Thomas Woodward Part 2

Member of the Governor’s Council, etc.

Member of the Governor’s Council, etc.

In attempting to establish the parentage and provenance of Thomas Woodward, who died in Isle of Wight County, Virginia about October the 5th, 16771 (and who has been the subject of much research and speculation), many modern researchers, no doubt following the lead of genealogist and historian John Bennett Boddie in 19382, have posited (ad infinitum) that said Woodward was somehow connected to the family of George Woodward and his wife Elizabeth Honywood (Honiwood, Honeywood, etc.), formerly of Burgate, Suffolk, Markeshall, Essex, and Charing, Kent. Boddie’s belief in Thomas Woodward’s relationship to these Woodwards and Honywoods has already been examined in a previous paper3. Though I cannot at present prove that Boddie was wrong in his belief (and of course, he could have been correct), and although it is true that Thomas Woodward did indeed seem to be acquainted with Col. Sir Philip Honywood in Virginia4 (undoubtedly a relation to the above Elizabeth), I hope at the least to show that serious question can now be raised regarding Boddie’s stated belief:

In attempting to establish the parentage and provenance of Thomas Woodward, who died in Isle of Wight County, Virginia about October the 5th, 16771 (and who has been the subject of much research and speculation), many modern researchers, no doubt following the lead of genealogist and historian John Bennett Boddie in 19382, have posited (ad infinitum) that said Woodward was somehow connected to the family of George Woodward and his wife Elizabeth Honywood (Honiwood, Honeywood, etc.), formerly of Burgate, Suffolk, Markeshall, Essex, and Charing, Kent. Boddie’s belief in Thomas Woodward’s relationship to these Woodwards and Honywoods has already been examined in a previous paper3. Though I cannot at present prove that Boddie was wrong in his belief (and of course, he could have been correct), and although it is true that Thomas Woodward did indeed seem to be acquainted with Col. Sir Philip Honywood in Virginia4 (undoubtedly a relation to the above Elizabeth), I hope at the least to show that serious question can now be raised regarding Boddie’s stated belief:

The above-referenced George Woodward had no fewer than twenty-one children by two successive wives, the above-mentioned Elizabeth Honywood, plus an earlier wife named Alice Woodford5. Of those twenty-one children, and of the males who are now known to have married, only son Edward seems to have been of the right age to have been the father of our Thomas Woodward (born about 1600-16046). None of the children of wife Elizabeth Honywood seem to have been of the right age (old enough) to have fathered a son born around 1600 or 1604. And that Edward Woodward (wife Elizabeth Oxenbridge) is not presently known to have had a son named Thomas (though he indeed had a brother by that name, and it is possible he could have had a son with the same name).  These facts alone (despite George Woodward’s prodigious number of offspring), seem to rule out (for the moment) consideration of him as the potential grandfather (or father) of our Thomas Woodward, of Isle of Wight, Virginia. We must at least begin to look elsewhere, if we wish to attempt to resolve this question. And—strangely enough—better evidence for Thomas Woodward’s possible parentage does indeed lie elsewhere:

The above-referenced George Woodward had no fewer than twenty-one children by two successive wives, the above-mentioned Elizabeth Honywood, plus an earlier wife named Alice Woodford5. Of those twenty-one children, and of the males who are now known to have married, only son Edward seems to have been of the right age to have been the father of our Thomas Woodward (born about 1600-16046). None of the children of wife Elizabeth Honywood seem to have been of the right age (old enough) to have fathered a son born around 1600 or 1604. And that Edward Woodward (wife Elizabeth Oxenbridge) is not presently known to have had a son named Thomas (though he indeed had a brother by that name, and it is possible he could have had a son with the same name).  These facts alone (despite George Woodward’s prodigious number of offspring), seem to rule out (for the moment) consideration of him as the potential grandfather (or father) of our Thomas Woodward, of Isle of Wight, Virginia. We must at least begin to look elsewhere, if we wish to attempt to resolve this question. And—strangely enough—better evidence for Thomas Woodward’s possible parentage does indeed lie elsewhere:

Christopher Woodward, Jr., Esq., of Lambeth Marsh, London

Christopher Woodward, Jr., Esq., of Lambeth Marsh, London

But was that Thomas Woodward of Lambeth Marsh, Surrey and St. Mary le Bow, Cheapside, really and truly deceased “by 1655”? Might it not be at least possible that, instead of merely dying, he had rather simply absconded to the colonies—to Virginia—leaving a wife and child (or children?) back in London to believe he had met an untimely end? Such occurrences were not at all uncommon back then. Another, equally-valid possibility is that he could have been officially “encouraged” to go there (in view of saving his skin—and head) because his outspoken Royalist political views (which had already caused Parliament to sack him from one lucrative position) had rendered his remaining in England ‘problematic’ for those then in power (the Cromwellian ‘Long Parliament’). This is all merely speculation on my part, yes, I know.  But there are several circumstances which (intriguingly) lend themselves to this new interpretation:

But was that Thomas Woodward of Lambeth Marsh, Surrey and St. Mary le Bow, Cheapside, really and truly deceased “by 1655”? Might it not be at least possible that, instead of merely dying, he had rather simply absconded to the colonies—to Virginia—leaving a wife and child (or children?) back in London to believe he had met an untimely end? Such occurrences were not at all uncommon back then. Another, equally-valid possibility is that he could have been officially “encouraged” to go there (in view of saving his skin—and head) because his outspoken Royalist political views (which had already caused Parliament to sack him from one lucrative position) had rendered his remaining in England ‘problematic’ for those then in power (the Cromwellian ‘Long Parliament’). This is all merely speculation on my part, yes, I know.  But there are several circumstances which (intriguingly) lend themselves to this new interpretation:

Some circumstances regarding Thomas Woodward, the immigrant

Some circumstances regarding Thomas Woodward, the immigrant

This mystery begins to make a little sense, however, if we assume (for the sake of argument) that in fact Thomas Woodward didn’t want his English family to know where he was, in the 1650s and 1660s. Recall that in 1677, as Thomas Woodward lay on his deathbed, and wrote out his will (dying within only four more days), he stated publicly that he didn’t even know if he had grandchildren by his son John or not25. I have said it before, but this fact indicates a serious breach in communication between Thomas and his son John in England (for what reasons we can only guess). By this time in colonial affairs, letters and persons were regularly making the transatlantic crossing again and again—occasionally returning to England for visits and sometimes even to die and be buried there.

This mystery begins to make a little sense, however, if we assume (for the sake of argument) that in fact Thomas Woodward didn’t want his English family to know where he was, in the 1650s and 1660s. Recall that in 1677, as Thomas Woodward lay on his deathbed, and wrote out his will (dying within only four more days), he stated publicly that he didn’t even know if he had grandchildren by his son John or not25. I have said it before, but this fact indicates a serious breach in communication between Thomas and his son John in England (for what reasons we can only guess). By this time in colonial affairs, letters and persons were regularly making the transatlantic crossing again and again—occasionally returning to England for visits and sometimes even to die and be buried there.

In closing this discussion, I would like to mention a few passing items of trivia which may possibly have some bearing on this Thomas Woodward, the immigrant. They can either be seen as possibly helping to clarify the issues, or perhaps only helping to further muddy the picture:

In closing this discussion, I would like to mention a few passing items of trivia which may possibly have some bearing on this Thomas Woodward, the immigrant. They can either be seen as possibly helping to clarify the issues, or perhaps only helping to further muddy the picture:

A “Thomas Woodward, gent.” was apparently a law student at the Middle Temple, of the famous Inns of Court in London, from at least the year 161827.  But even more than that, he was a personal friend whilst there of the English metaphysical poet John Donne (see below). If (for the sake of argument) we assume for the moment that this Thomas Woodward is the same person as the immigrant to Virginia (and he may well have been), and if we further assume that Thomas Woodward the immigrant was indeed born around the year 1600 (as stated in one of his depositions in Virginia), then he would have been around eighteen years of age in 1618, just at the right age to be admitted as a student of the Middle Temple. I must stress, however, that I have not yet been able to fully examine this reference, and thus have not yet been able to determine whether or not 1618 was the year in which this Thomas Woodward matriculated at the Middle Temple.  

A “Thomas Woodward, gent.” was apparently a law student at the Middle Temple, of the famous Inns of Court in London, from at least the year 161827.  But even more than that, he was a personal friend whilst there of the English metaphysical poet John Donne (see below). If (for the sake of argument) we assume for the moment that this Thomas Woodward is the same person as the immigrant to Virginia (and he may well have been), and if we further assume that Thomas Woodward the immigrant was indeed born around the year 1600 (as stated in one of his depositions in Virginia), then he would have been around eighteen years of age in 1618, just at the right age to be admitted as a student of the Middle Temple. I must stress, however, that I have not yet been able to fully examine this reference, and thus have not yet been able to determine whether or not 1618 was the year in which this Thomas Woodward matriculated at the Middle Temple.  

This reference would seem to imply, however, that this Rowland and Thomas Woodward (who indeed would seem to have been the sons of the aforementioned Christopher Woodward, Esq., of Lambeth Marsh and St. Mary le Bow) might have been considerably older than our Thomas Woodward, the immigrant, since the poet John Donne is known to have been born in 1572, and to have entered Lincoln’s Inn in 159229. Based on this admittedly incomplete data, however, we cannot say this for certain one way or the other.

This reference would seem to imply, however, that this Rowland and Thomas Woodward (who indeed would seem to have been the sons of the aforementioned Christopher Woodward, Esq., of Lambeth Marsh and St. Mary le Bow) might have been considerably older than our Thomas Woodward, the immigrant, since the poet John Donne is known to have been born in 1572, and to have entered Lincoln’s Inn in 159229. Based on this admittedly incomplete data, however, we cannot say this for certain one way or the other.