555ed

"Henry Isham of Henrico Co., Va., will of; dated Nov. 13, 1678. . . . To my honored mother Mrs Katherine Isham, a third part of my personal estate, both of what is in Virginia & England, after ye legacies above are satisfied . . ." (Vol. 2, p. 619).

Henry, of Henrico county in Virginia, to whom Thomas
Isham of the Middle Temple, his cousin german once
removed, gave a legacy in his will of June 13, 1676, on
condition that he should come back to spend a whole
year in England. This legacy was a fatal one f
his voyage from England to Virginia after the completi
of the year. His will of Nov. 13, 1678, was proved
in London June 5, 1680, and in Virginia Feb. 1, 1678-7
by William Randolph the executor. He gave legacies
to his half-brother, Joseph Ryall and to his mother,
Mrs. Katharine Isham. His plantation, called Doggam
in Charles City county in Virginia, he bequeathed
to his sisters Mrs. Mary Randolph and Mrs. (i.e. Mistres
now Miss) Anne Isham, and the residue of his
estate in Virginia and England to Mr. William Randolp
He was never m. and was probably the last male of the
elder line of the Ishams of Pytchley.
Mary, m. in or before 1678 to William Randolph of Turkey
Island in Virginia.
Anne, unmarried at the date of her brother's will of 167
In 1685 she was m. to Francis Eppes, Jr.
The ancestry of Henry Isham of Virginia has become known through the researches of Rev. Henry Isham Longden, who was born at Lamport, and is a distinguished antiquary and genealogist of Northamptonshire families. He was M.A. of Keble College, Oxford and rector of Heyford, county Northampton, and later of a parish of Northampton itself. In 1898 he published a book having the title: Some Notes on Sir Euseby Isham of Pytchley in the County of Northampton with special reference to his Virginian Descendants. London: Mitchell and Hughes, 140 Wardour Street, 1898. He gave me a copy of this rare work in 1908, which is now given to the Connecticut Historical Society at Hartford, Conn. I give the gist of his researches in his own words:

I have not given all the Randolph particulars in this pedigree, but I must just say that Richard Randolph is given two brothers, Thomas Randolph the Poet, and Henry Randolph of Randolph's River, near Apomatocks, who left issue. Their father's habitation was Morton Hall in or near Warwick; but in these particulars there is not complete accuracy.
Some further notes there are, written about the manuscript probably by the person who handed in the Pedigree.

To enquire after the estate of Sr. Eusebius Isham of Pitchley in Northampton, and another estate of his named Isham; endeavor to see will.

Mrs Isham's estate in Gloucestershr, she was dau'r in Law to Christian Policy Clerk in the same County.

The estate of Sr Edward Brett in Kent known by the name of Blendome (on) Hall (in Bexle parish Dec. 22, 1682, probate Mar. 17, 1683, codicil Nov. 7, 1683), his will dated 1684.

The Family of Wathews
Banks in Kent.
Hare 27, Mar. 27, 1684.

The next thing was to look up the will of Sir Edward Brett (P.C.C., 27 Hare). Here are one or two extracts:--

I Sr Edward Brett of Blendenhall in Bexley parish, co. Kent, Knight and Sergeant Porter to the King's Maty

.... Whereas I did purchase of Edward Brewster Blenden Hall and all other messuages etc in Bexley, Welling, East Wickham, Woolledge and Plumsted, co. Kent . . . . I do give and devise the same to John ffisher eldest son and heir apparent of Henry ffisher of greeton, co. Northampton, gent. and of Elizabeth his wife, etc. . . . . And as for and concerning that personall estate with which it hath pleased God to blesse me I doe give and dispose of the same as herein after is menconed ffirst I devise and bequeath unto the several children of my Neece Ann Isham the daughter of my sister Mary Isham (vizr.) Richard Wathew, John W., Henry W., Alice W., and Sara W. the summe of ffive hundred pounds to bee equally divided amongst them (vizt) one hundred pounds apeece when they shall attaine the severall ages of 21 or day of marriage. Also I doe give and devise unto the Two daughters of my nephew Henry Isham, late of Virginia, deceased, by Katherine his wife the "summe of œ200 apeece to be paid unto them within 12 months after my decease. The will concludes with the bequest of œ10 to the poor of "Tudington, co. Beds, his "Carpentine Cupp" to his cousin Charles Brett's widow, and his "old cupp with Brett's Armes therupon engraven and tipt with silver" to his cousin Margaret Duncumbe, widow. This, with the previous evidence, seems to make the identification of our Virginian emigrant sure. The name Caleb in the Heralds' College paper is curious as possibly representing some tradition. I know of no Caleb Isham, but there was more than one Caleb Banks of Kent, and it will be observed that Henry Isham's wife, Katherine, is said to have been a daughter of a Banks of Canterbury, thus affording possibly an explanation for its use. Katherine had by her first husband Royall one son Joseph and two, or possibly four daughters.

From the above considerations I feel that I am not far wrong in concluding that the last male heir and representative of the elder branch of the house of Isham of Pytchley was Henry Isham (will dated 13 November 1678, proved 1 Feruary 1678-9), only son of Henry Isham and Katherine Royall (Banks), nephew of Euseby Isham who was buried at Wroxton, grandson of William Isham and great-grandson of Sir Euseby Isham of Pitchley. And therefore, through the recovery of this link, the Randolphs of Virginia, being descendants of Colonel William Randolph and Mary Isham, many of whom have been eminent in the service of their country, may trace back to the elder branch of one of the oldest of our Northamptonshire families.

There is little more to add.

4, Gregory, the fourth son of Sir Euseby, was baptized July 26, 1593 at Pitchley, but there is no further trace of him.

And here I should naturally have passed on to William's brothers, but that I have discovered evidence which leads me to the conclusion that William had a second son, named Henry Isham, who emigrated to Virginia.

The first evidence is this. Thomas Isham, the only surviving child of Thomas Isham of Wheatfield, county Oxford, who was the younger brother of William, made his will (P. C.C., 92 Bence) 13 June 1676, and the will is proved 20 July 1676. This younger Thomas is thus nephew to William Isham, and hitherto I had considered him the last surviving male of the Pytchley family. In his will, however, is this bequest: "Also I give to my cousin Francis Drake of Stretton Rudeley (sic) ffoure hundred pounds upon trust that thesame and all interests and other profitts ariseing thereby shall bee paid and disposed as is hereafter menc'oned (that is to say) to such person who is or shall bee for the time being Heire male apparent or heire male of the body of my Cousin German Henry Isham of Virginia whether borne before or after my decease or shall live to come into, reside and inhabit in this Kingdom of England for one whole yeare to be accomplisht at any time after he hath attained the age of twenty one yeares." A great deal of the will is taken up with the terms of this bequest, which is to be void if the heir male of his cousin does not come into and reside in England for the time specified. If there is no heir male, then his cousin Henry Isham is to have the sum of œ100. In a codicil, dated 17 July 1676, Thomas Isham gives his cousin Henry Isham œ100 more upon the same conditions, and he adds these words: "Memd one of the greatest reasons of this Guift to my Coz. Isham was to encourage Sr Edward Brett to be very kind to him when he comes over into England, and therefore I begg his kindnesse to his kinsman and mine aforesaid, this was declared in the presence of Richard Parker, Tabitha Parker."

It was quite clear then that Henry Isham of Virginia was a first cousin of the testator Thomas Isham. The request to Sir Edward Brett to be kind to "his kinsman and mine" equally clearly points to his being a son of William Isham and Mary Brett, who were married at Toddington, where many of the Brett family occur in parish registers.

Henry, the only son, died as a young man. His will (P. C.C., 81 Bath), dated 13 November 1678, was proved in Virginia 1 February 1678-9 and in London 5 June 1680 by William Randolph his executor. After bequests to his half-brother Joseph Ryall and others, he leaves to his honoured mother Mrs. Katherine Isham one-third of his estate "both of what is in Virginia and England"; to his sister Mrs. Anne Isham a third; and his plantation in Charles City County in Virginia, commonly known as Doggams, equally between his two sisters Mrs. Mary Randolph and Mrs. Anne Isham. Mr. William Randolph to be his residuary legatee and sole executor. Mary Isham had married Col. William Randolph, and on the latter's monument she is described as daughter of Mr. Henry Isham of Northamptonshire. Anne Isham, the other sister, married in 1685 Francis Eppes, a Justice of the Peace for Henrico County, son of Lieut. Col. Francis Eppes (born 1628, died 1678), and grandson of Captain Francis Eppes. So much information I had so far gathered together regarding these Virginia Ishams. And here I must acknowledge the great kindness and courtesy of Mr. Robert A. Brock, the able Corresponding Secretary of the Virginia Historical Society, who has given me much help, but I must own I had little suspicion that these Virginians were of the Pytchley stock, and therefore the senior members of the family, till I found the will of Thomas Isham before mentioned. I ought perhaps to have guessed it. The keeping up of the name "Isham" as a Christian name in both the Randolph and Eppes was not unusual. The Parkyns and Newell families did the same, as also others in more modern times. The keeping up of the surname "Brett" as a Christian name in the Randolph family was certainly a clue to be looked into. But there is one piece of evidence which I have which seems to me to determine the matter, at least to my own satisfaction, if not by actual proof.

A visit to the Heralds' College is always an event, and sure to produce results, but I little expected to find the following in a Pedigree of Ishams and Randolphs in H Manuscripts, vol. xxi--documents which, it must be remembered, are not in deed of authority but yet, as they represent almost contemporaneous tradition, may well be taken to be of great value; in this instance, I consider, giving moral proof to my point. (H. I. L.)