I don't know if the emigrants were non-conformist. I was wondering whether the port
(Bristol as opposed to London or elsewhere) might give a clue whether they were
indentured servants or from the wealthier ranks of society. Thank you both very much
for the useful insights so far.
Peter Park wrote:
> >>Virginia was a tobacco growing area and there was a thriving tobacco industry
> in Bristol - possibly because that was the nearest port to the Americas.
> Bristol also was a centre of the slave trade, and Virginia needed slaves.
> Therefore (as already pointed out) ships went to Virginia from Bristol: for
> trade purposes, because it was the closest port and because merchant traders
> financed the various expeditions. Liverpool was still undeveloped at that time.
>
> I guess that it was cheaper for emigrants, too: the fewer miles you had to go by
> ship, the cheaper the passage.<<
>
> London was the other major port trading with the Americas at this time and is
> nearer Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire. Bristol was a strong Quaker area - were
> the emigrants in the original query Quakers or any other form of non-conformist?
>
> Regards,
>
> Peter Park. Walton on Thames, Surrey, UK.
>
> ... to know something of our ancestors, has always appeared to have been a
> desirable thing to me, and if any records had been handed down to me, I should
> have considered it as a Vallueable treasure.
> Benjamin Shaw, 1826.
|