Davis was first found with his son, Martin, in King William County Quit Rent Rolls of 1704, but a Davenport Plantation and Landing existed on the Mattaponi River in Pamunkey Neck in 1696. I wonder why it is that no one has been able to learn Davis' wife's name but they can determine his children's names?

Depending on the Davenport researcher, his birth year varies. He may have been born out of wedlock, according to one researcher, however this is speculation. It may be that his father was Richard Davis and mother was Anne Davenport. Who was Anne's parents?

Some of this family history comes from the research courtesy of The Pamunkey Davenport's, courtesy of John Scott Davenport. Some of my family history comes from other Davenport researchers, with trees found at rootsweb.com, ancestry.com and other family tree sites online. Some research is my own using records such as census, birth, death, marriage, etc. Who would I tend to believe as a credible researcher with credible information? John Scott Davenport

It is believed some records may have been destroyed by fire or other means in New Kent, King & Queen, King William, Caroline, and Hanover counties. from what records that could be found, the earliest was a female Davenport in Pamunkey Neck, VA in 1650. In 1704, Davis and son Martin owned land in King William Co., VA. They were slave owners. Davis' mother could have been either immigrants Hannah Davenport (transportee 1650) or Anne Davenport (transportee 1658). It is learned that Anne appears to have lived very near Richard Davis, who is believed to be Davis Davenport's father. There is no mention as to what happened to Hannah Davenport. There is no mention of the ages of Anne and Hannah. Births are estimated.

It is believed that Davis' father is Martin Davenport b. 1625 King William Co., VA and that Martin's father is Lancelot b. 1599 England. The major researchers who seem to know what is going on and who have done extensive research do not have ancestors named for Davis.

There are many researcher's of this family and there are variations of birth/death years/locations. This can be quite confusing. I cannot verify most of the information and try to make sense of information I locate and I try to determine who may be more accurate. I have found birth years of some people being after the births of their own children!! I don't claim to be perfect and I am sure some of my information is not accurate.

Alternate death location: James City, VA and death date of 5-24-1732. Also Hanover Co., VA

source: http://wehmeyergenealogyplus.com/davenporttree.htm

• *************************

Re: [DAVENPORT] Father of Davis Davenport--Social Mores of Colonial Virginia Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 08:58:33 EDT

As noted earlier we have worked with documented social milieu for historical perspective while working with Colonial Virginia records. Bastards were sufficiently common, Kings as well as Subjects being given to the happenstance, that there were established rules and procedures. Masters took advantage of their female indentured servants sufficiently often in 17th Century Virginia as to require the House of Burgesses to pass an Act stipulating what was to be what when a bastard was born. (Excerpts of said Act are included in "The Further Pamunkey Chronicles" on the off chance that they might be applicable to the Davis Davenport situation.)

First and foremost, it was English Common Law (most Common Law was unwritten but practiced consistently) that a child always had a family name--it being that of the father when born in wedlock, it being that of the mother when born without benefit of clergy. There were/are six Davenport lines, mulatto and white, that began illegitimate in Colonial Virginia records. Those children and their mother are identified by name and circumstance in the records. So, we have documentary evidence of the English practice was employed in Colonial Virginia. When a father acknowledged a "natural child," the euphemism applied, the father's surname could be given to the child as a surname or as a given name, according to the father's stipulation. Woe unto the mother of a bastard who gave the father's name to the child as a surname or given name without either the father's permission or a Court Order. Hence, the fact that Davis Davenport had a surname as a given name signals that there was a Davis somewhere having some association with the Davenport, male or female, who provided the surname, and that said Davis approved of the name usage. If Davis Davenport obtained his surname from his mother, then the fact that he had Davis for a given name was prima facie evidence that his father was possibly a Davis. Not a fact, but indicative. Opportunity for fornication being limited by the hardships and limitations of travel in those days, social historians tell us that a radius of two miles was the most probable zone for illicit assignations, but in Colonial Virginia Masters dalliances with servant girls most likely occurred within their own households. Whatever, there is a wealth of literature on the subject, all of which supports the manner and form in which we have addressed Davis Davenport's parentage. We made no capricious determination but went with what we found and what Colonial Virginia social milieu indicated our findings meant. We are comfortable that our research can withstand the most rigorous scrutiny and is historically correct in its interpretation of social mores. Our conclusions and arguments are open to challenge, but consideration of those conclusions and arguments before challenging them would be appreciated.

As to bastards begot upon the bodies of servant girls by Masters, the servant girl was required to serve an additional year for so burdening her master, the Master was to raise the child, providing proper food, shelter, and clothing, and the child was required to serve the Master in payment thereof until his 31st birthday, if a male, until her 21st birthday if a female. When there was no Master-Servant relationship governing the bastardy, the father did what he agreed to do or what the Court made him do. As anyone who has done research in the Colonial records of Southern States knows, it is easier to find bastards than legitimate children, for most of the bastards are documented in Court minutes.

Bastardy among the Pamunkey Davenports was not rare. Off hand, sixteen instances of Davenport surnamed illegitimates are known, and a dozen Davenport-fathered "wrong sides of the blanket" of other surnames are suspected in Virginia and North Carolina, from the Revolution until 1840. Given the demonstrated Virginia and North Carolina propensities, we suspect that there were instances in South Carolina, Georgia, and points West also. One Davenport, of subsequent high public profile, obtained a Bastardy Bond relative to one lady on the same day that he obtained a Marriage Bond to another lady, with his maternal grandfather and the Colonel commanding the County Militia serving as his bondsmen in both instances. That, we suggest, required acumen of some sort and likely explained his later high achievements, and we are not referring to Congressman Thomas Davenport of Halifax, a man who had his own style.

John Scott Davenport Holmdel, NJ

• *************************************

Davenport DNA Results Consistently Rejecting Pamunkey Comparison

PAMUNKEY KIN & OTHERS INTERESTED:

Recent developments in the Davenport DNA Project have become exciting because certain American Davenport lines are now by hard evidence identifiable as having English roots--to the extent that eight classifications have been suggested for American Davenports who connect by DNA to English Davenport lines to the Manor born. As a result, there is emerging a test basis for determining whether a particular American Davenport has roots back to Orme, who allegedly arrived in England with William the Conqueror. All of this is good Davenport news for those of the blood. But it also isolates Pamunkey Davenports further from that legitimacy. We are increasingly on our own. Our Davenport beginning was with Davis Davenport.

DNAs of Pamuinkey Davenports are consistent to the 37 (most advanced) marker level. A descendant of Martin Davenport, Sr., eldest son of Davis Davenport, and a descendant to Elias Davenport, youngest son of Davis Davenport, are the same for 35 of 37 DNA markers, and differ only by a point on the other 2 markers. Other Pamunkeys are equally solid in comparison. Simply stated, Pamunkey Davenports are strongly related to each other back to a common ancestor. But that ancestor was not an English Davenport of the blood.

While we have hypothesized that Davis Davenport, patriarch of the Pamunkeys, was illegitimate, English & American-related Davenport DNA Analysis is telling us that we are not blood kin of theirs, hence DNA evidence increasingly documents that our concept of a bastard beginning is most likely true. We obtained our Davenport surname legitimately, but it came from a woman, likely Ann Davenport, transportee of 1658. Hence, we cannot pursue our Davenport ancestry by DNA testing beyond our patriarch Davis, for only male surname providers are subject to identification. By a tedious process of elimination, using the few records available and making sustainable deductions therefrom, we have nominated Richard Davis, Gentleman, of North Side New Kent (King & Queen County after 1691) as most likely the father of Davis Davenport. Considerable analysis from scant, but all facts extractable has gone into the Davis father identification. If we can find one or more Davis surnamed male descendants of Richard, Gentleman, we can test the Davis Davenport father hypothesis. Such a quest is virtually impossible now, for the Davis, Davies, Davids, etc, etc, families are so muddled in their own identifications--because of a massive presence in Colonial Virginia and the same records voids that we have had to deal with--that a DAVIS DNA project has not got off the ground, and likely will be years before, if and when, it happens.

Both DNA Bill and I are monitoring the DAVIS-L Rootsweb, and we can report that Davis Genealogy on a Total Family basis is far behind the Davenports in development, for we have established a typology and have sorted out American Davenports, particularly those of the South. Davenports of the North have been sorting out themselves, or have long established lines. The job for the DAVIS et al Families of Colonial Virginia roots has not yet begun.

It is possible to trace our Davenport roots in England, but we should go looking for an Ann Davenport who was transported to Virginia in the 1650s. Such records are available--particularly if Ann was a convict or a vagrant, and backtrack from there. There were seven Ann Davenports on the Colonial Virginia transportee lists, ranging over more than 100 years. (Davis Davenport's only daughter, who married Thomas Graves, was named Ann.) We examined all Anns in our research, came up with Ann, transportee of 1658, and chose her because she was associated with land in North Side New Kent (now King & Queen) County that adjoined land held by Richard Davis, Gentleman, and both lands were within four miles of where Davis Davenport first appeared in records in 1696 as a mature man with a plantation and a landing on the Mattaponi River in Pamunkey Neck on what was then Chickahominy Indian land, across the River from King & Queen County.

Whatever, no Pamunkey Davenport has a claim to the English Davenport Family Crest or Coat of Arms. Let us have no delusions in that regard. We are free to build our own provenance and shibboleths.

Do we have an artist among us who can design a unique Pamunkey Davenport Family Crest which reflects our beginning, our roles in the Revolution, on the Frontier, the War Between the States, and such other symbols that we have earned by our deeds in America?

Do not envy the Davenports who have ancient roots to connect to in the traditional manner. We have hoed our own rows, and gained our own merits. Onward and upward. PAMUNKEY is an American badge of honor. Wear it well.

John Scott Davenport Holmdel, NJ

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/DAVENPORT/2004-06/108...

• http://digginupfamily.com/documents/davenport2010.pdf

  ---

GEDCOM Source

@R-1550049838@ Millennium File Heritage Consulting. Millennium File [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations Inc, 2003. 1,7249::0

GEDCOM Source

1,7249::10891406

GEDCOM Source

@R-1550049838@ U.K. and U.S. Directories, 1680-1830 Ancestry.com Ancestry.com Operations Inc 1,3877::0

GEDCOM Source

1,3877::94318

GEDCOM Source

@R-1550049838@ Millennium File Heritage Consulting. Millennium File [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations Inc, 2003. 1,7249::0

GEDCOM Source

1,7249::10891406

GEDCOM Source

@R-1550049838@ U.K. and U.S. Directories, 1680-1830 Ancestry.com Ancestry.com Operations Inc 1,3877::0

GEDCOM Source

1,3877::94318

GEDCOM Source

@R-1550049838@ Ancestry Family Trees Online publication - Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com. Original data: Family Tree files submitted by Ancestry members.

GEDCOM Source

Ancestry Family Tree http://trees.ancestry.com/pt/AMTCitationRedir.aspx?tid=49479199&pid...

Davis and his son Martin Davenport were yeomen who achieved by their own labor,. They were not of the Cavalier or Great Planter Aristocracy who had indentured servants and slaves.

https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/details/L6PC-Y54