Re: Susan Greenleaf 1614 Virginia
-
In reply to:
Re: Susan Greenleaf 1614 Virginia
Sue Stepp 8/25/02
It's me again, raining on everyone's parade, and I don't know where this information is coming from, although i'd like to know.If you are talking about the Susan Greenleaf in the Jamestown area, this is what I DO know : Robert Greenleaf was Susan Greenleaf's HUSAND, not father.He was one of the "ancient planters", i.e. among the first group of Englishmen to come into Jamestown and try to plant tobacco.According to the information in the Muster Roll (1625) he had come to Va. and then later Susan (whose maiden name we don't know) and he married.They had a son, Thomas Greenleaf, and a very young daughter (22 weeks) at the time the Muster roll was taken in about 1625 by the English government to see who was left alive and what arms and supplies they still had to get through the winter.This was also for the purpose of knowing who owned land and should be taxed for it after all the illness, starvation, and massacres.
SOMETIME prior to 1636, we know that Robert Greenelaf died from something, because in a 1636 deed, we find a Thomas MARKHAM (not WARREN) claiming land for his having made the trip to Virginia to settle there,more land for the two male passengers he brought along , and some land through his WIFE Susan Greenleaf, relict (widow) of Robert Greenleaf before she married Thomas Markham.
This deed was miscopied later and a scrivener's error had Susan married to Thomas WARREN, but that is not the case (unless someone has a marriage record or other evidence to the contrary).The first deed says Thomas Markham, the copy
says Thomas Warren, but everything else is the same.A later copy and a map and some other records indicate that the 300 acres mentioned in both deeds belonged to Thomas MARKHAM, not Warren.
Unfortunately, someone did not go back far enough when researching - maybe only looked in the index without actually reading the deeds - and picked up the Warren deed and didn't know it was a mistake.Now it's all over the internet. Consequently, there appear to be many Warren researchers out there who think they trace back to Robert and Susan Greenleaf when they don't.
I don't know who Susan's parents were, but it isn't likely they were named Greenleaf, since her first husband was one.
From the muster roll, you can extrapolate the birth years of Susan, Robert, and their two apparent children.Thomas Greenleaf, their son, would have been about 14 when Susan married Thomas Markham.
I have no info about whether Thomas Greenleaf or his sister lived to grow up as i descend from the Markham end.Some of the Markhams believe and have published (and it's been an accepted theory in the genealogical periodicals) that another Thomas Markham who gets land across the James river later is the son of Thomas Markham and Susan maiden-name-unknown Greenleaf Markham, but no proof of this has been shown.
For any Greenleaf researchers who are interested in this Thomas Markham, the "accepted" theory is that the son of the original "Jamestown" Thomas Markham and Susan Greenleaf
was the progenitor of the Markham group (visible in the Revolution)which worked its way across Virginia to Bedford and Botetourt counties , Virginia.(Of course, this Thomas Markham COULD have been Thomas Greenleaf who took the Markham name, so if you are a direct Greenleaf descendant, we'd love your dna numbers !)
Sorry if this is bad news for the Warren folks.Anyone who wants to check my facts, can do so by looking up the Muster Roll in Va Pioneers and Cavaliers, and the deeds on microfilm at the Richmond archives.
Wow, I just clicked on the tv and Nova is doing a special on JAMESTOWN and Pocahontas !What a coincidence !
Happy Hunting
karen marcum pendergrass brandon
More Replies:
-
Re: Susan Greenleaf 1614 Virginia
vickie white 7/28/08
-
Re: Susan Greenleaf 1614 Virginia
Sue Stepp 2/10/08