history of bucks county/early spanish presence middle atlantic states

i'm finally reading 'the history of bucks county,' one of the resources i downloaded in the past two and a half years since i've begun researching my mother's family's background.  my great-great-great grandfather, william whittingham, is listed on the 1790 census as residing in bucks county.  his wife, rebecca livezey, is a descendent of the original Quaker Thomas Livezey, through his son Jonathan, who were 'First Proprietors' in Pennsylvania, so the history of bucks county is partially my family's history as well.  i'm interested in their history, and especially in the intersection with the local native american people which occurred, at the very least, when my great-grandfather, Alfred, married Mary Carney, a 'Moor' in 1872.  his parents were both deceased at that time, but alfred's brother refused to visit the home of alfred and mary, according to the civil war pension deposition filed on her behalf.

the so-called moor indians are usually given very little credence even for having existed in the past, so i've found it interesting to look into it a little.  i've found evidence for their existence in brewton berry's 1961 classic 'Almost White,' and also in 'Delaware's Forgotten Folk' by C.A. Weslager.  Weslager also wrote a book called 'The Delaware Indians' and in that book he states that the southernmost clans and bands, who spoke a Lenape (Algonquian) dialect similar to Unami, disappeared early by being absorbed into 'many peoples.'  In 'Delaware's Forgotten Folk,' Weslager makes the educated guess that the Moors were actually a remnant of the Lenape (Delaware) Indians, and I would assume he means the southern people, the Unalachtigo.  So, why was this remnant population known as 'the Moors'?

keeping all this in mind, it's interesting to read in different sources that there was a fairly strong Spanish presence all along the eastern coast of North America, at least as far north as the Hudson River as early as 1513 and throughout the 1500's.  In most of the American historical tradition and literature, a claim is made for the pre-eminent presence of the Dutch and English in these areas, but as we say, history is written by the victors, and I guess that's how the English wanted it to look.  An anti-Spanish, pro-Anglo bias has dominated American culture up until very recently, so I think it's important to keep that bias in mind.  Apparently, the Spanish - and their 'Moors' - were more present in the middle-Atlantic states than has been acknowledged up til now.

Paula Gunn Allen writes that Jamestown was situated 40 miles up-river in order to avoid Spanish ships as late as 1609.  According to the 'History of Bucks County,' the mouth of the Hudson River was first glimpsed by Verrazana in 1513, also a few years later by Stephanus Gomez who called it 'Rio de Gomez.'  "Henry Hudson, an Englishman in the service of the Dutch East-India company, discovered [for the English] Delaware bay August 28, 1609, but he made no attempt to ascend the river.  Captain Cornelius Jacobson May ascended the river some distance in 1614, and two years afterwards Captain Hendrickson discovered the Schuylkill.  In 1616 three Dutch traders struck across to the headwaters of the Delaware, down which they traveled to the Schuylkill.  Here they were captured by the Minquas (Susquehannas) but were rescued by Captain Hendrickson at the mouth of that river."  All of this takes place a full hundred years after the Spanish first began exploring the region.  The Spanish also had two aborted colonies in the Chesapeake Bay region in the 1500's.

Historical record shows that many people came to the area and it is likely that there were more whose recorded names have been lost to the corrosive effects of time or who were never noted down in records to begin with.  The people we have records of are mostly those who were associated with one of the big trading companies who were all excellent record-keepers.  "About 1624-25 the West India company established a trading house on a small island (in the Delaware River) just below Trenton Falls, and located upon it three or four families of French Walloons.  The post was broken up about 1627, and the Walloons returned to New York.  In March 1685 Peter Lawrensen stated in a deposition that he came into that provice a servant of the West India company in 1628 (and) that in 1631, he, with seven others, was sent into the Delaware, where the company had a traditing house, with ten or twelve servants attached to it; that he saw them settled there.  A considerable body of Waldenses and Huguenots were sent to the Delaware in 1656-1663, but it is not known what became of them."  These are just people we can keep some kind of track of, thanks to the written record of these trading companies, but how likely is it that there were more who did not come under the auspices of an official institution?

For example, between 1623 and 1634 there was a group known as "The Albion Knights" who settled along the Delaware.  "Colonists were actually introduced and made their homes on the Delaware, but neither the number nor exact location can be told." (p.9)  This group is sometimes referred to as 'Plowden's Colony.'  William Rawle, who has studied the colony, "believed that some of those who welcomed Penn to the shores of the Delaware, were the survivors of the Albion Knights." (p.10)

It's no secret that these early Europeans started mixing their stock in with the Indians.  "During the early period, the river of the Sickoneysincks at Lewes, Delaware, received a new and vulgar name - Hoeren Kill (Whore's Creek), "From the liberality of the Indians in generously volunteering their wives or daughters to our Netherlanders at that place." (p. 294, Weslager, Dutch Explorers) "Evidence of miscegenation was soon to be seen in some of the Delaware villages when dusky-skinned females gave birth to lighter-complexioned, blue-eyed infants.  The process of Europeanizing the Indians had a subtle beginning, and unplanned cross-breeding preceded the technological changes." (p.109 Weslager, The Delaware Indians)  This sharing of the bed was part of Indian hospitality.  The Europeans were, by and large, Christian men (with the exception of the early Moors in America) and due to Christianity's emphasis on the sacredness of virginity, and their patriarchal slant on monogamy, there was very little understanding of a society where sexuality could be more liberally shared. Certainly such an offer implied a very close tie, a real acceptance of the Dutch or the Moors into the tribal network, and not just 'casual sex' which was more likely to have been the assumption made by many of the sailors or their captains. The name the Dutch gave to Lewes reflects their distorted view of what was going on.  But the subject of sexual distortions in Christian society could be a lengthy discussion, as we all know by now.

If people-making was happening among the Dutch, why not also with the Moors? 

Comments

[S.]

I don't know how far you've gone in your research, but I live currently in Solebury Township, where many of the Livezey family members were reared.

I thought you might find the below link of interest and assistance to you.

http://books.google.com/books?id=vx8MAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA959&lpg=PA959&dq=Thomas+Livezey,+Bucks+County&source=bl&ots=rNmDN4Bcwl&sig=owSnG3zG1gac_MBm8XbHYzYwt1M&hl=en&ei=FmRuStvpG5K4NqKpkOQC&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1

[Karen Mattern]

Thanks S., yes, the link you gave me leads to the History of Bucks County which is the document I am now reading and quoting above. There is also a book on the Livezeys available through the library, which I have read. There are many many Livezey descendents in the greater Philadelphia area. I am, indeed, interested in finding out more but it all takes time. I have found out that some very good friends of mine, growing up in Philly, were also Livezey descendents, so that was a kick!

thanks for writing, S ~ Kasturi

[Mary Daniels]

Nice article - I was raised in the Philadelphia suburbs- my maiden name was Livezey.

I now reside in Florida.

I have a book "the geneology of the Livezey family" but it is after the civil war. Myself and my two brothers are not even listed. Nor could I find a lot of our immediate relatives. In other words, there were a lot missed.

I would be glad to share this with you, or anyone, that wishes the information.

[kasturi]

thank you, mary. I wonder if your book is part of the one that the Ch of the LDS Library has. That one, published I believe in 1934, traces the Livezeys back to England (briefly) and begins really with Quaker Thomas Livezey and his son Jonathan who came to Philadelphia in 1683 or 84. My mother, grandfather and great-grandfather are not listed in that book either, but his parents are. They were the offspring of a second marriage that seems to have been held in 'less esteem' (let's say it that way), and the two children from that union are not traced beyond their marriages. One of those children was my great-great-great grandmother. I believe we've been added to some of the on-line lists of descendents at this point. My friend used to joke that there were so many Livezey descendents, it hardly counted as anything remarkable. I guess it must be difficult to keep track of all of us!

Does your book feature J. Whittingham Livezey? I theorize that he was named after my ggg-grandfather, Wm Whittingham, who would have been JWL's uncle or great-uncle I believe. I notice that J. Whittingham Livezey was honored as a Civil War veteran in a local Penna newspaper, and I've come across him on line more often than my great-grandfather. The two men were in the same age group, and would have been fairly close cousins, I think. And again it shows/reiterates the Whittingham - Livezey connection.

What other surnames do you have in your Livezey line ? Just curious! Thanks for writing, Mary.

[Mary Daniels]

The book is entitled "Livezeys since the Civil War".

The cover shows a man in a hot air baloon.

On the right hand side are two paragraphs as follows:

"The birth and death records of Livezeys who have lived and died in America over the past century."

"Current Livezey resident records."

On the left hand side are two notations as follows:

"Part I and II of the Livezey Family Who's Who Series" and then

"Published by the Family News Network".

These listings are all after social security started recording in the mid 1930's so does not include Thomas Livezey (Of "Livezey House" fame).

There are many "J" Livezeys.Any other info? State born in? Apx year?

This book actually lists social security numbers and has a listing of current addresses (when published). This is the one we are NOT in.

I had attempted to contact a cousin, asking for the phone number of my uncle (Dad's brother), years ago after I became an adult and interested in my geneology. She curtly refused to give it to me as they had not liked some circumstances (of unknown origin to me) that had happened apparently. What a shame as I had fond memories of this uncle from when I was young and had many questions.

And how very odd - considering that the boys' father had deserted during the depression - just up and disappeared. (Interesting story there).

We went through extensive pedigree examination with a geneticist due to a rare illness they thought my daughter had. This doctor did research on the Livezey pedigree.

For anything else, more personal on anyone, please email me with your personal email address.

[kasturi]

hi mary,

i'm sorry it's taken me so long to reply to you - i was travelling when you wrote and it is amazing how long it has taken me to get back to my routine after that trip.

anyway, i really understand about how much it hurts when relatives won't answer your questions, fill you in, or even give you a hint because of some offense they've taken a long time ago, especially when you are trying to find out about someone you really truly cared about. i've had plenty of that with my - i'm beginning to see - 'crazy' family.

anyway J. Whittingham Livezey was a civil war hero in upstate pennsylvania, so I would assume he was born in the late 1830's, around the same time as my ggfather, b.1836, Alfred Whittingham. Alfred lost a leg in the civil war and i have plenty of info on him - but he was never lauded as a hero, probably because he married a woman much disapproved of. J. Whittingham Livesey just sounds like he must be a cousin. But yes, many of the Liveseys don't seem to have made it into the book, even the old book. your book sounds newer, just since social security came in, so none of us would be in that one - although obviously our cousins would! our last direct livesey ancestor was a female, the grandmother of Alfred Whittingham, so the Livesey name drops out of our direct line way back then.

feel free to email me if you'd like ot continue this discussion off the blog. ~ hoping you're well ~ kasturi