PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY, VIRGINIA
LARGEST SLAVEHOLDERS FROM 1860 SLAVE CENSUS SCHEDULES
and
SURNAME MATCHES FOR AFRICAN AMERICANS ON 1870 CENSUS
Transcribed by Tom Blake, August 2003
PURPOSE. Published information giving names of slaveholders and numbers of slaves held is almost non-existent. It is possible to locate an ancestor on a U.S. census for 1860 or earlier and not realize that ancestor was also listed as a slaveholder on the slave schedules, because published indexes almost always do not include the slave census. The last U.S. census slave schedules were enumerated by County in 1860 and included 393,975 named persons holding 3,950,546 unnamed slaves, or an average of about ten slaves per holder. The actual number of slaveholders may be slightly lower because some large holders held slaves in more than one County and would have been counted in each County. Excluding slaves, the 1860 U.S. population was 27,167,529, with about 1 in 70 being a slaveholder. It is estimated by this transcriber that in 1860, slaveholders of 200 or more slaves, while constituting less than 1 % of the total number of U.S. slaveholders, or 1 out of 7,000 free persons, held 20-30% of the total number of slaves in the U.S. The process of publication of slaveholder names beginning with the largest holders will enable naming of the holders of the most slaves with the least amount of transcription work. Surname matching of slaveholders with 1870 African Americans is intended merely as suggesting another possibility for further research by those seeking to make connections between slaves and holders.
SOURCES. The 1860 U.S. Census Slave Schedules for Prince George County, Virginia (NARA microfilm series M653, Roll 1396) reportedly includes a total of 4,997 slaves. This transcription includes 65 slaveholders who held 20 or more slaves in Prince George County, accounting for 2,796 slaves, or about 56% of the County total. The rest of the slaves in the County were held by a total of 279 slaveholders, and those slaveholders have not been included here. Due to variable film quality, handwriting interpretation questions and inconsistent counting and page numbering methods used by the census enumerators, interested researchers should view the source film personally to verify or modify the information in this transcription for their own purposes. Census data for 1860 was obtained from the Historical United States Census Data Browser, which is a very detailed, searchable and highly recommended database that can found at http://fisher.lib.virginia.edu/census/ . Census data on African Americans in the 1870 census was obtained using Heritage Quest’s CD “African-Americans in the 1870 U.S. Federal Census”, available through Heritage Quest at http://www.heritagequest.com/ .
FORMAT. This transcription lists the names of those largest slaveholders in the Prince George County, the number of slaves they held in the County and the first page number on which they were listed. The page numbers used are the numbers rubber stamped in the upper right corner of every other page of the census, with the intervening pages being reported here with a B added to the number of the preceding page. No local districts were shown on the enumeration. Following the holder list is a separate list of the surnames of the holders with information on numbers of African Americans on the 1870 census who were enumerated with the same surname.
TERMINOLOGY. Though the census schedules speak in terms of “slave owners”, the transcriber has chosen to use the term “slaveholder” rather than “slave owner”, so that questions of justice and legality of claims of ownership need not be addressed in this transcription. Racially related terms such as African American, black, mulatto and colored are used as in the source or at the time of the source, with African American being used otherwise.
PLANTATION NAMES. Plantation names were not shown on the census. Using plantation names to locate ancestors can be difficult because the name of a plantation may have been changed through the years and because the sizeable number of large farms must have resulted in lots of duplication of plantation names. In Virginia in 1860 there were 641 farms of 1,000 acres or more, the largest size category enumerated in the census, and another 2,882 farms of 500-999 acres. Linking names of plantations in this County with the names of the large holders on this list is beyond the scope of this transcription.
FORMER SLAVES. The 1860 U.S. Census was the last U.S. census showing slaves and slaveholders. Slaves were enumerated in 1860 without giving their names, only their sex and age and indication of any handicaps, such as deaf or blind Slaves 100 years of age or older were supposed to be named on the 1860 slave schedule, but there were only 1,570 slaves of such age enumerated, out of a total of 3,950,546 slaves, and the transcriber, though not specifically looking for such named slaves, did not notice any such information while doing this transcription. Freed slaves, if listed in the next census, in 1870, would have been reported with their full name, including surname. Some of these former slaves may have been using the surname of their 1860 slaveholder at the time of the 1870 census and they may have still been living in the same State or County. Before presuming an African American was a slave on the 1860 census, the free census for 1860 should be checked, as almost 11% of African Americans were enumerated as free in 1860, with about half of those living in the southern States. Estimates of the number of former slaves who used the surname of a former owner in 1870, vary widely and from region to region. If an African American ancestor with one of these surnames is found on the 1870 census, then making the link to finding that ancestor as a slave requires advanced research techniques involving all obtainable records of the holder.
MIGRATION OF FORMER SLAVES: According to U.S. Census data, the 1860 Prince George County population included 2,899 whites, 515 “free colored” and 4,997 slaves. By the 1870 census, the white population had decreased about 4% to 2,774, while the “colored” population had decreased over 8% to 5,046. (As a side note, by 1960, 100 years later, the County was listed as having 15,444 whites, over a five times increase, while the 1960 total of 4,713 “Negroes”was about 14% less than what the colored population had been 100 years before.) In comparing census data for different years, the transcriber was not aware of any relevant changes to County boundaries.
Where did the freed slaves go if they did not stay in the same County? Between 1860 and 1870, the Virginia colored population declined by about 36,000, to approximately 513,000, a 6.5% decrease. Two Virginia Counties that showed a significant increase in colored population between 1860 and 1870 were Henrico, with an increase of over 7,000, and Norfolk, with an increase of over 10,000. States that saw significant increases in colored population during that time, and were therefore possible places of relocation for colored persons from Prince George County, included the following: Georgia, up 80,000 (17%); Texas, up 70,000 (38%); Alabama, up 37,000 (8%); Florida, up 29,000 (46%); North Carolina, up 38,000 (8%); Ohio, up 26,000 (70%); Indiana, up 25,000 (127%); and Kansas up from 265 to 17,000 (6,400%).
SLAVEHOLDER LIST:
AVERY, John, 119 slaves, page 81
BIRCHETT, P., 51 slaves, page 73B
BIRCHETT, P. Senr. Decd., W. G. & Peter Birchett Exrs of, 27 slaves, page 73B
BIRCHETT, W. G., 34 slaves, page 80B
BLAND, J. B., 53 slaves, page 62
BLAND, J. T., 37 slaves, page 65B
BLAND, M. B., 39 slaves, page 62
BOWDEN, W. R., 28 slaves, page 78B
BROWNLEY, Mary, 21 slaves, page 59
BRYANT, A., 29 slaves, page 80
BUTTS, A. 37 slaves, page 74B
CAIN, Chas., 24 slaves, page 58B
COCKE, H. H., 78 slaves, page 62B
COCKE, H. H., 29 slaves, page 64
COCKE, Jas. B., 66 slaves, page 60B
COCKE, Martha, 42 slaves, page 51B
COCKE, N. C., 37 slaves, page 61
COLE, Wm., 48 slaves, page 60
DANIEL, T. H., 31 slaves, page 76B
DUPRY?, J. J. & 4 others, 40 slaves, page 59B
EPPES, D., R. G. Dunn Committee of, 22 slaves, page 74
EPPES, J. W., 43 slaves, page 82
FRIEND, C., 52 slaves, page 77B
GEE, D. M., 32 slaves, page 53B
GEE, Wm., 105 slaves, page 68
GURLEY, J. W., 52 slaves, page 71B
HAIR, O. P., 30 slaves, page 73
HARRISON, Geo. E. & 2 others, 255 slaves, page 75
HARRISON, H.?, 27 slaves, page 80
HARRISON, Sally, 31 slaves, page 53B
HARRISON, Wm. H., 23 slaves, page 53
HARRISON, Wm. B., 139 slaves, page 53B
HARWELL, A. Decd., Wm. Gee and J. W. Temple Exr of, 21 slaves, page 68B
HURT, B. T., 21 slaves, page 64
JORDAN, J. M., 22 slaves, page 65
JUDKINS, B. T., 22 slaves, page 56B
MARKS, E. A., 38 slaves, page 79B
MARKS, Peter C., 28 slaves, page 51
ORGAM?, Mary, 32 slaves, page 54B
OSBORN, W. M., 87 slaves, page 55
PETERSON, J. A. Snr., 35 slaves, page 66
PROCTOR, W. E., 26 slaves, page 58B
RANEY, A. H., 23 slaves, page 51B
RANEY, A. S., 21 slaves, page 59
RUFFIN, E. Jr., 95 slaves, page 52
RUFFIN, J. C., 22 slaves, page 79B
RUSSELL, M. E., 23 slaves, page 61B
SIMMONS, Wm__son?, 31 slaves, page 70
SMITH, Lucy J., 20 slaves, page 56
SMITH, S. R. & V. A., Wm__son? Smith Guard. for, 27 slaves, page 70
SMITH, S. T., 30 slaves, page 55B
SMITH, Thos., 31 slaves, page 67
TATUM, David, 62 slaves, page 67
TATUM, W. H., 22 slaves, page 68
TAYLOR, W. B., 21 slaves, page 72B
TEMPLE, F. Senr., 32 slaves, page 66
TEMPLE, J. W., 25 slaves, page 69B
TEMPLE, J. A., 23 slaves, page 65B
TEMPLE, M. G., 33 slaves, page 69
WELLS, W. E., 27 slaves, page 77B
WESTBROOK, W. B., 24 slaves, page 71
WILCOX, J. V., 27 slaves, page 71B
WILCOX, M. J., 91 slaves, page 77
WILLIAMS, M., 22 slaves, page 66B
WILLIAMS, R. H., 21 slaves, page 71
SURNAME MATCHES AMONG AFRICAN AMERICANS ON 1870 CENSUS:
(exact surname spellings only are reported, no spelling variations or soundex)
SURNAME, # in US, in State, in County, born in State, born and living in State, born in State and living in County)
AVERY, 377, 22, 0, 48, 22, 0
BIRCHETT, 16, 12, 0, 13, 12, 0
BLAND, 594, 221, 9, 296, 221, 9
BOWDEN, 232, 22, 0, 28, 22, 0
BROWNLEY, 6, 5, 0, 5, 5, 0
BRYANT, 2129, 111, 0, 243, 106, 0
BUTTS, 294, 60, 1, 85, 59, 1
CAIN, 445, 28, 0, 45, 25, 0
COCKE, 37, 9, 0, 13, 9, 0
COLE, 2004, 291, 6, 516, 284, 5
DANIEL, 1765, 153, 0, 258, 149, 0
DUPRY?, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
EPPES, 125, 69, 0, 74, 69, 0
FRIEND, 105, 43, 0, 52, 40, 0
GEE, 296, 82, 2, 116, 82, 2
GURLEY, 64, 2, 0, 5, 2, 0
HAIR, 56, 4, 0, 8, 4, 0
HARRISON, 3639, 371, 42, 693, 353, 42
HARWELL, 162, 5, 0, 16, 4, 0
HURT, 398, 86, 0, 121, 84, 0
JORDAN, 2359, 301, 0, 497, 281, 0
JUDKINS, 121, 14, 0, 22, 14, 0
MARKS, 255, 31, 2, 63, 30, 2
ORGAM?, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
OSBORN, 302, 18, 0, 49, 17, 0
PETERSON, 1101, 115, 4, 233, 113, 4
PROCTOR, 435, 22, 0, 56, 17, 0
RANEY, 116, 4, 0, 20, 4, 0
RUFFIN, 591, 158, 16, 238, 157, 16
RUSSELL, 1487, 147, 0, 273, 142, 0
SIMMONS, 2845, 187, 5, 343, 178, 5
SMITH, 29087, 3499, 25, 6339, 3398, 25
TATUM, 273, 29, 0, 54, 29, 0
TAYLOR, 11696, 1887, 32, 3149, 1849, 32
TEMPLE, 253, 73, 0, 100, 70, 0
WELLS, 1647, 221, 0, 389, 216, 0
WESTBROOK, 205, 8, 0, 24, 8, 0
WILCOX, 222, 2, 0, 16, 2, 0
WILLIAMS, 28865, 2184, 42, 4695, 2087, 42
You are the visitor to this page.