A Modest Proposal about early VA Womacks

There has been much discussion and debate recently about the earliest Womacks in Virginia.  After some consideration, I'm posting this page for further debate. To start with - the Womacks probably were not Quakers.  Several branches of the family were later to become Quakers, but it's very unlikely that the very earliest Womacks were Friends.  It is true that the Friends first arrived in Virginia about the time and place the Womacks did, but records of the earliest meetings do not exist, and they really didn't start getting established until after the 1660s or so.  However, based on their behavior, or more specifically, John's and Abraham's behavior, they would have been expelled from any meeting they tried to join.  It is true that "failing to fill their pew," which these guys were variously brought up on charges for, could mean that they were members of a minority religion.  But in their case, what with drinking, gambling, horse racing, hog stealing, suing people, etc., it's more likely they simply weren't showing up for services.  They simply weren't acting like Friends, basically. Now, for the family -  we first come to an entry in the Minutes of the General Court of VA, 1670-1676, p. 177, dated April 8, 1674. "The difference between Abra. Womack and Wm. Clarke about the estate of Wm. Womack decd.  It is ordered that the said Abra. Womack brother to said Wm. Womack have two thirds of his estate both real and personal and that the widow have the other part." So, here we have William, who has died, and his brother Abraham.  Now, basically, this entry could only occur if William died without leaving a will and with no descendants living at the time of judgement.  The only way for a brother, and in fact it would have to be the eldest living brother, to get 2/3s of the estate is for that to be the case.  Had William had living children, his estate would have gone to them.  Had the children been under age, a guardian would have been named to manage the estate.  The widow in this case got her 1/3 dower right and may well have remarried. (Sadly the Library of VA moved their page on colonial intestate probate, as did the MD state archives.  If you really want to go read up on it, you'll need a copy of Hening's Laws.) That being the case, we have to ask, who was the William whose estate was settled before the Orphan's Court of Henrico Co., VA in 1677.  In this action, Oct 1, 1677, Timothy ALLEN, Jr. presented the account of cattle belonging to the orphans of William Womack dec. - "Mary Womack 4 cowes and one heifer.  Mary and Thomas Womack hath between them 4 cowes and 3 calves.  The said Marys proper stock is 5 head of cattle - which is in all 12 head.  It is consented by the court that one of Mary Womacks cows which is changed for a 3 yeare old heifer of Abraham Womack shall soe stand confirmed."  Timothy Allen was apparently appointed administrator for an estate of a William Womack, who had 2 children who were minors.  It appears there are 2 distinct Marys referred to: one with 5 head and one splitting the other 7 with her brother Thomas.  The first would probably be the widow with her dower portion, and the other the daughter.  It is interesting to note that Abraham shows up here swapping cows to even things out.  So, to me, it appears that here we have a William who died WITH children, distinct from the other William who died WITHOUT children. Thomas then sued Timothy Allen in 1685, after the death of his mother, for items that Allen had failed to turn over to him.  It is possible that this date is when Thomas turned 21, not 1677 - in 1692 Thomas said in court that he was about 28, which would also give an approximate birthdate of 1664 not 1656.  Thomas Womack died in Henrico Co., VA in 1697, apparently unmarried and without children, but happily leaving a will.  In this will, he says that Abraham was his brother.  He calls Thomas PUCKETT his brother, and after many bequests to nieces, nephews and godchildren, leaves the remainder of his estate to - Abraham Womack, John Granger, Thomas Puckett, and William Puckett. One does wonder why he didn't name John Womack as a brother, but then, John was the black sheep of the family and in bad with the Granger family in particular.  That last is interesting because John Granger was the second husband of the widow of Richard Womack: Mary Puckett.  Thomas Puckett apparently had married Mary Womack, and William Puckett may well have married Anne Womack.  We know that Abraham sued John Granger and wife for not educating his brother Richard's children.  He also sued to have Thomas' will tossed out (as the eldest surviving brother he would have gotten the whole estate if it had).  Anne Womack Puckett, of all of these links is the weakest - but her husband is given equal standing with the others in Thomas' will, and she also apparently named a kid Womack Puckett.  That leaves us with the following family to debate on this evidence or other evidence to be added  -  slings and arrows are welcome! 1. William Womack d. bef 1677 m. Mary ? who was alive in 1677 but died before 1685.           2. William Womack Jr. d.  bef1674 - no children           3. Abraham Womack b. abt 1644 had at least one child           4. John Womack b. ca 1653 - married, had children - although not mentioned above in connection with Abraham, his own legal troubles mention his relations to the family.           5. Richard Womack b. abt1655 d. 1684 - wife remarried to John Granger - had children                     6. Anne Womack m. William Puckett - had children                     7. Mary Womack m. Thomas Puckett - had children           8. Thomas Womack b. ca 1660 d. 1697 - no children

This page was last updated on: December 28, 2003

Hopefully this page will now work better on Macs and/or alternative browsers like OmniWeb and Opera.