Re: Why did John Cooke name a son John Lett Cooke ?
-
In reply to:
Re: Why did John Cooke name a son John Lett Cooke ?
jim cooke 10/02/12
Thanks Jim, for your reply.
In June 1739 John Lett Cook patented 400a in Brunswick Co, thus proving that he was at least 21 at the time he applied for the patent and thus was born in 1718 or earlier, and probably a year or so earlier.
The next known child of John, Richard, was born in 1729 in Bristol Parish.This child was born to John and Dianna, sometimes Dinah.
Bristol Parish birth / christening records began from 1720 or possibly a year or so earlier, even though the parish itself was established long before 1720.
It is certain that John who with Dianna had Richard in 1729 lived in Prince George Co, the main parent of Brunswick Co,and thus lived in Bristol Parish,for years before the 1729 birth of Richard.
Even so there were no births / christenings for John in the Bristol Parish Register between 1720 and 1729, thus strongly suggesting, I contend,that John and Dianna did not marry until about 1728, and therefore that John Lett Cook who was born in 1718 or earlier was by an earlier wife, said by some to be Elizabeth Lett daughter of John Lett.
I think this must be the origin of the naming of John Lett Cook, but I am hoping that someone has more details on the Lett family or John Cook’s early life.
P.S.
Research suggests that the Lett family in Virginia was concentrated almost entirely in Charles City Co and its offspring Prince George Co.