Nataniels Bekons

Nataniels Bekons


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Nataniels Bekons dzimis Safolkā, Anglijā, 1647. gada 2. janvārī. Strīds ar sievas ģimeni pārliecināja viņu emigrēt uz Ziemeļameriku. Ar tēva finansiālu atbalstu viņš iegādājās divus īpašumus pie Džeimsa upes Virdžīnijā.

Viljams Bērklijs iecēla Bekonu savā pārvaldības padomē, taču abi vīrieši drīz vien nonāca pie domām par kolonijas attīstību. Bērklijs atbalstīja ierobežošanas politiku, bet Bekons vēlējās paplašināties apgabalos, kurus kontrolē indiāņi.

1676. gadā Bekons organizēja savu ekspedīciju. Baidoties no plaša kara ar indiāņiem, Bērklijs vērsa savus spēkus pret Bekonu un saviem vīriem. Bekons sagūstīja Džeimstaunu, un Viljams Bērklijs bija spiests bēgt uz Austrumu krastu. Tomēr Nathaniel Bacon nomira no drudža 1676. gada oktobrī, un bez viņa vadības dumpis ātri sabruka.

Bieži sūdzības par asinsizliešanu seram Viljamam Bērklijam tika nosūtītas no upju galvu puses, uz kurām tikpat bieži atbildēja ar palīdzības solījumiem. Tie Jēkaba ​​un Jorkas upju galos (tagad lielāko daļu cilvēku iznīcinājuši indiāņi) kļuva nepacietīgi pret daudzajām kaimiņu kaušanām un cēlās vai paši aizstāvējās, izvēloties. Bekons savam vadītājam, bieži nosūtīts gubernatoram, pazemīgi lūdzot komisiju vērsties pret šiem indiāņiem pēc saviem ieskatiem.

Bekona kungs ar piecdesmit septiņiem vīriešiem turpināja, līdz atlaida palises, iebruka un nodedzināja fortu un kajītes, un (zaudējot trīs angļus) nogalināja 150 indiāņus.

Ģenerālis Bekons kopā ar 1000 vīriem devās mežā, lai meklētu ienaidnieka indiāņus; un pēc dažām dienām mūsu nākamā ziņa bija tāda, ka gubernators bija sasaucis kopā Glosteras un Midleseksas apgabalu kaujiniekus līdz 1200 vīriešiem un ierosināja viņiem sekot un apspiest nemiernieku Bekonu.

Bekons iebruka tajā (Džeimstaunā) un ieņēma pilsētu, kurā tika nogalināti un ievainoti divpadsmit vīrieši, bet gubernators Bērklijs ar lielāko daļu sekotāju ar saviem kuģiem aizbēga pa upi. Šeit, dažas dienas atpūtušies, viņi piekrita pilsētas dedzināšanai. Lorensa kungs un Drumonda kungs, kam pieder divas labākās mājas, izņemot vienu, aizdedzināja katrs savu māju, kuras piemērs karavīriem, kas visu pilsētu (ar baznīcu un valsts namu) noguldīja pelnos, sakot, ka ļaundariem tur vairs nevajadzētu būt. .

Bekona kungs no savas ekspedīcijas atgriezās slims ar slimi; neatrodot nevienu ienaidnieku indiāni, kas nav aizgājuši tālu aiz viņu aizkaitināmības dēļ. Tāpat viņš nebija pavadījis nevienu sausu dienu visos gājienos šurpu turpu mežā, kamēr plantācijās vasara bija tik sausa kā indiešu kukurūzas un tabakas graušana utt.


Bekona un#8217 gadu sacelšanās (1676–1677)

Bekona sacelšanās, kas cīnījās no 1676. līdz 1677. gadam, sākās ar vietēju strīdu ar Doegas indiāņiem Potomakas upē. Uz ziemeļiem vajājuši Virdžīnijas miliči, kuri arī uzbruka citādi neiesaistītajiem Susquehannocks, indiāņi sāka reidu pret Virdžīnijas robežu. Gubernators sers Viljams Bērklijs pārliecināja Ģenerālo asambleju pieņemt plānu, kas izolēja Susquehannocks, vienlaikus piesaistot Indijas sabiedrotos Virdžīnijas pusē. Citi Susquehannock karā saskatīja iespēju visaptverošam Indijas karam, kas atnestu indiešu vergus un zemes, kā arī ļautu izjust tautas pret Indiju noskaņojumu. Viņi atrada līderi Natanielā Bekonā, nesen ieradās Virdžīnijā un gubernatora padomes locekli. Bekons pieprasīja komisiju cīņai pret indiāņiem, kad neviens nebija gaidāms, viņš vadīja “brīvprātīgos” pret dažiem Virdžīnijas tuvākajiem sabiedrotajiem Indijas sabiedrotajiem. Tas noveda pie pilsoņu kara, kas Bekona sekotājus nostādīja pret Berklija lojālistiem. Konflikts bieži bija rūgts un personisks - vienā brīdī Bērklijs attaisīja krūtis un uzdrošinājās Bekonu nogalināt, un tas bija saistīts gan ar nemiernieku, gan lojālistu īpašumu izlaupīšanu. Bērklijs izraidīja Bekonu no Padomes, atjaunoja viņu amatā un pēc tam izraidīja otro reizi. Pēc tam, kad gubernators aizbēga no Džeimstaunas uz Austrumu krastu, viņš atgriezās, bet viņu aizdzina Bekona armija, kas sadedzināja galvaspilsētu. Bekons pēkšņi nomira 1676. gada oktobrī, bet rūgtas cīņas turpinājās arī janvārī. Kronis nosūtīja karaspēku uz Virdžīniju, kas ieradās neilgi pēc sacelšanās apspiešanas. Bekona sacelšanās cēloņi jau sen ir apstrīdēti. Mūsdienās to parasti uzskata par daļu no vispārējas krīzes Virdžīnijas sociālajā, ekonomiskajā un politiskajā kārtībā. Arguments, ka tas jāuzskata par sacelšanos pret angļu tirāniju un Amerikas revolūcijas (1775–1783) priekšteci, ir diskreditēts.


Bekona ’s sacelšanās

"... dumpīga un dumpīga prakse ..." -Nataniels bekons, 1676

Tas, kas sākās kā strīds starp kolonistiem un indiāņiem pie Virdžīnijas un Merilendas robežas 1675. gada rudenī, ātri pārvērtās Nathaniela Bekona pilnā dumpī pret gubernatoru seru Viljamu Bērkliju, bagātu stādītāju, un viņa valdību nākamajā gadā.

1600. gadu beigās elitārie stādītāji Virdžīnijā paļāvās uz ierindas kalpu darbu. Pēc dienesta beigām šīs personas pārcēlās tālāk uz iekšzemi no Tidewater reģiona, bieži nonākot konfliktā ar indiāņiem, iebraucot Pjemontā. Baidoties no pieaugošajiem indiešu reidiem un neapmierinātībā ar gadiem zemām tabakas cenām un augstiem nodokļiem, kolonisti pulcējās aiz Nataniela Bekona.

Bekons, gubernatora Bērklija brālēns pēc laulības, bija labi savienots kungs, kurš nesen ieradās kolonijā. Bekons nepiekrita Berklija mēģinājumiem panākt mieru starp kolonistiem un vietējām ciltīm. Viņš un viņa sekotāji centās iegūt vairāk zemes, pilnībā padzenot pamatiedzīvotājus no Virdžīnijas.

Vardarbība ātri saasinājās. Saskaroties ar nepārtrauktu zemes zaudēšanu, doegu cilts uzbruka Eiropas apmetnēm. Kolonisti atriebās, tomēr kļūdaini uzbruka miermīlīgajai Susquehannock ciltij, kas izraisīja turpmākus konfliktus. Reidi, kurus bieži vadīja pats Bekons, izraisīja daudzu pamatiedzīvotāju nogalināšanu. Saskaņā ar vēsturiskajiem ierakstiem, Pamunkey cilts ar savu karalieni Cockacoeske priekšgalā aizbēga purvainos apgabalos, kur nemierniekiem tos būtu grūtāk izsekot.

Visu šo mēnešu laikā gubernators Bērklijs centās panākt mieru. Galu galā viņš pavēlēja būvēt jaunus fortus un ierobežoja tirdzniecību ar pamatiedzīvotājiem. Tomēr šie lēmumi tika uzskatīti par tādiem, kas vēl vairāk ierobežo nabadzīgo balto varu un palielina viņu nodokļus (līdzekļi, kas nepieciešami, lai samaksātu par jaunajiem nocietinājumiem). Bekons, tikko iecelts Virdžīnijas padomes loceklis, 1676. gada augustā vērsās pie tautas ar dedzīgu kritiku par Bērklija valdīšanu un turīgās elites korupciju. Bērklijs savukārt pasludināja Bekonu par nemiernieku un sapulcināja spēkus, lai viņam pretotos.

30. jūlijā Bekons un viņa 600 sekotāji izsūtīja “Virdžīnijas tautas deklarāciju”, kurā teikts, ka Bērklijs “ļaunprātīgi izmantoja tiesnešus, padarot tos par skandaloziem un nezinošiem favorītiem”. 19. septembrī viņi devās gājienā uz Džeimstaunas galvaspilsētu un, Bērklijam bēgot, to nodedzināja. Nākamajā mēnesī Bekons nomira no asiņainās plūsmas (dizentērijas). Bez harizmātiskā līdera dumpis zaudēja impulsu. Bērklija lojālisti sakāva nemierniekus līdz 1677. gada janvārim.

Bekona sacelšanās bija visnopietnākais karaliskās varas izaicinājums pirms Amerikas revolūcijas. Vēsturnieki šo notikumu bieži saista ar iecietīgas kalpības samazināšanos un attiecīgi verdzības pieaugumu britu amerikāņu kolonijās.


Bekona sacelšanās: Amerikas pirmā bruņotā sacelšanās

Bekona sacelšanās bija konflikts, kas sākās kā daudz domstarpību - ar piedzēries strīdu. Bet šī īslaicīgā sacelšanās 17. gadsimta koloniālajā Amerikā tiek uzskatīta par ilgtermiņa ietekmi uz koloniālajām apmetnēm, politiku attiecībā pret indiāņiem un rases jēdzieniem Ziemeļamerikā.

Incidents notika Koloniālajā Virdžīnijā no 1676. Patiesībā Toms Džefersons uzskatīja sacelšanās vadītāju Natanielu Bekonu par patriotu.

Bet mūsdienu vēsturnieki uz Bekona sacelšanos skatās, ņemot vērā konfliktu starp kolonistiem un amerikāņu pamatiedzīvotājiem, kā arī to ietekmi uz to, kā Amerikas kolonijās attīstījās priekšstati par rasi.

Bekons bija relatīvs jaunpienācējs Virdžīnijā, kad uzsāka sacelšanos. Tātad, kā viņam izdevās savākt pietiekamu atbalstu, lai izraisītu konfliktu, kas mainītu vēstures gaitu?

Nathanial Bacon the Man

1647. gadā Anglijā, Safolkā dzimušo Bekonu tēvs bija iesaiņojis Virdžīnijas kolonijā, jo viņš bija mēģinājis apkrāpt 16 gadus vecu kaimiņu, norāda Džeimss Raiss, Valtera S. Diksona profesors un vēstures katedras priekšsēdētājs. , Tufta universitātē, kura saka, ka Bekons tika uzskatīts par “ļoti nepatīkamu cilvēku”

Šķiet, ka tā ir vispārēja vienprātība par vēsturisko personību. Nacionālā parka dienesta tīmekļa vietnē teikts: "Bekons bija nemiera cēlājs un shēmotājs, kura tēvs viņu nosūtīja uz Virdžīniju cerībā, ka viņš nobriedīs."

Neskatoties uz personību, Bekonam viss sākās labvēlīgi. Viņš Virdžīnijā ieradās 1675. gadā, un, pateicoties viņa sakariem - ar laulību viņš bija saistīts ar gubernatoru Viljamu Bērkliju - Bekons saņēma gan zemes dotāciju, gan vietu gubernatora padomē, liecina Virdžīnijas Vēstures un kultūras muzeja dati. Tomēr viņa ierašanās sakrita ar Virdžīnijas ekonomiskās, sociālās un politiskās kārtības krīzi, kurā viņš drīz vien iejauksies.

Problēmas Virdžīnijā

Virdžīnijas tabakas stādītāji kolonijā bija piedzīvojuši tabakas cenu kritumu ar ekonomiskām atšķirībām starp lielākajiem zemes īpašniekiem un mazajiem stādītājiem, nabadzīgajiem imigrantiem un atbrīvotajiem vergiem. Lielākā daļa vietējo iedzīvotāju nebija iesaistīti politiskajā dzīvē, un zemes īpašnieki nevarēja balsot. Papildus šiem stabilitātes izaicinājumiem Virdžīnijas kolonistiem bija dažādi viedokļi par to, kā pārvaldīt attiecības ar vietējām tautām un vietējām ciltīm.

Tajā pašā laikā starp Susquehannock indiāņiem un kolonistiem bija izcēlies karš, kas sākās ar "sīku tirdzniecības strīdu", sacīja Rīss rakstā "Bekona sacelšanās Indijas valstī", kuru viņš rakstīja 2014. gada žurnālam "Journal of American History". Bija divas idejas, kā reaģēt.

Gubernators Bērklijs uzskatīja, ka labākais risinājums būtu karot pret Susquehannock, bet palikt mierā ar citām kaimiņu ciltīm. Citi, tostarp Bekons, nepiekrita un uzskatīja, ka konflikts dod iespēju iznīcināt visus vietējos iedzīvotājus.

Un tas nebija tikai Bekons, saka Rīss. Daži apgabala turīgie stādītāji arī vēlējās iet tālāk par gubernatora ierobežoto karu plānu. Bekons pārņēma kontroli pār brīvprātīgo miliču nometni, lai cīnītos pret Susquehannock un citām ciltīm.

Kas bija šie miliči? Saskaņā ar Raisu, to ir grūti zināt. Viņš saka, ka ir bijis mīts, ka Bēkona nemiernieki sastāvēja no nabadzīgiem Rietumu (pierobežas) stādītājiem pret bagātajiem austrumu stādītājiem, ka tā bija sacelšanās no apakšas uz augšu. Tomēr milicijas sociālekonomisko statusu ir grūti noteikt, un ir pierādījumi par bagātiem stādītājiem no robežas, piemēram, pats Bekons un Viljams Bērds, kurš bija viens no vīriešiem, kas viņu pieņēma darbā.

Historiogrāfija ir koncentrējusies uz pilsoņu karu starp virdžīniešiem, un indiāņi ir atstājuši stāsta robežas, saka Raiss. Bet Bēkona sacelšanās patiesībā bija cīņa pret indiešiem vairāk nekā domstarpības starp nabadzīgajiem un bagātajiem kolonistiem.


Melnbaltā izgudrošana

1600. gados Virdžīnijā Entonijs Džonsons nodrošināja savu brīvību no iejaukšanās, ieguva zemi un kļuva par cienījamu savas kopienas locekli. Elizabete Keja veiksmīgi vērsās pie kolonijas tiesību sistēmas, lai atbrīvotu viņu pēc tam, kad viņa bija nelikumīgi paverdzināta. Līdz 1700. gadiem Virdžīnijas likumi un paražas sāka atšķirt melns cilvēki no balts cilvēki, padarot neiespējamu lielākajai daļai afrikāņu izcelsmes virdžīniešu paveikt to, ko bija izdarījis Džonsons un Kejs.

Šī Hovarda Peila 1905. gada glezna attēlo Džeimstaunas dedzināšanu 1676. gadā, ko veica melnbaltie nemiernieki Nataniela Bekona vadībā.

Kāpēc Virdžīnijas likumdevēji veica šīs izmaiņas? Daudzi vēsturnieki kā pagrieziena punktu norāda uz notikumu, kas pazīstams kā Bēkona sacelšanās 1676. gadā. Nataniels Bekons bija bagāts baltā īpašuma īpašnieks un Virdžīnijas gubernatora Viljama Bērklija radinieks. Bet Bēkons un Bērklijs viens otram nepatika, un viņi nepiekrita jautājumiem, kas saistīti ar kolonijas pārvaldību, ieskaitot kolonijas politiku attiecībā pret indiāņiem. Bekons vēlējās, lai kolonija atriebtos par indiāņu reidiem pierobežas apmetnēs un izņemtu no kolonijas visus pamatiedzīvotājus, lai tādi zemes īpašnieki kā viņš varētu paplašināt savu īpašumu. Bērklijs baidījās, ka tas apvienos visas tuvējās ciltis dārgā un postošā karā pret koloniju. Spītējot gubernatoram, Bekons organizēja savu miliciju, kurā bija baltie un melnādainie kalpi un paverdzinātie melnādainie cilvēki, kuri pievienojās apmaiņā pret brīvību un uzbruka tuvējām ciltīm. Sākās cīņa par varu ar Bekonu un viņa miliciju vienā pusē un Bērkliju, Virdžīnijas Burgesses namu un pārējo kolonijas eliti, no otras puses. Sekoja mēnešu konflikts, tostarp bruņotas sadursmes starp kaujiniekiem. 1676. gada septembrī Bekona milicija ieņēma Džeimstaunu un nodedzināja to līdz pamatiem.

Lai gan Bekons pēc mēneša nomira no drudža un sacelšanās izjuka, Virdžīnijas turīgos stādītājus satricināja fakts, ka nemiernieku kaujinieki, kas apvienoja baltos un melnos kalpus un vergus, bija iznīcinājuši koloniālo galvaspilsētu. Juridiskā zinātniece Mišela Aleksandra raksta:

Notikumi Džeimstaunā bija satraucoši stādītāju elitei, kas ļoti baidījās no [iejaukšanās kalpu] un vergu daudznacionālās alianses. Vārdi par Bēkona sacelšanos izplatījās tālu, un sekoja vēl vairāki līdzīga veida sacelšanās. Cenšoties aizsargāt savu augstāko statusu un ekonomisko stāvokli, stādītāji mainīja savu stratēģiju dominējošā stāvokļa saglabāšanai. Viņi atteicās no lielās paļaušanās uz apkalpotiem kalpiem par labu vairāk melno vergu ievešanai. 1

Pēc Bekona sacelšanās Virdžīnijas likumdevēji sāka juridiski nošķirt “baltos” un “melnos” iedzīvotājus. Pastāvīgi paverdzinot afrikāņu izcelsmes virgīniešus un piešķirot nabadzīgajiem baltajiem kalpiem un zemniekiem dažas jaunas tiesības un statusu, viņi cerēja nošķirt abas grupas un mazināt iespēju, ka viņi atkal apvienosies dumpī. Vēsturniece Ira Berlin skaidro:

Drīz pēc Bēkona sacelšanās viņi arvien vairāk nošķir Āfrikas izcelsmes cilvēkus no Eiropas izcelsmes cilvēkiem. Viņi pieņem likumus, kas saka, ka Āfrikas izcelsmes cilvēki ir iedzimti vergi. Un viņi arvien vairāk dod zināmu varu neatkarīgajiem baltajiem lauksaimniekiem un zemes īpašniekiem. . .

Tagad interesanti ir tas, ka mēs parasti sakām, ka verdzība un brīvība ir pretējas lietas - ka tās ir diametrāli pretējas. Bet tas, ko mēs šeit, Virdžīnijā, redzam 17. gadsimta beigās, ap Bēkona sacelšanos, ir tas, ka brīvība un verdzība tiek radītas vienā mirklī. 2

Saskaņā ar Oksfordas angļu vārdnīcu, īpašības vārda pirmā parādīšanās drukātā veidā balts Atsaucoties uz “baltu cilvēku, rases cilvēku, kas izceļas ar gaišu sejas krāsu”, bija 1671. gads. Koloniālās hartas un citi oficiālie dokumenti, kas rakstīti 1600. un 1700. gadu sākumā, reti atsaucas uz Eiropas kolonistiem kā baltiem.

Tā kā afrikāņu izcelsmes cilvēku statuss britu kolonijās tika apstrīdēts un uzbruka, kā arī baltiem ierēdņiem tika piešķirtas jaunas tiesības un statuss, vārds balts joprojām tika plaši izmantota publiskajos dokumentos un privātajos dokumentos, lai aprakstītu Eiropas kolonistus. Eiropas izcelsmes cilvēki tika uzskatīti par baltiem, un Āfrikas izcelsmes cilvēki tika apzīmēti kā melni. Vēsturnieks Robins D. G. Kelijs skaidro:

Daudzi no Eiropā cēlušajiem nabadzīgajiem baltajiem sāka identificēties, ja ne tieši ar bagātajiem baltajiem, noteikti ar to, ka ir balti. Un šeit jūs iegūstat šo ideju par balto rasi kā veidu, kā atšķirt sevi no tiem tumšādainiem cilvēkiem, kuri viņiem asociējas ar mūžīgo verdzību. 3

Amerikas sabiedrības sadalījums starp melno un balto, kas sākās 1600. gadu beigās, atstāja postošas ​​sekas afroamerikāņiem, jo ​​verdzība kļuva par institūciju, kas uzplauka gadsimtiem ilgi. Jurists un pilsoņu tiesību aktīvists Braiens Stīvensons skaidro:

[S] verdzība atņēma paverdzinātajai personai jebkādas likumīgas tiesības vai autonomiju un piešķīra verga īpašniekam pilnīgu varu pār melnādainajiem vīriešiem, sievietēm un bērniem, kas likumīgi atzīti par īpašumu. . .

Amerikāņu verdzība bieži bija brutāla, barbariska un vardarbīga. Papildus grūtībām, kas saistītas ar piespiedu darbu, vergu īpašnieki tika sabojāti vai nogalināti vergu īpašniekiem kā sods par pārāk lēnu darbu, ciemošanos pie citas plantācijas dzīvojošā laulātā vai pat mācīšanās lasīt. Arī verdzībā esošie cilvēki tika seksuāli izmantoti. 4

ASV un visas pasaules līderi un zinātnieki arvien vairāk paļautos uz domājamām atšķirībām starp melnbaltām rasēm, lai attaisnotu brutālo un necilvēcīgo izturēšanos pret vergiem.


Nataniela Bekona daudzās dzīves

Nathaniel Bacon, 1647-1676 Acīmredzot tas nav dumpinieks Nataniels Bekons. Atvainojos par kļūdu.

Viena no visspēcīgākajām atziņām, ko Edmunds Morgans mums piedāvāja savā garajā un izcilajā karjerā, bija tāda, ka Bēkona sacelšanās, tās konteksts un sekas ir agrīns ceļvedis rasu attiecību vēsturei un tās mijiedarbībai ar klases politiku Amerikas vēsturē. [1] Atklājot stāstu par zaudētajām iespējām, Morgans ierosināja, ka Bekona sacelšanās 1676. gadā iezīmēja pagrieziena punktu verdzības vēsturē Virdžīnijā un plašāk dienvidu kolonijās.

Līdz tam verdzība vēl nebija centrālā institūcija, kāda tā būs vēlāk, jo gan ieradušies kalpi, gan vergi veidoja agrīnās Virdžīnijas zemāko klasi. Pēc Bēkona sacelšanās baltie vīrieši tā vietā, lai veidotu starprasu aliansi, kas apstrīdētu džentlmeņu šķiras likumu, baltās krāsas vīrieši noslēdza faustisku darījumu pāri klašu līnijām melno ļaužu mugurā, definējot brīvību kā baltā cilvēka privilēģiju un verdzību. kā afrikāņu izcelsmes cilvēku noklusējuma statuss. Tādējādi dienvidos verdzība kļuva par iecienīto darba režīmu, samazinājās verdzība, un melnums un baltums nostiprinājās likumos un paražās.

Šīs agrīnās Virdžīnijas nemiernieku centrā stāvēja pazīstams amerikāņu paraugs, demagogs Nataniels Bekons. Veicinot naidu pret indiāņiem un sanitāros aizvainojumus pret Virdžīnijas eliti, Bekons nonāca atklātas sacelšanās priekšgalā pēc sarežģītiem notikumiem. Līdzīgi kā mūsu mūsdienu divdesmit pirmā gadsimta populists, Bekonam nebija skaidra dizaina un viņš ienāca populismā bez liela plāna. Tomēr tas, ko viņš darīja ļoti labi, izraisīja naidu pret īpaši nestabilu balto vīriešu grupu, pirmkārt un galvenokārt pret indiāņiem, bet arī pret kolonijas vadību, ko daudzi uzskatīja gan par samaitātu, gan mīkstu pret „mežonīgajiem”. Atkal, līdzīgi mūsu ievēlētajam prezidentam, Bekons pats bija kolonijas aristokrātijas sastāvdaļa, kurš tomēr sasniedza pareizo toni ar pieaugošo neapmierināto balto cilvēku bloku.

Pārsteidzošāks par pašu sacelšanos, sacelšanās izvirduma konteksts un sociālās spriedzes atrisināšana Virdžīnijā pēc tam izrādījās nākotnes priekšvēstnesis. Virdžīnija 17. gadsimta beigās bija sabiedrība, kas ātri izgāja no iepriekš izveidotā “līdzsvara”, kura pamatā bija augsts mirstības līmenis un ienesīgu zemes gabalu pieejamība, ko vietējie indieši piespieda ar spēku. Līdz gadsimta vidum kolonijas ekonomiskais uzplaukums galvenokārt balstījās uz darbaspēka iegūšanu no ierunātiem kalpiem, kuri tika piesaistīti kolonijai ar solījumiem gan par brīvību, gan zemi, kad viņi bija veikuši noteikto bezmaksas darba laiku. Tas izrādījās “dzīvotspējīgs”, kamēr mirstība bija augsta un bagātīgas tabakas audzēšanas zemes. Šādā veidā daudzi no tiem, kas izdzīvoja savus verdzības periodus, varēja pievienoties stādītāju klasei, jo brīvi vīrieši un sociālā spriedze joprojām bija pārbaudīta.

Tomēr 17. gadsimta otrajā pusē, cilvēkiem dzīvojot ilgāk un galvenās tabakas audzēšanas zemes pārņemot lieliem stādītājiem un zemes spekulantiem, bijušo kalpu rindas pieauga, un arvien mazāk „atbrīvotāju” kļuva finansiāli nostiprināti. Tā rezultātā palielinājās bagātību atšķirības starp brīvībā esošajiem un labi attīstītajiem stādītājiem, un sociālās mobilitātes izredzes kļuva vājas. Šī bija recepte sociālajiem nemieriem.

Pēc Morgana teiktā, Nataniela Bekona panākumi, veicinot naidu pret indiāņiem kā līdzekli tautas atbalsta stiprināšanai, paredzēja, ka būs jāgaida nākotnē. Lai gan Bekons nomira diezgan ātri pēc tam, kad bija pārņēmis kolonijas vadību, un pēc viņa nāves sacelšanos karaļa varas iestādes viegli nomāca, „daudzo” tautas sacelšanās rēgs pret „retajiem” mudināja Virdžīnijas eliti pārkalibrēt sociālo kārtību. . Viņi arī izmantoja rasu satraukumu kā līdzekli, lai veicinātu popularitāti un solidaritāti dažādās klasēs, bet indiešu vietā viņi kā izvēlēti grēkāži pievērsās “citiem” Āfrikas izcelsmes cilvēkiem.

Šajā ziņā pēc Bekona sacelšanās vēlamā brīvā darba forma kļuva verdzība, ko papildināja sacietējusi rasu līdzība. Tas arī atviegloja satraukumu, ko radīja kolonijā pieaugošās nestabilo vīriešu kārtas, jo, pieaugot verdzībai un samazinoties kalpībai, mazāk brīvu strādnieku sasniedza brīvību un apdraudēja sabiedrisko kārtību. "Vergi," atzīmēja Morgans, "izrādījās mazāk bīstami nekā brīvi vai daļēji brīvi strādnieki". Pretstatā baltajiem vīriem “vergi bija neapbruņoti”, un, tā kā bijušos varēja paļauties uz sociālās kārtības uzturēšanu, vergiem “nevajadzēja būt bruņotiem”. (2) Baltie vīri tagad apvienosies pret indiešu draudiem un par vergu sacelšanos.

Nopietnais jautājums, kas, šķiet, atkārtojas atkal un atkal Amerikas vēsturē, ir tas, kurš ir vainojams draudīgajā derībā, kas mums atnesa balto patriarhātu tādu, kādu mēs to pazīstam Amerikas vēsturē. Daudzsološs ir tas, ka noslēguma piezīmēs par sociālo pārkārtošanos Virdžīnijā Morgans izmantoja pasīvo balsi, apspriežot zemākās klases balto vīriešu statusu pēc sacelšanās. "[T] hei [mazie stādītāji]," apgalvo Morgans, "tika atļautas ne tikai labklājībai, bet arī sociālo, psiholoģisko un politisko priekšrocību iegūšanai, kas novērsa ekspluatācijas virzienu un pielīdzināja tās ekspluatantiem [mans slīpraksts]. ” Līdzīgi viņš ieskicēja Virdžīnijas trīspusējo sociālo organizāciju līdz astoņpadsmitā gadsimta otrajam ceturksnim: “vergu darbaspēks, kas rases un rasisma dēļ bija izolēts no pārējās sabiedrības, lielu stādītāju kopums, kas bija stingri apņēmies īstenot savu valsti. politikā un politiskajā manevrēšanā un lielāku mazo stādītāju kopumu, kas bija pierunāts ka viņu intereses labi apmierināja lielo kaimiņu vadība [mans slīpraksts]. ”(3)

Morganam, tāpat kā daudziem citiem, “izmantotāji” bija Virdžīnijas lielie vīri, savukārt zemākās klases baltie šajā lietā bija tikai bijušie vēsturiskie aģenti. Daudzi izcili pētījumi ir atklājuši šo problēmu, nepiedāvājot pilnīgu risinājumu šim graujošajam jautājumam. Pirmkārt, protams, bija W.E.B. Du Bois savā meistarībā Melnā rekonstrukcija Amerikā (1935). Dažus gadus vēlāk, 1938. gadā, C. Vann Woodward turpināja šo tradīciju ar savu ceļu lauzošo interpretāciju par populismu un jaunajiem dienvidiem, kas sākās ar Toms Vatsons: Agrārais nemiernieks un turpināja savu turpmāko darbu. In Kara nosaukums (1998) un Mūsu mežonīgie kaimiņi (2008), Džila Lepore un Pīters Sudrabs izsekoja, kā baltie kolonisti apvienoja spēkus ar genocīdām sekām indiāņiem attiecīgi karaļa Filipa kara un septiņu gadu kara laikā. Tieši šogad publicētais Roberts Parkinsons atspoguļoja šādas analīzes savā izsmeļošajā rases un nacionālisma pētījumā Amerikas revolūcijas laikā: Kopīgais cēlonis (2016). Un Deivids Rēdigers un Aleksandrs Saksons veica līdzīgu lietu par Džeksonijas un pirmsdzemdību periodu ar Baltuma algas (1991) un Baltās Republikas uzplaukums un krišana (1990), attiecīgi.

Rasisma dinamika Amerikas vēsturē ir skaidra: “baltuma algas”, kā Deivids Reodigers formulēja Du Bois koncepciju, atkal un atkal ir izrādījušās vilinošākas nekā materiālie ieguvumi. Baltajiem vienkāršajiem ļaudīm, veidojot brīvībai veltītu kolektīvu, konsekventi priekšroka tika dota rases identitātei, nevis jebkurai citai uzticības formai. Parasti lielākajai daļai balto bija arī daži materiāli ieguvumi - lai gan nekad būtiska ekonomikas pārstrukturēšana.

Natanielam Bekonam bija daudz dzīvību: viņš mums parādījās kā Endrjū Džeksons, Toms Vatsons, tēvs Koulins un tagad Donalds Tramps. Tomēr, iespējams, daudz svarīgāka par to īpašo mantojumu, ko ieguvušas dažādas personas, kuras izcēlušās, izmantojot rasu animu un antiautoritāru aizvainojumu, mums atkal ir palikusi nepatīkama izvēle. Vai šajā daudzkārt stāstītajā amerikāņu stāstā mums vajadzētu uzskatīt vienkāršos baltos vīriešus par pilnvērtīgiem aģentiem, vai arī izteikt savu neapmierinātību par arvien nenotveramo viltus apziņas dēmonu un visu vainu novelt uz balto eliti? Visproduktīvākais ceļš uz priekšu, iespējams, ir kaut kur pa vidu. Es ceru, ka vienā lietā var piekrist pietiekami daudz cilvēku, mums ir fundamentāli jāapstrīd kapitālistiskā un rasistiskā kārtība, kuras rezultātā ir notikuši gandrīz visi pārējie.

[1] Tas bija viņa grāmatas centrā Amerikāņu verdzība, Amerikas brīvība: Koloniālās Virdžīnijas kārtība (Ņujorka: Norton, 1975).


Nataniels Bēkons (1647. gada 2. janvāris un#1666. gada 26. oktobris) bija Virdžīnijas kolonijas kolonists, slavens kā 1676. gada Bekona sacelšanās ierosinātājs, kas sabruka, kad Bekons nomira no dizentērijas. [1]

Bekons dzimis 1647. gada 15. janvārī Fristonas zālē Safolkā, Anglijā, turīgu tirgotāju vecākiem. Tomass Bekons un sieva Elizabete Brūka Bekona. Nataniels bija vienīgais viņu daudzo bērnu dēls, un viņš ieguva izglītību Kembridžas universitātē. Viņš devās grandiozā tūrē pa Eiropu Džona Reja aizgādībā, kā arī studēja jurisprudenci Greja viesnīcā. Tomēr Nataniels apprecējās ar Elizabeti hercogu, sera Edvarda Djūka meita, bez atļaujas. Pēc apsūdzībām, ka Nataniels krāpis citu jaunekli no viņa mantojuma, Tomass Bekons iedeva dēlam ievērojamo summu � un jauneklis aizbrauca trimdā pāri Atlantijas okeānam. [2]

Ierodoties Virdžīnijā, Nataniels Bekons nopirka divas pierobežas plantācijas pie Džeimsa upes. Tā kā viņa brālēns bija ievērojams milicijas pulkvedis un gubernatora Viljama Bērklija draugs, Bekons apmetās galvaspilsētā Džeimstaunā. Drīz vien Bekons tika iecelts gubernatora padomē. [3] Bērklija sieva Frensisa Kulpepere, iespējams, arī bija Bekona brālēns laulībā. [4]

Pirms 1674. gadā nopietni sākās "Virdžīnijas sacelšanās", kā toreiz sauca, daži brīvi turētāji uz Virdžīnijas robežas pieprasīja, lai indiāņi, tostarp draudzīgās ciltīs dzīvojošie, kas dzīvo uz līgumiem aizsargātās zemēs, tiktu padzīti vai nogalināti. [3] Viņi arī protestēja pret korupciju gubernatora Bērklija valdībā, kuru vēsturnieks Stīvens Zonders Vēbs nosauca par "neattaisnojami korumpētu, necilvēcīgi nomācošu un nepiedodami neefektīvu, īpaši karā." [5] Pēc indiešu reida Stafordas apgabalā, Virdžīnijā, nogalināja divus baltos cilvēkus vīrieši, kas saistīti ar tirgotāju Mathewsu, kuru vēlākā ziņojumā regulāri atrada "krāpti un ļaunprātīgi" indiāņi, Virdžīnijas milicijas grupa, kas veica reidu pret Doegu un Susquehannock cilšu apmetnēm, tostarp pāri Potomakas upei Merilendā. Merilendas gubernators Kalverts protestēja pret iebrukumu, un Susquehannock atriebās. Pēc tam Merilendas milicija pievienojās Virdžīnijas spēkiem un uzbruka nocietinātam Susquehannock ciemam. Pēc tam, kad pieci priekšnieki bija pieņēmuši Merilendas līdera uzaicinājumu sarunāties, viņi tika nokauti, un tas izraisīja vēlāku likumdošanas izmeklēšanu un aizrādījumus. [6] [7] Susquehannocks atcēla spēkā stādījumus: nogalināja 60 kolonistus Merilendā un vēl 36 viņu pirmajā uzbrukumā Virdžīnijas augsnei. Tad pievienojās citas ciltis, nogalinot kolonistus, dedzinot mājas un laukus un nokaujot mājlopus līdz Džeimsa un Jorkas upēm. [8]

Cenšoties izvairīties no plašāka kara, kas līdzīgs karaļa Filipa karam Jaunajā Anglijā, Bērklijs iestājās par ierobežošanu, ierosinot vairāku aizsardzības nocietinājumu būvniecību gar robežu un mudināja pierobežas kolonistus pulcēties aizsardzības pozā. Pierobežas kolonisti noraidīja plānu kā dārgu un neatbilstošu, kā arī apšaubīja to kā iespējamu attaisnojumu nodokļu likmju paaugstināšanai. [3]

Tikmēr Bekons, kura pārraugu Džeimsa upes plantācijā bija nogalinājuši indiešu reidi, kļuva par nemiernieku līderi. [9] Kad Bērklijs atteicās piešķirt Bekonam militāru komisiju uzbrukt visiem indiāņiem, Bekons sapulcināja savus 400–500 vīru lielos spēkus un pārcēlās augšup pa Džeimsa upi, lai uzbruktu Doegu un Pamunkiju ciltīm. Lai gan abi parasti bija mierīgi dzīvojuši kopā ar kolonistiem un nebija uzbrukuši pierobežas apmetnēm, viņu apstrādātās zemes bija vērtīgas. Martā Bērklijs bija mēģinājis nodrošināt kaujiniekus no Pamunkey cilts, lai cīnītos ar naidīgām ciltīm saskaņā ar iepriekšējiem līgumiem. Pamunkey karaliene Cockacoeske kaislīgi atgādināja gubernatora padomei par viņas vīra un 100 karavīru nāvi pirms 20 gadiem, kuri bija līdzīgā situācijā. Priekšsēdētāja bija ignorējusi viņas sūdzību, tā vietā turpināja pieprasīt vairāk karavīru (un saņēma solījumu pretī piegādāt duci). Bērklijs arestēja Bekonu un atcēla viņu no Padomes, taču Bēkona vīri ātri nodrošināja viņa atbrīvošanu un piespieda Bērkliju rīkot likumdevēja vēlēšanas. Tikmēr Bekona vīri turpināja ofensīvu pret Pamunkeys, kuri aizbēga Pūķa purvā. Kad draudzīgajam Occoneechee izdevās ieņemt Susquehannock cietoksni, Bekona spēki pieprasīja visu laupījumu, lai gan nebija palīdzējuši cīņās. Pēc tam viņi nodevībā uzbruka Oconeechee, nogalinot vīriešus, sievietes un bērnus. [10]

Neskatoties uz Bekona likumpārkāpuma statusu, Henriko apgabala vēlētāji viņu ievēlēja atkārtoti izveidotajā Burgesses namā. Šī iestāde ieviesa vairākas visaptverošas reformas, ierobežojot gubernatora pilnvaras un atjaunojot vēlēšanu tiesības bezpajumtniekiem bez zemes. [3] Viņi arī ieroču pārdošanu jebkuram indietim piemēroja nāvessodu. Bekona sekotāji netika mollificēti, apsūdzot Bērkliju par atteikšanos atļaut atriebību pret vietējiem iedzīvotājiem viņa kažokādu tirdzniecības ieguldījumu un viņa favorītiem piešķirto monopolu dēļ. After a number of verbal alterations, including a quarrel in a Jamestown street, Berkeley retreated to his plantation and signed the military commission Bacon demanded.[11] Scouting parties accordingly set out to requisition supplies, as well as to kill and enslave Indians, prompting protests from citizens of Gloucester County subjected to the militia's exactions.[12] Bacon's forces retreated to Middle Plantation (later renamed Williamsburg).

On July 30, 1676, Bacon and his makeshift army issued a Declaration of the People of Virginia,[7] which criticized Berkeley's administration, accusing him of levying unfair taxes, appointing friends to high positions, and failing to protect outlying farmers from Indian attack. They also issued a 'Manifesto' urging the extermination of all Indians, charging that they did not deserve legal protections because they "have bin for these Many years enemies to the King and Country, Robbers and Thieves and Invaders of his Majesty's Right and our Interest and Estate."[13] Months of conflict ensued, including a naval attempt across the Potomac and in Chesapeake Bay by Bacon's allies to capture Berkeley at Accomac. Bacon himself focused on the Pamunkey in Dragon Swamp his forces seized 3 horse loads of goods, enslaved 45 Indians and killed many more, prompting the queen (who narrowly escaped with her son) to throw herself on the mercy of the Governor's Council. Berkeley raised his own army of mercenaries on the Eastern Shore, as well as captured Bacon's naval allies and executed the two leaders. Bacon's forces then turned against the colony's capital, burning Jamestown to the ground on September 19, 1676.[7][14]

Before an English naval squadron could arrive, Bacon died of dysentery on October 26, 1676. Although Joseph Ingram took control of the rebel forces, the rebellion soon collapsed. Governor Berkeley returned to power, seizing the property of several rebels and ultimately hanging twenty-three men, many without trial.[3] After an investigative committee returned its report to King Charles II, criticizing both Berkeley and Bacon for their conduct toward friendly tribes, Berkeley was relieved of the governorship, returned to England to protest, and died shortly thereafter.[7] Charles II later supposedly commented, "That old fool has put to death more people in that naked country than I did here for the murder of my father." This is, however, likely to be a colonial myth, arising about 30 years later.[15]

  • BACON, Thomas (c.1620-97), of Friston, Suff. and Wandsworth, Surr.
  • b. c.1620, o.s. of Nathaniel Bacon of Friston by Anne, da. of Sir Thomas Le Gros of Crostwick, Norf. educ. Corpus Christi, Camb. 1637 G. Inn 1640, called 1651, ancient 1658. m. (1) Elizabeth (d. 2 Jan. 1649), da. of Sir Robert Brooke† of Cockfield Hall, Yoxford, Suff., 1s. d.v.p. 1da. (2) Martha, da. of Sir John Reade of Wrangle, Lincs., wid. of Edward Empson of Boston, Lincs., 1da. suc. fa. 1644.1
  • Offices Held
    • Commr. for assessment, Suff. 1644-52, 1657, Aug. 1660-80, j.p. 1645-53, 1657-87 elder, Saxmundham classis 1647 commr. for militia, Suff. 1648, Mar. 1660, scandalous ministers 1654, recusants 1675.2

    Nathaniel Bacon was born in Suffolk, England on 2nd January, 1647. A dispute with his wife's family persuaded him to emigrate to North America. With the financial support of his father, he purchased two estates along the James River in Virginia.

    William Berkeley appointed Bacon to his governing council but the two men soon fell out about the development of the colony. Berkeley favoured a policy of containment, whereas Bacon wanted to expand into areas controlled by Native Americans.

    In 1676 Bacon organized his own expedition. Fearing a large-scale war with Native Americans, Berkeley turned his forces against Bacon and his men. Bacon captured Jamestown and William Berkeley was forced to flee to the Eastern Shore. However, Nathaniel Bacon died of fever in October, 1676, and without his leadership, the rebellion quickly collapsed.

    Nathaniel, born in England and resident of Suffolk, came to Virginia in 1676 he was a General. He was the hero of Bacon's Rebellion in Virginia. See John Fisk's "Old Virginia and Her Neighbors" Vol II Sparks Library Am.

    General Nathaniel Bacon was of an old family of Suffolk England. His father Thomas Bacon of Triston Hall was a cousin of the great Lord Bacon and his mother was the daughter of Sir Robert Brooke Kt. He studied at Cambridge, read law at Grays Inn and after extensive travel on the continent came to America bringing with him his wife Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Edward and sister of Sir John Duke of Benhill Lodge, Suffolk. Historians are not agreed as to the year of his birth, they range from 1644 to '48, the former is probably correct. Though less than thirty years of age when he arrived in Virginia such were his character and abilities that he was at once given a seat in the Council. He is described as "an impetuous youth, brave, cordial, fiery at times and gifted with a persuasive tongue". He was tall, lithe, of swarthy complexion, melancholy eyes and had a somewhat lofty demeanor. In addition to the estate upon which he lived at Curl's Wharfe (Richmond) he owned another further up on the site marked in the city of Richmond by the name "Bacon Quarter Branch". There had after his settlement for some time been much trouble on the border from the Indians but Governor Berkeley had refused to send troops against them or to permit the people to organize companies to punish them. "If the red skins meddle with me" quoth the fiery young man "damn my blood but I'll harry them!" This threat he had soon to make good. One morning in May 1676 news came to Curl's Wharfe that the Indians had attacked his upper estate and killed his over-seer and one of his men. A crowd of men at once assembled (planters on horseback) and offered to march under Bacon's lead. Making then an eloquent speech he accepted the command and sent a courier to Gov. Berkeley for a commission. Berkeley answered evasively. Bacon sent him a polite note thanking him for the promised commission and started on his campaign. He had not gone many miles before a proclamation from the governor overtook him, ordering the party to disperse. A few obeyed. Bacon and the rest kept on their way and inflicted a severe defeat on the Indians. This was the beginning of the trouble between Bacon and Governor Berkeley, which resulted in what is called "Bacon's Rebellion" an account of which is to be found in almost every history of the U.S. The anxieties and exposure of his Indian campaigns, of which there were several, and his war with the governor undermined his health and this pioneer of the rights of the people in America passed away in early manhood (he died in 1676) his work remaining to be accomplished just a hundred years later by that greatest Virginian George Washington.

    References - Bancroft's History U.S. Vol. 1

    John Fiske. Old Virginia & her neighbors

    Sparks Library Am. Biography

    Mills Va. Carolurum - Va. Magazine etc.

    No one knows for certain when he was born. An earlier attribution of him as the Nathaniel Bacon born in 1646 or 1647 appears to be spurious, based on no firm foundation, although widely repeated in later literature including Encyclop๭ia Britannica. The 1922 edition of the Dictionary of National Biography does not give him a specific birthdate but does say he was "of Friston Hall". Although, from a contemporary document, his father is said to be "Thomas Bacon", his mother is Elizabeth Brooke.


    Nathaniel Bacon - History

    Economic and social power became concentrated in late seventeenth-century Virginia, leaving laborers and servants with restricted economic independence. Governor William Berkeley feared rebellion: “six parts of Seven at least are Poore, Indebted, Discontented and Armed.” Planter Nathaniel Bacon focused inland colonists’ anger at local Indians, who they felt were holding back settlement, and at a distant government unwilling to aid them. In the summer and fall of 1676, Bacon and his supporters rose up and plundered the elite’s estates and slaughtered nearby Indians. Bacon’s Declaration challenged the economic and political privileges of the governor’s circle of favorites, while announcing the principle of the consent of the people. Bacon’s death and the arrival of a British fleet quelled this rebellion, but Virginia’s planters long remembered the spectacle of white and black acting together to challenge authority.

    1. For having, upon specious pretenses of public works, raised great unjust taxes upon the commonalty for the advancement of private favorites and other sinister ends, but no visible effects in any measure adequate for not having, during this long time of his government, in any measure advanced this hopeful colony either by fortifications, towns, or trade.

    2. For having abused and rendered contemptible the magistrates of justice by advancing to places of judicature scandalous and ignorant favorites.

    3. For having wronged his Majesty’s prerogative and interest by assuming monopoly of the beaver trade and for having in it unjust gain betrayed and sold his Majesty’s country and the lives of his loyal subjects to the barbarous heathen.

    4. For having protected, favored, and emboldened the Indians against his Majesty’s loyal subjects, never contriving, requiring, or appointing any due or proper means of satisfaction for their many invasions, robberies, and murders committed upon us.

    5. For having, when the army of English was just upon the track of those Indians, who now in all places burn, spoil, murder and when we might with ease have destroyed them who then were in open hostility, for then having expressly countermanded and sent back our army by passing his word for the peaceable demeanor of the said Indians, who immediately prosecuted their evil intentions, committing horrid murders and robberies in all places, being protected by the said engagement and word past of him the said Sir William Berkeley, having ruined and laid desolate a great part of his Majesty’s country, and have now drawn themselves into such obscure and remote places and are by their success so emboldened and confirmed by their confederacy so strengthened that the cries of blood are in all places, and the terror and consternation of the people so great, are now become not only difficult but a very formidable enemy who might at first with ease have been destroyed.

    6. And lately, when, upon the loud outcries of blood, the assembly had, with all care, raised and framed an army for the preventing of further mischief and safeguard of this his Majesty’s colony.

    7. For having, with only the privacy of some few favorites without acquainting the people, only by the alteration of a figure, forged a commission, by we know not what hand, not only without but even against the consent of the people, for the raising and effecting civil war and destruction, which being happily and without bloodshed prevented for having the second time attempted the same, thereby calling down our forces from the defense of the frontiers and most weakly exposed places.

    8. For the prevention of civil mischief and ruin amongst ourselves while the barbarous enemy in all places did invade, murder, and spoil us, his Majesty’s most faithful subjects.

    Of this and the aforesaid articles we accuse Sir William Berkeley as guilty of each and every one of the same, and as one who has traitorously attempted, violated, and injured his Majesty’s interest here by a loss of a great part of this his colony and many of his faithful loyal subjects by him betrayed and in a barbarous and shameful manner exposed to the incursions and murder of the heathen. And we do further declare these the ensuing persons in this list to have been his wicked and pernicious councilors, confederates, aiders, and assisters against the commonalty in these our civil commotions.

    John West, Hubert Farrell, Thomas Reade, Math. Kempe

    And we do further demand that the said Sir William Berkeley with all the persons in this list be forthwith delivered up or surrender themselves within four days after the notice hereof, or otherwise we declare as follows.

    That in whatsoever place, house, or ship, any of the said persons shall reside, be hid, or protected, we declare the owners, masters, or inhabitants of the said places to be confederates and traitors to the people and the estates of them is also of all the aforesaid persons to be confiscated. And this we, the commons of Virginia, do declare, desiring a firm union amongst ourselves that we may jointly and with one accord defend ourselves against the common enemy. And let not the faults of the guilty be the reproach of the innocent, or the faults or crimes of the oppressors divide and separate us who have suffered by their oppressions.

    These are, therefore, in his Majesty’s name, to command you forthwith to seize the persons above mentioned as traitors to the King and country and them to bring to Middle Plantation and there to secure them until further order, and, in case of opposition, if you want any further assistance you are forthwith to demand it in the name of the people in all the counties of Virginia.

    General by Consent of the people.

    Source: "Declaration of Nathaniel Bacon in the Name of the People of Virginia, July 30, 1676,"Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, 4th ser., 1871, vol. 9: 184󈟃.


    Nathaniel Bacon - History

    Bacon in most incens'd manner threatens to be revenged on the Governor and his party, swearing his soldiers to give no quarter and professing to soorne to take any themselves, and so in great fury marches on towards James Towne, onely halting a while about New Kent to gain some fresh forces, and sending to the upper parts of James River for what they could assist him with.

    Having increased his number to about 300 in all, he proceeds direcdy to towne, as he marcheth the people on the high wayes coming forth praying for his happiness and railing ag't [against] the Governour and his party, and seeing the Indian captives which they led along as in a shew of tryumph, gave him many thankes for his care and endeavours for their preservation, bringing him forth fruits and victualls for his soldiers, the women telling him if he wanted assistance they would come themselves after him.

    Intelligence coming to Bacon that the Governour had good in towne a 1000 men well arm'd and resolute, "I shall see that," saith he, "for I am now going to try them.".

    In the evening Bacon with his small tyr'd body of men comes into Paspahayes old Fields and advancing on horseback himselfe on the Sandy Beech before the towne commands the trumpet to sound, fires his carbyne, dismounts, surveys the ground and orders a French worke to be cast up.

    All this night is spent in falling of trees, cutting of bushes and throwing up earth, that by the help of the moone light they had made their French worke before day, although they had but two axes and 2 spades in all to performe this work with.

    About day-break next morning six of Bacons soldiers ran up to the pallasadees of the Towne and fired briskly upon the guard, retreating safely without any damage at first (as is reported). [T]he Governor gave comand that not a gun should be fir'd ag't Bacon or his party upon paine of death, pretending to be loath to spill bloode and much more to be beginner of it, supposing the rebells would hardly be so audacious as to fire a gun against him, But that Bacon would rather have sent to him and sought his reconciliation so that some way or other might have bin found out for the preventing of a warr, to which the Governour is said to have shewne some inclination upon the account of the service Bacon had performed (as he heard) against the Indian enemy, and that he had brought severall Indian prisoners along with him, and especially for that there were several! ignorant people which were deluded and drawne into Bacon's party and thought of no other designe than the Indian warr onely, and so knew not what they did.

    But Bacon (pretending distrust of the Governor) was so fair from all thought of a Treaty that he animates his men against it, celling them that he knew that party to be as perfidious as cowardly, and that there was noe trust to be reposed in such, who thinke it noe Treachery by any wayes to Suppresse them, and for his tendernesse of Shedding Blood which the Governor pretends, and preventing a warr, sayes Bacon, "There are some here that know it to be no longer since than last weeke that hee himself comanded to be Fired against us by Boats which the Governor sent up and downe to places where the country's Provisions were kept for mainteinance of the Indian Warr, to fetch them away to support a warr amongst ourselves, and wounded some of us (which was done by Sorrell) which were against the designe of converting these stores to soe contrary a use and intention of what they were raised for by the People." Bacon moving downe towards the Towne and the Shipps being brought before the Sandy Beach the better to annoy the enemy in case of any attempt of theirs to storme the Palassadoes, upon a signall given from the Towne the Shipps fire their Great Gunns, and at the same tyme they let fly their Small-shot from the Palassadoes. But that small sconce that Bacon had caused to be made in the night of Trees, Bush and Earth (under w'ch they lay) soe defended them that the shott did them noe damage at all, and was return'd back as fast from this little Fortresse. In the heat of this Firing Bacon commands a party of his men to make every one his Faggott and put it before his Breast and come and lay them in order on top of the Trench on the outside and at the end to enlarge and make good the Fortification, which they did, and orders more spades to be gott, to helpe to make it yet more defensible, and the better to observe their motion [Bacon] ordered a constant sentinel in the daytime on top of a brick chimney (hard by) to discover from thence how the men in Towne mounted and dismounted, posted and reposted, drew on and off, what number they were, and how they moved. Hitherto their happen'd no other action then onely firing great and small shott at distances.

    But by their movings and drawings up about towne, Bacon understood they intended a sally and accordingly prepares to receive them, drew up his men to the most advantageous places he could, and now expected them (but they observ'd to draw off againe for some tyme) and was resolved to enter the towne with them, as they retreated, as Bacon expected and foretold they would do. In this posture of expectation Bacons forces continued for a hour till the watchman gave notice that they were drawne off againe in towne, so upon this Bacons forces did so too. No sooner were they all on the rebells side gone off and squandered but all on a sudden a sally is made by the Governors party,. . . But we cannot give a better account, nor yet a truer (so far as we are informed) of this action than what this Letter of Bacons relates.

    & quot. Yesterday they made a sally with horse and foote in the Van they came up with a narrow Front, and pressing very close upon one anothers shoulders that the forlorne might be their shelter our men received them so warmly that they retired in great disorder, throwing downe theire armes, left upon the Bay, as also their drum and dead men, two of which our men brought into our trenches and buried with severall of their armes. They shew themselves such pitifull cowards, contemptable as you would admire them. It is said that Hubert Farreii is shot in the belly, Hartwell in the legg, Smith in the head, Mathewes with others, yet as yet we have no certaine account. & quot

    After this successless sally the courages and numbers of the Governors party abated much, and Bacons men thereby became more bold and daring in so much that Bacon could scarce keepe them from immediately falling to storme and enter the towne but he (being as wary as they rash) perswaded them from the attempt, bidding them keepe their courages untill such tyme as he found occasion and opportunity to make use of them, telling them that he doubted not to take the towne without losse of a man, and that one of their lives was of more value to him than the whole world.

    Having planted his great guns, he takes the wives and female relations of such gentlemen as were in the Governors service against him (whom he had caused to be brought to the workes) and places them in the face of his enemy, as bulworkes for their battery, by which policy he promised himself (and doubdess had) a goode advantage, yet had the Governors party by much the odds in number besides the advantage of tyme and place.

    But so great was the cowardize and baseness of the generality of Sir William Berkeley's party (being most of them men intent onely upon plunder or compell'd and hired into his service) that of all, at last there were onely some 20 gende-men willing to stand by him, the rest (whom the hopes or promise of plunder brought thither) being now all in haste to be gone to secure what they had gott so that Sir Wm. Berkeley himselfe who undoubtedly would rather have dyed on the place than thus deserted it, what with importunate and resisdess solicitations of all, was at last over persuaded, now hurryed away against his owne will to Accomack and forced to leave the towne to the mercy of the enemy.

    Bacon haveing early intelligence of the Governor and his party's quitting the towne the night before, enters it without any opposition, and soldier like considering of what importance a place of that refuge was, and might againe be to the Governor and his party, instandy resolves to lay it level with the ground, and the same night he became poses'd of it, sett fire to towne, church and state house (wherein were the country's records which Drummond had privately convey'd thense and preserved from burning). The towne consisted of 12 new brick houses besides a considerable number of frame houses with brick chimneys, ail which will not be rebuilt (as is computed) for fifteen hundred pounds of tobacco.

    Now those who had so lately deserted it, as they rid a little below in the river in the shipps and sloop (to their shame and regret) beheld by night the flames of the towne, which they so basely forsaking, had made a sacrifice to ruine.

    1 (1677). In Charles M. Andrews, ed., (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1915), pp. 129-36. A True Narrative of the Rise, Progresse, and Cessation of the Late Rebellion in Virginia, Most Humbly and Impartially Reported by His Majestyes Commissioners Appointed to Enquire into the Affaires of the Said Colony Narratives of the Insurrections, 1675-1690


    Mattocks Family Heritage Resources

    Source: Charles Hervey Townshend, “The Bacons of Virginia and Their English Ancestry,” New England Historical and Genealogical Register 37[1883].

    Grimbaldus, a Norman gentleman, it is said, came into England at the time of the Conquest in company with William DE WARREN, Earl of Surry, to whom he was related, and was granted lands at Letheringsete,* near Holt, in the County Norfolk, and had issue three sons, Radulph, Edmund and Ranulf, and here he founded a church, appointing for its parson his second son Edmund.**

    His younger son Ranulf, or Reynold, resided at Thorp, Norfolk, and took the name of BACON and as there were several Thorps, this place was called Bacons-Thorpe,*** as Reynold was Lord of the town, and from him sprang this illustrious family, many members of it being distinguished for talent and brilliancy of mind. This Ranulf was father of George, whose son Roger BACON released to his own sister Agnes all the lands belonging to this family in Normandy, and from him down through many generations descended the BACONs of Drinkstone and Hessett in the County Suffolk.****

    [* See Note I. At the end of this article. – EDITOR]

    ** See Blomefield’s Norfolk, Kimber and Johnson’s Baronetage. The history of Grimbaldus and his immediate descendants, which we here repeat, needs investigation.

    Of this (the Hessett) family, we find a John BACON, who married Cecilly HOO, sister of John HOO or HOWE, perhaps of Hessett, who with his brother in law John BACON were probably the builders of the beautiful church there, as proved by evidence still extant on the exterior and interior of this edifice, as shown in heliotype by the Rev. Canon COOKE in his introductory history of HESSETT, published in the “Proceedings of the Suffolk Institute of Archæology and Natural History.”

    He had sons John and Nicholas BACON. Nicholas was chaplain of Hessett. John of the same place married Hellen GEDDING, and had issue another John BACON, who married for first wife Hellena, daughter of Sir George TILLOTTS, of Rougham, and secondly, Julian, daughter of —- BARDWELL. From this first marriage came Sir Nicholas BACON (the Lord-Keeper and father of the great Lord BACON), and from the second marriage the BACONs of Hessett, who flourished there more than five hundred years, when the male line ended in Henry BACON, the son of Edmund and Elizabeth (CORNWALLYS) BACON, who died without issue there in 1651, and the estates were all parcelled out among his sisters, viz.: Elizabeth, wife of Calibut WALPOLE Frances, wife of George TOWNSEND Katherine, wife of William COLEMAN Susan, wife of Henry LAMB Anne, wife of John ALDRICH Cordelia, wife of —- HARRIS, of Maldon, and Abigail, wife of John GRIGBYE.

    His father Edmund BACON, son of John BACON of Hessett, and grandson of Edmund BACON by wife Elizabeth, daughter of John PAGE of Westley, Suffolk, of which family perhaps Philip PAGE, father of Robert PAGE, Lord of the Manor of Gedding, and whose marriage to Alice HOO is recorded at Hessett, July 21, 1545, is interesting to note. This John BACON, son of Edmund and Elizabeth (PAGE) BACON aforesaid, married first, Barbara, sister of Sir Ambrose JERMYN of Rushbrook, Knt., and secondly, Katherine PERIENTE, sister of Elizabeth PERIENTO (Lady Style) mother of Henry TOWNSEND of Bracon Ash, Norf. And Gedding, Suff., and by her had a son Captain Robert BACON, who married the Lady Cordilia, daughter of John GYLL or GILL, and widow of Sir Thomas HARRIS, Knt.*

    We now return to John BACON, son of John and Helena (TILLOTTS) BACON, who married Margery THORPE, daughter and heir of John, son of William and grandson of Sir William THORPE by the daughter and heir of Sir Roger BACON, a celebrated commander in the wars, temp. Edward II. and Edward III., and lineally descended from Grimbald, the patriarch of this family.

    The said John BACON was father of Edmund BACON of Drinkstone, whose son John by wife Agnes COKEFIELD had son Robert BACON who was buried at Hessett with Isabella his wife, daughter of John CAGE of Pakenham in Suffolk, and by whom he had three sons and two

    * These families, the DRURYs, BACONs, PAGE, TOWNSENDs, HOW or HOO, were all connected and interested in early settlements in Virginia and New England, as the records show.

    daughters, viz.: 1st, Thomas BACON of Northaw in Hertfordshire, who married the daughter of Mr. BROWN, but died without issue. 2nd, Sir Nicholas BACON, the Lord Keeper. 3d, James BACON, Esquire, Alderman of London, who died June 15, 1573, and was buried in the Church of St. Dunstans in the East, London and had by first wife Mary, daughter of John GARDINER of Grove Place, county Bucks, an only son and three daughters, all dying young except Anne, wife of John REVETTS,* Esquire, of Brandiston, who died 1616, aged 77. His second wife was Margaret, daughter of William RAWLINS, of London, and widow of Richard GOULDSTON, Salter, by whom he also had issue, William BACON, second son, of —-, Essex, and a son and daughter who died young, also his eldest son Sir James BACON, of Friston Hall, Suffolk, who was knighted at White Hall in 1604, and died at Finsbury, London, January 17, 1618, and buried in St. Giles Church on the 11 February, 1618.

    This worthy Knight, by Elizabeth, daughter of Francis and Anne (DRURY**) BACON of Hessett, had two sons, Nathaniel and James and three daughters, the latter all dying young. The eldest son, Nathaniel BACON, Esq., of Friston, “son and heir and of full age,” January 17, 1644, by Anne, daughter of Sir Thomas LE GROSS of Crostwick, Norfolk, Knt., had a daughter Anne who died unmarried, and also Elizabeth, wife of Nathaniel, second son of Sir Nathaniel BARNARDISTON of Kelton, Knt., also a son Thomas BACON, who by first wife Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Robert BROOKE of Cockfield Hall, Yoxford, Knt., who died January 2, 1647, aged 25, and was buried at Friston, Suffolk, had issue Elizabeth, wife of Mr. HOVENER of London, and a son and heir, Nathaniel BACON, Esq., who emigrated to Virginia as early as 1670, where his father’s cousin,*** Colonel Nathaniel BACON (the governor****) resided, being possessed of large landed estates in York, Nanceymond and other counties bordering on the James River. The first Nathaniel BACON became so notorious in Virginia history on account of the conspicuous part he took in opposing Governor BERKELEY that he acquired the cognomen of “The Rebel.”***** A quarrel between the settlers and natives caused the former to choose BACON their general, and disregarding the

    * See pedigree in The Brights of Suffolk, where this gentleman connects with numerous New England families.

    ** See pedigree of the DRURY family of Rougham, co. Suff., in Cullum’s History of Hawstead. John NEWGATE’s (of Boston, N.E.) grandfather Walter HOO or HOWE, leased from the DRURYs Rougham Hall, and of this family was William DRURY, LL.D., whose widow Mary SOUTHWELL married Robert FORTH, LL.D., grandfather of Thomas TOWNSEND. See TOWNSEND family of Lynn, in Old and New England.

    **** He may have held the courtesy title of governor, as an English pedigree has it. He was of the Council, and in 1688 was its presiding officer and acting governor. His cousin Nathaniel BACON the general was a delegate from Henrico Plantation, where he held an estate near the Falls of the James River.

    ***** Gent. Mag. Oct. 1816, vol. lxxxvii, p. 124 Burke’s Hist. Virg. Sēj. ii. Barber’s Hist. Coll. Virg. Campbell’s Hist. Virg. As early as 1663 we find Nathaniel BACON, “a hopeful young gentleman,” one of the company of RAY, who sets out on his travels in foreign parts in company with Mr. WILLOUGHBY and Sir Philip SKIPPON. Gen. BACON’s father seems to have objected to his marriage to Elizabeth, a sister of Sir John DUKE of Benhall Lodge, near [footnote continued on next page]

    orders of the governor, who refused him a commission, he put himself at the head of a company of colonists and punished the Indians. For this act the governor in May, 1676, proclaimed him a rebel, and soon after arrested him at Jamestown, where he was tried before the Governor and Council, but acquitted and promised a commission, which the governor refused to sign. BACON therefore raised a regiment of six hundred men and compelled the governor to grant the commission. After prosecuting the Indian war with success, he was again proclaimed a rebel. He then turned his forces against the governor, whom he defeated, and burnt Jamestown, and was following up his advantages, when he died suddenly, October 1, 1676. He was very popular in the colony, and subsequent historians seem to justify the part he took as “rebellion in good cause.” […]

    [footnote continued from previous page] Saxmundham, co. Suff., and so he emigrated to Virginia where his cousin Col. BACON resided. After Gen. BACON’s death his wife married second Mr. JARVIS, a merchant, and thirdly Mr. MOLE. Some writers say BACON died of brain fever, others of a disease contracted in the trenches before Jamestown. There was another Nathaniel BACON who has often been confused with Col. BACON the Councillor and Gen. BACON the “Rebel,” or “Patriot,” as called by some. He was Recorder of Ipswich, co. Suff., and wrote several books. His work, “Of the Uniformity of the Governments of England,” published in 1647, was far in advance of his time, and his publishers were prosecuted and fined, and hundreds of copies seized and burnt.

    These three Nathaniel BACONs had also a cousin Sir Nathaniel BACON of Culford, Suff., who excelled in landscape painting (whose uncle Sir Nathaniel BACON of Stiffkey, Norfolk, who died Nov. 7, 1622, had daughter Anne, wife of Sir John TOWNSEND of Raynham, Knt., who was also buried the same day as her father Sir Nathaniel, in Stiffkey Church [see Stiffkey Register], who died 1627), and gave his estate to Lady Jane his wife, who was buried at Culford, May 8, 1659, aged 79. His son Nicholas BACON died sans issue, 1660, and this property went to his half brother Frederick Lord CORNWALLYS, son of Lady Jane by her first husband, Sir William CORNWALLYS, and ancestor of Charles Earl CORNWALLYS, who by wife Elizabeth TOWNSHEND (aunt to George Marquis TOWNSHEND, to whom Quebec capitulated upon the death of Gen. WOLFE) was father of Charles, first Marquis CORNWALLIS, whose surrender of his army at Yorktown, Va., to General WASHINGTON, brought to a close the struggle for American independence.

    There was also a Nathaniel BACON living in New England as early as 1661 (see Savage), and in the New Haven Records there are three depositions, taken October 17, 1661, and recorded by the secretary, James BISHOP. The first by John FLETCHER of Milford, second by Mary FLETCHER of Milford, and the third by John WARD of Branford, which last we copy verbatim, and print at the end of this article. The first two mention the family of BACON living in Stretton, and moving to Clipsam, co. Rutland.

    Michael BACON, of Dedham, Mass. (see Will, REGISTER, vol. vii. p. 230-1), and ancestor of the late Leonard BACON, D.D., LL.D., of New Haven, came from the neighborhood of Ipswich, co. Suffolk, Eng., perhaps Barham, Suffolk. Tradition says he held the office of captain of a company of yeomanry there.

    N.B. – Monument in Barham Church says Ellen, daughter of Thomas LITTLE, married Edward BACON, third son of the Lord Keeper. They are said to have had 19 sons and 13 daughters, [See Note V. – ED.] This family held 22 manors, besides lands in 19 parishes in co. Suffolk. This Edward BACON’s daughter Jane married Francis STONER, whose mother Mabel was daughter of Roger HARLAKENDEN, whose family were also interested in New England settlement. – Bury St. Edmunds and Environs, p. 81. […]

    DEPOSITION OF JOHN WARD OF BRANDFORD. – [N. Hav. (Ct.) T. Recs.]

    Know all men whom it may concern y t I John WARD of Brandford in ye Colony of New Haven in New England and aged about thirty Six yeares doe declare & upon my knowledge testify on oathe that I well knew for ye space of six or seven yeares one Henry BACON of Clipsam in ye County of Rutland within ye realme of England & One William BACON brother to ye sayd Henry BACON in the same county of Rutland abouvesayd, and I never knew or heard of any brother or bretheren more y t they had by ye fathers side and I doe further testify y t I well knew Thomas BACON sonne of Henry BACON & Nephew to Sayd William BACON & I never knew or heard the sayd Henry BACON had any other child but only the sayd Thomas BACON whoe I have heard went to the Barbadoes and died there and further I the sayd John WARD upon Certaine knowledge doe testify, y t I well knew Nathaniel BACON to be the eldest son of William BACON, brother to the sayde Henry BACON, and the sayd Nathaniel BACON is now liveing in New England & was p’sent at my attesting hereoff and further sayth not.

    This is a true record of the originall P’ JAMES BISHOP, secret.

    NOTES BY JOHN COFFIN JONES BROWN, ESQ., OF BOSTON.

    Piezīme I. – Letheringsete was granted to Grimbaldus, but was one of the many manors granted to the veteran soldier Walter GIFFARD, formerly Lord of Longueville, afterward first Earl of Buckingham, and one of the commissioners who superintended the compilation of the Domesday Boke.

    The name of GIFFARD comes from “fat-cheeks,” and, in the slang of the Normans, cooks were called “Giffardi” in reference to their popular representation as fat and rubicund.

    Grimbaldus 1 was undoubtedly an early tenant, and the history of his descendants furnishes a key to the method of obtaining patronymics, if a changeable family name could be so styled. Edmund, 2 who is usually called the third son, took the name of his abode for a surname, and so did Ranulph, 2 whose son Gilbert 3 DE LARINGSETA had a son Jordan 4 DE LARINGSETA, whose son Adam, 5 in accordance with another custom, signed his name as Adam-FITZ-JORDAN (or Adam, son of Jordan), while his son Peter 6 assumed again the name of the location, and in 1268 held an eighth of the fee, of the Earl of Clare, into whose possession Walter GIFFARD’s family estates had passed.

    Piezīme II. – The word Thorp is Saxon for village. Becuns-Thorp means Beach-tree Village and in such a one the remaining son of Grimbaldus undoubtedly located, and was known by his place of residence as Ralph 2 DE BACONS-THORP. The early monumental brasses of the family have effigies under trees, an evident allusion to the origin of the name. A Sir William BACON or Sir Roger BACON is taken notice of, among knights bearing banners, as well Norman as of other provinces, in the reign of Philip III. of France, and bore for his arms a beech-tree. Roger 3 DE BACONSTHORP, son of Ralph, 2 was father of Robert, 4 who assumed the name of BACON and to make his identity clear, during the change of patronymic, was styled Robert-FITZ-ROGER. He was a person of great power and cousin of Jeff RIDEL, Bishop

    of Ely in 1174. He was father of Reginald, 5 who was father of Richard, 6 who having five sons, one of them, the fifth son, Sir Henry 7 BACON of Letheringsete, a justice itinerant, or Circuit Judge, would seem by the affix to his name to be in possession of the estate of his distant cousin Peter 6 DE LETHERINGSETE.

    Piezīme III. – Mr. TOWNSHEND has given attention to the later part of the family history. The early history is in a state of bewilderment, which is hardly worth clearing up for general readers. Joseph FOSTER, one of the most eminent genealogists of the world, says “the early descent of this family, which was very widely spread through Suffolk, is variously set forth, as may be seen on reference to Davy’s MS. Collections relating to the County. In “Collectanea Genealogica” he has given a long list of the MS. Pedigrees in the British Museum, which are of importance to students of this family history. To show the variety in pedigrees, the best guide would be the QUAPLADDE quartering, of which the family is proud, derived from Margaret QUAPLADDE, an heiress in Dethrick’s Grant of 1568, preserved by the family, she is stated to be the wife of Edmund BACON, about the time of Edward II., and eight generations are given between her and Sir Nicholas, the Lord Keeper, while Playfair finds that she did not marry a BACON direct, but was wife of William THORP, a grandson of Roger (12th generation from Grimbaldus) BACON, and that her grandchild Margaret THORP was the wife of John 16 BACON, of Drinkston, the great-great-grandfather of Sir Nicholas, Dethrick giving eight generations between them, while Playfair gives but five. Playfair gives the line of descent from George 3 as follows: Roger, 4 Robert, 5 Reginald, 6 Richard 7 (he was the first to bear the arms, Gu. on a chief. Ar. two mullets sa), Reginald, 8 Richard, 9 Sir Henry, 10 Sir Henry 11 (he married Margaret LUDHAM, who bore 3 inescutcheons), Sir Roger 12 (whose daughter Beatrix 13 was wife of Sir William THORP, their son William 14 THORP, married Margaret QUAPLADDE, whose arms, barry of six or. and az. a bend gules, are generally quartered with descendants of the Drinkston line – John 15 THORP, whose daughter Margaret 16 THORP married John BACON of Drinkston. He was the John 4 of Mr. TOWNSHEND’s pedigree, which begins with John, 1 married Cicilly HOO.

    The Hessett line from John, 3 by his second marriage with Julian BARDWELL, bore different arms, viz.: Ar. on a fesse engrailed between three inescutcheons gu. three mullets or. I think these inescutcheons came from Margaret LUDHAM, wife of Sir Henry 12 BACON, instead of the D’AVILIERs, to whose connection with the BACON family they have sometimes been attributed.

    Piezīme IV. – It will be seen in Mr. TOWNSHEND’s article that the great-grandfather of Nathaniel BACON of Virginia, the rebel, was first cousin to the celebrated Lord BACON, from whom Nathaniel 5 BACON, the leader of the rebellion, was fifth in descent through Sir James, 2 Nathaniel, 3 and Thomas 4 his father. Sir James 2 had another son, Rev. James, 3 who was father of Col. Nathaniel 4 BACON of Virginia, who, I suppose, may, in Mr. SHATTUCK’s nomenclature (REG. i. 355-9), be termed the cousin-uncle of his namesake.

    The numbers indicating generations in this and the following note, begin with the Lord Keeper Nicholas and his brother James.

    Piezīme V. – Foster, in the “Register of Admissions to Gray’s Inn, 1521-1881,” p. 29, states that Edward 2 BACON “was one of five sons, who with his five sons were all members of Gray’s Inn.” The first Nathaniel 2 of the family was his brother, Sir Nathaniel 2 BACON of Stiffkey, Knight, whose first wife was Anne, daughter of Sir Thomas GRESHAM of London, Knight, the founder of the Royal Exchange. Another brother, Sir Nicholas 2 BACON of Redgrave, Bart., was the first Baronet ever created in England, May 22, 1611. The cost of this honor was £1095. Simple knighthood had become a pretence for the exaction of penalties and fees, yet the title was eagerly sought for by men of wealth, and conferred so generally that persons of high character preferred the payment of fines for non-acceptance of the honor! The names of BACON and TOWNSHEND can be found in such a list. James I. knighted 240 while on his way from Scotland to England, July 23, 1603 he knighted 400 in one day, 900 the first year, and 2333 during his reign. This Sir Nicholas 2 BACON, Bart., was father of Nathaniel 3 BACON, the artist of Culford. Edward’s 2 half brothers were Anthony 2 and Sir Francis 2 BACON, the Philosopher – usually styled Lord BACON, but whose real title was Francis, Baron Verulam and Viscount St. Albans. These were the five sons of Sir Nicholas 1 BACON, the Lord Keeper.

    Edward 2 BACON’s third son Nathaniel 3 was recorder of Ipswich and Bury St. Edmunds, and was the distinguished republican writer of CROMWELL’s time, whose principal work is referred to by Mr. TOWNSHEND. […]


    Skatīties video: Evidence of Bacons Rebellion with a Jamestown cellar a look back at a 2008 excavation


Komentāri:

  1. Geza

    Jūs pieļaujat kļūdu. Ienāc, mēs to apspriedīsim.

  2. Tejar

    Es atvainojos, bet, manuprāt, jūs pieļaujat kļūdu. Apspriedīsim. Raksti man PM, sazināsimies.

  3. Kathy

    Propertyman goes, what then

  4. Kelvan

    Es domāju, ka tev nav taisnība. Ienāc, mēs to apspriedīsim. Raksti man PM, sarunāsim.



Uzrakstiet ziņojumu