Update on the English Origins of William Ives

Richard Ives just returned England where he was conducting more research for his book about his branch of the Ives family in America. He was kind to share his latest discoveries and conclusions. The text that follows is by Richard with only a few minor edits. After a careful examination of the evidence that has recently come to light about the William Ives who was baptized in Langham, Rutland County, England on March 21, 1607, Richard has become convinced that he and our ancestor, William Ives, who arrived in Boston in 1635, are the same person. The evidence to support this view is, admittedly, scanty but extremely compelling.

The first bit of evidence resides in the fact that on the day Will Ives, the immigrant to Boston, boarded the "Truelove" in England, he was asked to swear his allegiance to King Charles - which he did. He was no doubt asked other questions by the ever-suspicious Royal customs and immigrations inspector, but the only answer the inspector was required to write down was William's age, which Will Ives gave as "28." This age accords perfectly with the date of birth of William Ives of Langham. To grasp the significance of this fact, one ought to ask just how men named  William Ives were living in England in the early decades of the 17th century? We know of at least half a dozen and there may have been twice that many. How many of the William Ives men we know about were born in 1607? Answer? Only one.

The second bit of evidence is somewhat more tangential but nevertheless extremely telling. When William Ives of New Haven died in about May 1648, his wife (We will call her Hannah for the same of convenience) understood that in a matter of months she must find a husband (At her age, she would not have been allowed to live without a husband in New Haven.). Now, consider the fact that she might have found a man from anywhere in New England to marry, or she might have chosen an immigrant from any of the 10,000 towns and villages in England itself. Whom did she choose in the end? Dr. William Bassett, scion the Bassett clan of North Luffenham (pronounced "Luff-Num") a village located just 9 miles from Langham, where the only English William Ives we know of from that period who was born in 1607 was born and raised. What, then, are the chances then that William Ives of Rutland and William Ives of New Haven are not the same person?

For some time now, our cousin David Ives and Richard have been in contact with the Langham Village History Group, based in Will Ives' home village, which has produced a magnificent volume entitled The Life and Families of 17th Century Langham. In it there is a considerable amount of information in it that pertains to Will Ives' youth, his family, and his ancestors. Richard would urge any Ives person who is interested in knowing about the background of our ancestor, Will  Ives, to purchase a copy. A careful examination of the book and of the website that the Langham History Group maintains on the internet will open vistas that Ives researchers have been seeking for hundreds of years. Richard believes the that the book may be purchased directly from the Langham History Group, which can be contacted at  [email protected]  The Langham Village History Group Home Page can be accessed simply by entering the name at Google Search or any search engine.   

Last month, Richard traveled to England and met with members of the Langham Village History Group. They could not have been more obliging and generous in their hospitality. He laid the evidence before them that indicates that Will Ives of Langham and Will Ives of New Haven were one in the same person, and they agreed that the evidence is extremely persuasive. Attached below are a few photos by Richard of the Church of St. Peter and St. Paul at Langham - the church where Will Ives was baptized in 1607. Also included is a photo of the font - original to the church, and dating from the 16th century of before - at which Will Ives was baptized.

Finally, Richard it is time to clear the air about a few details relating to Will Ives, both before he arrived in America, and after. Three years ago, he procured copies of the records of church membership for St. Stephen Coleman, London for the years 1630 to 1635 from the LDS genealogical center in Salt Lake City, Utah. Since 17th century English cannot be read by anyone not trained to read that script, he paid several experts to decipher the rolls. What they revealed was that Will Ives was never enrolled as a tithing member of St. Stephen Coleman during the period 1630-1635, nor is there a record of any person named Ives having been enrolled during that time. The legend, perpetrated by well-meaning scholar Isabel Calder that Will Ives was a member of Reverend Davenport's congregation is, simply, false. This is not meant to suggest that Will did not attend St. Stephen - he may have - only that the records indicate clearly that he was never a member.

There is a second bit of William Ives lore in need of correction. It is been stated in the past that on arriving at Boston in 1635, Will resided in Cambridge/Watertown Massachusetts, near Boston, presumably to be near or live with his supposed kinsman, Miles Ives. As far as I have been able to discover, there is not the slightest bit of evidence to support this claim. Because the Ives name is relatively rare, they were probably related, and in view of the fact that Boston and Cambridge were mere villages at the time, the two men probably did meet, but that is really all that can be said about it.

Comments

[David J Ives]

Congratulations to Richard for his excellent archival and on-site research that has cleared up a number of 'fuzzy' issues with William Ives. A number of "false trails" can now be eliminated. He has presented compelling evidence for William's ancestry to lie in Langham Parish and adjacent areas.

[Mike Frisby]

The email address for Langham Village History Group needs correcting in the above post, it should be [email protected]

Another person from a yeoman farmer Langham family "James Hubbard" was transported on the Mathew to St Christophers on the 21st May 1635. Two years later he made his way to Boston joining up with Lady Deborah Moody and her party which made its way to Nieu Amsterdam where he set up and surveyed what became "Gravesend".

We have assumed both he and Ives were Anabaptists and suffered religious persecution, they both came from well established families who were likely to have had financial stability. We can see from records that our local church was undergoing considerable upheaval. See EA Irons notes on our web site.

Kind Rgds

Mike Frisby
Web Master and archivist Langham Village History Group

[Bill Ives]

Mike - Thanks for the update and the correction. I will try to fix it and in the meanwhile your comment will show the right way. We were recently near the Gravesend area of Brooklyn where the English landed troops to fight George Washington in the first battle after the declaration of Independence. What more do you know about William Ives in England. I would be very interested. Bill

[Dorothy Crooks]

I know I am new to this conversation, but I have been researching William Ives, my 8-ggf, after a trip to New Haven last fall. I am very impressed by all of the research and thought presented by Bill Ives, Richard Ives and David Ives!

I went to the wonderful Langham Village History Group website and found the will of Thomas Ives, which references his eldest son William Ives. The argument seemed compelling enough that I entered parents and siblings for William in my primary database based on the will. But then I had second thoughts.
http://www.langhaminrutland.org.uk/wills&inventories/17thc-wills.pdf (page 109)

First, it does not seem plausible that William was being dispossessed and that the will was written to advise William of his prospects. Based on other research I have done and another comments posted on a different blog entry, I think William had already been provided for and hence the nominal sum in the will. As the eldest, he would already have 'launched'. When I looked at the bottom of the will, it appears that the will was probated about 2 months after it was written, so the will was written because Thomas' death was imminent. That does not mean that Thomas and Susan are not the parents of William, but does remove one possible reason for William choosing to emigrate. Second, even though 6 or 7 siblings of William are named, none of these names match the names of the 4 children eventually born to 'our' William. That is not conclusive, but seems very unusual to me. Third, I decided to go to Ancestry again to search for birth information for William Ives. I found an entry for Wm Ives, son of Richard Ives, baptized 14 May 1607, in Market Deeping, Lincoln, England, FHL Film# 421987. I am trying to find siblings for this William, but have not had much luck yet. I have not ordered the film, but I understand this to be a film of a primary source: [Item 2: Bishop's transcripts for Deeping-Market, 1562-1836. Author: Church of England. Parish Church of Deeping-Market (Lincolnshire)]

I started to research William Preston and his family, since he is listed immediately above William Ives on the passenger list. Furthermore, they both end up as early settlers of New Haven. This makes me wonder if they knew each other back in England... Plus, William and his wife Mary [Seabrook] are my 9-great-grandparents... So far, I have not found anything, but am not done exploring.

The 2 pieces of evidence I remember being presented for 'our' William being the William in Langham is his birthyear and the fact that his wife's second husband had lived about 9 miles from Langham. Are there other items to consider?

Thanks for letting me be part of the conversation.

Dorothy Crooks

[Bill Ives]

Dorothy - Thanks for your significant input. It is greatly appreciated.

[Dorothy Crooks]

To correct my earlier post, one of the brothers of William Ives of Langham was named John, and 'our' William Ives DID name a son John. But I would still expect more overlap on names. And John is a very common name.

[Barry Wood]

I am a little late finding this blog, but I have read the more recent posts with interest. I agree with Dorothy Crooks' comment to the effect that the will of Thomas Ives of Langham, Rutland did not actually dispossess his oldest son, William, but rather attempted to equalize his benefit from the estate with that of his siblings. Specifically, I think that William had received a gift of money from his father upon reaching his 21st birthday, and Thomas wanted to ensure that the younger sons would be entitled to the same upon reaching their majority. There seems to have been no residuary clause in the will. Therefore, in the absence of such the remaining personal estate of Thomas Ives, after payment of the legacies specified in the will and of any debts, would be distributed equally among the children, after deduction of the widow's third.

As noted on page 21 of the report, the actual text of the will is that the eldest "sonne," William, was to receive "Twelve pence" from the estate. It doesn't say, "twelve pence and no more," or "Twelve pence in full satisfaction of any claim he may make against my estate." Therefore, in my judgment William was still entitled to share in the ultimate distribution of the residue. Same with daughter Mary, the wife of Thomas Hacke. She had no doubt received her "marriage portion" at the time of her November 1628 marriage, and it was therefore necessary to give her only a nominal legacy of money in the will, whereas the younger, unmarried daughters were to receive ten pounds each upon obtaining their majority.

I realize that the "disinheriting" story makes better drama, but I suspect that the reality was more mundane than that.

Finally, as to the William Ives buried at Langham in 1639, I think that this could have been an uncle or great uncle of the New England immigrant. Even though life expectancy then wasn't what it is now, a great many burials in 17th century England relate to people who had attained (relatively) advanced age. FamilySearch reveals that there were more than a few men named William Ives (Eves, etc.) born in the period between 1560 and 1619, such that it would not have been deemed necessary to mention a parent if they had happened to die in Langham in 1639.

Further, you may have identified the origins of Thomas Ives of Langham. I am new to that issue, so I have no idea whether he might or might not have been the Thomas Ives chr. 10 June 1581 at Tuttingham, Norfolk, or not -- but the timing seems perfect, and Norfolk is not that far from Rutland. Notably, he was the son of a William Ives, such that it would have been appropriate for this Thomas, upon achieving fatherhood, to name his first son William after the grandfather.

Also, I find it suggestive that a William Ives - perhaps the same man - also had a son William christened at St. Martin at Palace, Norwich, 7 May 1567. If the babe of 1567 was an older brother of Thomas Ives of Langham, what would be more natural than that, in his old age, hearing that his brother had died leaving minor children in Langham, he would move there to assist with the upbringing of his nieces and nephews.