Thomas Berry was born about 1741, most likely before his parents had moved into Virginia. Indirect evidence suggests that this extended Berry clan of Scotch-Irish pioneers, after emigrating from Northern Ireland or Scotland at an unknown date, were probably living in central Pennsylvania, possibly Lancaster County, by the late 1730s or early 1740s, where a significant contingent of Scotch-Irish families had already settled. (Figure 29) Since Thomas Berry’s parents are known to have lived in Augusta County until the late 1760s or early 1770s, young Thomas’ boyhood home was probably the family farm on the upper reaches of Kennedy Mill Creek in the Borden Grant in Augusta County, Virginia. (Figure 10) He married Mary ? (Unknown Last Name), and, although the date of his marriage is not known with certainty, they appear to have tied the knot sometime in the four year period between 1763 (about the time he turned 21) and 1767 (when their first child was born). It seems logical to assume that it would be closer to the latter date, about a year before their first child was born, which approximates the date of their marriage sometime in 1766. The marriage more than likely took place in Augusta County, Virginia. During the late 1760s and early 1770s Thomas Berry spent time in what would eventually become Washington County, in the southwestern part of the sate, apparently completing the requirement for actual settlement in 1769. He eventually spent the rest of his life on land he had selected that year and maintained a persistent, though not necessarily consistent, presence in the area during the early 1770s.

     Over the approximately 38 years of their marriage, and actually, within a time span of twelve years, Thomas and Mary had eight children, all boys, and while there is little direct documentation for Thomas Berry during the early to mid 1770s, his life experiences can be approximated from the flow of well-documented historical events. In 1769 Thomas claimed squatter’s rights on a chunk of land located along 15 Mile Creek, a tributary of the South Fork of the Holston River and part of the Wolf Hills settlement located about six miles south of the modern day town of Abingdon, Virginia. At that time the area was part of Augusta County, Virginia. It then fell under the jurisdiction of Botetourt County, Virginia from 1770 through 1772, which corresponds to the time period the Shawnees temporarily expelled most of the settlers in southwestern Virginia. About the time they returned, the area was reorganized to become part of Fincastle County, and for the next four years, particularly during the time of the 1776 Cherokee uprising, his land remained in that county.  In late 1776, not long after Col. Christian’s punitive expedition against the Cherokee, the counties reorganized again, and Thomas Berry’s land became part of Washington County. (Figure 65) As soon as Washington County was formed Thomas Berry began appearing somewhat regularly in the county court records. When the Virginia land offices opened back up after the Revolutionary War, he purchased his 15 Mile Creek property, so, in all probability, this location is where he, his wife and five young sons lived through the entire decade of the 1770s and into the early 1780s. This was also a time of great threat to the frontier settlers living in the Holston, Clinch and Powell valleys due to Cherokee and Shawnee opposition to the expansion of European settlers into the area. It is inconceivable to think that Thomas Berry, or any of the other Berry families living in this area at this time, did not take up arms as part of the local militia. Although some of the evidence is sketchy, somewhat conflicting and confusing, it is quite clear that Thomas Berry served in the Fincastle and Washington County militias during this time, participating in military actions against the Cherokee, as well as the Kings Mountain Campaign against the British. He was also commissioned as a militia officer and was wounded in action by Cherokee.

     Beginning in 1782, and continuing to his death, Thomas Berry can be traced through Washington County tax records. This data set can be divided into a number of categories, mostly dealing with who paid the taxes, how much was paid and what items of personal property were taxed. Consequently, it yields a rich source of information. Changes for Thomas Berry within the various data categories can be tracked through a time span of 29 years, allowing inferences and analytical conclusions to be drawn about elements of Thomas Berry’s life that cannot be derived from any other sources. This data also presents a thorny interpretation problem. Multiple Thomas Berrys were listed in this data set, and accurately determining which individuals were represented by the individual entries is critical in order to effectively analyze the associated tax data and draw correct conclusions about the lives of the individuals they represent. Within the two Washington County tax districts, the county clerks had to be able to uniquely identify each individual for tax purposes, so they used discrete identifiers, such as Jr. or Sr., jockey, knobs, river and forks to differentiate same-named individuals. The Senior designation typically represented the oldest Thomas Berry within a specific tax district with multiple Thomas Berrys, while the junior designation generally referred to the youngest individual. The Jr. and Sr. designations, however, did not always define a father and son relationship, and, in some cases, referred to grandfather and grandson. Knobs, river and forks represented conspicuous geographic locations in the Holston River Valley near the home of a particular Thomas Berry, and the jockey designation, which was assigned by the tax district officials more than likely represents a unique hobby or past time of this Thomas Berry which was well known by the local population. The Thomas Berry of this report was designated either as Thomas Berry Jr. or jockey from 1782 through 1799, and his father was identified as Thomas Berry Sr. After his father’s death Thomas Berry Jr. became the oldest Thomas Berry and was then identified as Thomas Berry, Sr.

     Thomas Berry was also a slave owner, as documented by tax and court records, the latter primarily comprising his estate appraisal. The data clearly shows that Thomas Berry owned a small number of slaves. When taxes were first recorded in Washington County, Virginia in 1782, Thomas Berry was 40 years old and already a slave owner, so there is no telling when his slave-owning days actually began. He could easily have owned African slaves through the 1770s and first two years of the 1780s. This data also reveals a pattern of the periodic selling of individual slaves, the probable occurrence of an enslaved African family and the sale of that family to convert their value into a cash inheritance for his sons and wife. Thomas Berry seems to have been in the habit of buying and selling a small number of young African slaves on a somewhat regular basis, and the fact that this pattern happened repeatedly almost sounds like it represents a speculative money-making operation.

     Thomas Berry can also be identified, located and traced from the 1770s through the time of his death in southwestern Virginia via court records, real estate transactions, as well as militia and tax records. At some point he acquired property in central Tennessee, although he never lived there. All of the parcels that he purchased were originally North Carolina land grants based on military service, but only one of the tracts was originally awarded to Thomas Berry. All of the others were granted to other people, who then assigned (sold) their grant to Thomas Berry. North Carolina compensated its veterans with its western lands based on their term of service. Since he was awarded 429 acres, he would had to have served for just over 56 months, which amounts to just over two and a half years of North Carolina military service. The problem is, there doesn’t seem to have been that much time for him to have served that amount of time in the North Carolina Continental Line. The Revolutionary War began in 1776 and ended in 1783, and, given what appears to be a long-standing and continuous membership in the Washington County militia from 1776 through 1781, there seems to be very little time for him to have served in North Carolina’s military. Furthermore, from late 1781 through 1783, Thomas Berry appeared in Washington County court records, buying land, serving on juries and appraising estates, all, of which makes it appear that he was actually living in Washington County Virginia during this time period rather than serving in the North Carolina militia at some remote location far from his home. The only exception to military service was to serve as a surveyor, laying out those lands, or to the guards who protected them. On two occasions, once in 1777 and again in 1781, Washington County records document that Thomas Berry was a land surveyor. Although it is not clear when he actually performed these surveying duties for North Carolina, it seems highly likely that his original North Carolina land grant was based on his services as a surveyor, and not as a soldier. Unfortunately, the North Carolina grants do not specify which service was performed, and lumped them all into the same category.
 

     Thomas Berry remained married to Mary ? (Unknown Last Name) from about 1766 until about 1804, as documented by a number of Washington County records. After that date, however, they appear to have gotten a divorce and Thomas married a widow, Prudence Rowlett Dickinson, who had also been through a prior marriage. When Thomas wrote his will in April 1812 he made sure to note that Prudence would have the use of a slave, kept the personal property she brought into the marriage, and received income from the sale of livestock and crops from his estate. Apparently, she found another husband a few weeks after Thomas’ death.

     As was the usual custom after the death of a household head, by court order, Thomas Berry’s personal property was identified and all items were appraised in preparation for an estate sale. Analysis of the content of the estate appraisal reveals his personal property can be broadly divided into five categories: Crops & Farm Products, Household Items, Livestock, Slaves and Tool & Farm Items. What clearly stands out is the immense value of the enslaved human property, which constituted nearly two thirds of the value of the entire estate. Second in value were the animals, which comprise nearly a quarter of the estate’s value. Combined, the living property, both human and livestock, form an overwhelming 86% of the personal property wealth of Thomas Berry. The other categories, basically, the inanimate objects needed to conduct daily life on a farm, combined, make up only 14% of the estate, a rather pitiful amount in comparison to the value of his living property.

     Among the personal property items listed in Thomas Berry’s estate appraisal, a number of them are of particular interest since they cast a uniquely focused light on Thomas Berry’s lifestyle. Most of these items demonstrate that Thomas Berry, his family and his slaves lived rather labor-intensive lives. The bulk of them show that much of their time must have been devoted to operating a farm and livestock operation without the benefit of many modern labor-saving conveniences. Prominently differentiated from this labor-driven universe, however, are a small number of books, which, quite clearly, identify an intellectual side to Thomas Berry’s character that can be seen in few other source data points that document his life. It should not be forgotten that he was a land surveyor, so he definitely was able to master basic trigonometry. The fact that he owned a small number of books clearly indicates he was not illiterate and was, in fact, actively interested in intellectual pursuits.

     Thomas Berry wrote and signed his will on 25 April 1812, and by the 21st of May the document was presented in court to execute, so Thomas passed away sometime during the 26 day period between these two dates. Although the site of his grave is not known, it is a safe bet to assume that he was buried in Washington County, either at a local cemetery or on his farm.

     Thomas Berry’s activities in southwestern Virginia are sketched out in one of the legal depositions where he noted that he was part of a hunting party in the Turkey Cove area in 1770 or 1771. Thomas Berry testified that he was hunting for buffalo while one of the men in the party sought to claim some land in Powell Valley. Thomas Berry, apparently, was not looking for land, since he had already made his selection on 15 Mile Creek in what would eventually become Washington County. Instead, he was hunting, but the purpose of the hunting trip is unknown. He could have been hired as a hunter for another party, acquiring skins for the fur trade or providing meat for his family. About the only reasons to hunt for others would be to supply food for a garrisoned militia force or for a group of traveling land speculators. The string of defensive fortifications built by the Holston militia would not appear in the area for several more years, and there’s no indication that he was working for a group of land speculators, since the Loyal Land Company had legal claim to all of the land in the area. People who settled on land in this area were, essentially, squatters, so it doesn’t seem likely that an organized group of hired men, who would be requiring a food source, would be operating in the area marking territory. In addition, the era of the Long Hunters, those solitary or small groups of hunters who acquired animal skins in order to generate income, was near an end and the bulk of these men were most likely operating farther west in Kentucky and Tennessee where the population density was even less than in southwestern Virginia. Of these three explanations, then, supplying food for his family seems a most logical explanation, and, very indirectly, suggests that Thomas Berry was living in the area at that time.

     Following the eviction of the French from most of the North American continent following what’s known in America as the French and Indian War, the British king issued the Proclamation of 1763, which restricted English settlement to the river basins that drained into the Atlantic Ocean. The ban was widely ignored, and recognizing that westward expansion could only be slowed, not stopped, a follow-on treaty was negotiated in 1770, pushing the line significantly westward. Settlers immediately rushed into southwestern Virginia, and Thomas Berry appears to have arrived in the area right around this time. As noted above, Shawnee and to a lesser extent, Cherokee opposition temporarily pushed back most settlers from the area in 1771, but by 1772 most had returned. Shawnee resistance continued, culminating in the late 1774 Battle of Point Pleasant, the only sizeable conflict in what became known as Dunmore’s War. Thomas Berry does not appear on any of the Fincastle County militia lists from this battle, so, in all likelihood, he was not a participant, most likely remaining at home, protecting the settlements in the area from Indian attacks while the militia was deployed, although a Thomas Berry, presumably his father who lived nearby, supplied the militia troops with sundry goods.^{462,570,865,866,885}

     With the Shawnee temporarily out of the picture, the Cherokee became increasingly involved in the efforts to thwart the European advance, and it was the American Revolution that provided them with the impetus to execute their goals of territorial reoccupation. Through the early to mid 1770s, relations between the American colonies and Great Britain rapidly deteriorated to the point of open revolution. By the time war finally broke out, the British had instigated a strategy of using British and Loyalist troops to attack the rebels from the sea while simultaneously taking advantage of their already aggrieved Indian allies to pressure the American rebels from the frontier. Consequently, numerous British agents visited the western tribes with arms, supplies and cash, inciting them to take up arms against the English colonists. The Cherokee, being eager to regain their lost territories, readily agreed and became increasingly aggressive. This, of course, greatly alarmed the settlers in the Powell, Holston and Clinch valleys of Botetourt and later Fincastle counties, who responded by organizing into militia units.^{462,570,865,866}

     In July 1776, as open conflict between the American rebels and the British homeland erupted, the British, along with their Indian allies, developed a plan to eradicate settlers from these valleys once and for all. An assembled force of 700 warriors, predominantly Cherokee, but also including Shawnee, Delaware and Mohawk warriors, was split into two groups. The dissident Cherokee chief Dragging Canoe was to attack the Nolichucky and Watauga settlements with half of the warriors while Raven was to lead the rest up the Clinch and Holston valleys to break up those settlements. Getting word of the impending attacks, the southernmost settlements along the Nolichucky River were abandoned and the refugees fled northward to the protection of the only nearby fortified positions -- Eaton’s Fort near the Long Island of the Holston River and the fort on Watauga Creek (Watauga Fort). Finding the Nolichucky settlements abandoned, Dragging Canoe split his force again, sending Old Abram to lead an attack against the settlements on the Watauga Creek while he took the bulk of his force, nearly 200 warriors, to assault Eaton’s fort. (Figure 66) At this time the North Carolina settlements were governed by Virginia authority, so they looked to their neighbors in Fincastle County, Virginia for assistance. As the Nolichucky refugees poured into the two fortifications, word of the Indian onslaught was sent out to the nearby Virginia militia units at Thompson’s Fort, Edmiston’s Fort, Cocke’s Fort, Shelby’s Fort and the settlements near Wolf Creek. The next day, 20 July 1776, 170 members of the Virginia militia from in and around these locations quickly concentrated at Eaton’s Fort. Rather than wait for the inevitable defensive battle, or worse yet, sitting behind walls as the Cherokee looted their properties and killed stragglers, the militia army opted to go on the offensive and attack the approaching force. Two divisions marched toward Long Island, about seven miles away. Several miles short of their target a small group of Indians, loaded with plunder was encountered and attacked. As the Indians fled back to the nearby main Cherokee force, the militia, expecting a quick attack, fell back about a mile toward high ground. The counter attack came quickly as the main Cherokee force soon caught up with the settlers. Finding the settlers in apparent retreat, the Indians attacked, expecting an easy victory from an enemy that appeared to be in retreat already. The militia quickly formed a quarter mile long line of battle along the crest of a small ridge as the Cherokee attacked their center and left flank. The fighting soon devolved to bitter hand to hand combat, lasting from 30 to 45 minutes, but ending as quickly as it began with the rapid withdrawal of the Indian force. The militia suffered no losses and only two four minimally wounded men, while Indian losses were somewhat higher, with at least 13 known dead and many more wounded. Dragging Canoe was seriously wounded during the clash and soon withdrew his force from the field. Meanwhile, after an initial unsuccessful assault on Fort Watauga, Old Abram’s force settled into siege, but failed to overcome the fort’s defenses, and after two weeks, gave up. This battle of Long Island Flats, was the first clash of the Revolutionary War that took place west of the mountains and, especially coupled with the follow-up campaign, was considered to be an overwhelming victory for the settlers.^462,570,867

     The militia returned to Eaton’s fort immediately after the battle, but with Raven’s force wrecking havoc throughout the lower Holston and Clinch River valleys, the Virginians quickly headed back to defend their homes and families. The only safe zone in the vicinity was now Black’s Fort, situated where the present city of Abingdon, Virginia is now located. For the next few days, Raven’s warriors killed and scalped settlers, looted and burned their homes and scattered their livestock, as they made their way through the area, eventually reaching as far north as 7 Mile Ford. Refugees from the affected areas streamed into the fort and on the eve of the battle of Long Island Flats, at least 400 men, women and children had left their homes for the safety of the fort. The Cherokee were mostly an unorganized force, roving the countryside in small bands, and one such band that was busy burning and plundering homes in the Wolf Hills settlement about eight miles south of the fort was attacked by Virginia militia members that had ventured out from the fort. Eleven Indians were killed in the encounter and their scalps were brought back to the fort where they were attached to a tall pole at the gate of the fort.^462,570

     Eventually, after the Watauga siege was lifted, the Cherokee withdrew from the area, and the settlers quickly reoccupied the territory. In early October of 1776, Col. Christian, leading a force of 1,800 Virginia and North Carolina militia, launched a punitive raid against the Cherokee, coordinated with similar raids by the North and South Carolina militias. From October through December Col. Christian’s army marched southward into the heart of Cherokee territory, burning villages, destroying crops, capturing British supplies and killing livestock as a force of North Carolina militia and another force of South Carolinians, approached from farther south and to the east, doing the same in a giant pincer movement. All of the major Cherokee towns were destroyed in the process with obviously devastating effects due to the oncoming winter season. Another, much smaller punitive expedition was mounted in April 1777. The Cherokee sued for peace, which ended the expedition, and made additional territorial cessions that were formalized in a treaty with the North and South Carolinians in May 1777 and the Virginians in July 1777. In these agreements, the Cherokee gave up all of their claims to contested lands in the Nolichucky, Watauga, Holston and New River valleys in addition to other territorial cessions with North and South Carolina. Col. Christian’s casualties were very light, resulting in only one killed and several wounded.^{570,868,869,870}

     The development of the southwestern Virginia counties during the 1770s is also important in understanding this portion of Thomas Berry’s life journey. (Figure 65) Assuming that he lived on the same plot of land on 15 Mile Creek during the 1770s, a fairly safe assumption, his land, which he “settled” in 1769, would have originally been part of Augusta County, Virginia when his son John Berry was born. It then fell under the jurisdiction of Botetourt County, Virginia from 1770 through 1772, during the time when the Shawnees temporarily expelled all of the settlers in southwestern Virginia and when his next son, James Berry, was born. About the time they returned it became part of Fincastle County, and for the next four years, particularly during the time of the Cherokee uprising, his land remained in that county. He was still living there when his son George Berry was born in 1774. In late 1776, not long after Col. Christian’s punitive expedition against the Cherokee, the counties reorganized again, and Thomas Berry’s land became part of Washington County. As soon as Washington County was formed, Thomas Berry began appearing in the court records.⁵⁶

     While there is little direct documentation for Thomas Berry during the early to mid 1770s, his life experiences can be approximated from the flow of documented historical events, described above, that took place around him. From all available evidence, it is fairly clear that Thomas Berry was living in Fincastle County during this time period. In 1769 he claimed squatter’s rights on a chunk of land located along 15 Mile Creek, a tributary of the South Fork of the Holston River and part of the Wolf Hills settlement located about six miles south of the modern day town of Abingdon, Virginia. Due to a change in Virginia land laws in 1779, which will be discussed below, he eventually purchased the property in 1783, so, in all probability, this location is where he, his wife and five young sons lived through the entire decade of the 1770s. This approximate location fix places Thomas and Mary Berry and their five children, ranging in age from two through nine, right in the middle of the area that was subject to the roving bands of Raven’s Cherokee warriors. No doubt Thomas Berry and his family formed part of the mass of frightened masses of settlers seeking shelter in Black’s Fort. Furthermore, it is inconceivable to think that Thomas Berry, or any of the other Berry families living in this area under these conditions, did not take up arms against these mortal threats as part of the local militia. Although some of the evidence is somewhat conflicting and confusing, it is quite clear that Thomas Berry did, indeed, serve in the Fincastle and Washington County militias at this time, in the lead-up to these events, as well as in the Col. Christian’s raid on the Cherokee settlements several months later, in the Kings Mountain Campaign in the fall of 1780 and another punitive raid against dissident Cherokee in December of 1780. These events provide some insight into the dangerous conditions endured by the frontier settlers living in the Holston, Clinch and Powell valleys at this time, as well as the response of the settlers to these threats.

     When Dunmore’s War sparked up in 1774, Fincastle County drafted a number of the local men to serve in the campaign, while the rest remained behind to protect the settlements. Since Thomas Berry’s name does not appear on any of the militia lists from this event, which are quite complete, it is clear that Thomas Berry must have been among the men who remained behind. Two years later, at the time of the Cherokee Uprising of 1776, however, there is more direct evidence of Thomas Berry’s involvement. Washington County court records reveal that Thomas Berry was shot in the chest by Indians in the service of his country on 4 September 1776, which clearly indicates that he was serving in the Fincastle County militia at the time. Since the Cherokee raid occurred later in the same month, the shooting incident must have occurred during the hostilities that led up to the raid. It also noted that it took nearly a year for him to recover from the wound, so it must have been somewhat serious. Thomas Berry’s name appears on the list of local militiamen who served on Col. Christian’s punitive raid on the Cherokee in early October 1776, and the source also notes that he was wounded during the campaign. Whether this actually refers to the earlier incident or not is unclear, so either he was wounded once, in the lead-up to the Cherokee invasion or during Col. Christian’s campaign or both. Either way, during 1776 Thomas Berry served in the Fincastle Militia, since he was living in the area, and was wounded by enemy fire in an engagement during his term of service.
 

     The only documentation for Thomas Berry’s involvement in the Battle of Kings Mountain, which took place on 7 October 1780, is a court document indicating that he and several others, were being sued for their actions, or actions they allowed, specifically, plundering, most likely after the battle had taken place. This piece of evidence firmly documents that Thomas Berry was one of the Overmountain Men who responded to a call for Virginia and North Carolina militia from the settlements over the mountains to assault British forces marauding across the Carolina coastal plain. The only real question to resolve is which Thomas Berry does this represent, and Washington County tax records pretty well solve that issue. From 1782 through 1786 only two Thomas Berrys appear in Washington County Personal Property tax records, Thomas Berry Sr. and his son, Thomas Berry Jr. In 1780, the elder Thomas Berry was 62 years old, while his son was only 38. Given his relative youthfulness, his father’s somewhat advanced age, as well as the fact that the younger Thomas Berry was already deeply involved in the local militia, it seems much more likely that the Thomas Berry who participated in the Kings Mountain engagement was Thomas Berry, Jr. Despite the fact that, other than this brief court record, no other primary source can be found that could verify Thomas Berry’s involvement in this event, a glimpse into what Thomas Berry, Jr. experienced during this campaign can be obtained by examining the well documented activities of the OverMountain Men in the days leading up to the battle, the battle itself, and their return to the settlements across the mountains afterwards. Consequently, a portion of Thomas Berry’s life can be viewed through the lens of the generalized experience of the entire group, as illustrated in the following narrative:
 

     Flush with success from their guerilla campaign against British troops east of the mountains, North Carolina militia leaders requested assistance from the Washington County Virginia militia for an offensive aimed to eliminate the continuing threat from the east. Col. William Campbell, the Washington County militia commander, at first was willing only to contribute half of his available troops, amounting to 200 men who had just returned from east of the mountains in successful service against North Carolina Loyalists. On 25 September 1780 this group of militia soldiers arrived at Sycamore Shoals on Watauga River, to concentrate with the North Carolina militia already gathering there for the upcoming campaign. The rest of the Washington County militia, another 200 men, were to remain behind to defend against potential Cherokee attacks. After further consultations, however, it was determined that the expeditionary force was not sufficient, so the rest of the Washington County militia, another 200 troops, was committed to the cause. It was most likely from this group that the bulk of the Berry men who participated in the campaign, including Thomas Berry, were drawn.^{441,462,570,872}

     These citizen soldiers did not have the orderly look of a typical army. Being grizzled veterans of a dangerous pioneer life positioned at the edge of civilization, they were dressed in the attire of the woodsmen and farmers that they were - fur skin caps and woolen clothes manufactured by their wives and daughters. In addition, they brought only minimal baggage – a water cup, blanket and small satchel of provisions, primarily consisting of parched corn meal mixed with maple sugar. An observer described their appearance as follows:^441,462,570

Their fringed and tassled hunting-shirts were girded in by bead-worked belts, and the trappings of their horses were stained red and yellow. On their heads they wore caps of coon-skin or mink-skin, with the tails hanging down, or else felt hats, in each of which was thrust a buck’s tail or a sprig of evergreen. Every man carried a small bore rifle, a tomahawk and a scalping knife. A very few of the officers had swords, and there was not a bayonet nor a tent in the army.
 

Every member of this little army was equipped with a Deckard rifle, and they were not only splendid horsemen but excellent marksmen; and the warfare that they had been carrying on with the Indians they were accustomed to every kind of danger and hardship.

     On 26 September 1780, with the last minute arrival of the remaining Washington County troops, the small army, organized into companies, then mounted their horses, and headed up into the forested mountains on a long and arduous march. A herd of cattle was driven behind them for additional food. From Sycamore Shoals they proceeded up Gap Creek, across the divide to the Little Doe River valley, then up that valley and across a low divide to the Big Doe River, a clear, fast-slowing mountain stream. Their first night’s camp was at a place called Shelving Rock, a distance of about 20 miles from their starting point that day. At this place, many of the horses were shod by a blacksmith who lived nearby. Unbeknownst to the Overmountain Men, COL. Ferguson, at this time, was in Gilbert Town, North Carolina. (Figure 69)^{441,462,871,872,874}

     Next morning, 27 September, they decided to eliminate the cattle herd which had been slowing them down, so they slaughtered and cooked what they needed and sent the rest back, which delayed their march some. Eventually, they returned to their mission, continuing upstream along a well known path known as Bright’s Trace, which made a relatively easy ascent to a gap between the snow-covered Yellow and Roan Mountains. At the top of the pass they encountered an open area covered by ankle-deep snow where they took lunch and conducted military drills. The units fired off a volley with their rifles and noted the muted explosions in the thin mountain air. During roll call it was discovered that two men with known Loyalist tendencies had deserted one of the North Carolina units, and were probably on their way to Ferguson with news of the approaching army. As a result, the route of march was changed to a more northerly approach in order to throw off anyone looking for them on the originally planned trail. The group then proceeded a few miles downhill for their second night’s camp – this time near the mouth of Brights Branch as it emptied into Roaring Creek. The Overmountain Men were still unaware of Ferguson’s location, who, on this day, had left Gilbert Town in pursuit of a Georgia militia unit under the command of a Col. Clarke. He had just laid siege to a British garrison at Augusta, Georgia, located about 50 miles south of the garrison at Ninety Six, which contained arms and supplies for the Cherokee to be used in their attacks on the Watauga and Nolichucky settlements. After the battle Clarke headed north toward the mountains. Ferguson hoped to intercept Clarke before his force melted into the countryside, and was completely unaware of the new rebel force in pursuit of him (Figure 70).^{441,462,871,872}

     The next day, 28 September, the Overmountain Men descended the valley of Roaring Creek to the North Toe River, passing Bright’s place along the way. As they headed downhill the weather became more summer-like and enjoyable. After encountering some rough terrain, they eventually ended up at the mouth of Grassy Creek, near the present day town of Spruce Pine, North Carolina, where they camped for the night. Col. Ferguson at this time was still in pursuit of Col. Clarke, and had crossed Mountain Creek, around ten miles southwest of Gilbert Town. (Figure 71)^{441,462,871,872}

     The next morning, Friday, the 29th of September, the march took the Overmountain Men up Grassy Creek to its head, a place called Gillespie’s Gap, located along the crest of the Blue Ridge Mountains. Fearing a British ambush, they decided to divide their forces at this point. Col. Campbell led his Washington County militia south about seven miles to a place called Turkey Cove, located near the North Fork of the Catwaba, where they bedded down for the evening. The North Carolina troops headed easterly down another valley about the same distance to a place called North Cove, near the confluence of Honeycutt Creek and the North Fork of the Catawba River, where they camped for the night. Each group had traveled about 15 miles that day. Intelligence reports indicated that additional militia forces from North and South Carolina were converging on the area and that Col. Ferguson was currently encamped about 30 miles away at Gilbert Town, unaware of the approaching military forces. All of this news greatly encouraged the overmountain men. Unfortunately it was only partially true. Col. Ferguson was not yet aware of their presence in the country, but he was no longer in Gilbert Town. This information suggests that the source of the intelligence had last been in Gilbert Town on or before the 26th of September. (Figure 72)^{441,462,871,872}

     When the next day dawned, Saturday the 30th, the North Carolina Overmountain units encamped at North Cove headed eastward, across the North Fork of the Catawba River, then over Linville Mountain and down Paddy Creek to the Catawba River, where they reunited with the Washington County militia who had a longer haul from their starting point at Turkey Cove, and took a different route. They marched down the North Fork of the Catawba until it joined the main stream, then headed downstream to the mouth of Paddy Creek. The latter group had traveled 31 miles that day while the North Carolina troops had to cover 23 miles. After reuniting, the combined force moved downstream a few miles to Quaker Meadows, located near the present city of Morganton, North Carolina. This was the home of Col. McDowell, a North Carolina militia leader, and it was on his grounds that they united with other North Carolina militia troops from the area, led by Col. Cleveland, which boosted their force by 350 men. On 30 September, two days after they had left the camp of the Overmountain Men, the two North Carolina deserters caught up with Ferguson and relayed the news of the approaching rebels. At the time, Ferguson had furloughed many of his Loyalist allies, so he was undermanned, and being located about halfway between Charlotte, North Carolina, where General Cornwallis was located, and the garrison at Ninety Six in South Carolina, so he was some distance from immediate help. Consequently, he sent urgent messages to the Ninety Six garrison and to Cornwallis, requesting reinforcements and informed Cornwallis that he was headed that way. Suspecting that the Overmountain men were in the vicinity, he then feinted a withdrawal toward the garrison at Ninety Six in order to draw in the approaching rebel forces in the wrong direction, as well as to continue his pursuit of Col. Clarke and give his Loyalist forces time to return. (Figure 73)^{441,462,871,872}

     The next day, 1 October 1780, presented the Overmountain Men with continued good weather, and the united force marched southwestward skirting the base of the South Mountains along a good road, which allowed them to make better time. They passed Pilot Mountain, a landmark for travelers in the area that could be seen for miles, then continued on until a thunderstorm struck later in the afternoon. The storm caused them to call a halt to the march for the day along the headwaters of Cane Creek and to make camp after marching 18 miles. Meanwhile, Col. Ferguson, now somewhat alarmed, as well as reluctant to give up the chase of Col. Clarke, began a slow march in the general direction of Charlotte. He made it as far as Denard Ford’s on the Broad River, located about five miles southwest of Gilbert Town. (Figure 74)^{441,462,871,872}

     The next day, 2 October, proved to be rainy, so the Overmountain army remained in camp. Meanwhile, Col. Ferguson was located south of Gilbert Town on the Broad River and was still reluctant to give up the chase, eager for the return of his furloughed troops and for reinforcements from Cornwallis. As yet he did not know the location of the approaching Overmountain force, but he must have thought they were within striking distance for his forces crossed over to the north side of the Broad River and remained on full alert that night. The fact that he crossed over to the north side of the river to form his defensive line indicated that he suspected the attack to come from the south, which was the direction of approach reported by the two North Carolina deserters. A position with the river in the rear would have been militarily indefensible. In all likelihood, the rain affected his movements that day, as well.^{441,462,871,872}

     On the 3rd of October, the Overmountain Men were grumbling, being unaccustomed to military discipline and long marches. That, plus the fact that they were only about 16 miles from Gilbert Town, where Ferguson’s location was last reported, and that the Overmountain force was composed of elements from different states, the corps commanders determined that a single commander was needed. After much discussion, Col. William Campbell, the only colonel from Virginia, was selected. Sensing that the pivotal encounter that they sought was now at hand, and that it would probably be taking place in the vicinity of Gilbert Town, all of the men were called to form a circle and Col. Cleveland, one of the North Carolina commanders, made the following speech to stir up the men.⁴⁴¹

Now, my brave fellows, I have come to tell you the news. The enemy is at hand, and we must up and at them. Now is the time for every man of you to do his country a priceless service – such as shall lead your children to exult in the fact that their fathers were the conquerors of Ferguson. When the pinch comes, I shall be with you. But if any of you shrink from sharing in the battle and the glory, you can now have the opportunity of backing out, and leaving; and you shall have a few minutes to considering the matter.

     After a few minutes, Col. Shelby, another overmountain North Carolina colonel said:⁴⁴¹

You have all been informed of the offer, you who desire to decline it, will, when the word is given, march three steps to the rear, and stand, prior to which a few more minutes will be granted you for consideration.

     When the word was given not a man took the three steps back, and immediately a round of applause arose from the gathered citizen soldiers. Being quite pleased by this, Col. Shelby again took center stage for some final directions:⁴⁴¹

I am heartily glad to see you to a man resolve to meet and fight your country’s foes. When we encounter the enemy, don’t wait for the word of command. Let each one of you be your own officer, and do the very best you can, taking every care you can of yourselves, and availing yourselves of every advantage that chance may throw in your way. If in the woods, shelter yourselves, and give them Indian play; advance from tree to tree, pressing the enemy and killing and disabling all you can. Your officers will shrink from no danger – they will be constantly with you, and the moment the enemy give way, be on the alert, and strictly obey orders.

Fresh prime your guns and every man go into battle firmly resolving to fight till he dies.

     Ferguson’s troops, consisting of 100 British regulars and around 1,100 Loyalists, had absolutely no idea that their enemy was now upon them. As they arrived at the mountain, they split into two groups and filed around the flanks of the mountain to completely surround Ferguson. (Figure 79) The Virginia militia units were placed along the southwestern flank. Since they had the longest circuit to make, when the center element of the rebel militia force was in place, the plan was that they would initiate the attack by firing their rifles and screaming a frontier war whoop in the manner of the Indians they had so often battled. Before they were in place, however, elements of the left flank were discovered and fired upon by Ferguson’s troops. At that point Col. Campbell yelled as loud as he could:^441,462,871

Here they are my brave boys; shout like hell, and fight like devils!

     Upon hearing this, the woods erupted in deafening fire and yelling. The part of the mountain where the Washington County militia was assigned was the steepest, rockiest and roughest part of the ridge, which greatly slowed their progress. They continued upward, however, firing and moving from tree to tree until they reached the top, where they were able to fire long shots along the flat, treeless summit. It was here that Ferguson’s main body of troops were located, so he quickly directed a fixed bayonet charge against this threat with deadly results. Soon, the Virginians broke their line and retreated down the mountainside, running down to the valley and up the next hill, being hotly pursued by the blade-wielding British soldiers. Before they reached the bottom, however, the British turned and headed back uphill. The Washington County men were then rallied by their officers and returned to the fight, chasing the British back up the hill until they had regained the summit in desperate hand to hand combat. Immediately after the Virginians were pushed off the mountain, Ferguson directed his force to the North Carolinians on the opposite side of the mountain, who were also forced to retreat under fire, firing as they pulled back. When they reached the bottom of the hill, like the Virginians, they too began fighting their way back up. Both flanks soon found themselves back on top of the mountain, at the edges of the summit, pouring deadly fire into the British lines, which presented easy targets for the riflemen. The battle soon engulfed the entire top of the mountain with deafening rifle fire combined with the flash of firing barrels and choking powder smoke. During the course of the battle the Washington County militia, as well as the North Carolinians on the other side of the hill experienced three bayonet assaults that drove them back down the hill, only to fight their way back up again. As soon as the British charges ended, the patriots returned to firing from behind trees and rocks and chased the British back up to the top. The steady losses, repeated ineffective charges, combined with the fact that they were running low on ammunition began to take a toll on Ferguson’s troops, who began to yield ground, some of them waving white flags. Ferguson’s force was now isolated into two groups, one at the northern end of the mountain at Ferguson’s command post and the other at the southern end, and all attempts at mutual support ended in failure. Sensing the inevitable, Ferguson’s second in command advised surrendering to end the slaughter. Ferguson refused, and, to avoid capture, made a desperate, last minute attempt to break out with a select group of men. Seeing this, the mountain men quickly cut them down with accurate rifle fire. Very shortly thereafter, scattered soldiers began raising white handkercheifs and were picked off, the Overmountain Men, giving what they referred to as “Tartleton’s Quarter”. Col. Tarleton, in battles with American forces earlier in the year, had ordered his men to continue shooting after white flags were raised, so the slaughter continued for some time until the men were brought under control. After just over an hour of intense combat and twelve days of cross country chase, the firing finally ceased and Col. Patrick Ferguson, along with his entire command, was defeated.^441,874

     On the return trip to the overmountain settlements, the victorious militia was burdened by their wounded, as well as a large number of prisoners, the latter, of which were not treated well. In addition, many militia members split off into separate groups and plundered the homes of Loyalists as they proceeded homeward. It became enough of a problem that Col. Campbell felt the need to issue the following general order:⁴⁴¹

It is with anxiety that I hear the complaints of the inhabitants on account of the plundering parties who issue out of the camp, and indiscriminately rob both Whig and Tory, leaving our friends, I believe, in a worse situation than the enemy would have done.

exert themselves in suppressing this abominable practice, degrading to the name of soldiers.

     It is of some interest to note that two years later Thomas Berry, along with several other Washington County residents of the Wolf Hills settlement (John Berry, Samuel McChesney, McCauley, McFerren and James Gilliland) were sued in Washington County court for plunder that occurred during the Kings Mountain Campaign. This lawsuit not only documents their participation as members of the Overmountain Men who pursued and defeated Col. Ferguson, but it also appears to indicate their involvement in some of the post battle looting and plundering of Tory (Loyalist) and Whig (Patriot) homes on the return trip. James Gilliland was a next door neighbor of Thomas’ cousin John Berry, and William McFerrin and Samuel McChesney were next door neighbors in the same area. Another court record notes that the plundering, at least in the case of John Berry, appears to have consisted of the acquisition of a hog by an element of the Washington County militia under his leadership. A further closeness of these men is indicated by the fact that three of John Berry’s children married children of John Gilliland and William McFerrin. In addition, Samuel McChesney was married to Susannah Berry, Thomas Berry’s half sister. The Washington County militia suffered the highest casualties in the battle, so it is not a great surprise that some of these men are listed, who lost their neighbors, friends and relatives, were among the revenge-seeking plunderers.¹⁰⁰

     Another bit of documentary evidence of Thomas Berry’s militia service, and, indirectly, some of his life experiences, comes from William Alexander’s 1832 application for a federal pension based on his service during the Revolutionary War. He declared that in early December of 1780, while living in Washington County, he had been drafted into the Washington County Militia to serve on a campaign against the Cherokee, and among the officers leading the expedition he identified Ensign Thomas Berry. William Alexander describes marching to a ford on the Holston where they waited several days for supplies. From there, they marched down to the French Broad River where they were reinforced by troops led by Col. Sevier, fresh from an engagement with the Cherokee. The combined contingent continued marching southward to the Hiawassee River, and crossed the Little Tennessee River. As they were crossing the rivers they often received incoming fire from Indians, most likely from the dissident Chickamauga Cherokee, who had left the main tribal group and moved to the vicinity of present day Chattanooga. They destroyed numerous Indian towns, took a few prisoners, then marched back to an Indian town, waited for supplies, then returned to Washington County.⁵³⁹

     In the late fall of 1780, Thomas Berry was awarded a commission to the rank of Ensign in the Washington County Militia by the governor of Virginia. Ensign is the lowest commissionable officer rank, and officers serving in such a status would do so until they resigned, were replaced or promoted. Undoubtedly, it represents recognition and compensation for significant military service during the Shawnee and Cherokee Uprisings, the subsequent punitive campaigns, as well as his participation in the Kings Mountain battle. It also indicates that he had been enrolled in the militia for some time, and had served, at least for the most part, honorably. While the war ended in 1781, no further documentation of Thomas Berry’s militia service has been found after his late 1780 promotion and commission.¹⁰⁶⁹

          To deal with the flood of settlers streaming into the Virginia frontier territories and squatting on any lands of their choosing, the Virginia General Assembly in Williamsburg, the colonial capital of Virginia, developed a land patenting process that sanctioned and secured legitimate land ownership for these risk takers. The Virginia Land Law, Part A, entitled “An Act for adjusting and settling the titles of claimers to unpatented lands under the present and former government, previous to the establishment of the commonwealth’s land office” was approved by the Virginia General Assembly in May 1779. The law was passed, ostensibly, to solve land disputes and generate funds to discharge the public debt, as well as to establish rules and guidelines for determining land ownership. As shown below, it defined the circumstances under which the land ownership issue developed, the time and geographic constraints defining where and when this settlement had to have occurred, and how much land could be claimed.¹⁰⁷⁰

And whereas great numbers of people have settled in the country upon the western waters, upon waste and unappropriated lands, for which they have been hitherto prevented from suing out patents or obtaining legal titles by the king of Great Britain’s proclamations or instructions to his governors, or by the late change of government, and the present war having delayed until now, the opening of a land office, and the establishment of any certain terms for granting lands, and it is just that those settling under such circumstances should have some reasonable allowance for the charge and risk they have incurred, and that the property so acquired should be secured to them: be it therefore enacted, that all persons who, at any time before the first day of January, in the year one thousand seven hundred and seventy eight, have really and bona fide settled themselves or their families, or at his, her, or their charge, have settled others upon any waste or unappropriated lands on the said western waters, to which no other person hath any legal right or claim, shall be allowed for every family so settled, four hundred acres of land, or such smaller quantity as the party chooses, to include such settlement.

     The law also loosely defined what qualified as settlement:¹⁰⁷⁰

And to prevent doubts concerning settlements, it is hereby declared, that no family shall be entitled to the allowance granted to settlers by this act, unless they have made a crop of corn in that country, or resided there at least one year since the time of their settlement. All persons who, since the said first day of January, in the year one thousand seven hundred and seventy eight, have actually settled on any waste or unappropriated lands on the said western waters, to which no other person hath a just or legal right or claim, shall be entitled to the preemption of any quantity of land, not exceeding four hundred acres, to include such settlement at the state price to other purchasers. And all those who, before the said first day of January, in the year one thousand seven hundred and seventy eight, had marked out or chosen for themselves, any waste or unappropriated lands, and built any house or hut, or made other improvements thereon, shall also be entitled to the preemption upon the like terms, of any quantity of land, to include such improvements, not exceeding one thousand acres, and to which no other person hath any legal right or claim; but no person shall have the right of preemption for more than one such improvement; provided they respectively demand and prove their right to such preemption, before the commissioners for the county, to be appointed by virtue of this act within eight months, pay the consideration money produce the auditor’s certificate for the treasurer’s receipt for the same, take out their warrants from the register of the land office within ten months, and enter the same with the surveyor of the county, within twelve months next after the end of this present session of assembly; and thereafter duly comply with the rules and regulations of the land office.

     To summarize, anyone who had settled themselves or their families on unclaimed lands lying on the western waters, rivers that did not drain into the Atlantic Ocean, prior to 1 January 1778, AND who had planted a corn crop OR lived on the settlement site for at least a year (before 1778), qualified for a preemption up to 400 acres of land in and around the actual settlement site. The price of the land was not to exceed the going state price. Furthermore, if unclaimed land had been marked or selected AND either a hut or cabin had been built OR some other unspecified improvement had been made prior to that date, the settler was entitled to purchase an additional 1,000 acres. Additional required paperwork involved presenting settlement documentation to the county land commissioners and paying for the certificate which was then issued by the county land commissioners, filing a land warrant at the land register’s office within 10 months of the end of the 1779 legislative session and submitting the warrant to a surveyor within a year of the end of the same session.
 

     The paper trail for Thomas Berry’s property acquisition consists of a certified surveyor’s record issued on 10 Aug. 1781 and a land patent issued by the Land Office several years later on 20 June 1785 for a 374 acre tract of land (just under the 400 acre maximum) lying on the waters of 15 Mile Creek, a tributary of the South Fork of the Holston River. The Holston and French Broad Rivers merge to form the Tennessee River, which ultimately drains into the Gulf of Mexico via the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers, so it is definitely a western river. Apparently, Thomas Berry had presented sufficient evidence to the Washington and Montgomery District Commissioners to show that, beginning in 1769, he had either planted a corn crop or had lived on the property for at least year sometime in the nine-year period between 1769 and 1 January 1778. Upon their approval of his evidence he then paid a fee of 2£ sterling and was issued a Certificate in Right of Settlement by the commissioners in compliance with the act passed by Virginia’s General Assembly in May 1779. The price he paid for the land, if indeed he paid anything, was not defined in any of these records.

     Once the Washington County government was organized, the court began holding regular sessions, and Thomas Berry first appears in these records in the spring of 1777 where his specific livestock markings were officially noted in the records. The crops and slits in the ears of cattle and hogs served as the equivalent of a brand widely used by cattle ranchers today, marking the ownership of these animals. Apparently, these markings were officially recognized, approved and sanctioned by the county government. This record also clearly shows that Thomas Berry was living on the land by at least late April 1777, and probably had been there for some time, probably several years, prior to that. This record also demonstrates that he owned livestock, most likely for home consumption. In all likelihood he was also a farmer, but these records don’t speak to that part of his life. About a month later, in late May of 1777, Thomas Berry, along with several other local men, William Montgomery, William McGahey, Adam Kerr and James Doran, were ordered to appraise the estate of a neighbor Michael Montgomery, no doubt a relative of William Montgomery. William McGahey is probably the same William McGahee/McGaughey who, according to an 1803 deposition by Thomas Berry in a law suit, accompanied Thomas Berry on a hunting trip to the Powell Valley in 1770 or 1771. This is an interesting entry since about six years later, in May of 1782, the court records identified Thomas Berry and Adam Kerr, along with several new people, John Berry and Alexander Doran, and leaving out William Montgomery and William McGahey, in an appraisal of the same estate. What seems likely in this case is that the estate of Michael Montgomery was caught up in a dispute over the final distribution, and the case was finally settled in 1782, whereupon the appraisal was allowed to go forward.

     In late August of 1777 there began a series of court proceedings in which Thomas Berry was ordered by the court to view lands in the vicinity of their property where the county planned to construct a road from the court house of present day Abingdon through the Great Knobs to a location near Phillips Mill on the road leading to the Watauga settlements. A month later their report had been submitted, indicating that a road along that route was possible, so the court ordered road construction activities. In the same record Thomas Berry was ordered to survey that section of the road, and a list of the taxable landowners along the way was to be generated by James Montgomery. These landowners would provide the labor force for the road construction, and were required to eventually be responsible for the maintenance of this section of the road. From this entry it can be seen that, in addition to his farming occupation, he also had another skill – that of land surveyor. No doubt he generated some income from the county to compensate for his surveying duties. Apparently there was some bad blood between Thomas Berry and James Montgomery, the man who was responsible for the tithable list along the road construction route, since the latter reported to the court in the May 1781 not only that Thomas Berry ran an illegal tippling house, an unlicensed liquor establishment, but he was also negligent in his surveying duties. In the same court entry, though, Thomas Berry, Adam Kerr, and Josiah Gamble, the same group of three road reviewers from four years earlier, were ordered to view a road segment in the vicinity of the growing town of Abingdon. The reason that Thomas Berry, apparently, had neglected his duties is not addressed in these records, but the tippling house certainly could have kept him busy. As will be shown, he could also have been busy with surveying duties in other places.¹⁰⁷¹

     From the spring of 1778 through the spring of 1784 a Thomas Berry appeared in Washington County records, participating on several juries, serving as a witness to the last will and testament of a neighbor, Benjamin Gray, and appraising the estate of several other neighbors, Robert Lowry and Thomas Hill. Since this individual is not identified as Thomas Berry Jr., whereas most other county court records from this time clearly identify him with the Junior moniker, it seems likely that these records could actually represent the activities of his father, Thomas Berry Sr. During this time period three more sons were born to Thomas and Mary Berry. Robert Berry was born about 1777, David Berry was born about 1779 and Basil, their last child, came into the world sometime in 1781. Since Thomas and Mary Berry were living in Washington County at this time, their place of birth can de definitively stated.

     Thomas Berry continued to appear sporadically in Washington County records until 1800. In 1786 he served as a witness for the will of Samuel Henry who had married Elizabeth Berry, a cousin who lived very close to Thomas Berry’s homestead (Figure 22). When James Philips, another neighbor (Figure 22), passed away in 1796, at least one underage child was “orphaned”, so Thomas Berry served as a guardian for the child. The elder Thomas Berry, Thomas’ father, passed away in 1799, so Thomas was identified in the will and the subsequent probate court proceedings. In 1799 Thomas sold a small chunk of his land to an adjacent neighbor, James Wilson (Figure 22) and in 1800 Thomas discharged Mary Philips from a bond requirement. She was most likely related to Thomas’ neighbor, James Philips, who had died a few years earlier.

      In 1782, immediately after the end of the Revolutionary War, Washington County initiated the collection of taxes. In that year Thomas Berry Jr. was about 40 years old, and owned some taxable livestock (horses and cattle). Since a previous Washington County record indicated that he also owned a number of pigs, he was clearly running a farm operation. He also owned one slave, most likely of African origin. At this time this Berry family consisted of Thomas and Mary and eight young boys, ranging in age from one to 15. The Washington County tax records provide a great deal of detailed information on Thomas Berry’s life, but there are some confusing elements of the data that need to be understood before an accurate analysis can be conducted.

     From 1782 through 1800 there were multiple individuals named Thomas Berry appearing in the Washington County tax records. Table XLII shows how each Thomas Berry was identified within this data set through this time period. Within the two Washington County tax districts, the county clerks had to be able to uniquely identify each individual for tax purposes, so they used discrete identifiers, such as Jr. or Sr., jockey, knobs, river and forks. The Senior designation represented the oldest Thomas Berry within a specific tax district with multiple Thomas Berrys, while the junior designation generally referred to the youngest individual. As will be seen, the Jr. and Sr. designations did not always define a father and son relationship, and, in some cases, it referred to grandfather and grandson. Knobs, river and forks represented conspicuous geographic locations in the Holston River Valley near the home of a particular Thomas Berry. The knobs Thomas Berry probably lived near a line of sharp, steep hills within the county often referred to as the knobs as shown in the following tract written on 4 December 1859 by John Berry McFerrin, a grandson of another Berry family living in the same area.⁸⁵⁴

Monday morning, being furnished with an excellent horse, and accompanied by Dr. Heikell and Brother Wexler, we took a direction south of Abingdon, through what is technically called “the Knobs”. These are very singular elevations. They rise abruptly to a considerable height, and are covered with timber. You soon pass through these, and enter the valley of the “South Fork of Holston river.”

     The other geographic identifiers, forks and river, most likely refer to the Thomas Berry who lived conspicuously close to a major river fork. In this area the Middle Fork of the Holston River empties into the South Fork not far from several Berry properties in the Wolf Creek settlement area, but it could also refer to the location of a minor tributary. Jockey may refer to a well-known occupation or past time of one of them. When there was only one individual with that name within a tax district he was merely referred to as Thomas Berry, since there was no need to differentiate him.

     Between 1782 and 1786 the Washington County clerks only had to differentiate between two Thomas Berry’s, father (1718 - 1799) and the son (1742 – 1812), and they generally designated them either as Thomas Berry Sr. or Thomas Berry Jr. In 1787 there were four individuals named Thomas Berry in the same tax district for the clerks to deal with, so, from this year until 1799, they assigned specific identifiers to each man, although one of these Thomas Berry’s only appeared in the tax records for one year. From 1788 until the death of his father in 1799, Thomas Berry, son of Thomas Berry Sr. and previously referred to as Thomas Berry Jr., was shown in the records as Thomas Berry (jockey), while his father continued to be identified as Thomas Berry Sr. The change in identifiers became necessary since another Thomas Berry, a grandson of the original Thomas Berry Sr., came of taxable age in 1787, and, since he was the youngest Thomas Berry in the bunch, he became the new Thomas Berry Jr. From 1791 through 1794, this new Thomas Berry Jr. was also referred to as Thomas Berry (knobs), which clearly meant to show that he lived near the prominent Washington County topographic feature known as “The Knobs”. In 1795 the knobs identifier was dropped, and he was again called Thomas Berry Jr. By 1797, however, this Thomas Berry was gone, having moved to Davidson County, Tennessee. For the next three years, from 1797 through 1799, the original Thomas Berry Jr., who had been re-identified as jockey when the younger Thomas Berry became old enough to tax, was again called Thomas Berry Jr., but the jockey identifier was kept, possibly in an attempt to avoid even more confusion. Upon the death of his father, Thomas Berry (jockey), the original Thomas Berry Jr., became the most senior Thomas Berry in the Washington County records and was, from then on, was identified by the county clerks as Thomas Berry Sr.¹⁰⁷²

     In 1787, another Thomas Berry in one of the tax districts was identified as “Thomas Berry Capt.” This man was the son of Francis Berry Sr., who lived near Thomas Berry Jr. (Figure 22), and who married Jane Wallace in 1786. This is the only year that Captain Thomas Berry appears on the Washington County tax lists, since he moved westward after that year, and while there is no documentation that he was actually promoted to the rank of captain, it is certainly clear that this identification was used to distinguish him from the other Thomas Berrys in the same tax district.⁴⁹¹

     Also first appearing on the county tax rolls in 1787 was Thomas Berry, son of James Berry/Elizabeth McCutchen. James Berry was another son of Thomas Berry Sr. (1718 – 1799) and a brother of Thomas Berry Jr. (jockey). He, as well as his son named Thomas Berry, lived in a separate tax district from the other Berry family members, at least until 1790. Since there was no there other Thomas Berry in that district, the clerks did not need to distinguish this Thomas Berry from any other same-named individual and he was simply identified as Thomas Berry in 1787 and 1788. There is no data for that tax district in 1789, but since there is no change in the identifiers for the other two Thomas Berrys, it is assumed that the data for the second tax district is missing from the 1789 records. By 1790 these two tax districts were merged, so a unique discriminator was now needed for the Thomas Berry son of James Berry. Rather than establishing a new Thomas Berry Jr., the clerks opted to identify this Thomas Berry by his geographic location. Since he must have lived near a major river fork, he was referred to either as Thomas Berry (river) or Thomas Berry (forks). In the year 1798 his entry is crossed out, so he must have started out the year in Washington County, but moved out of the area before the year was up. Court records show that he sold his Washington County properties and moved to Blount County, Tennessee.¹⁰⁷³

     In 1799 the original Thomas Berry Sr. was still alive and his son Thomas Berry Jr. (jockey) are both identified in the records, as well as an additional individual referred to only as Thomas Berry Jr – clearly a younger man than both of the above Thomas Berrys. By 1800, the original Thomas Berry had passed away, and his son Thomas Berry Jr. (jockey) was now the oldest Thomas Berry and became the new Thomas Berry Sr. as far as the county clerks were concerned. The younger Thomas Berry Jr., possibly the same one as in 1799, was also present.

     Differentiating these Thomas Berrys is a case study in the danger of relying upon county tax records to provide accurate information on family relationships by means of the Jr. and Sr. identifiers. Where tax records are concerned, these identifiers were merely convenient tools to differentiate same-named individuals and did not necessarily represent father and son relationships.

Year

Names Recorded in Tax Records

Relationship to Thomas Berry Sr (1718 - 1799)

Tax List/Owner Book #

1782

Thomas Berry

self

CAPT James Montgomery

Thomas Berry

son

CAPT James Montgomery

1783

Thomas Berry Sr

self

CAPT James Montgomery

Thomas Berry Jr

son

CAPT James Montgomery

1784

Thomas Berry Sr

self

Alexander Montgomery

Thomas Berry Jr

son

Alexander Montgomery

1785

unreadable tax records

1786

Thomas Berry Sr

self

Alexander Montgomery

Thomas Berry Jr

son

Alexander Montgomery

1787

Thomas Berry

self

Book 1

Thomas Berry

son

Book 1

CPT Thomas Berry

first cousin of Thomas Sr.

son of Francis Berry Sr.

Book 1

Thomas Berry

grandson

son of James Berry/Elizabeth McCutcheon

Book 2

1788

Thomas Berry Sr

self

Book 1

Thomas Berry (jackey)

son

Book 1

Thomas Berry Jr.

grandson of Thomas Sr. (1718 - 1799)

son of Thomas Berry (jockey)

Book 1

Thomas Berry

grandson

son of James Berry/Elizabeth McCutcheon

Book 2

1789

Thomas Berry Sr

self

Book 1

Thomas Berry (jockey)

son

Book 1

Thomas Berry Jr.

grandson of Thomas Sr. (1718 - 1799)

son of Thomas Berry (jockey)

Book 1

1790

Thomas Berry Sr

self

Book 1

Thomas Berry (jockey)

son

Book 1

Thomas Berry Jr.

grandson of Thomas Sr. (1718 - 1799)

son of Thomas Berry (jockey)

Book 1

Thomas Berry (river)

grandson

son of James Berry/Elizabeth McCutcheon

Book 1

1791

Thomas Berry Sr

self

Book 1

Thomas Berry (jockey)

son

Book 1

Thomas Berry Jr. (knobs)

grandson of Thomas Sr. (1718 - 1799)

son of Thomas Berry (jockey)

Book 1

Thomas Berry (river)

grandson

son of James Berry/Elizabeth McCutcheon

Book 1

1792

Thomas Berry Sr

self

Book 1

Thomas Berry (jockey)

son

Book 1

Thomas Berry Jr. (knobs)

grandson of Thomas Sr. (1718 - 1799)

son of Thomas Berry (jockey)

Book 1

Thomas Berry Jr.

grandson

son of James Berry/Elizabeth McCutcheon

Book 1

1793

Thomas Berry Sr

self

Book 1

Thomas Berry (jockey)

son

Book 1

Thomas Berry (knobs)

grandson of Thomas Sr. (1718 - 1799)

son of Thomas Berry (jockey)

Book 1

Thomas Berry (forks)

grandson

son of James Berry/Elizabeth McCutcheon

Book 1

1794

Thomas Berry Sr

self

Book 1

Thomas Berry (jockey)

son

Book 1

Thomas Berry (knobs)

grandson of Thomas Sr. (1718 - 1799)

son of Thomas Berry (jockey)

Book 1

Thomas Berry (forks)

grandson

son of James Berry/Elizabeth McCutcheon

Book 1

1795

Thomas Berry Sr

self

Book 1

Thomas Berry (jockey)

son

Book 1

Thomas Berry Jr.

grandson of Thomas Sr. (1718 - 1799)

son of Thomas Berry (jockey)

Book 1

Thomas Berry (forks)

grandson

son of James Berry/Elizabeth McCutcheon

Book 1

1796

Unreadable Tax Records

No Data

1797

Thomas Berry Sr

self

Book 1

Thomas Berry (jockey)

son

Book 1

Thomas Berry (forks)

grandson

son of James Berry/Elizabeth McCutcheon

Book 1

1798

Thomas Berry Sr

self

Book 1

Thomas Berry (jockey)

son

Book 1

Thomas Berry (forks)

grandson

son of James Berry/Elizabeth McCutcheon

Book 1

1799

Thomas Berry Sr

self

Book 1

Thomas Berry (jockey)

son

Book 1

Thomas Berry Jr.

son of John Berry and Jane Campbell*

Book 1

1800

Thomas Berry Sr.

son

Book 1

Thomas Berry Jr.

grandson/son of William Berry

Book 1

      The rest of the data from the Washington County Personal Property Tax Records reveal some interesting and unique details about Thomas Berry’s life. Information recorded within this data set falls into four categories: data on the age categories and number of taxable white males in the household, the number, race and general age categories of at least some of the slaves he owned, the amount and type of some of his livestock, and the rates and amount of taxes he paid for all of this taxable property. For the last category, there is such a small amount of information, that no analysis was conducted on this data. Changes within each of the remaining categories can be tracked through a time span of 29 years, allowing inferences and analytical conclusions to be drawn about elements of Thomas Berry’s life that cannot be derived from any other sources. Before that information is explored, however, a brief explanation of colonial tithables is in order.

     The term ”tithable” refers to a potentially productive member of the labor force. Originally, in ancient English law, the term referred to someone who paid ten percent of their livestock and crops to support the church. By the time it was used in colonial America in 17th century, however, it had developed into a tax on each “head”, and during the 18th century it came to denote a person who paid taxes to support the colonial government. The tax was imposed on all free Caucasian males at least 16 years of age, a small number of women, typically widows, and while all slaves over the age of 16 were also counted as taxable workers, their taxes were paid by their owners. For that matter, taxes on males between the ages of 16 and 21 were paid by the head of the household. In this case, the term household does not mean a household in the sense of typical federal census enumerations or even a family unit, but a group of people composed of a unit head who paid the tax for himself plus any people whose taxes he was responsible for – some were family – some were not. Consequently, a tithable household can represent a family unit, but not completely. Young free males under the age of 21 and slaves formed the household. When a son reached the age of 21 he was taxed as the head of an individual taxable household even though he might still live in the same house as his parents. Tithable lists for these colonial household did not include anyone under the age of 16 or women unless they were designated as the head of a household. To appear in the records, free white males had to be at least 16 years old, and when they were listed on their own instead of being a part of another household, they had to be at least 21 years old. Consequently, a young male should appear in a household when he turned 16, tracked through the next few years as a tax liability for the head of the household and then appear as an independent tax payer when he turned 21.^{1074, 1075, 1076, 1077}

Date

White Tithables

 > 21

White Tithables

16 - 21

1

1783

1

1784

1

1785

No Data

No Data

1786

1

5 June 1787

1

2

20 Oct 1788

1

1

4 July 1789

1

4 Sept 1790

1

2

25 July 1791

1

2

8 June 1792

1

1

Jan 1793

1

1

1794

1

1

1795

1

1

1796

No Data

No Data

1797

1

1

1798

1

1

1799

1

1

1800

1

1801

1

1802

1

1803

No Data

No Data

1804

1

1805

1

1806

1

     Table XLIII summarizes the tax data available on the white tithable males in Thomas Berry’s household. Through about half of the time period covered by these tax records, Thomas Berry Jr. was the only white tithable male in his household. For the other half of that interval, a small number of young males between the ages of 16 and 21 were recorded in the household. While there certainly is the possibility that these males could represent extended family members or even unrelated individuals, with a house full of young boys, it is quite reasonable to suspect that these white males represent his sons. As they reached the age of 16, they began appearing in the tax records of their father’s household, and when they reached the age of 21, they were taxed in their own right. As they left the nest, or at least became old enough to pay their own taxes, the next younger son would come of taxable age and begin appearing in the records. Probably the most important nugget of information that this data sets yields on Thomas Berry’s life is that it serves as an approximate record of when his sons turned 16 and 21, both, of which, in turn, can be used to make a reasonably accurate estimate of their birth dates. Furthermore, knowing where Thomas Berry Jr. was living at that time of these births establishes the birth place of the various sons.

     From 1782 through 1786 there was only one tithable male in his household – Thomas Berry Jr. himself. None of his sons were old enough to qualify as being taxable according to the records. In 1787, however, two of his sons, presumably the oldest boys, Thomas Berry III and William Berry, appear as males in the 16 to 21 age category. Since the year before, in 1786, there were no males 16 or older, it seems that both had turned 16 by late spring of 1787, which places both of their birth dates at 1771. However, the following year, in 1788, both Thomas Berry III and William Berry, Thomas’ oldest sons, were taxed on their own, which means they had just turned 21, so their birth dates must have actually been 1767. If this birth date calculation is correct, then both of these boys would have turned 16 in 1783 and should have appeared in the 16 to 21 age bracket as taxable males from then through 1787. Either they were not actually living in the household at the time, or their presence in the household was purposefully not reported in the records. Without any collaborative information, it is impossible to determine why they didn’t show up in the records from 1783 through 1786, but it is certain that they were identified as separate and independent tax payers from 1788 onward. While Thomas and William both reached tax “maturity” in 1788, another brother must have reached the age of 16, since there is one such male in Thomas Berry’s household that year. The next son in line is John Berry, so this tax entry probably represents him. There is a John Berry that appears in Washington County tax records from 1789 through 1801, but there are at least four other John Berrys living in the county at the time, and these tax records could easily refer to any one or more of them. Consequently, determining when Thomas Berry Jr.’s son named John turned 21 cannot be easily determined. If he turned 16 the year he showed up in his father’s tax household, he would have been born in 1772, but, given the uncertainty in regard to his older brother’s absence in the tax records when they SHOULD have been there, there is no guarantee that this John Berry was actually 16 that year.

     In 1789 no sons were recorded in the 16 to 21 age bracket, but for the next two years, 1790 and 1791, there are two sons in this bracket. The next sons in the Thomas Berry family are James and George Berry. James appears as an independent tax payer in 1792, so he must have been one of the two males in 1790 and 1791. After James Berry came of taxable age only one son remained in the 16 to 21 bracket – George Berry, and he appeared as an independent tax payer in 1795. In the same year there was still a young male in the 16 to 21 year bracket, David Berry, and he can be tracked through the records in his father’s household until 1799. The next year he appeared on his own, and no more young males appeared in Thomas Berry Jr.’s household after that time. Unlike their older brothers, both George and David Berry can be tracked in their father’s household from the time they turned 16 to when they began being listed as independent taxpayers at age 21.

     If this analysis of tax records illustrates anything, it is that great care should be taken when determining the ages of males by using the 16 to 21 year age bracket. The accuracy and completeness of the data is sketchy at best. On the other hand, the first appearance of a son as an independent tax payer, particularly after having appeared in the 16 to 21 year bracket in the year or years immediately prior to is a much more definitive and reliable tool for estimating birth dates.

     The African slaves, at least the taxable slaves, owned by Thomas Berry from 1782 through 1811, are shown in Table XLIV While the data is incomplete and rather minimal in nature, a number of observations and conclusions can be drawn from an analysis of these records. In the first place, the data is not continuous - there are several breaks in the continuity of the records. In 1785, 1796 and 1803 no county tax data is available at all, perhaps due to loss of the original tax records or the lack of tax data being recorded. Three other breaks in the record stream, in 1786, 1794 and 1797, are not related to a lack of tax records, but rather to the lack of any slave data in Thomas Berry’s household during those years. This could mean that he still owned slaves but they were but not recorded for some reason. A common practice was to remove them from the parish or county just prior to tax time. On the other hand it could be that they were not recorded because he owned no slaves at that time, perhaps having sold them. If he sold them, then he quickly purchased more, since he always seems to have one or two in the next taxable year. In addition, the fidelity of the information changed over the 29 year time span covered by this data set. From 1782 through 1784 only the presence of taxable slaves is shown – not even broad age range categories or the fact that they were African in racial origin are provided in this data set, so the only conclusions that can be drawn for this time period are that Thomas Berry was, indeed a slave owner and that he owned a small number of them. One more conspicuous fact from this time frame is important. When taxes were first recorded in Washington County, Virginia in 1782, Thomas Berry was 40 years old and already a slave owner, so there is no telling when his slave-owning days actually began. He could easily have owned African slaves through the 1770s and first two years of the 1780s.

Date

Slaves

Blacks

< 16

Blacks

12 - 16

Blacks

 > 16

Blacks

16 - 21

1782

1

1783

2

1784

2

1785

No Data

No Data

No Data

No Data

No Data

1786

5 June 1787

1

20 Oct 1788

1

4 July 1789

1

4 Sept 1790

1

25 July 1791

1

2

8 June 1792

2

Jan 1793

1

1794

1795

1

1796

No Data

No Data

No Data

No Data

No Data

1797

1798

1

1799

1

1

1800

1

1

1801

1

1802

2

1803

No Data

No Data

No Data

No Data

No Data

1804

2

1805

2

1806

2

      From 1787 through 1811 general age categories are provided for the enslaved Africans, and the fact that they are African in origin is clearly noted, since they are referred to as “blacks”. The age categories, at least for Thomas Berry’s slaves, were either greater than or less than 16, between 12 and 16 and between 16 and 21. From 1787 through 1791 Thomas Berry paid taxes on one African slave under the age of 16. Between 1788 and 1791 this person was specified as being between 12 and 16, placing his or her birth between 1772 and 1776. From 1792 through 1798, no slaves under the age of 16 appear in Thomas Berry’s household. The obvious assumption is that this individual was quite young when first appearing in the records as Thomas Berry’s slave, then reached the age of 16 and so appeared in the older age category. However, 1791 was the last year a slave under the age of 16, at least for the next six years, was recorded, but two slaves over 16 were also recorded that year and in subsequent years, so it does not appear that the young slave remained in Thomas Berry’s household and merely grew older. It seems more likely that this person either passed away or was sold. In 1791 and 1792 there were two slaves over 16, but from 1793 through 1801 there is only one slave in Thomas Berry’s household over 16. As in the previous case, it seems likely that either the second slave passed away or he or she was sold. In 1799, one slave under the age of 16 appears briefly in Thomas Berry’s taxable household, but, after 1800, that slave is also gone. As in the previous case, there is also a slave in the older age category, so the young slave does not appear to have remained in the household, but disappears, most likely either passing away or being sold. The same thing occurred again in 1809. If this interpretation is correct, then Thomas Berry seems to have been in the habit of buying and selling a small number of young African slaves on a somewhat regular basis. The fact that this pattern happened repeatedly almost sounds like it represents a speculative money-making operation. From 1799 through 1811, Thomas Berry gradually increased the number of African slaves over the age of 16 that he owned, which sounds like purchases of additional slaves were made every few years.¹⁰⁷⁴

     Other than the tax records, the only other occurrences of the slaves in Thomas Berry’s records are related to their identification in a deed gift to his son David Berry and in estate distribution documents. In 1803, in an effort to ensure that his son David Berry would receive his share of the estate, Thomas Berry awarded a male slave by the name of Edmond to him. Presumably, in order to obtain the monetary value of the gift, Edmond would have to be sold. Tax records from this time, however, do not reflect the loss of a slave from Thomas Berry’s household.

     Thomas Berry, who must have been very near death at the time, wrote his will in April of 1812 and had passed away by late June of the same year. In his will he bequeathed his female slave, Chriss, to his second wife, Prudence with the stipulation that Prudence could maintain ownership until her death or remarriage. Upon either outcome, Chriss was to be sold and the money divvied up among Thomas Berry’s sons. Since Prudence remarried a short seven weeks after Thomas Berry’s death, the money, quite clearly, stayed in the family. In estate appraisal documents, Chriss was referred to as a family slave, which means that she must have performed household chores rather than tending the fields. Prior to her sale, she was loaned out to other households to generate cash for the Berry family. In his will, Thomas Berry instructed that the rest of his slaves were to be sold and the income generated from their sale be distributed to his sons. An inventory and appraisal of Thomas Berry’s estate was completed in late June of 1812, identifying four slaves: Sam, Nancy, Nelson and Chriss, which seems to corroborate the tax records which showed that Thomas owned three slaves in 1811. Apparently, he had acquired another slave in late 1811 or early 1812. The appraisal records indicate that one of the four slaves was a child by the name of Nelson, which solves the issue of where the extra slave came from. He appears to have been a result of the “natural increase” in a slave owner’s slave inventory. The estate appraisal also identified one male slave, Sam, and two female slaves, Chriss and Nancy. It seems quite reasonable to assume that Sam is the father of Nelson, and that either Chriss or Nancy is the mother, so this small group of slaves, at least three of them anyway, appears to represent an enslaved African family. While all of the adult slaves were appraised at values of several hundred dollars, Nelson, being a baby, was worth significantly less – under $100. The slaves were appraised at a total value of $1050, and sold at the estate auction, which took place on 02 November 1812, for $1332. The documentation of Thomas Berry’s slaves, culled from tax and court records, reveals a pattern of periodic selling of individual slaves, the probable occurrence of an enslaved African family and the sale of that family to convert their value into cash for his sons.

     Thomas Berry can be identified, located and traced from the 1770s through the time of his death in southwestern Virginia through court records, real estate transactions, militia and tax records, but, at some point, he acquired land in central Tennessee. He lived in Virginia all of his life (except for a possible brief time after his birth), and much of that time, at least his adult life, appears to have been spent in Washington County, which makes his acquisition of lands in central Tennessee seem rather odd and difficult to understand. More confusing is the way he appears to have acquired the land – through military service in the North Carolina Continental Line. Through four separate transactions during 1785 Thomas Berry came to own 1,617 acres of land described as being on the north fork of the main Harpeth about a mile or so above the point where the west fork and the main Harpeth join, and along Indian Creek, a small creek that empties into the north side of the Tennessee River. (Table XLV, Figure 102) Two of the land tracts along Indian Creek were described as being adjacent. All of these lands were in Davidson County, Tennessee, and all were surveyed for Thomas Berry by Isaac Roberts, a licensed surveyor. All of the parcels were originally North Carolina land grants based on military service, and the entire paper trail from initial location of the tract to the final award of the patent took right around three years. Only one of the tracts was originally awarded to Thomas Berry. All of the others were awarded to other people, who then assigned (sold) their grant to Thomas Berry. The very odd part of this when could Thomas Berry served in the North Carolina Continental Line? In 1776 he participated in Colonel Christian’s punitive campaign against the Cherokee, presumably as a member of the Washington County militia, in 1780 he was promoted to the rank of Ensign in the Washington County militia, which strongly suggests his continued membership in that Virginia county militia and in 1781 he participated, as an officer in that military organization in the Kings Mountain campaign. North Carolina paid its veterans with its western lands based on their term of service. A private, which was the stated rank of Thomas Berry in his North Carolina land grants, was entitled to receive 7.6 acres for each month of service. Since he was awarded 429 acres, he would had to have served for just over 56 months, which amounts to just over two and a half years of North Carolina military service. The problem is, there doesn’t seem to have been that much time for him to have served that amount of time in the North Carolina Continental Line. The Revolutionary War began in 1776 and ended in 1783, and, given what appears to be a continued membership in the Washington County militia from 1776 through 1781, there seems to be very little time for him to have served in North Carolina’s military unless he served there almost immediately following his Kings Mountain experience. Furthermore, from late 1781 through 1783, Thomas Berry appeared in Washington County court records, buying land, serving on juries and appraising estates, all, of which makes it appear that he was actually living in Washington County Virginia during this time period rather than serving in the North Carolina militia at some remote location far from his home. The only exception to military service was to serve as a surveyor, laying out those lands, or to the guards who protected them. On two occasions, once in 1777 and again in 1781, Washington County records document that Thomas Berry was a land surveyor. Although it is not clear when he actually performed these surveying duties, it seems highly likely that his original North Carolina land grant was based on his services as a surveyor, not a soldier. Unfortunately, the North Carolina grants do not specify which service was performed, and lumped them all into the same category.^{1078,1079,1080,1081}

Located

Surveyed

Granted

Registered

Acres

NC Patent #

Military Warrant #

Original Assignee

23 Feb 1785

28 Dec 1785

15 Sept 1787

23 April 1788

429

547

711

Thomas Berry

23 Nov 1785

1 Apr 1786

15 Nov 1787

23 April 1788

640

640

1112

Azariah Massey

23 Dec 1785

8 Jan 1786

15 Nov 1787

23 April 1788

274

639

1398

William Morgan

23 Dec 1785

20 Jan 1786

16 Nov 1787

24 April 1788

274

638

1397

John Connor

     From 1785 through 1788 Thomas Berry acquired 1,617 acres of land in Davidson County, Tennessee, as noted above. Beginning in 1797 four of his sons moved there from their home in Washington County, Virginia and were either given or purchased some of these land tracts from their father. In 1798 Thomas either sold or gave the 429 acre parcel to his son Thomas Berry, and, in early 1802 he, essentially, gave the larger 640 tract to his sons William, James and Basil. At about the same time the sons began moving there. Thomas left Washington County and moved to the area in 1797, the year before he received the land from his father. William Berry was living in the area by 1800 and possibly moved there as early as 1798, but definitely by late 1799. James Berry also left Virginia for the same area in by late 1799 and Basil Berry appears to have moved there with his brothers sometime in the late 1790s. Mary Berry, his ex-wife left him and moved in with her sons in Tennessee by 1803 or 1804.

     Thomas Berry had acquired several parcels of land on the north side of the South Fork of the Holston River in Washington County, Virginia, and from 1799 through 1804 he distributed those lands, mostly to his sons, David and John, who had remained in Washington County. In 1799 he sold a small chunk of land to a neighbor, James Wilson (Figure 22), and in the same year Samuel Duff sold back some land (139 acres) along Wolf Creek that he had purchased from two sons of Thomas Berry, William and James, back in 1791. Those sons were now living in Tennessee. While there is no evidence that Thomas Berry had ever owned this plot of land, he was identified as being the father of William and James. In 1803 a legal agreement was reached between Thomas Berry and his son David, to work Thomas’ land together and to share in the profits. Later in the same year, though, Thomas Berry gave David partial ownership of the land. He further stipulated that his wife should live there for the rest of her days, and that, after Thomas, his wife Mary and their son Jonathon passed away, full ownership would pass to David. Finally, in 1804, Thomas sold 159 acres of land to John Berry. This land parcel is described as being on the north side of the Holston and abutting the properties of William Duff and Adam Hope. Both of these men owned land along 15 Mile Creek just downstream from Thomas Berry’s known property. No record of this land acquisition has been found, and it is not clear which John Berry purchased it from him.

     Thomas and Mary Berry did not appear together in Washington County records very often, but, as shown in Table XLVI, critical data entries from land and will records, that show when they did and didn’t occur together, as well as other details, can be used to approximate when their marriage broke apart, when Mary left for Tennessee to live with her sons and when Thomas remarried. From Table XLVI it can be seen that Thomas and Mary were still husband and wife through 1799. During this era, dowry laws required that the wife be taken aside, out of reach of the husband, and questioned on whether or not she agreed with any land sale negotiated by her husband, since land was one of the few things in a marriage that a woman could actually claim some control over. As late as 1799, Mary agreed to a land sale when privately questioned by the judge, thus indicating that they were still married. From 1802 through 1803 two deed gifts were made by Thomas Berry to some of his sons, and he entered a contract with one of them in land/labor agreement. Mary mentioned in only in one of these documents, a mid 1803 deed gift. In this document, Thomas noted that one of his sons will inherit his Washington County land after the death of Thomas himself, Mary and one other son. This record appears to represent a line of land inheritance – a documentation of how the land will be passed down to a specific son, and, since Mary is mentioned as one of the key players, it seems likely to assume that they are still married. By 21 August 1804, however, Thomas Berry sold a parcel of land and, not only was no mention made of Mary, she was not questioned as to her dowry rights. Her absence from this land sale is quite conspicuous and strongly suggests that she and Thomas were no longer married. Following a divorce, a woman no longer enjoyed the dowry rights of marriage, so they must have been divorced sometime in the year and a half period between the spring of 1803 and the late summer of 1804. In the final record, Thomas Berry’s will, he specifically states that his wife rode to Tennessee, presumably to live with her sons, at some point in the past, although no date was specified. From the Washington County tax records, and other associated records, it can be seen that some of Thomas Berry’s sons moved to Williamson County, Tennessee to occupy and own the lands that Thomas Berry had acquired on the Harpeth River, and it appears that their mother soon left her husband and moved in with them. In addition, in the spring of 1807, Thomas Berry married Prudence Rowlett Dickinson, the widow of Archelous Dickenson, who was 13 years younger than Thomas. In his will, Thomas took care of his second wife, ensuring that she received one of the slaves, kept her property, which she may have inherited from a previous marriage, revenues from the sale of a horse, some harvested crops and some livestock and cash derived from the sale of his estate. Apparently, she did not remain a grieving widow for long, since a newspaper article from the time sarcastically commented on how quickly she remarried.

     As was the usual custom after the death of a household head, by court order Thomas Berry’s personal property was identified and all items were appraised in preparation for an estate sale. Analysis of the content of the estate appraisal, summarized in Table XLVII, reveals that they can be broadly divided into five categories: Crops & Farm Products, Household Items, Livestock, Slaves and Tool & Farm Items, facilitating an understanding of the relative values of Thomas Berry’s property. What clearly stands out is the immense value of the enslaved human property, which constituted nearly two thirds of the value of the entire estate. Second in value were the animals, which comprise nearly a quarter of the estate’s value. Combined, the living property, both human and livestock, form an overwhelming 86% of the personal property wealth of Thomas Berry. The other categories, basically, the inanimate objects needed to conduct daily life on a farm, combined, make up only 14% of the estate, a rather pitiful amount in comparison to the value of his living property.

Category

Percentage

Crops & Farm Products

3%

Tools & Farm Items

4%

Household Items

 7%

Livestock

23%

Slaves

63%

     Among the personal property items listed in Thomas Berry’s estate appraisal, a number of them are of particular interest since they cast a uniquely focused light on Thomas Berry’s lifestyle. Table XLVIII shows the items that are considered to be lifestyle indicators, the general category into which they were classified and an assessment of the type of work each represented. From the bulk of these items it can be seen that Thomas Berry, his family and his slaves lived rather labor-intensive lives. The bulk of these items and associated assessments shows that much of their time must have been devoted to operating a farm and livestock operation without the benefit of many modern labor-saving conveniences. Prominently differentiated from this labor-driven universe, however, are a small number of books, which, quite clearly, identify an intellectual side to Thomas Berry’s character that can be seen in few other source data points that document his life. It should not be forgotten that he was a land surveyor, so he definitely was able to master basic trigonometry. The fact that he owned a small number of books clearly indicates he was not illiterate and was, in fact, actively interested in intellectual pursuits. Of particular interest are three books whose authors and titles are specifically identified, thus attaching a higher level of significance to them than the other books which are merely generically referenced as a collection of small books. Those three books are Bailey’s Dictionary, Elements of Logic and two volumes of Jones’ Geography.

     “Bailey’s Dictionary”, which is a shortened version of the book’s actual title: “Dictionarium Britannicum: or a more compleat universal etymological English dictionary than any extant”, a very popular reference manual during the 19th century, was written by Nathan Bailey and originally published in 1730 in London. As explained in its introduction, the book’s purpose was to explain the “hard and technical Words, or Terms of Art, in all the ARTS, SCIENCES, and MYSTERIES following. Together with ACCENTS directing to their proper Pronuntiation, shewing both the Orthography, and the Orthoepia of the English Tongue”. The introduction goes on to list the topics it covered, which included “Algebra, Anatomy, Architecture, Arithmetick, Astrology, Astronomy, Botanicks, Catoptricks, Chymistry, Chiromancy, Chirurgery, Confectionary, Cookery, Cosmography, Dialling, Dioptricks, Ethicks, Fishing, Fortification, Fowling, Gardening, Gauging, Geography, Geometry, Grammar, Gunnery, Handicrafts, Hawking, Heraldry, Horsemanship, Hunting, Husbandry, Hydraulicks, Hydrography, Hydrostaticks, Law, Logick, Maritime and Military Affairs, Mathematicks, Mechanicks, Merchandize, Metaphysicks, Meteorology, Navigation, Opticks, Otacousticks, Painting, Perspective, Pharmacy, Philosophy, Physick, Physiognomy, Pyrotechny, Rhetorick, Sculpture, Staticks, Statuary, Surveying, Theology, and Trigonometry.” Quite simply, this was book was a reference manual that summarized the technological advances of the day for the general public, and appears to have supplied a great deal of information that would be quite useful for a pioneering life style.^1083,1084

     “Elements of Logic” appears to be a book on logic and reasoning, explaining the basis of philosophical inquiry and a sort of guide to the correct and logical application of common sense. A book of the same title published in 1854 by Richard Whately explores these topics, and, although that book appeared after Thomas Berry’s death, it’s logical to assume that an earlier author could have covered the same ground. While no book entitled Geography by an author named Jones could be found from this time period, it does seems quite probable that a two volume set of books on this subject sets the owner apart from many of his neighbors. The fact that Thomas Berry owned this collection of books and that they were specifically identified during his estate appraisal testifies to the intellectual curiosity of Thomas Berry. He does not appear to have been a mere farmer, but an intelligent man capable improving his understanding of the physical world, perhaps in an effort to take advantage of the benefits of what was then modern science in his everyday life.¹⁰⁸²

     A number of household and farm items testify to the labor-intensive nature of these pioneer families. Of particular interest are the butter churns, a reel and loom and the associated reed and gears, as well as the various clothing and bedding items listed as being home spun or homemade. The butter churns clearly demonstrate that Thomas Berry’s family operated a farm with cows whose milk was processed by hand in the churns to make butter, which, more than likely, was a valuable household staple. The fact that he owned a loom clearly shows this family had the ability to make their own cloth, probably ultimately derived from the wool of sheep. The fact that he owned a small herd of sheep, a pair of wool shears and the eight pounds of sheared wool clearly documents the fact that this family must have harvested wool from their sheep to make the thread for their clothing items that were processed into cloth with the loom. The reel was used to create thread from which cloth could be made in the loom, so, in light of this, the hand-made clothing items were probably made in the Berry household every step of the way from scratch – growing the wool, processing it into thread with the reel, then using these materials in the loom to create the clothing they wore, and probably their bedding, as well. No doubt the women also sewed and quilted, creating the other clothing and bedding items. The candlesticks, as well as the candle snuffers clearly place this family in the pre-electric age when candles were a critical source of light after the sun went down. The smoothing iron was, quite clearly, an iron used to press clothes, possibly their more formal church-going and special occasion garments, and, of course, the looking glass or mirror for checking out one’s appearance. Also listed in the estate inventory was a fat tub and a vessel containing soap, all, of which, strongly suggests that they made their own soap. The process for making soap starts with collecting pig fat to create lard. Included in his estate were a total of 29 hogs and pigs and over seventy pounds of bacon, so he clearly raised pigs, slaughtered them for food and used some of the remaining parts. Lye, derived from the ashes of wood fires is rapidly mixed with lard and stirred over a fire for hours to produce a thick soap in a very labor-intensive effort. All of these items, the churn, the loom, the homemade clothing and the evidence of soap production document a home life dominated by manual labor comprising numerous time consuming and laborious tasks needed to not only survive, but to sustain a degree of comfort within a pioneering lifestyle.¹⁰⁸⁵

     The various tools and farm equipment that showed up in his estate appraisal further testify to a pioneering farm family oriented around a life of manual labor. The fire irons show that the family utilized wood fires, and the ax and auger are definitely wood working tools. His shovel plough with coulter (a sharp wedge located on the front of a plow that actually cuts the soil), old shovel of a plough and bar share plough cannot be mistaken for anything other than equipment for plowing land and planting crops. They were most certainly horse drawn plows, and, if anything, Thomas Berry can be definitively documented as being a horse owner as testified by his combination of an obviously breeding herd of horses and colts. There was also plenty of horse-related equipment documented in the appraisal, including various types of saddles, saddle blankets and bridles, saddle bags and horse collars, and the fact that there was a woman’s side saddle included in his personal property shows that it wasn’t just the men who rode horses. Of course the associated chains and gears show that the horses were relied upon to perform heavy duty work. The hoes and scythe were undoubtedly used to harvest and process the crops, and the grindstone was used to sharpen the various steel tools. It is also quite clear that, at least in his final years, Thomas Berry was planting, growing and harvesting rye and wheat. In the spring of 1781 Thomas Berry was accused of keeping a tipling house, which probably means that he had a still to make some homemade whiskey, which he, apparently, sold on the side without a government license. No doubt he also grew the grains to make the whiskey. In his estate appraisal a hogshead was identified, which was a barrel used, among other things, to store alcoholic beverages. It certainly could be that he continued with his whiskey-making, but on a legal basis.

     In his will, Thomas made a special point that the property that his second wife, Prudence, brought into the marriage would remain with her. In the estate appraisal those items, mostly household items and furniture, were identified, appraised and officially turned over to Prudence during the estate settlement. He also stipulated that she should receive a cash payment of $333, the proceeds from the sale of one of his horses in addition to 10 bushels of corn, twenty bushels of wheat and four barrows of hogs. In the final estate distribution, Prudence received $519.42, a $150 spinning wheel from her deceased husband’s estate, $167 worth of wool and $30 worth of corn. Prudence married Major William Love not long after the death of Thomas Berry, and, as noted earlier in the report, a local newspaper made a rather sarcastic comment on her quick remarriage. It is rather interesting to note that a Major Love paid Thomas Berry’s estate to rent a slave woman named Chris, who, according to Thomas Berry’s will, was “assigned” to Prudence by Thomas in order to provide for in her widowhood.

     One of the more interesting facets of Thomas Berry’s final estate distribution records is the information provided on the income generated by the labor of his enslaved Africans after his death. Apparently, during the interim period between his death and his final estate distribution, the estate managers were not idle in utilizing the assets available to them. As shown in Table XLIX, significant income for the estate was derived not only from the “leasing” or “renting” of the slaves, but also from interest on the sale of one of the slaves, which indicates they were purchased by a buyer on credit.

      Until the estate was settled in 1817, about four years after Thomas Berry’s death, the estate assets generated income and costs were paid out, the income primarily being interest payments and the latter mostly being taxes. Table L shows the monetary inheritance distributions to Thomas Berry’s family members and the taxes paid on Thomas’ land in central Tennessee, as well as interest income from loans made by Thomas Berry.

      By 1815 two of Thomas Berry’s sons, James and William Berry, had passed away. In the case of William Berry, Thomas Berry’s estate records show that William’s children received their father’s share of his inheritance. Rebecca, the widow of James, was granted ownership of the Tennessee lands that had been bequeathed to her deceased husband, James Berry. This also happened to be the location of James and Rebecca’s homestead. From the estate records it can also be seen how some of Thomas’ land in central Tennessee land had been distributed. (Table LI) While no records have been located on the 274 acre tract he had purchased, the 429 acre parcel was “sold” to Thomas Berry, and the division of the three-way split of the 640 acre tract can be calculated. When Basil Berry left Tennessee he sold his share, which amounted to 227 acres, and Rebecca Berry, James Berry’s widow, gained control of 258.5 acres from her widow’s dower. That leaves 154.5 acres to William Berry. It should also be noted that David Berry inherited his father’s land in Washington County, Virginia.