This current discussion is based on the "Aheinly Analysis" posted herein on 25 Feb 2012 - message 21665.As intriguing as it was at first glance, it was not convincing, just another possibility. But ...... if we add the data provided by Ruth Sehen - proving Ancell Carter, Grocer of London, did not have a son Thomas - then the Aheinly Analysis becomes quite compelling.
There has been much controversy and speculation over the past twenty odd years on the parentage
of our Capt. Thomas Carter.The following now demonstrates a high probability - but without
actually proving the matter - his parents were William Carter and Anne Emmery.Not Ancell and
Jane Myles. Not the other William and Mary Ancell.Not Major Thos. Carter (John the Vintner)
Our singular guideline in all this is from this side of The Pond:
"The first one of the Carters was my grandfather's grandfather Thomas Carter son of a
London merchant of good family"[Aunt Fanny, Carter MSS 1858 John of The Nest]
"Our old Ancestor Thomas Carter was about 21 years old when he come to Lancaster"
Hence, the year 1653 now becomes quite pivotal in sorting out the truth.Locating
the Thomas Carter of the 1653 Tithe List of Lancaster will be most helpful, if not
compelling.(There were several collectors assigned to different parts of the county).
With the overlapping details from both sides of The Pond of an arrival at age 21, together with the 1653 Tithe List,
it is now inconceivable our Capt. Thomas Carter of Lancaster was not the Grandson of Thomas of Kempston!
Thing is, William Carter 1606 was a Glover, and never made it to London; our Thomas did, however,
have two Uncles and a first cousin - who were "Citizens and Grocers of London" - and who were
the principals of the (confusing) London Visitation of 1634 at the home of Ancell.
A. First and Foremost, Ancell did not have a son named Thomas
GenForum Posting of Ruth Sehen on 23 Aug 2012 provides ... some ... proof beyond speculation:
"I think aheinly's analysis [below] of Captain Thomas Carter's parentage as William Carter and
Anne Emmery is very convincing".[Only ..... if you include her added data].
"The parish registers of St Dunstan in the West which are available on Ancestry.com
support this record of Ansell's children. George was baptised in 1619, John in 1622,
Ansell and Jane in 1629 and William in 1632. Ansell's will also does not mention a son named Thomas".
[A will of 1658 is Moot - Capt. Thomas Carter is proven in Lancaster VA by 1653]
B. Legitimate confusion of a Sixth Son ... vs. ... Six Sons ...
"I also have a copy of the Harleian Society's publication of the Visitation Returns
(published 1880) and there has clearly been a misinterpretation in one of the two books:
Ansyle Carter of London grocer *** 6 sonn *** living ao 1634 = Jane da. of John Myles
Georgeeldest sonne & heireJohnAnsyleWilliamandJane Carter". No, it does not say "sonnes"
"The difference is that in this interpretation Ansell Carter is effectively described as the sixth son of
William & Mary (it was a fairly common practice in Visitation pedigrees to specify which number son or
daughter an individual was), rather than as having six sons". [Rules of Primogeniture]
C.However, two reliable sources conflict in the date of birth:
"YOUNG THOMAS CARTERCapt. Thomas Carter Sr. (b. Sep 1632)",vs. the Prayer Book entry:
"Thomas Carter Senr. Departed this Life on the 22d ofOctober 1700 Aged about 70 years".
For all of their business accumen, would the Carters of Lancaster be off by two years?
Perhaps only one year with the old year / new year conversion?
Yet 1632 would still allow for the *** 1653 Tithe Listing *** in Lancaster County VA for the
Thomas Carter (with four servants) to be at that magic age of 21 - per Aunt Fanny and Common Sense.
Did the Young Thomas ARRIVE with the four servants, thanks to Uncle Thomas?
Did he just arrive in 1653?
A birth in 1632, rather than 1630, is an advantage to us in the long run!
D. Another conflict, this time with the statement of Aunt Fanny:
"Grandfather Thomas Carter son of a London merchant of good family"vs.
"THE FATHER William" - never in London - and was a Glover, not a Merchant
"He and his spouse died before their children were adults".
[Bedfordshire Parish Registers, Vol 39, Kempston, 1570-1812:
Anne Emmery 1637 Mary Spencer 1641 - yet a wife Anne in 1644]
25 MAY 1606 Kempston, Bedfordshire - 5 SEP 1644 in Bedfordshire [Hertfordshire?]
"Young Thomas Carter lost his mother at the age of 4, a stepmother
at the age of 6, and his father at the age of 10.  When Young Thomas
was 16, his grandfather Thomas Carter "the Older" died".[Summer 1647]
Thomas' will was dated 11 August 1647 at Kempston, Bedfordhsire, England and
proved 5 October 1647 in the Perogative Court of Canterbury. He was listed as
"Thomas Carter, the elder of Kempston, Bedfordshire, gentleman".
I give my grandchild Thomas Carter the residue of my estate.
My son Thomas Carter to be the Administrator during the minority
of my grandson Thomas Carter who is under 21 [and orphaned]
E.The answer lies with "THE UNCLEThomas Carter" (1612), the son in the will and older brother of Ancell.
"He was born in Great Barford and went to London where he was an apprentice in 1634.
From 1647 to *** 1653 *** he was responsible for financing the career and education of his nephew".
Separately, where did Dr. Miller come up with a son four years old in London?
"In the Harleian Society version, Ansell also had a daughter, Jane, instead of a son,
James, and no son Thomas (*** as the reference to a Thomas was to his brother ***)".
As cleary diagrammed on Page 149 above for the London Visitation of 1634.
"Grocer and Citizen of London" was a title of prestige, Anscell and George Carter began their wills with this title."
All put together, our Capt. Thomas Carter had two uncles and a first cousin as Merchants of London -
more than a fair substitute for a father, per our opening comments from Aunt Fanny.
Given all the above, did our Thomas arrive in 1653 (and not two or three years earlier as long suspected)
... and arrive with four servants ... thanks to Uncle Thomas?A birth in 1632 "nails" the coming of age to 1653!
F.Despite our opening criticism, Dr. Miller did not manufacture data; there was a 1653 Tithe, but we can
not find the names:"He appears first in the tax list of Lancaster County in 1653 when "Mr. Tho: Carter" paid
tithes on himself and four servants".
From a Lawson Family Website - citing just one of the several collectors on the "Corrotoman" - Book 1
will be on Reel 1. at The Library of Virginia: [We now know Barford was NW of King Carters Corrotoman].
Lancaster County, VA, Deeds, Wills and etc., Book 1, 1652-1657, page 90 - Court, 24 October 1653.
Whereas this County of Lancaster is indebted to these several sums following in total
24,896 pounds of tobacco to ye several men hereafter mentioned ye Court hath therefore
ordered that 40 pounds of tobacco per poll be laid upon every tithe person in this County
to be levied by ye several Collectors within their several limits as is hear after specified:
Mr. Row Lawson to collect from ye eastern most side of Costatawoman downward by ye
South side of Rappahannock River for these families. (Here followed the names of
fourteen heads of families with 67 tithes, which was paid.) Part of what he collected was
to pay himself for his salary - 370 pounds of tobacco.
Using this Lawson Excursus as a model, it would be most helpful to examine Roll 1. of the Lancaster County
deeds for the description of the area where the Thomas Carter is listed.That would settle the issue of the
Thomas Carters of the Isles of Wight, close associates of King Carter, and known to be in the area at the time.
If ..... the Thomas Carter of the 1653 Tithe List of Lancaster County VA proves to be somewhere
northwest of King Carter, rather than southeast with the Lawsons, then we shall have proven our
Capt. Thomas Carter of Lancaster once and for all.Charlie Carter (The Carter Society 2005) has proven
beyond all doubt that the Barford of Lancaster VA was up in the northwest channel from King Carter,
at an Estate which is today called Verville.