Search billions of records on Ancestry.com
   

 ESSEX COUNTY, VIRGINIA

LARGEST SLAVEHOLDERS FROM 1860 SLAVE CENSUS SCHEDULES

and

SURNAME MATCHES FOR AFRICAN AMERICANS ON 1870 CENSUS

 

Transcribed by Tom Blake, July 2003

 

PURPOSE. Published information giving names of slaveholders and numbers of slaves held is almost non-existent. It is possible to locate an ancestor on a U.S. census for 1860 or earlier and not realize that ancestor was also listed as a slaveholder on the slave schedules, because published indexes almost always do not include the slave census. The last U.S. census slave schedules were enumerated by County in 1860 and included 393,975 named persons holding 3,950,546 unnamed slaves, or an average of about ten slaves per holder. The actual number of slaveholders may be slightly lower because some large holders held slaves in more than one County and would have been counted in each County. Excluding slaves, the 1860 U.S. population was 27,167,529, with about 1 in 70 being a slaveholder. It is estimated by this transcriber that in 1860, slaveholders of 200 or more slaves, while constituting less than 1 % of the total number of U.S. slaveholders, or 1 out of 7,000 free persons, held 20-30% of the total number of slaves in the U.S. The process of publication of slaveholder names beginning with the largest holders will enable naming of the holders of the most slaves with the least amount of transcription work. Surname matching of slaveholders with 1870 African Americans is intended merely as suggesting another possibility for further research by those seeking to make connections between slaves and holders.

 

SOURCES. The 1860 U.S. Census Slave Schedules for Essex County, Virginia (NARA microfilm series M653, Roll 1389) reportedly includes a total of 6,696 slaves. This transcription includes 99 slaveholders who held 20 or more slaves in Essex County, accounting for 4,305 slaves, or about 64% of the County total. The rest of the slaves in the County were held by a total of 299 slaveholders, and those slaveholders have not been included here. Due to variable film quality, handwriting interpretation questions and inconsistent counting and page numbering methods used by the census enumerators, interested researchers should view the source film personally to verify or modify the information in this transcription for their own purposes. Census data for 1860 was obtained from the Historical United States Census Data Browser, which is a very detailed, searchable and highly recommended database that can found at http://fisher.lib.virginia.edu/census/ . Census data on African Americans in the 1870 census was obtained using Heritage Quest’s CD “African-Americans in the 1870 U.S. Federal Census”, available through Heritage Quest at http://www.heritagequest.com/ .

 

FORMAT. This transcription lists the names of those largest slaveholders in the Essex County, the number of slaves they held in the County and the first page number on which they were listed. The page numbers used are the numbers rubber stamped in the upper right corner of every other page of the census, with the intervening pages being reported here with a B added to the number of the preceding page. Sometimes the rubber stamped numbers do not show up on the microfilm, so researchers should be aware the entire census also has consecutive local page numbers and local page number 1 is NARA page 490. Following the holder list is a separate list of the surnames of the holders with information on numbers of African Americans on the 1870 census who were enumerated with the same surname.

 

TERMINOLOGY. Though the census schedules speak in terms of “slave owners”, the transcriber has chosen to use the term “slaveholder” rather than “slave owner”, so that questions of justice and legality of claims of ownership need not be addressed in this transcription. Racially related terms such as African American, black, mulatto and colored are used as in the source or at the time of the source, with African American being used otherwise.

 

PLANTATION NAMES. Plantation names were not shown on the census. Using plantation names to locate ancestors can be difficult because the name of a plantation may have been changed through the years and because the sizeable number of large farms must have resulted in lots of duplication of plantation names. In Virginia in 1860 there were 641 farms of 1,000 acres or more, the largest size category enumerated in the census, and another 2,882 farms of 500-999 acres. Linking names of plantations in this County with the names of the large holders on this list is beyond the scope of this transcription.

 

FORMER SLAVES. The 1860 U.S. Census was the last U.S. census showing slaves and slaveholders. Slaves were enumerated in 1860 without giving their names, only their sex and age and indication of any handicaps, such as deaf or blind Slaves 100 years of age or older were supposed to be named on the 1860 slave schedule, but there were only 1,570 slaves of such age enumerated, out of a total of 3,950,546 slaves, and the transcriber, though not specifically looking for such named slaves, did not notice any such information while doing this transcription, except for the following: 120 year old black female servant Alice, held by John Saunders on page 490; 100 female black Peggy, held by E. A. Westmore on 499B; and 100 male black Sam, held by J. R. Micon on 505B. Freed slaves, if listed in the next census, in 1870, would have been reported with their full name, including surname. Some of these former slaves may have been using the surname of their 1860 slaveholder at the time of the 1870 census and they may have still been living in the same State or County. Before presuming an African American was a slave on the 1860 census, the free census for 1860 should be checked, as almost 11% of African Americans were enumerated as free in 1860, with about half of those living in the southern States. Estimates of the number of former slaves who used the surname of a former owner in 1870, vary widely and from region to region. If an African American ancestor with one of these surnames is found on the 1870 census, then making the link to finding that ancestor as a slave requires advanced research techniques involving all obtainable records of the holder.

 

MIGRATION OF FORMER SLAVES: According to U.S. Census data, the 1860 Essex County population included 3,296 whites, 477 “free colored” and 6,696 slaves. By the 1870 census, the white population had stayed about the same at 3,277, while the “colored” population had decreased about 7 % to 6,650. (As a side note, by 1960, 100 years later, the County was listed as having 3,509 whites, about a 6% increase, while the 1960 total of 3,163 “Negroes”was about 66% less than what the colored population had been 100 years before.) In comparing census data for different years, the transcriber was not aware of any relevant changes to County boundaries.

 

Where did the freed slaves go if they did not stay in the same County? Between 1860 and 1870, the Virginia colored population declined by about 36,000, to approximately 513,000, a 6.5% decrease. Two Virginia Counties that showed a significant increase in colored population between 1860 and 1870 were Henrico, with an increase of over 7,000, and Norfolk, with an increase of over 10,000. States that saw significant increases in colored population during that time, and were therefore possible places of relocation for colored persons from Essex County, included the following: Georgia, up 80,000 (17%); Texas, up 70,000 (38%); Alabama, up 37,000 (8%); Florida, up 29,000 (46%); North Carolina, up 38,000 (8%); Ohio, up 26,000 (70%); Indiana, up 25,000 (127%); and Kansas up from 265 to 17,000 (6,400%).

 

SLAVEHOLDER LIST:

 

ANDREWS, Mary L., 24 slaves, page 490B

ATKINSON, R. L., 26 slaves, page 491

BAIRD, B. R., 74 slaves, page 499

BAYLOR, Brooke, 48 slaves, page 519B and 522

BAYLOR, Richd., 340 slaves, page 491 and 493B

BENTLEY, John G., 57 slaves, page 498

BEVERLY, Wm. B., 78 slaves, page 491B

BIRD, S. J.?, 25 slaves, page 491

BLACKBURN, Wm., 36 slaves, page 492B

BOUGHTON, Chas. H., 20 slaves, page 516

BRAY, Susan, 20 slaves, page 512B

BRAY, Winter Estate, J. S. Trible Admr. Of, 53 slaves, page 513

BROCKENBROUGH, Francis, 62 slaves, page 512

BROOKS, Wm. H., 66 slaves, page 490

BURKE, Ann B. For self and Guardian for J. W. & J. C. Burke, 28 slaves, page 504

CAUTHORN, R. S.?, 24 slaves, page 518B

CLARKE, Anna, 22 slaves, page 507B

CLEMENTS, Mace, 28 slaves, page 512

COGHILL, M. F. & Julia A., 39 slaves, page 493

COLEMAN, Catherine, 27 slaves, page 510B

COVINGTON, R. L., 26 slaves, page 525

DILLARD, Geo. W., 42 slaves, page 541

DISHMAN, David, 25 slaves, page 492B

DUNN, Harriett, 29 slaves, page 510B

FAULCONER, Elizabeth S., 57 slaves, page 514B

FAUNTLEROY, R. P. W., 21 slaves, page 516

FOGG, Wilsey, 37 slaves, page 507

GARNETT, M. H. & M. R. H., 21 slaves, page 530

GARNETT, Muscov?, 39 slaves, page 513B

GARNETT, Thos. P., 54 slaves, page 520

GOULDMAN, J. J., 25 slaves, page 515B

GRAY, Lucy, 34 slaves, page 506

HAILE, R. G., 49 slaves, page 502B

HENLEY, Leoard, 37 slaves, page 523B

HILL, Jno. T.?, 37 slaves, page 497

HOSKINS, Jno. T., 33 slaves, page 508

HUNDLEY, Andrew, 26 slaves, page 513

HUNDLEY, Larkin, 23 slaves, page 520B

HUNDLEY, Thos. J., 32 slaves, page 519

HUNTER, Jane S., 42 slaves, page 522

HUNTER, Martha F., 41 slaves, page 522B

HUNTER, R. M. T., 116 slaves, page 523

HUNTER, S. H. A., 43 slaves, page 522B

JONES, A. H., 21 slaves, page 518

JONES, Walter S., 21 slaves, page 530

KAY, James, 24 slaves, page 493

LATANE, H. W., 143 slaves, page 507B and 509B

LATANE, J. H., 37 slaves, page 503B

LATANE, Mary B., 50 slaves, page 511

LEWIS, Warner, 76 slaves, page 502

MICON, J. R., 27 slaves, page 505B

MICON, Susan S., 23 slaves, page 504B

MOTLEY, J. R., 35 slaves, page 501B

NEWBALL, Wm. G., 24 slaves, page 520B

NOEL, E. F., 37 slaves, page 503

ONEAL, A. G., 39 slaves, page 496B

POWERS, Edwd., 25 slaves, page 504

RENNOLDS, Martha, 26 slaves, page 516B

RENNOLDS, Otway, 26 slaves, page 507

RENNOLDS, R.? G., 21 slaves, page 527

ROANE, Lawrence?, 40 slaves, page 525B

ROBINSON, J. W., 21 slaves, page 519B

RONZIE?, Jno. S., 28 slaves, page 501B

RONZIE?, Richd., 26 slaves, page 501B

ROY, A. G. D., 41 slaves, page 518B

ROY, B. D., 21 slaves, page 506B, 507 and 511

SALE, Dandrige?, 175 slaves, page 526

SALE, L. P., 97 slaves, page 529

SAUNDERS, John, 22 slaves, page 490

SHACKLEFORD, Rv.? Z.?, 48 slaves, page 527B

SMITH, Wm., 30 slaves, page 515B

SMITH, Wm. F., 60 slaves, page 517B and 521B

SOWELL, Tibitha, 23 slaves, page 516

SPINDLE, Fanny, 25 slaves, page 498

SPINDLE, James, 47 slaves, page 492 and 521B

SPINDLE, Jos.? C., 29 slaves, page 498

SPINDLE, Paul, 45 slaves, page 492

TEMPLE, Arthur F., 34 slaves, page 525

TEMPLE, H. W. L., 43 slaves, page 508B

TUPTMAN?, J. M., 23 slaves, page 496B

UPSHAW, Geo. W., 65 slaves, page 496

WARE, E. M., 40 slaves, page 515

WARING, Lucia, 41 slaves, page 493B

WARING, Lucy R., 63 slaves, page 528

WARING, R. Payne Sr., 24 slaves, page 514B

WARING, Ro.? P., 57 slaves, page 528B

WARING, Thomas L., 23 slaves, page 514

WARING, Thos. R., 103 slaves, page 500B

WARING, W. L., 66 slaves, page 498B

WARINGEliza L.?, 54 slaves, page 500B

WESTMORE, E. A., 57 slaves, page 499B

WHITLOCK, N. J. B., 22 slaves, page 514

WRIGHT, B. E., 35 slaves, page 509 and 510

WRIGHT, Charlotte, 32 slaves, page 506B

WRIGHT, Edward, 38 slaves, page 500

WRIGHT, Edward L., 26 slaves, page 527B and 529B

WRIGHT, John J., 51 slaves, page 524

WRIGHT, Mary B., 40 slaves, page 503B

YOUNG, Smith, 21 slaves, page 515

 

SURNAME MATCHES AMONG AFRICAN AMERICANS ON 1870 CENSUS:

(exact surname spellings only are reported, no spelling variations or soundex)

SURNAME, # in US, in State, in County, born in State, born and living in State, born in State and living in County)

 

ANDREWS, 1160, 88, 0, 145, 88, 0

ATKINSON, 465, 20, 0, 41, 20, 0

BAIRD, 190, 6, 0, 13, 6, 0

BAYLOR, 150, 111, 23, 120, 111, 23

BENTLEY, 207, 37, 0, 57, 37, 0

BEVERLY, 225, 84, 12, 135, 83, 12

BIRD, 1401, 305, 27, 431, 303, 27

BLACKBURN, 418, 32, 1, 81, 32, 1

BOUGHTON, 12, 2, 0, 2, 2, 0

BRAY, 256, 46, 1, 61, 33, 1

BROCKENBROUGH, 11, 11, 4, 11, 11, 4

BROOKS, 4486, 690, 14, 1171, 673, 14

BURKE, 452, 54, 0, 95, 54, 0

CAUTHORN, 11, 6, 5, 7, 6, 5

CLARKE, 641, 159, 1, 208, 156, 1

CLEMENTS, 364, 68, 0, 100, 66, 0

COGHILL, 14, 11, 0, 12, 11, 0

COLEMAN, 4329, 932, 10, 1515, 922, 10

COVINGTON, 447, 20, 3, 42, 19, 3

DILLARD, 568, 186, 1, 228, 179, 1

DISHMAN, 42, 9, 0, 18, 9, 0

DUNN, 994, 45, 0, 102, 44, 0

FAULCONER, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0

FAUNTLEROY, 66, 66, 10, 66, 66, 10

FOGG, 72, 2, 0, 6, 1, 0

GARNETT, 289, 103, 21, 136, 102, 21

GOULDMAN, 6, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5

GRAY, 3207, 398, 5, 692, 387, 5

HAILE, 47, 2, 1, 3, 2, 1

HENLEY, 125, 39, 0, 52, 39, 0

HILL, 6675, 1025, 24, 1627, 1007, 24

HOSKINS, 158, 25, 1, 47, 24, 1

HUNDLEY, 83, 48, 0, 57, 47, 0

HUNTER, 2838, 326, 6, 597, 308, 6

JONES, 27193, 3894, 39, 6648, 3807, 39

KAY, 82, 8, 2, 12, 8, 2

LATANE, 11, 11, 5, 11, 11, 5

LEWIS, 8707, 1513. 34, 2588, 1483, 34

MICON, 17, 3, 2, 4, 3, 2

MOTLEY, 246, 60, 1, 87, 57, 1

NEWBALL, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0

NOEL, 166, 47, 4, 55, 47, 4

ONEAL, 360, 5, 1, 22, 4, 1

POWERS, 516, 42, 0, 90, 41, 0

RENNOLDS, 25, 15, 7, 17, 15, 7

ROANE, 173, 120, 31, 133, 120, 31

ROBINSON, 8046, 1242, 25, 2251, 1233, 25

RONZIE?, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1

ROY, 332, 148, 23, 195, 148, 23

SALE, 78, 44, 9, 49, 44, 9

SAUNDERS, 1072, 405, 7, 466, 391, 7

SHACKLEFORD, 138, 16, 0, 31, 16, 0

SMITH, 29087, 3499, 36, 6339, 3398, 36

SOWELL, 76, 3, 0, 8, 3, 0

SPINDLE, 17, 10, 0, 13, 10, 0

TEMPLE, 253, 73, 4, 100, 70, 4

TUPTMAN?, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0

UPSHAW, 91, 11, 1, 19, 11, 1

WARE, 998, 133, 7, 234, 131, 7

WARING, 90, 8, 4, 12, 7, 4

WESTMORE, 1, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0

WHITLOCK, 121, 17, 0, 37, 17, 0

WRIGHT, 5428, 621, 19, 1010, 603, 19

YOUNG, 6185, 536, 26, 986, 520, 26

Return to Home and Links Page

You are the visitor to this page.