Culpeper Ancestry

Sources: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~myfriendsthelambs2/part4/other/culpeper.html and http://www.culpepperconnections.com/ss/p10529.htm and pages thereof.

(click names to see the Culpeper Connections entry)

The Culpeper surname is also spelled Culpepper and Colepeper. "The name Culpep(p)er was derived from two Old English words, 'cullen' (to gather) and 'pepper' and was used as an occupational title for a seller of pepper and other spices." - from "Know Your Name: Culpeper meant 'seller of spices'" (Sunday, January 31, 1982) by John Downing - Special to The Journal-Constitution, The Atlanta Journal, The Atlanta Constitution.

Notes from Lew Griffin of Culpepper Connections in view of Y-DNA findings:

"We found that the Culpeppers of Barbados, who have a known Culpepper ancestry back to England, and the Culpeppers who descend from a 1700s East India Company settler in India, both share the same DNA. We don't know the exact ancestry of the India branch of the family, but it seems to be distinct from the Barbados family, meaning, not a branch of the Barbados family. So two matching Y-DNA samples from disparate branches of the family, with a common ancestor in some unknown but early generation.

The American Culpeppers share a completely different Y-DNA profile. This means that at some unknown point in the past, there was a non-parental event. There are any number of cases of non-parental events, but one common one is adoption, and another common one is that the son takes his mother's maiden name. I think this latter is most likely the case for the American Culpeppers. So I suspect that we still descend from the Culpeppers of early England, except through a daughter rather than through a son. We currently have no way of knowing how far back this non-parental event took place. So we have no way of knowing if we can prove our ancestry back to Cicely Dingley Barret or not. We can prove it through DNA only back to Henry (Henry Culpeper of South Norfolk, VA).

The key word here is "prove." The paper records certainly suggest the ancestry you [James "Jamie" Arthur Johnson] mention [Ancestry back to Capetians and Carolingians through Cicely Dingley Barret].

Bottom line is that the paper records suggest royal ancestries through Cicely Dingley Barret, but it is not yet proven by DNA. Therefore the following ancestries remain unproven: the Malet, Poyntz, Beaumont, Vermandois, Anjou, Kievan ancestry, Byzantine ancestry, Viking ancestry, de Braiose, La Zouche, ancestry to kings of Leinster, legendary Irish ancestry and ancestry to the kings of Wales and Mercia and all the ancestries thereof.

However, I am descended from Sarah Culpeper Pritchard, daughter of John Culpeper "The Rebel of Albemarle." And with him having sailed from Barbados, that would point to English ancestry. The specifics are still in question, but John "The Rebel" won't show up in Y-DNA since he did not have any sons.

~ James "Jamie" Arthur Johnson
December 30, 2016

[There was ] someone from England who joined the East India Company as a young man and was in India by 1750[.] His name was Edmund Culpeper (one less p) and he was the founder of a small branch of the Culpepers which now lives in India, Pakistan, Canada, Australia, etc. After taking Indian brides for many generations they are essentially an Indian family except for the Y-DNA. If we could figure out the ancestry of Edmund, born circa 1728, it would solve a great puzzle in the Culpepper family. As a point of curiosity, Edmund probably had shore leave at Gibraltar on his way to India in 1750.

You may be curious as to why this obscure Edmund Culpeper is of such great interest to us. The answer is that the Y-DNA his descendants carry is of great importance. The brief gist of the problem is that the male line of the Culpepper / Culpeper / Colepeper family very nearly went extinct. I don't know if it was because they were on the wrong side of the English Civil War, or if they were wiped out by the plague of London or the Great Fire of London. In any case, only three modern branches of the family survive. One branch went to Barbados in the 1600s, and is mostly found today in South Africa and elsewhere in the British Commonwealth. The second branch was this Edmund who went to India, probably from England, but there are no known records of him in either England or Barbados. These two lines share the same DNA signature, which proves a common ancestor in England prior to 1600. The ancestry of the Barbados line is well-documented in England back to the 1400s. The American Culpeppers descend from a Henry Culpepper who came to Virginia in the 1600s, and his descendants share a Y-DNA signature which is distinct from the other two lines just mentioned. So the question then arises, which of the two DNA signatures is the oldest, and goes back to the 1400s, and which represents a case of "hidden paternity?" Circumstantial paper records connect Henry to John Culpeper "The Merchant," born 1606. They were found traveling on the same ship, and were both in records in Lancaster County, VA, before Henry moved to Norfolk County in the 1660s. And this John’s ancestry is well-known and he should have the same DNA signature as Edmund and as the Barbados Culpepers. But Henry, at least, does not. So the most likely guess at this point is that Henry himself was the result of hidden paternity. He may have been a Culpepper on the maternal side, and that would probably be likely. But at this point all we have to work with is our best guess as to probabilities. And Henry seems to be the odd man out, as opposed to Edmund of India and the Barbados group. Henry would have been born around 1644, a time of upheaval and disorder in England. There does not seem to be any practical way to solve this mystery, other than by taking DNA samples from known graves of early Culpepers in England. And that does not seem to be a likely possibility in my lifetime.

...

It was my great grandmother's brother, Joseph Culpepper, who wrote a letter to his cousin George Bright Culpepper, around 1910, in which he stated that he had always heard that "there were two Lord Culpeppers, and we were descended from one of them." He was pointing out that there were errors in the information he had received from George, but this was the one bit of tradition he knew. Joe's father Lewis Culpepper (1816 – 1915) was still living at the time the letter was written, so the tradition most likely came from Lewis. It was Thomas Lord Culpeper Second Baron of Thoresway (died 1689) who was an early governor of Virginia, and he left no male descendants. He rarely showed up in Virginia to fulfill his post. It was his relative John Culpeper of Astwood in Feckenham (1565-1635) who apparently did leave descendants in America, although not necessarily named Culpepper. He was the father of Thomas Culpeper of the Middle Temple (1602-1652) who supposedly died in Virginia. And the father of John Culpepper "The Merchant" (1606-1674) who also died in Virginia. We think John "The Merchant" was the father of John "The Rebel" of Albemarle. John "The Rebel" had at least one known daughter who married a Pritchard, and left many currently living descendants. Our Henry was once thought to also be a son of John "the Merchant" and brother of John "the Rebel" and there is paper evidence, quite inconclusive, which leans in this direction. But the DNA, as mentioned, throws a large monkey wrench at the paper conclusions. After 40 years, I never did figure out if I was descended from one of two Lord Culpeppers, as my great grandmother's brother Joe Culpepper (1840-1920) claimed. But I had fun trying, and I ran into a lot of interesting folks along the way.

~ Lew Griffin, 18-19 January 2017

                          Ancestry

|
|
  Ancestry

|
|
Walter de Cantilupe
|
|
|
|
William I de Cantilupe
d. 7 April 1239
Mazilia (Marcelin) Braci
m.
|
|
|
|
 
  Ancestry
through parents
William and Eve (Marshal)
de Braiose
(de Braose)


|
|
              His ancestry includes Charlemagne and Alfred the Great
|
|
  |
|
  Alan la Zouche,
Baron

b. ca. 1224
Ashby-de-la-Zouch, Leicestershire, England
d. 10 Aug 1270
m. before 1244 Elena de Quincy
b. ca. 1226
d. ca. 20 Aug 1296
Millicent (or Maud) de Gournai, daughter of Hugh de Gournai
m.
|
|
|
|
  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sir Thomas de Colepeper the Recognitor
b. ca. 1170
m.
b.
d.
            Sir Nicholas Poyntz,
Knight

(circa 1220 - before 7 Oct 1273)
m. ca. 1251 Elizabeth Dyall
b. ca. 1220
    |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
  William III de Cantelowe (de Cantelou, de Cantelupe),
Knight, of Calne, Wiltshire, Baron of Eaton Bray, Bedfordshire

b. ca. 1216
Calne, Wiltshire, England
d. 25 September 1254
Calstone, Wiltshire, England
Body interred 30 September 1254 at Studley Priory, Studley, Warwickshire, England
Related Wikipedia article
m. 25 July 1238 Eva de Braiose
b. ca. 1220-1227
flourished in 1238
d. July 1225
Bramber, co. Sussex, England
d. before 28 July 1255
Related Wikipedia article
  |
|
                |
|
      |
|
    |
|
 
  John Culpeper
b. ca. 1200
m.
b.
d.
            Sir Hugh Poyntz,
Knight, of Curry-Mallet, 1st Lord Poyntz

(25 Aug 1252 - 1307)
m. ca. 1273 Margaret Paveley
b. ca. 1254
  Eudes (Eudo de) la Zouche of Harringworth, Northhamptonshire
b. ca. 1244
Ashby-de-la-Zouch, Leicestershire, England
d. before 1280
m. ca. 1274
Abergavenny, Monmouthshire, England
Millicent de Cantelowe (de Cantilupe)
b. ca. 1250
Calne, Wiltshire, England
d. ca. 1299
Harringworth, Northamptonshire, England
 
    |
|
                |
|
      |
|
     
    Sir Thomas Culpeper of Brenchley and Bayhall
b. ca. 1230
d. after 1309
m.
b.
d.
            Sir Nicholas Poyntz,
Knight, of Curry-Mallet, 2nd Lord Poyntz

b. ca. 1278
Tockington, Gloucestershire, England
d. before 12 July 1311
co. Kent, England
m. before 20 Jan 1287 Elizabeth la Zouche
b. ca. 1274
Harringworth, Northamptonshire, England
 
      |
|
                  |
|
         
      Sir Thomas Culpeper of Bayhall in Pembury, co. Kent
b. ca. 1260
d. 1321
Referred to as "fil' Thom' Colepeper de Brenchesle" in 1306. He was executed at Winchelsea for taking the side of the Earl of Lancaster against King Edward II.
m. 1299 Margery Bayhall
b. ca. 1265
        Richard Norton
b. ca. 1325
    Nicholas Poyntz of Hoo, Kent
b. ca. 1304
d. after 1355
m. Alianora
(maiden name unknown)

b. ca. 1310
     
        |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
  |
|
      |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
      |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
       
        Sir John Culpeper of Hardreshull and Bayhall
b. ca. 1305
d. after 1370
m. ca. 1345
Pembury, co. Kent, England
Elizabeth Hardreshull
b. ca. 1320
  Thomas Barrett of Belhouse in Aveley, Essex, Esquire
b. ca. 1353
m. Elizabeth Norton
b. ca. 1355
      Nicholas Poyntz of North Okenden, Essex, Esq.
b. ca. 1330
d. after 1372
       
          |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
      |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
  |
|
    |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
       
          Sir Thomas Culpeper of Bayhall, Hardreshull & Exton
b. ca. 1356
d. ca. 1428
m. ca. 1380 Joyce
(maiden name unknown)

b. ca. 1348
d.
  John Barrett of Belhouse in Aveley, Essex, Esquire
b. ca. 1383
m. Alice Belhouse
b. ca. 1385
    Edward Poyntz of Essex, Esq.
b. ca. 1385
       
            |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
  |
|
  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
      |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
       
            Walter Culpeper of Goudhurst, Bayhall & Hardreshull
b. ca. 1400
d. 24 Nov 1462
Goudhurst, co. Kent, England
His body was interred after 24 Nov 1462 at Bedgebury Chapel of St. Mary's Church, Goudhurst, co. Kent, England.
m. Agnes Roper
b. ca. 1400
St. Dunstan's, Canterbury, co. Kent, England
d. 2 Dec 1457 Goudhurst, co. Kent, England
Her body was interred circa 3 Dec 1457 at Bedgebury Chapel of St. Mary's Church, Goudhurst, co. Kent, England.
  Thomas Barrett of Belhouse in Aveley, Essex, Esq.
b. ca. 1413
m. ca. 1437 Mawde (or Margaret) Poyntz
b. ca. 1415
              |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
John Gaynesford
b. ca. 1400
d. after 9 October 1450
|
|
?
That John Gaynesford was the father of Agnes is speculation. Suggest checking the will of John Gaynesford, dated 9 October 1450 and made at Prerogative Court of Canterbury, England. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
           
              John Culpeper of Bayhall, Hardreshull & Bedgebury
b. ca. 1430
d. 22 Dec 1480
m. ca. 1465 Agnes Gainsford
b. ca. 1445
    Robert Barrett of Belhouse in Aveley, Essex, Esq.
b. ca. 1455
m. ca. 1483 Margaret (or Margery) Knolles
b. ca. 1460
 
                |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
        |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
         
                |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
              |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
   
                |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edward de Guildford
b. ca. 1385
d.
m. ca. 1408 Julian Markett
a.k.a.
Julian de Pitlesden
b. ca. 1387
d.
     
Sir Richard Waller
b. ca. 1394
Groombridge, co. Kent, England
d. 1462
Speldhurst, co. Kent, England
Magaret Gulby
b. ca. 1395
d.
m. ca. 1416
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
   
                |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
        |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
   
                |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
  Sir John Guildford,
Knight

b. ca. 1423
co. Kent, England
d.
m. ca. 1445 Alice Waller
b. ca. 1424
d.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
   
                |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
    |
|
  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
    |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
   
                |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
    Henry Aucher of Lossenham
b. ca. 1456
d. before 28 November 1494
m. Elizabeth Guildford
b. ca. 1453
    |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
   
                |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
      |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
      |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
  |
|
                Walter Culpeper of Calais and Wigsell
b. ca. 1475
d. 1514
m. ca. 1498 Anne Aucher
b. ca. 1480
d. ca. 1533
  John Barrett of Belhouse in Aveley, Essex
(1485 - 4 Oct 1526)
m. ca. 1504 Phillipe Bardfeld
b. 1490
                  |
|
              |
|
 
I am possibly related to Princess Diana
Definitely through this couple: The late Diana Spencer, Princess of Wales, if considering only this couple, is my 12th cousin, once removed as she is also descended from this couple. They are her 13th great grandparents and my 12th great grandparents. ~ James Arthur Johnson
William Culpeper of Hunton and Wigsell
b. 1509
d. November 1559
m. 4 January 1530 at Wigsell, Salehurst, co. Sussex, England Cicely Dingley Barrett
b. 1512
d. 6 December 1559

Please refer to above "Research Note" as DNA connection to Cicely Dingley Barrett is unverified.

                    |
|
|
|
|
|
The below three generations are probable in that John Culpeper "The Rebel of Abelmarle" was descended from a John Culpeper and based on details of his life, likely John the Merchant. While other John Culpepers existed and were candidates for his father, all of those John Culpepers were descended from a common ancestor in William Culpeper of Hunton and Wigsell and Cicely Dingley Barrett
                    |
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
Since she is my probable ancestor, the following surnames are probably in my ancestry: Sedley, Grove and Cotton.          
I am related to Princess Diana
Certainly through the couple above and likely through this couple. The late Diana Spencer, Princess of Wales, through this couple, would be my 11th cousin, once removed as she is descended from this couple. They are her 12th great grandparents and would be my 11th great grandparents. ~ James Arthur Johnson
John Culpeper of Wigsell
(a.k.a. John Culpeper of Greenway Court)
b. 1531
at Wigsell, Salehurst, co. Sussex, England
d. 20 October 1612
at Salehurst, co. Sussex, England
m. ca. 1560
Salehurst, co. Sussex, England
Elizabeth Sedley
b. 1534
Southfleet, co. Kent, England
d. 16 May 1618
Salehurst, co. Sussex, England
 
                      |
|
|
|
|
|
             
                      |
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
         
                      John Culpeper of Astwood
in Feckenham, co. Worcs., England
b. 1565
at Wigsell, Salehurst, co. Sussex, England
d. ca. 16 December 1635
at Hollingbourne, co. Kent, England
m. at Greenway Court, Hollingbourne, co. Kent, England, in 1600 Ursula Woodcock
b. 27 January 1566
d. 2 June 1612
Since she is my probable ancestor, the Bower surname is probably in my ancestry.        
                        |
|
   
The parents of John Culpeper "The Rebel of Albemarle"
According to Culpeper, John by Mattie Erma E. Parker (1979), an article first appearing in Dictionary of North Carolina Biography, University of North Carolina Press, the father of John Culpeper "The Rebel" (seen below) was Thomas Culpeper of Feckenham, Worcestershire, England, who was brother to the John Culpeper the Merchant seen to the right. If that is true, then the mother of John Culpeper "The Rebel" would be Katherine St. Leger. This would also place John "The Rebel" being born ca. 1633. However, the article comes from a 1979 source. If the article was correct, then it only changes who the parents of John "The Rebel" are and his patrilineal ancestry prior to his father remains the same. However, Culpepper Connections is well-researched and indicates that John "The Rebel" is not John Culpeper son of Thomas & Katherine on the basis of the deposition of John "The Rebel" concluding his being born between November 1641 and August 1648 as indicated in the Master's Thesis of William S. Smith, Jr., "Culpeper's Rebellion, New Data and Old Problems," page 19. And of course there are the other conclusions from other sources there indicating that John "The Rebel" is not John son of Thomas and Katherine. Rather, John "The Rebel" and John son of Thomas and Katherine were first cousins.
John Culpeper the Merchant
b. ca. 1606
baptized at Harrietsham, co. Kent, England, on 26 Oct 1606.
d. ca. 1674
in Virginia
m.
b.
d.
       
The above three generations are probable in that John Culpeper "The Rebel of Abelmarle" was descended from a John Culpeper and based on details of his life, likely John the Merchant. While other John Culpepers existed and were candidates for his father, all of those John Culpepers were likely descended from a common ancestor in William Culpeper of Hunton and Wigsell and Cicely Dingley Barrett. However, this is not proven.   |
|
|
|
|
|
         
                          |
|
|
unverified
|
|
  George Maggs
b. ca. 1620
d. June 1677
Barbados
m. ca. 1645 Ann
(maiden name unknown)

b. ca. 1622
 
                          |
|
|
|
|
|
    |
|
|
|
|
|
   

According to Bardsley, "Mayo is an ancient English family: Mayhew, Mayow, Mayo, Mayhow, Mayho.-Bapt. 'the son of Matthew,' from O.F. Mayheu. It was impossible to keep the surname from corrupted forms. There is probably no connexion with co. Mayo, Ireland, in any single instance." ... But in all fairness, it should be pointed out that Woulfe (in Irish Names and Surnames) lists "Mayhew, Mayhow" and also "Mayo" as old Irish names. So the name Mayo is either English or Irish, or both. ... Edward Mayo, Esquire, settled by 1684 in Perquimans County, North Carolina." Edward Mayo could have had a wife named Sarah, but that is undetermined at the writing of the magazine in 1971. He certainly had a daughter named Sarah. (North Carolina Genealogy - Spring-Summer 1971, pp. 2617-2618).

|
|
|
|
|
|
Edward Mayo
b. ca. 1635
d. ca. 1701
Albemarle Co., North Carolina
m. 2 September 1666
Christ Church, Barbados
Sarah Maggs
(unverified)
b. ca. 1650
d. ca. 1680
Barbados
   
                          |
|
|
|
|
|
  |
|
|
|
|
|
     

It seems that there are some significant indications regarding John "The Rebel" and Barbados in William Smith, Jr.'s Master's thesis (NCSU, 1990) Culpeper's Rebellion: New Data and Old Problems: He indicates that John "The Rebel" Culpeper had "arrived in South Carolina about 16 February 1670/71 in the ship Carolina from Barbadoes." (p. 14) - source being mentioned on page 94 of the thesis: "John West to Lord Ashley, 2 March 1670/71 in Collections of the South Carolina Historical Society, vol. 5, The The Shaftesbury Papers, (Charleston: South Carolina Historical Society, 1897), 266-267 (hereafter cited as Shaftesbury Papers; Stephen Bull to Lord Ashley 2 March 1670, 71 in Shaftesbury Papers, 273. Note that despite being First Vice President of the South Carolina Historical Society in 1696-7, Gen. Edward McCrady cited the Calendar of State Papers Colonial (Sainsbury) London, 1899 as his source for stating that Culpeper arrived in the John and Thomas, a ship which had arrived on 8 February 1670/71. The time difference is such that it matters little which ship was used. Edward McCrady, The History of South Carolina Under the Proprietary Government 1670-1719 (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1901), 143; the ship Carolina was owned by the Lords Proprietors and made its first voyage from Downes to the colony via Barbadoes and Bermuda in 1669 with a load of colonists, see K.H.D. Haley, The First Earl of Shaftesbury (Oxford: Claredon Press, 1968), 248." And on page 17: "There is the John Culpeper who immigrated from Barbados to the Charles Town area of what is now South Carolina, and whose name was later the same one used in conjunction with the disturbances in Albemarle County in 1677." I also have to remember that the conclusion that most American Culpepers are descended from Henry is Y-DNA. I am descended from Sarah Culpeper Pritchard, daughter of John "The Rebel." And with him having sailed from Barbados, that would point to English ancestry. The specifics are still in question (see also John Culpeper of Barbados as well as the article by Warren Culpepper "John Culpepers of Barbados"), but John "The Rebel" won't show up in Y-DNA since he did not have any sons.

Notes from Smith's thesis (mentioned above): He "arrived in South Carolina about 16 February 1670/71 in the ship Carolina from Barbadoes" (p. 14, citing the following on p. 94: John West to Lord Ashley, 2 March 1670/71 in Collections of the South Carolina Historical Society, vol. 5, The Shaftesbury Papers, (Charleston: South Carolina Historical Society, 1897), 266-267 (hereafter cited as Shaftesbury Papers; Stephen Bull to Lord Ashley 2 March 1670, 71 in Shaftesbury Papers, 273. Note that despite being First Vice President of the South Carolina Historical Society in 1696-7, Gen. Edward McCrady cited the Calendar of State Papers Colonial (Sainsbury) London, 1899 as his source for stating that Culpeper arrived in the John and Thomas, a ship which had arrived on 8 February 1670/71. The time difference is such that it matters little which ship was used. Edward McCrady, The History of South Carolina Under the Proprietary Government 1670-1719 (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1901), 143; the ship Carolina was owned by the Lords Proprietors and made its first voyage from Downes to the colony via Barbadoes and Bermuda in 1669 with a load of colonists, see K.H.D. Haley, The First Earl of Shaftesbury (Oxford: Claredon Press, 1968), 248).

John Culpeper,
"The Rebel of Albemarle"
"The Carolina Rebel"

b. ca. 1644 (btwn Nov. 1641 and Aug. 1648)
Albemarle, NC, or Barbados??
d. ca. January 1694
Pasquotank Precinct, NC
(NCPedia Article)

OR

"died in Albemarle County sometime between 11 June 1691 and February 1693/94" (Smith thesis, p. 54).
m. 23 August 1688
in Perquimans Precinct, NC
This was his third marriage.
Sarah Mayo
b. ca. 1668-1672
Barbados
d. ca. 1726

According to William Wade Hinshaw, Encyclopedia of American Quaker Genealogy (Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1936), Vol. I, p. 162, she was born early 1670's(?), before the family came to Carolina died probably before 1726. Pasquotank [Quaker] Monthly Meeting, Pasquotank Co., N.C., reported, 3 of 2 Mo. 1726, the death of Matthew Pritchard [Sarah's last husband]; Thomas his sole surviving heir.

Sarah first married John Culpeper, second John Larkin and third Matthew Pritchard according to data published in Hathaway's magazines. "The document appears in full in Hathaway, and is entitled: "The Petition of Matthew Pritchard and wife Sarah to the Court of Chancery. (Original in Court House at Edenton, N.C.)." The first part of the petition reads as follows: "To the honoble high Cort of Chancery The Bill of Complaint of Matthew Pritchard and Sarah his wife Administratrix of Patrick Henley deceased and also Extrix of John Culpeper deceased Complaynants agt Capt John Hunt, Deft In humble manner yor Dayly Orator humbly shew to your Honors that some time before the Decease of the sd Culpeper yor orator Sarah's former husband One James Larkin of New England came to and agreed with him for the use of s Store house and accomodations for Such person as he should Send to look after the management and Sale of what Goods should be Sent...." It is obvious that the statement in the foregoing--"Sarah's former husband"--refers to Culpeper, and NOT to James Larkin, as Hathaway interpreted it. Sarah married as a Mayo to Culpeper, and the petition plainly states that after the death of Culpeper the said Sarah then married Henley; and as Sarah Henley; and as Sarah Henley she married in 1699 to Matthew Pritchard. So the Mayo-Larkins marriage may be discounted since it never took place" (North Carolina Genealogy - Spring-Summer 1971, pp. 2619-2620).

                            |
|

descendants
       

John Culpeper of Albemarle, Carolina (later North Carolina), was most likely son of John Culpeper the Merchant. Some errant records may have him as the fictitious John Harlow Culpeper or John Marlo Culpeper, but middle names were not used in that era and those names were added as a "prank" in the early 1900s (see http://www.culpepperconnections.com/ss/p62576.htm). In 1667, the actual John Culpeper of Albemarle became known as "the Rebel" in the Culpeper Rebellion (see below). Though there were other John Culpepers and questions regarding this John Culpeper's ancestry, they all (including this John) likely have a common ancestor in William Culpeper of Hunton and Wigsell (1509-1559).

The Culpeper Rebellion (1677-1679) (Encyclopaedia Britannica)
"The Culpeper rebellion was one of the first popular uprisings in the American colonies against British authority. "The northern, or Albemarle colony in Carolina consisted at that time of not more than 4000 persons. They were engaged, mainly, in the raising of tobacco, which they traded for necessities with New England merchants, but enforcement of the navigation laws denied them a free market outside of England, and heavy duties placed on every pound of tobacco sold was directed at keeping the northern merchants from their harbour. "Resentment was fostered by refugees from Virginia, where Nathaniel Bacon's rebellion had been put down with repressive measure, and by the New England men who were anxious to resume a profitable trade. All feelings of repression found an object in Gov. Miller, who in the absence of Governor Eastchurch, was at once the governor, secretary and collector. "The insurrection came to a head in 1677 with John Culpeper as its leader. Culpeper had emmigrated to the southern or Clarendon colony at about 1670, where he was commissioned surveyor-general, and was active in political life. At the time of the insurrection, he was said to have been a refugee from Clarendon where he was wanted for inciting poor planters to riot. "Under his leadership, the first act of the insurgent settlers was to imprision Gov. Miller and seven proprietary deputies, that is, the entire council except the president whose sympathies they had won. They also appropriated some 3000 pounds and all public records, established courts of justice, appointed judges and convoked a legislative assembly. "On 3 December 1677, they issued the first American manifesto entitled "Remonstrance of the inhabitants of Pasquotank to all the rest of the county of Albemarle” and signed by 34 persons. In an outline of the grievances justifying their rebellion, they protested against excessive taxation, the denial of a freely elected assembly and interference with the regular channels of commerce. Miller had no military forces at his disposal and the settlers were virtually unopposed. For two years, with Culpeper as governor, they exercised all the powers and duties of government and functioned as an independent commonwealth. When Eastchurch arrived from England the following year, he was not accorded recognition, but before he could enlist military assistance from the governor of Virginia, he died of a fever. "The settlers, hopeful of a just settlement, sent Culpeper and his assistant Holdern to England, promising submission to proper authority. But Gov. Miller had in the meantime managed his escape and was in England to greet Culpeper with charges of treason and embezzlement. Culpeper submitted to trial, but requested that, if pardon was denied, he be allowed trial in Carolina, where the events charged had taken place. This was not necessary for he found support in the influential earl of Shaftesbury, himself a proprietor, who defended him claiming that no regular government existed in Albemarle and that Culpeper's actions were not treasonable. Culpeper returned to South Carolina in 1680 where he surveyed and laid out Charles Town (now Charleston)."
[source]

Extensive timeline with solid research.

This was not in the old site.