahannock Co Va Deed Book 1, Part I - 1656-1662, (Antient Press), 33.
5. "Will of Richard Bennett, Jr.," Maryland Historical Magazine I (Baltimore: 1906), 73-74.
Susan Lord of the Calderdale Family History Society (Yorkshire) wrote on 30 August 2019, "The source of our St. Thomas' records is from a transcription done by the Hebden Bridge Transcription Society (an arm of the HB local History Society). Hebden Bridge is the town at the bottom of the hill from the village of Heptonstall. They transcribed from the actual Parish registers. A John Uttley married Ann Longworth there on 30th July 1616. Uttley/Utley is a common name in the area. No one called Utie can be found. The entry is shown as 'doubtful.'"
I've uploaded a copy of the scan into FamilySearch's Memories. It's easy to see why the transcription is labeled doubtful. First, the line attributed to this marriage appears to be both squeezed in and crossed out (the 30 at the end is evidently the day of the month). Other than "ann," the entry is virtually unreadable. The husband's name is definitely not John, which is the name in the entry below it. But I'll leave it to others to arrive at individual conclusions.
A permanent URL is at https://imgur.com/a/nR19b5T
It's possible, I'm told, that there might be a second copy of the register. But even if the transcription is one day shown to be authentic, the case isn't proven. After all, there's also a 1618 marriage for a John Utie and Ellen Whale in Essex, and a marriage between John Otley and Mary Myster at Hampshire in 1615, and certainly others not discovered. What do these records tell us? Nothing at this point. But for all we know, Mary Ann could just as easily have been Mary Myster as Ann Longworth. It comes down to this: We should be vested in the maiden name of a 400 year-old ancestor only to the extent that we're interested in the truth.
There is a fabricated transcription of a baptismal record for John Utie, Jr. (There is no surname on the original, as shown in the image below.) A fabricated assertion that Mary Ann was the daughter of George and Margaret Longworth is proved false by the 1567 Visitation of Lancashire. (There's a link below for that, too.) And other falsehoods about Mary Ann are propagated throughout the internet, including that she died 11 Nov 1687 at Cecil County, Maryland. (That was her daughter, Anna Bennett Bland Codd.) Indeed, there are a host of unsubstantiated myths surrounding both Utie and Bennett (Mary Ann's second husband). It's time to start over by looking at the records that actually exist.
There are only four known records that mention Mary Ann Utie Bennett:
1) John Bennett Boddie wrote in Colonial Surry that "John Utie, Jr., died before 15th of December, 1642, for on that date the County Court of Lower Norfolk commanded on, Richard Foster, to carry out the previous order dated October 4, 1641 and 'pay unto Mrs. Marian Utie, now the wife of Richard Bennett, Esq., 114 lbs. tobacco.'" Boddie lists the source as item 17 in Book 1637-46 of the records of the county court of Lower Norfolk.[1]
2) We learn from the "List of the Living and the Dead in Virginia," taken on 16 February 1623, that the Utie family lived at Hogg Island. They are listed as "John Utie, Mrs Utie, John Utie, infant."[2]
3) In 1624, King James I commissioned the 1624/1625 muster of Virginia. The searchable database at Virtual Jamestown for "Hog Iland" states that John Uty, the head of the household, arrived on the Francis Bonaventure, date not given, and that his wife, Ann Uty, and son John arrived on the Seafloure (Seaflower), date not given.[3]
4) Deed of sale from Richard Bennett and Mary Ann Bennett of Nansamum [sic] River to John Carter. It's dated 20 May 1658. Carter would become the father-in-law of Mary Ann's son, Nathaniel Utie.[4]
In short, the whole of the documentary record informs us that the Uties arrived in Virginia by February 1623, and that John came on a different ship from his wife and child. The natural inference is that they were all born in England (of course) and that John Jr was probably born not long before the voyage — possibly during or right after. Both ships made multiple voyages in the early years of Jamestown. It's impossible to infer which manifest they belonged on. We also know from the record that Mary Ann's first husband died by July 1637 and that she married Richard Bennett before October 1641. Finally, we can infer, honestly and with a degree of certainty, that Mary Ann is not mentioned on Richard Bennett's will because she had died by the date of its signing in 1674.
Dispelling myths
That's all we know about Mary Ann. We don't know to whom or where and when she and other members of her family were born, although we can guess that she was born after 1600 by virtue of the fact that she and Richard Bennett were having children well into the 1640s. The 1567 Visitation of Lancaster disproves she was the daughter of George Longworth and Margaret Trafford by reason that the couple was listed with grandchildren that year, and that they were old enough to have been her second great-grandparents. (Traditional, yet unsubstantiated, genealogies for the Longworth family state that George Longworth was born in 1525.) And the original parish records for Holy Trinity The Less Church on Knightrider Street in London for the date of 28 June 1619 could not have been for their son, John Jr, for the simple reason that no surname is listed, neither for the newborn nor for his parents. The images that prove the false nature of the earlier claims are:
https://i.imgur.com/sSMOI8Z.png
https://i.imgur.com/XfS7Roi.jpg
But there's more. The 1667 will of Mary Ann's son, Richard Bennett, bequeaths 400 acres of his Maryland property to his cousin, John Langley. Although a cousinship can be connected to either side of the family, none have been found among the Bennetts. Langleys were present in Jamestown: a Captain John Langley was master (navigator) of the "Margaret and John." It was a common name at the time in Somersetshire. I believe the names Langley and Longworth were conflated by researchers.[5]
Richard Bennett's birth is well documented in contemporaneous records. (See sources and notes for him.) However, there is only speculation in regard to the Uties. The best case scenario is finding wills for their parents that includes enough identifying information.
More information can be found at http://ancestraldata.com/ahnentafel/3755/
Notes
1. John Bennett Boddie, Colonial Surry (PA: Clearfield Printing, 1948), reprinted by Genealogical Printing Company, 1989.
2. http://www.jamestowne.org/1623-lists-of-living--dead.html. The original is in the Public Record Office, London, England.
3. http://www.virtualjamestown.org/Muster/muster24.html. The original is in the Public Record Office, London, England.
4. Old Rappahannock Co Va Deed Book 1, Part I - 1656-1662, (Antient Press), 33.
5. "Will of Richard Bennett, Jr.," Maryland Historical Magazine I (Baltimore: 1906), 73-74.
I've uploaded a copy of the scan into FamilySearch's Memories. It's easy to see why the transcription is labeled doubtful. First, the line attributed to this marriage appears to be both squeezed in and crossed out (the 30 at the end is evidently the day of the month). Other than "ann," the entry is virtually unreadable. The husband's name is definitely not John, which is the name in the entry below it. But I'll leave it to others to arrive at individual conclusions.
A permanent URL is at https://imgur.com/a/nR19b5T
It's possible, I'm told, that there might be a second copy of the register. But even if the transcription is one day shown to be authentic, the case isn't proven. After all, there's also a 1618 marriage for a John Utie and Ellen Whale in Essex, and a marriage between John Otley and Mary Myster at Hampshire in 1615, and certainly others not discovered. What do these records tell us? Nothing at this point. But for all we know, Mary Ann could just as easily have been Mary Myster as Ann Longworth. It comes down to this: We should be vested in the maiden name of a 400 year-old ancestor only to the extent that we're interested in the truth.
There is a fabricated transcription of a baptismal record for John Utie, Jr. (There is no surname on the original, as shown in the image below.) A fabricated assertion that Mary Ann was the daughter of George and Margaret Longworth is proved false by the 1567 Visitation of Lancashire. (There's a link below for that, too.) And other falsehoods about Mary Ann are propagated throughout the internet, including that she died 11 Nov 1687 at Cecil County, Maryland. (That was her daughter, Anna Bennett Bland Codd.) Indeed, there are a host of unsubstantiated myths surrounding both Utie and Bennett (Mary Ann's second husband). It's time to start over by looking at the records that actually exist.
There are only four known records that mention Mary Ann Utie Bennett:
1) John Bennett Boddie wrote in Colonial Surry that "John Utie, Jr., died before 15th of December, 1642, for on that date the County Court of Lower Norfolk commanded on, Richard Foster, to carry out the previous order dated October 4, 1641 and 'pay unto Mrs. Marian Utie, now the wife of Richard Bennett, Esq., 114 lbs. tobacco.'" Boddie lists the source as item 17 in Book 1637-46 of the records of the county court of Lower Norfolk.[1]
2) We learn from the "List of the Living and the Dead in Virginia," taken on 16 February 1623, that the Utie family lived at Hogg Island. They are listed as "John Utie, Mrs Utie, John Utie, infant."[2]
3) In 1624, King James I commissioned the 1624/1625 muster of Virginia. The searchable database at Virtual Jamestown for "Hog Iland" states that John Uty, the head of the household, arrived on the Francis Bonaventure, date not given, and that his wife, Ann Uty, and son John arrived on the Seafloure (Seaflower), date not given.[3]
4) Deed of sale from Richard Bennett and Mary Ann Bennett of Nansamum [sic] River to John Carter. It's dated 20 May 1658. Carter would become the father-in-law of Mary Ann's son, Nathaniel Utie.[4]
In short, the whole of the documentary record informs us that the Uties arrived in Virginia by February 1623, and that John came on a different ship from his wife and child. The natural inference is that they were all born in England (of course) and that John Jr was probably born not long before the voyage — possibly during or right after. Both ships made multiple voyages in the early years of Jamestown. It's impossible to infer which manifest they belonged on. We also know from the record that Mary Ann's first husband died by July 1637 and that she married Richard Bennett before October 1641. Finally, we can infer, honestly and with a degree of certainty, that Mary Ann is not mentioned on Richard Bennett's will because she had died by the date of its signing in 1674.
Dispelling myths
That's all we know about Mary Ann. We don't know to whom or where and when she and other members of her family were born, although we can guess that she was born after 1600 by virtue of the fact that she and Richard Bennett were having children well into the 1640s. The 1567 Visitation of Lancaster disproves she was the daughter of George Longworth and Margaret Trafford by reason that the couple was listed with grandchildren that year, and that they were old enough to have been her second great-grandparents. (Traditional, yet unsubstantiated, genealogies for the Longworth family state that George Longworth was born in 1525.) And the original parish records for Holy Trinity The Less Church on Knightrider Street in London for the date of 28 June 1619 could not have been for their son, John Jr, for the simple reason that no surname is listed, neither for the newborn nor for his parents. The images that prove the false nature of the earlier claims are:
https://i.imgur.com/sSMOI8Z.png
https://i.imgur.com/XfS7Roi.jpg
But there's more. The 1667 will of Mary Ann's son, Richard Bennett, bequeaths 400 acres of his Maryland property to his cousin, John Langley. Although a cousinship can be connected to either side of the family, none have been found among the Bennetts. Langleys were present in Jamestown: a Captain John Langley was master (navigator) of the "Margaret and John." It was a common name at the time in Somersetshire. I believe the names Langley and Longworth were conflated by researchers.[5]
Richard Bennett's birth is well documented in contemporaneous records. (See sources and notes for him.) However, there is only speculation in regard to the Uties. The best case scenario is finding wills for their parents that includes enough identifying information.
More information can be found at http://ancestraldata.com/ahnentafel/3755/
Notes
1. John Bennett Boddie, Colonial Surry (PA: Clearfield Printing, 1948), reprinted by Genealogical Printing Company, 1989.
2. http://www.jamestowne.org/1623-lists-of-living--dead.html. The original is in the Public Record Office, London, England.
3. http://www.virtualjamestown.org/Muster/muster24.html. The original is in the Public Record Office, London, England.
4. Old Rappahannock Co Va Deed Book 1, Part I - 1656-1662, (Antient Press), 33.
5. "Will of Richard Bennett, Jr.," Maryland Historical Magazine I (Baltimore: 1906), 73-74.
Family Members
Advertisement
Records on Ancestry
Sponsored by Ancestry
Advertisement
