Jim Denbow Unearths Interesting New Information on John Denboe's Indenture

James Denbow, co-editor of the Denbow Diaspora, and professor of archaeology and anthropology at the University of Texas, has put his professional sleuthing skills to work for us and unearthed, at least figuratively speaking, some very interesting new information and fascinating new leads about the probable first Denbow in North America.  This is the John Denboe who came to these shores as an indentured servant in 1663.  I'm going to ask Jim to write an article about his findings for an upcoming issue of the Diaspora, but for now, I'll tantalize you with a copy of an email that he sent me that outlines some of his findings and analysis.  The Sandy referred to in this email is Sandy Jameyson, of Lodi, Ohio, a long-time Denbow researcher.  I had forwarded to Jim some material that Sandy had sent me on John Denboe, some of this was material originally collection by Mary Denbow Petro, of Chillicothe, Ohio.  Before reading the email below, please click here to see a copy of a most interesting map of colonial Maryland showing an area called Scotland near the place that John Denboe would have likely served his indenture.

Hi Carl,

Got the stuff you forwarded to me from Sandy today. Here is my take on this:

   1. the "Hursfurl" document is simply a retyping of the info from Mary Petro that you had earlier.  I don't believe Sandy herself went back to the originals.  After doing so, in two different versions since there are no "original" originals -- those were apparently burnt in 1704 in a fire -- I believe the man's name is George Hasfurt, not Horsford and certainly not Hursfurl.  If you type in Hasfurt in your search engine and look at all the documents I think you will agree.  It is well known that many typos and transcription errors crept into these documents, some of which can be seen by comparing the two versions I have, which are listed below.

    2. While waiting for those copies from you, I received from the Maryland State archives the following copies of the following two documents:

John Denboe 1675-1680 Description: Liber WC, page 147.  Accession No.: 17, 319 MSA No. S920-32 Location: 1/28/4/34

And

John Denboe 1675-1680 Description: 19, transcript of Liber WC, page 258.  Accession No. 17,353-1 MSA No. S920-46 Location 1/29/2/61

I believe the first transcript is the earlier one and is likely NOT the version copied by Mary Petro.  What led to the problems of the Hasfurt association is that in the later transcription, the bottom of the page conveniently ends with the "mysterious" 2nd May Thomas Thurston signature and seal giving over the rights to his "servants" to Miles Gibson.  She does not seem to have gone on to the next page where those servants, including John Denboe, are mentioned again.  In the later version, one would have to go on to the NEXT PAGE to find the final two sections signed by Thomas Thurston ON THE SAME DAY, 2nd May, 1676, mentioning those servants, including John Denboe, for whom he (Thurston) paid transport.  

Quite what the legal sense of these missed entries is, I am not sure  -- maybe you can figure it out. They most certainly have something to do with the marriage of Miles Gibson and Thurston's daughter Ann.  Nonetheless, I think it is indisputable that the Hasfurt document has nothing at all to do with John Denboe -- and if you read Mary Petro's transcription of it you can see it deals only with the parcel of land, not other property such as servants.  It is the next TWO (or maybe three depending on how they should be separated) signed by Thomas Thurston on the 2nd of May that outline his transport of servants, as well as 200 acres of land to Miles Gibson, soon to be his son-in-law.  The third entry deals with some kind of other obligation involving an obligation to pay 10,000 pounds of tobacco to Lord Baltimore.  Maybe mentioning the servants was some kind of surety  -- I really have no idea.  But Hasfurt and Brittain have nothing to do with us.

Also interesting is that if you look at the copy the earlier record I sent you, it has brackets that are different from the ones in the later copy.  Specifically, the earlier document appears to leave out the first 4 names in the last column as those to be included in the notation "12 years since" and does not mark off the last column of names as somehow different from the other two.  The second record seems to show that he is giving Gibson (who was himself a 1660s transportee) five(?) hundred acres of land for the transport of his family and 8 of the servants (not John Denboe).  The last entry dealing with the tobacco obligation, however, mentions all of the servants by name again, including John Denboe, as having been transported by him (Thurston) "into the said province of Maryland."

On the hand written notes (by Sandy?), there is also a question about whether or not Thurston returned to England after trying to settle in Virginia.  This is indeed the case, and after being jailed as a trouble maker in Jamestown in 1657 or 8, he returned to America with his wife, family and servants in 1663, but this time to Maryland which was more tolerant of Quakers because they were more desperate for labor.  

Another mystery is how long John Denboe's indenture lasted.  Generally they were for 4-5 years, though if the person was under the age of 18 they could last until they were 25.  Thus, I don't see how John Denboe was still an indentured servant in 1676 unless he got a really bad deal out of the firebrand-Quaker Thurston, who would later backslide into establishment respectability and eventually even lead a militia.

The other John Denbow indenture that you sent dates to 1828 and has nothing to do with the original indenture of 1663, which probably no longer exists in any paper form.  But given Thurston's connections with Gloucestershire and sailing from Bristol, maybe those are areas we need to investigate in UK  -- perhaps looking to see who was associated with Thurston, Fox, or other early Quakers there.

In sum, I think we need to now more carefully go back to original, first hand sources whenever possible to see how things were expressed, how they were written, etc. if we are to sort out some of these relationships.  Fortunately, in some ways DNA stuff gives us firmer ground around which to base interpretations of whatever paper documents we find.  That being said, if indentures of some sort were still around in 1828, and "Scotland" is located just across the river from the Tanyard and near others of Thurstan's holdings, then maybe it is that "Scotland" our early family stories are referring to.  (I still can remember the shock of my son Jeremy when he found out that the "Tangiers" inhabited by the beat poet William Burroughs was a neighborhood in New Orleans -- not North Africa! He couldn't believe it.)  So maybe it really is Scotland, Maryland that some of our early ancestors "escaped" from.

Cheers,

Jim