In addition to tracing their lineage and family history, genealogists of today have another important duty: to correct mistaken family traditions passed down by earlier generations. Now that genealogical training is widely available in workshops, seminars, and genealogical courses, family historians know that they must support what they write in their genealogies or family histories by citing records contemporary with an event. They know, too, that any undocumented family narrative, or one which cites only printed sources, cannot be accepted until it is verified by records, not simply by printed sources. That a number of published Dillard family traditions cannot be substantiated was first published by Carlton M. Dillard in Back to Old Virginia with Dillard, Daniel and Kin.1 He went to the source---the indexes of those who had studied at the four Inns of Court in London--to show that George Dillard, the first of the surname in America, contrary to legend, did not come to Virginia as a barrister of the King of England, since he was not listed in student indexes. Study and training at one of the Inns of Court was, and still is, a requirement for a barrister.2 "To Test Tradition: Ballad to George Dillard--Immigrant 1650" and its notes in the same book showed that other Dillard traditions are undocumented and unverifiable and consequently
1Carlton M. Dillard, Back to Old Virginia with Dillard, Daniel and Kin: Showing Relationship with Bruce, Cunningham,
Ellington, Ewing, Slaton, Thomson, and Wright Families (Baltimore, MD: Gateway Press, Inc., (c) by compiler 1993), p. 3.
Letter of 7 Apr. 1993 to Mr. Dillard from Mr. Anthony Camp, Director Society of Genealogists, London, stated that he had
examined "the published registers of admission at Grays Inn 1521-1839, the Middle Temple 1501-1944 and Lincolns Inn
1420-1893 but regret to say that they make no mention of any person called Dillard or Dyllard." Letter to Mr. Dillard from
Mr. I. G. Murray, Archivist of The Honourable Society of the Inner Temple, London, reported, "I have searched our records
of admission and call to the Bar without success" in finding George Dillard listed. Copies of the two letters were graciously
sent this writer by Mr. Dillard.
2Elaine Saunders, "Tracing Your British Ancestors Through Their Trades and Occupations,
Ancestry, Vol. X: No. 6
(November 1992), pp. 8-12.
229. DILLARD--A partial history of the Dillard family--In a military
enrollment for the militia at James town in 1660 the name of George Dillard, 26
years of age, from Wiltshire, England, first appears, in an apportionment of lands
for the New Kent Land District, the same George Dillard is credited with 250
acres of land for military services rendered against the Indians, dated 1665. A few
years afterwards George Dillard obtains another grant of land, 139 acres in King
and Queen County adjoining the former tract. In his will he gives 389 acres to a
son, James Stephen Dillard of James City County, and two girls. In 1694 James
Stephen Dillard appears with the Carys, Wises and Pages with a Royal Grant for
25,000 acres of land which they located according to "Williamsburg Founders" in
a body and called it "The Williamsburg Plantation." This James Stephen Dillard
was born in Wiltshire England in 1658, and settled in the James City District
(afterwards County), in 1694.4
The "Ballad" corrected the first part of the undocumented clipping by showing that George
Dillard's first American record was 22 May 1650 in Virginia, rather than 1660; that no Dillard
birth record in Wiltshire could be found; that seventeenth and early eighteenth century Dillard
records are in New Kent and King and Queen County, not in James City County; and that George
received his land--250 acres in 1665, adjoining that on which he lived, for paying transportation
costs of five persons, and 139 acres in 1694 by importing three persons---not for militia service.
Every free male between 16 and 60 was subject to militia duty, but land was not awarded for that
service until the French and Indian War (1754-1763); and George entered Virginia during a
peaceful interlude in the long struggle against Indians. Typical of legends, sometimes this one
became garbled, so that George Dillard, instead of James Stephen, was said to be the owner of
"The Williamsburg Plantation."
3Dorothy Dillard Hughes, " To Test Tradition: Ballad to George Dillard--Immigrant 1650," in Carlton M. Dillard, Back to Old
Virginia, pp. 135-153.
4Henry Moorman Dillard, "DILLARD--A partial history of the Dillard family," clipping of almost 2 columns from the
Montgomery [AL] Advertiser, 2 Feb. 1902, no page, which the writer had copied at the Alabama Department of Archives and
History in Montgomery 23 Feb. 1976.
Mr. Terry M. Dillard Your letters July 12 and 23rd inst.: (part of letter) Briefly, the land known
as Middle Plantation was not a plantation on the present sense of the word but a
group of small plantation [sic] in the area between Archers Hope Creek running
into the James River and Queens Creek, running into the York River which in 1633
was ordered palisaded as a protection against the Indians. In 1699 after the
statehouse at Jamestown was burned in 1698, the General Assembly passed an act
to build a new Capitol and [at] the City of Williamsburg at Middle Plantation, and
the town was laid out in 1693-1698, and Burton [Bruton] Parish Church was also
there. You will find an account of the settlements of Middle Plantation, which was
part of [in] York and part in James City County, in Lyin C. [Lyon G.] Tyler,
Williamsburg and the Old Colonial Capitol (Richmond: 1907) and in Rutherford
Goodwin, A Brief and True Account of Williamsburg in Virginia, third edition,
Williamsburg: 1940. We know the names of some of the early settlers who
obtained grants in the Archer Hope area, but do
Therefore no Dillard was the recipient of "The Williamsburg Plantation." James Stephen
Dillard is not found in any early Virginia record. In fact, no James Dillard is in a Virginia record
until 1758, exactly a hundred years after James Stephen Dillard's supposed birth date. This leads
to the second question.
Numbers of people trace their Dillard lineage to a man living about Revolutionary War
times. The frustration begins in the Virginia records when these researchers look for the father of
a particular James, John, George, Thomas, Nicholas, Edward, or another Dillard of that era.
Several books published between 1925 and 1960 include brief sketches of Dillard ancestry, all of
which name James Stephen Dillard as second (or first) of the Dillard surname in Virginia.
6 Yet
there is no Virginia record of an early James Stephen Dillard, and no living person can testify of
his own knowledge that James Stephen Dillard existed. So the logical question, then, is: Was
James Stephen Dillard, of Virginia, a myth--a made-up name--or did he really exist? The puzzle
can be solved, but not easily.
The usual order of research is to look first in printed material and then try to verify it by
actual records. Printed Dillard sketches in available books begin with Judith Parks America Hill's
A History of Henry County, Virginia . . ., first published in 1925.
7 Actually
5Katherine Reynolds, The Dillard Family, Vol. 1 (Houston, TX: Bound Typescript, 1975), p. 22. Miss Reynolds told the
writer that three copies had been made: one for DAR Library, one for Clayton Library in Houston, and one for herself. The
writer had the 576 pages copied on visits to the DAR Library during the next several years (limit of 40-50 pages copied per
day). Since then the 2 volumes have been microfilmed by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (LDS or
Mormons).
6Hughes, "Ballad to George Dillard," in Carlton M. Dillard,
Back to Old Virginia, Note 29, pp. 148-150, and "Dillard
in Print: Fact or Fallacy?" Stirpes, Vol. 33, No. 4 (Dec., 1993), Note 29, p. 26. Note 29 lists books and articles
naming George, James Stephen, and James or James Dillard, Jr., as the first three Dillard generations in Virginia.
7Judith Parks America Hill,
A History of Henry County, Virginia with Biographical Sketches of Its Most
Prominent Citizens and Genealogical Histories of Half a Hundred of Its Oldest Families (Martinsville, VA:
In more than sixty photostatic copies of printed Dillard sketches or pedigrees in the writer's
possession, those which purport to trace a Dillard line back to the 1600's have the same first three
generations, none documented, but often in the same words as the 1902 clipping: George Dillard,
his son James Stephen Dillard (born in 1658), his son James (or James Stephen, Jr.). Credit is
occasionally given to Hill's Henry County, which is itself undocumented and therefore not an
adequate source.
Several records of George Dillard appear in Nugent's Cavaliers and Pioneers, from the
first one when he was a headright of Capt. Moore Fantleroy on 22 May 1650, through his
acquisition of land in New Kent County, which fell into King and Queen County, where he
acquired more land in 1694 after it was created in
1691.9
We learn that he had a wife when the
two sold 76 acres of New Kent County land in 1679.
10
The 1704 Quit Rent Rolls, printed in several
books, are a virtual census of Virginia landowners. Every landowner had to pay the Crown an
annual quit rent of one shilling per fifty acres. Queen Anne was the reigning monarch in 1704.
Names included were Nicho. and Edwd. Dilliard and Thomas and Geo. Dillard in King and Queen
County and William Dolerd in New Kent
County.11
Bulletin Printing and Publishing Co., Inc., 1925), pp. 67-70, 152-156.
8H. M. Dillard, "229. DILLARD. A partial history of the Dillard
family," Montgomery [AL] Advertiser, 2 February 1902, n.p.,
copy in possession of writer.
9Nell Marion Nugent, Cavaliers and Pioneers:
Abstracts of Virginia Land Patents and Grants, 1623-1666, with
Introduction by Robert Armistead Stewart (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc.,
1963 [hereinafter, GPCo,],
originally published Richmond, VA: 1934), pp. 194-195, in Patent Book 2, p. 231.
Hereinafter , Nugent, C&P 1:194,
PB 2: 231; and a later volume by Nugent--Cavaliers and Pioneers. . . ,
1666-1695, Vol. 2, (Richmond: Virginia State
Library, 1977): Nugent, C&P 2: 240, PB 7: 173; 2: 259, PB 3: 99; 2;
341-342, PB 8:37, 42; and 2: 386, PB 8, 320.
10Microfilm Reel 7, Virginia State Land Office
Patents No. 7, 1679-1689, p. 173, read in Virginia State Library, Archives
Division (now called "Research and Information Services Division, The Library
of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia"); also in
Nugent, C&P 2:240, P.B. 7:173.
11"Virginia Quit Rent Rolls, 1704," Virginia Magazine of History
and Biography, William G. Stanard, editor, Vol. 29 (1921), p.
342; Vol. 31 (1923), p. 218; Vol. 32 (1924), p. 147; Thomas J. Wertenbaker,
The Planters of
This is important, because it is further evidence that all Dillards descend from George
Dillard, the first of the surname in America. Yet none of the Dillard landowners except George
are in genealogies published before 1960. When a researcher attempts to verify the existence of
James Stephen Dillard and his son James--since printed statements are not necessarily true--the
trouble begins. No James Stephen Dillard is in any early Virginia record in any county. No James
Dillard appears in any official record until 1758--a hundred years after James Stephen's supposed
birth--when a James Dillard patented 269 acres, part in New Kent and part in James City County,
Virginia; hence the frustration of Dillard
researchers.13
No colonial county records exist for New Kent or King and Queen County because they
were burned during the Civil War and in earlier
fires.14
Consequently the few extant
Colonial Virginia (Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press, 1922), pp. 26, 177, 297; Elizabeth Lawrence Dow,
Virginia Rent Rolls 1704 (New York: National
Edition and Library Bindery, (c) 1979), pp. 71, 96; Annie Laurie Wright Smith, The Quit Rent Rolls of Virginia, 1704
(Baltimore: GPCo.), pp. 26-28. These list Nicho. and Edwd. (Nicholas and Edward) Dilliard with 150 acres each, Thomas,
175, and Geo. (George) Dillard, 325 acres, and William Dolerd with 50 acres in New Kent County. Thomas Dullard was said
to have 100 acres in Isle of Wight Co., but he was proved to be Thomas Bullard. See next note.
12Blanche Adams Chapman, Wills and Administrations of Isle of
Wight County, Virginia 1647-1800, (Smithfield, VA:
Compiler, 1938), Book I, p. 78; Book II, pp. 135-136. On 26 April 1715 Henry Bullard
was one of three witnesses to Thomas
Bullard's will, and on 26 April 1746 Henry Bullard witnessed Thomas Dixon's will.
No Dillard or Dullard was found in Isle
of Wight records. The 1704 Quit Rent Rolls were colony records, not county records,
and are preserved in the Public Record
Office in London. The handwriting could have faded in the two hundred plus years
that elapsed between 1704, when the
record was made, and the transcription of the record during this century, or the
surname initial record could have been
misread, a common occurrence.
13Virginia Land Records from the Virginia Magazine of
History and Biography, William and Mary, Quarterly and Tyler's
Quarterly (Baltimore: GPCo, Inc., 1982), p. 260; also Virginia Patent
Book 33, p. 530; and Rev. Lindsay O. Duvall, Virginia
Colonial Abstracts, Series 2, Volume 4, James City County
(Washington, D.C., 1957). Patent "Book No. 33 . .. . . 530."
Original publication in "Patents Issued During the Regal Government,"
William and Mary College Quarterly, Vol. XII, No. 3
(1903), p. 190: "Book No. 33, 530. James Dillard. Dec 15 1758.
269 acres. In the counties of James City and New Kent
Counties. Beginning at the Intersection where one of the
disputed lines falls in with Isaac Goddins line." William Waller
Hening, The Statutes at Large, Vol. VIII (New York: Printed for
the Editor, by R. & W. & G. Bartow, 1823. Facsimile
reprint Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia), pp. 208-209:
Part of James City County was given to New Kent County
and part of New Kent County was given to James City County in November
1766, 7th George III. What that did to James
Dillard's land cannot be known.
14All New Kent County records were destroyed "when John
Price Posey burned the courthouse in 1787 and records from that
date were burned in 1865" in the Richmond fire of 1865, when the
public warehouses
So is James Stephen Dillard a myth? The successful researcher must go beyond the
obvious. He needs to know how colonial records differ from those of the present. Spelling was
not standardized, and the handwriting of the 1600's and 1700's was different from today's. Names
were written as they sounded to the record keeper, since the man giving his name was probably
illiterate. St. Peter's Parish Register, New Kent County, lists
three families. William Dollard with
wife Margaret had sons William in 1704 (who became the father of
Thomas in 1736) and Francis
in 1709,17
the year William, the father, died;
18
and James Dollard, with no wife named, had
Elizabeth in 170_ and James in 17__ [page torn]. A
generation later John and Susannah Dollard
had James (1736), Edward (1739), Lucy (1754), and
Susann (1757).19
burned. Many counties had stored
records there for safekeeping. Robert Young Clay,
Virginia Genealogical Resources (Detroit, MI: The Detroit Society for
Genealogical Research, Inc., 1980), pp. 16-17, and
lectures in Washington, D.C. at National Institute on Genealogical
Research, 1975, 1976; King and Queen County records
"were burned in 1833, and in 1864, the Federal Army under general
Kilpatrick burned the courthouse and many of the private
homes in the area, in retaliation for the death of Col. Ullric Dalgren.
. . . There were no colonial records left." Dr. Malcolm
Harris, Old New Kent County: Some Account of the Planters,
Plantations, and Places in New Kent County; Some Account of
the Planters, Plantations, and Places in King and Queen
County; Some Account of the Planters, Plantations, and
Places in Old New Kent County, Vol. 1 (West Point, VA: compiler,
(c) 1977), p. 512.
15Chamberlayne, C. G., ed.
The Vestry Book of Stratton Major Parish King and Queen County, Virginia 1729-1783
(Richmond, VA: Division of Purchase and Printing, 1931),
pp. 42-47, 22, 26, 34, 49, 59, 68, 76, 86, 102, 109, 124, 136, 143,
145, 153, 154, 158, 160, 161, 163, 167, 168, 172, 174,
187, 205, 207, 209, 210, 212, 214, 216, 217, 219, and 221-230.
16The National Society of Colonial
Dames of America in the State of Virginia,
The Parish Register of Christ Church, Middlesex
County, Va. from 1653 to 1812 (Baltimore: GPCo., 1964),
pp. 76, 139-140, 143, 149, 150, 156, 160, (not 196), and 280.
Hereinafter NSCDA VA. Also Chamberlayne, The Vestry Book
of Christ Church Parish Middlesex County, Virginia 1663-
1767 (Richmond: Old Dominion Press, 1927), pp. 168
[not listed in index], 170, 239, 250, 259, 268, 281, 323, and 327.
17NSCDA VA, St. Peter's Parish Register,
pp. 7, 8. William bap. 19 Mar. 1703/4; Francis bap. 13 Mar. 1709/09. They were
recorded as sons of William Dollard and his wife Margaret.
Thomas, son of William and Sarah Dollard, was b. in New Kent
Co., 27 May, bap. 1 July 1736, p. 121.
18NSCDA VA, The Vestry Book of St. Peter's, New Kent
County, VA. from 1682-1758 (Richmond: 1905), p. 45: "Wm.
Dollard departed this life october ye 24th 1709."
19NSCDA VA, St. Peter's Parish Register,
pp. 127, 140, 152, 153. James was born 27 Mar., baptized 15 May 1736, p. 127;
Edward, b. 18 May, bap. 8 July 1739, p. 140; Lucy b. 5 Apr 1754, p. 152;
Susann b. 12 Aug., bap.
The very next year (1758), James Dillard appeared in a
Virginia land record, patenting
269 acres part in James City County and part in New Kent County. [See Note 13.] On 9 and 17
August 1782, Thomas Dillard and George Dillard--not Dollard--
were exempt from New Kent
Militia Class 6; and Edward Dillard--not Dollard--was
assigned to Class 5 to serve in the Army of
the United States from New Kent County.
20
These three men named Dillard were later in tax
records in New Kent County. The Dollard name thus disappeared from New Kent County
records after the baptism of Susann Dollard in 1757; and the Dillard name appeared consistently
after that, beginning the next year, 1758. The key to the mystery is in changed handwriting. In
the 1600's and 1700's the letter e was often written
like an o with a loop at the top.
21 Thus, William,
James, and John Dollard were meant to have the surname Dellard.
Often short e is pronounced
like short i, especially in the South, and Dillard is often
pronounced in such ways that it could be
spelled with any first vowel.
On 6 September 1978 at the Virginia State Library,
to make sure of the appearance of the
letter transcribed as an o, the writer had the
photostats of the parish register and the vestry book
brought from the stacks. One should go to the original
when possible. Printed versions often have
copying errors. It was disappointing to see that
the o was definitely an o. But David Mossom,
rector from 1727 past 1758, the last date in the book
(died 1767), testified that Hen Collings,
rector from 1723-1725, "had the books recopied."
Therefore no originals of the books exists.
However, in the part that had not been recopied,
the e in Charles and in other words was written
like o with a loop at the top. Each e in ordered
had a loop at the top, and o had a horizontal line
straight out from the top. That indicates that the
name Dollard in the two books was first written
as Dellard, an alternate form of Dillard, which was
later miscopied--a frequent type of error.
22
The recopied birth entries of St.
23 Oct 1757, p. 153, all in
St. Peter's Parish, New Kent Co., VA.
20"New Kent Military Classes in 1782," Tyler's Quarterly, Vol. 10, pp. 178-179.
21Kent P. Bailey and Ransom B. True,
A Guide to Seventeenth-Century Virginia Court Handwriting (Richmond: The
Association for the Preservation of Virginia Antiquities, 1980);
E. Kay Kirkham, The Handwriting of American Records for a
Period of 300 Years (Logan, UT: The Everton
Publishers, Inc., 1973); Harriet Stryker-Rodda, C.G., Understanding Colonial
Handwriting (Baltimore: GPCo., 1986, originally New
Jersey History (Spring, Summer 1980), and "Letter Forms Found in
American Handwriting 1640-1790," (Washington, D.C.:
Handout and Lecture at National Institute on Genealogical Research,
1975, 1976).
22St. Peter's Parish, New Kent County,
Virginia, Vestry Book 1685-1758, Part I
(Virginia State Library, Archives Division No.
19729), now Library of Virginia (LVA).
In this the e written like an o with a loop
at the top is consistently used. Saint
Peter's Parish New Kent County Virginia Parish Register 1733-1778,
Part II (VSLAD No. 19740): In this, the seemingly
recopied part, the o of Dollard appears with a horizontal
line straight out from the top, not a loop at the top as in the
seemingly older first part. On 8 and 9 Sep. 1992 this author
spent a day and a half in LVA rechecking these volumes page by
page. The conclusions were the same as in 1978.
When people tell what they remember about ancestors, they often relate the events with the
names of those who participated but forget the dates. There is a tendency to compress
generations. Usually these are honest mistakes that anyone might make. For example, the writer's
mother said her grandfather's grandfather came from England. In subsequent research the writer
proved that it was not the ancestor of the fifth generation--her mother's second great grandfather--
but the one of the eighth--her mother's sixth great grandfather--who was the American settler of
1663. The strong tradition of a James, son of George Dillard, with son James seems a believable
memory of the kind legitimately passed down in families, especially since the Dollard/Dellard men-
-James and John Dollard, each with a proved son James---existed and are in official records.
But James Stephen Dillard? In "The Dillards of Amherst County, Virginia," Howard
Vallance Jones, Ph.D., wrote, "To date, not onepiece
of hard documentary evidence has surfaced
to prove even the existence of James Stephen
Dillard."23
Earlier, Terry Moorman Dillard said that
Mrs. Augusta B. Fothergill, a professional genealogist,
eighty-three in 1958 and an early authority
on Virginia records, had researched in Richmond and
in the various counties where Dillards had
lived. She had been employed "by William Dillard
and wife Mary to develop James Stephen
[Dillard] but was never able to find anything on
him and says no one then had a double name."
She was on the 389 acres of the first George Dillard,
where Dillards still lived, but they "knew or
would put out no information." Mrs. Fothergill also
said she doubted if James Stephen Dillard
existed and that Mrs. William Dillard had "misunderstood"
what Mrs. Fothergill had told her, that
Dillards did not live in James City
County.24
Anyone can verify the fact that double first names are not found in Virginia records until
about Revolutionary War times. Not even the governor, Sir William Berkeley, or the greatest
landowners used double given names. Hence chronology, the time when an event is likely to
occur, is something else a genealogist needs to consider.
23Howard Vallance Jones, "The Dillards of Amherst
County, Virginia," Dillard J-1, September 5, 1991, p. 1.
24Reynolds, The Dillard Family, pp. 83, 178;
also pp. 59, 375, 376. About Mrs. Fothergill, the word "authority" is not used
heedlessly. She compiled Wills of Westmoreland County,
Virginia 1654-1800 (1925), Marriage Records of Brunswick
County, Virginia and, with John Mark Naugle, Virginia Tax
Payers 1782-1787 (1940), the book which added about half the
Virginia counties omitted from the 1790 census published
by the Census Bureau. In his Vol. 19 of 34 volumes of Virginia
Colonial Abstracts (about 1943), Beverley Fleet wrote of her,
"Mrs. Augusta B. Fothergill, 1011 Grace St., Richmond, Va.
This lady is actually the Dean of Virginia genealogists.
We all agree that we are never with her but that she gives the solution
of some difficult problem. Her library and files are remarkably complete."
Often a man of one time is confused with a man of another time who has the same name
and lives in the same place. Could that have happened here? That, then, leads to the third
question.
Could James Stephen Dillard have been a later Dillard rather than the son of George
Dillard, the founder? One of the most frequent errors in genealogy is confusing two persons who
had the same name. The next is from "The Genealogy of the First Four Generations of Dillard in
America."26
James, son of John Dollard, was born in 1736 and was probably the James Dillard,
who was the first James Dillard, spelled with an i, in a Virginia record, and was the one cited
previously who patented 269 acres, part in New Kent and part in James City County in 1758.
(The first number of James Dillard below is his Modified Register System number; the number
after his name is the number given by Personal Ancestral File and indicates the order in which an
individual is entered into the computer program.)
84. James Dillard 4- 682, (John 3, James 2,
George1) baptized 15 May 1736 in New Kent
County, was probably the one who patented 269 acres of land, part in New Kent County and part
in James City County in 1758. If so, he had advertisements in the Virginia Gazette
on 12 September 1766 and Thursday 20 October 1774.
He had a son, James, Jr., whose death was
announced in the Virginia Gazette for 31 May 1776:
"About 2 o'clock in the morning mr. James
Dillard, jun. an amiable youth, was snatched off in the
flower of his age, to the great grief of his
friends. In the midst of life we are in death! Of whom may we
25NSCDA VA, St. Peter's Parish Register, pp. 7, 8, 153.
26Hughes, "Genealogy of the First Four Generations of Dillard in America" (Lubbock, TX: unpublished manuscript, 1995), p.
20.
So did a later Dillard researcher confuse James Stephen Dillard with a young James Dillard
who died more than 125 years after George's first appearance in a Virginia record in 1650 and less
than two months before the Declaration of Independence was signed in 1776? The question, of
course, cannot be answered. This paper, however, has presented evidence that no Dillard was part
owner of "The Williamsburg Plantation" and that, since no record of an early James Stephen
Dillard has been found in records, and records of men named James Dellard (recopied as Dollard)
do exist, one of those men of record was likely the James Dillard of Henry Moorman Dillard's
article and later Dillard families. Records of later James Dillards have also been discovered.
Correct reading of the early handwriting and consideration of a spelling variation of the Dillard
surname have solved the puzzle.
A wealth of information about the present and the recent past can be gleaned by
exchanging letters with adult relatives. Their personal knowledge of themselves, their children,
their parents, and usually their grandparents preserves this data and is a real gift to the future. For
earlier generations, however, what can be learned from this or a similar study is important to
genealogists. It boils down to documentation. This writer even uses a bit of doggerel as a reminder
to document, document, document:
If something is not documented, it cannot be accepted. If it is documented only by citing
printed material, it should be either omitted or verified by actual records. Also, if the author seems
to cite actual records, before the material is passed on, the records should be spot-checked to see if
the author is honest. Only by research in contemporary records, their correct interpretation, and
careful documentation can one avoid the pitfalls of passing on unverifiable information. Aside
from this, searching for the pertinent records is the great
27The Virginia Gazette of Williamsburg 1736-1780,
Issued on Microfilm by The Institute of Early American History and
Culture from Originals and Photostats loaned by Other Institutions
(Williamsburg, VA: Photographed by Recordak
Microfilming Service, Recordak Corporation, Subsidiary of Eastman
Kodak Company, 1950), Issues of 12 September 1766;
Thursday 20 October 20, 1774; and 31 May 1776.
28Terry Moorman Dillard,
"The Dillard Family," 1957, in Reynolds, The Dillard Family,
p. 4, mentions the burial. Marjorie
Holland, in a telephone call about 1983, told the writer about the tombstone.
This study, however, should not be interpreted as a plea to omit the delightful family stories
about Great Grandma's homesteading experiences; or how, when Grandpa forgot how to stop his
first Model T, he pulled back on the steering wheel and shouted, "Whoa! Whoa!"; or how grieved
Great, Great, Great Grandma was when her stoneware churn was smashed during an Indian
attack. It had been her status symbol--the only churn in the fort a husband hadn't whittled and
made of narrow wooden strips he had carefully fitted together. Family histories need these tales to
spice up the documented begats, and interest in genealogies would be improved by their inclusion.
So let's bury the tradition of James Stephen Dillard with his fabulous estate in the grave so
conveniently prepared for him, complete with a tombstone to remind us never to pass on accounts
of remote ancestors unless they are verified by records or a preponderance of the evidence
recorded in their own time.
DILLARD ANNUAL, Vol. 4, Jan., 1997,
Compiled and edited by John M. Dillard.
should not be accepted as part of the Dillard heritage.
3
Three questions omitted
in the "Ballad" are the subject of this article.
Did a Dillard and three others own "The Williamsburg Plantation"?
DILLARD ANNUAL, Vol. 4, Jan., 1997,
Compiled and edited by John M. Dillard.
Credit for discovering the answer to the question about ownership of "The Williamsburg
Plantation" goes to Henry Moorman Dillard's grandson, Terry Moorman Dillard (1890-1970); and
credit for printing it, to Katherine Reynolds, of Houston, Texas, now deceased. In two typewritten
volumes, The Dillard Family (1975, 576 pages), she included all Dillard information and letters
anyone had sent her and the research she and her sister Bess had done. Though this article and the
"Ballad" deal with errors made by previous researchers, we should realize the difficulty under
which they carried on their investigations. Each of the three--Henry Moorman Dillard, Terry
Moorman Dillard, and Katherine Reynolds--deserves the thanks of present Dillard researchers for
their positive contributions to our subject of interest--the genealogy of the Dillard family in
America. Henry Moorman Dillard (1834-1912) influenced numerous people to learn more of
their ancestors and preserved knowledge of his own family, an activity which Terry Moorman
Dillard carried on and expanded. Miss Reynolds' book should be used with care to distinguish fact
from opinion, but it contains things like the following letter that we would be unable to find
without it. Terry Moorman Dillard was the first to write about the Dillards in the 1704 Quit Rent
Rolls mentioned later. In doing so he found that there were other Dillards in the second generation
besides James, the ancestor claimed by most Dillards who wrote of ancestors before his time. His
letters, research, and trial genealogies make up almost half the book.
COLONIAL WILLIAMSBURG
Restored by John D. Rockefeller, Jr
Williamsburg, Virginia July 30 1956
201 Richard St.
Corpus Christi, Texas.
DILLARD ANNUAL, Vol. 4, Jan., 1997,
Compiled and edited by John M. Dillard.
not find a Dillard among them. As
I wrote Mrs. Sidney Richards, we have not been able to locate any early land grants
to the Dillards for land in James City County in the Virginia Land Patents; unfor-
tunately the records in New Kent and James City Co., Va records have been
destroyed. No deeds or wills prior to 1865 exist in [the] clerk's office and [it
would] be practically impossible to trace a title.
Research department
5 James Stephen Dillard: Was he a Dillard myth or a real person?
DILLARD ANNUAL, Vol. 4, Jan., 1997,
Compiled and edited by John M. Dillard.
there was an earlier
publication. On 23 February 1976 in the vertical file at the Alabama Department of Archives and
History in Montgomery, this writer found "DILLARD--A partial history of the Dillard family" by
H. M. [Henry Moorman] Dillard. It is almost two columns of fine print from the Montgomery
Advertiser for 2 February 1902.8
The first part was quoted previously. This undocumented article
seems to be the real source of most printed versions of Dillard ancestry, including the Hill History.
The explanation for its wide and uncritical use is that Henry Moorman Dillard carried on a
voluminous correspondence, and letter writing was the chief method of discovering ancestors
before large genealogical collections became widely available during the last half of this century.
DILLARD ANNUAL, Vol. 4, Jan., 1997,
Compiled and edited by John M. Dillard.
(Isle of Wight County records show that Henry
Dullard was Henry Bullard, not a Dillard or a
Dullard.12
) Dillard/Dolerd names were found only in
adjoining counties of King and Queen and New Kent.
DILLARD ANNUAL, Vol. 4, Jan., 1997,
Compiled and edited by John M. Dillard.
Church of
England records are vital. Parish registers and vestry books are really official records, since
vestries of the various parishes had certain civil duties. From 1735 the same names--George,
Thomas, and Nicholas Dillard--appear in King and Queen
County.15 Edward is in adjoining
Middlesex County records from 1733 to
1757.16
There is no James Stephen Dillard. There is no
James Dillard.
DILLARD ANNUAL, Vol. 4, Jan., 1997,
Compiled and edited by John M. Dillard.
DILLARD ANNUAL, Vol. 4, Jan., 1997,
Compiled and edited by John M. Dillard.
Peter's Parish Register are alphabetized by surname, further
evidence of a second edition.
DILLARD ANNUAL, Vol. 4, Jan., 1997,
Compiled and edited by John M. Dillard.
This, then, seems to be the answer. It was found earlier in the twentieth century by a
skilled Virginia researcher and by others later and has been verified by this writer. There was no
seventeenth century James Stephen Dillard, but there was a James Dillard
of record, who very
well could have been George Dillard's son. What is the explanation? He was the James
Dollard/Dellard, with no wife named, whose daughter Elizabeth (in 17__, on the same page as
the 1703/04 baptismal records) and son James (in 17__ [page torn], on the same page as 1709
baptismal records) were baptized in St. Peter's Church, New Kent County. The son, James
Dollard/Dellard, probably was the ancestor of later Dillards, since the Dollard name does not
appear in eighteenth century New Kent County records after Susann was baptized in
1757.25
This
James, however, was not the progenitor of all later Dillards, as a number of printed genealogies
imply. Dillards with other given names also had children. Thus a knowledge of the handwriting of
the period seems to have solved one puzzle of the second and later generations of Dillards.
Was James Stephen Dillard confused with a later Dillard?
DILLARD ANNUAL, Vol. 4, Jan., 1997,
Compiled and edited by John M. Dillard.
seek for succour, but of thee, O Lord!"
27
[This James Dillard, Jr., is probably the one buried
three miles from Williamsburg and
called James Stephen Dillard on the tombstone
erected to him some time during the present
century.28
This illustrates a common genealogical error,
that of confusing a person who lived at
one time with one who lived in another.
It is obvious that a James Dillard who died in 1776 "in
the flower of his age" could not have been a son of
George Dillard, first of record 22 May 1650.
It is possible, however, that a James Dillard of 1776 could
have had a second given name, since
men with two given names first appear in Virginia
records about the time of the American
Revolution.
Is not enough proof for a pedigree!
DILLARD ANNUAL, Vol. 4, Jan., 1997,
Compiled and edited by John M. Dillard.
challenge of genealogy, and discovering a
long-sought record is a joy rarely surpassed. Discovering one's true heritage, whatever the social
level of one's ancestors, is the achievement and reward of genealogy.
E-mail Dorothy Dillard Hughes at:
DorothyDHughes@juno.com
DILLARD ANNUAL, Vol. 4; Jan., 1997, pages 23-34.
by the Dillard Family Association
beginning January 1, 1992.
All individual articles are the property
of each writer.
John M. Dillard, compiling editor,
Post Office
Box 91, Greenville, South Carolina, 29602.
E-mail John M. Dillard at:
dillard@netside.com.