Talk:Jamestown

Descendants of Morning Ripple of the Powhatan

Through a writing by William L. Deyo, an Official Historican of the Patawomeck Tribe of Virginia (the Patawomeck Tribe I have learned I am a descendant of), also Deyo's writings of 'The Monteith Family and Potomac Indians' (2001), 'The Sullivan Family of Stafford County, Virginia' (2000) both by William L. Deyo, also the writing of Don Green - 'Shawnee Heritage' (vol. IV, p. 393, and Five Generations fo the Family of Burr Harrison (1991), by John P. Alcock, pp. 50 - 53, 93 as well as other records, have Morning Ripple of the Powhatan 'married' or together with Nonoma Winanuske, a statement Nonoma Winanuske is the daughter of Poechancanough, the child of the union is Running Stream, Werowance, of the Powhatan, of the Chesapeake Bay and Virginia Coast, he was born c. 1500/10, in the Werowocomoco, Orapax Virginia area, died c. 1570, near the Pamunkey River, King William, Virginia.

Running Stream is 'married' to 'Rachel' Scent Morning Flower Wahunsenacawh, is recorded to be born 3 June 1517, near the confluence of Dam and Staunton Rivers; Indian land in Virginia, dying c. 1570 - 1600, in Jamestown, James, Virginia. Rachel, 'Scent Morning Flower' the daughter of Weroance I-Opasus Dashing Stream Mangopeesomon Arroyah Powhatan (Blue Ridge Mountain area) he is the son of Murmuring Ripple and an Unknown, Rachel's mother is Pau Pauwiske Morning Scent Flower Arroyah Powhatan. Children: Mamuatonick a.k.a. Wahunsenacawh Ottaniack Powhatan, Openchancanough Mangopeesomon 'Eagle Plum', Opichipam Itoyatin 'Otiotan', Sasawpen, Apachamo Kekataugh.

Mamuatonick (Emperor) Wahunsenacawh Ottanicack of Powhatan ['Big Chief' a.k.a. 'Paramount Cheif of Powhatan', of Werowocomoco over a population of six tribes numbering from 13,000 - 34,000 persons within the Tsenacomacah (Tidewater region of Virginia) of his territory on the York River, Gloucester County, Virginia -area located around Jamestown Colony before Jamestown was established. Mamuatonick's 1st spouse is stated to be, Amopotuskee Shawano, the mother of Cleopatra Shawano Powhatan; his 2nd spouse: Winganuske Matatiske Patawomeck, daughter of Wahunsenacawh 'Great King' of the Patawomekc, possibly the older sister of Amopotuskee Shawano. The current recorded children of Mamuatonick and Winganuske are Pocahontas, Ursula 'Unity' Powhatan Croshaw.

Cleopatra Shawano Powhatan consider of royal bloodline is stated to be married to Chief Opechancanough Mangopeesomon 'Eagle Plum' Powhatan (her Uncle through her father), his YDNA ties to West Indies NA paternally. Their children: Jane Eagle Plume 'Plume Dodson', Weroance Nectowance Powhatan

Jane Eagle Plume 'Plume Dodson' is said to have married a John Dodson, who survived the Indian Massacre at Jamestown, 22 March 1622; John served in teh Council and General Court of Jamestown, 1622 - 1629; He is listed in the 1624 muster, without children. John Dodson is stated to be born 1571, Great Henny, Braintree District, Essex, England, d. 1652, James City Co., Virginia. Buried: Unknown. Children of this union is stated to be, Jesse, William, Benjamin, yet stated to have died young.

Weroance Nectowance Powhatan, 'Chief of Wyanoak and Werowance' 'King Nectowance' (1630 -1644) signed the treaty with the English, born c. 1600/15, Prapax Farms, New Kent County, Virginia, d. c. 1649. Buried: Pamunkey Indian Reservation, King William, King William Co., Virginia. is stated to have been married to Unknown. Children of this union are Cockacoeske, Patawomek.

Cocacoeske Powhatan West, 'Queen Anne', 'Queen of Pamunkey and Weroansqua' (Ruled: 1656 - 1686) First signer of the Treaty of Middle River Plantation Pamunkey, confirmed to the Pamunkey Tribe in 1658 by Governor, Council, and General Assembly of Virginia; Cockacoeske signed the Treaty of 1677 between the Prince William III, of Orange acting through the Governor of Virginia and several Native American Tribes, including the Pamunkey Tribe. It was King Charles II who presented 'Queen Anne' wit ha silver headband, or coronet, inscribed, 'Queen of Pamunkey'.

Cockacoeske was in appearance in 1715 seeking more fair treatment for her people, yet suggested to have died before 1686, this death is refuted by William Deyo's recordings. Her spouse is stated to be Totopotomoi a.k.a. Tatpatamoi Chepiack, 'Toby West' (Ruled: 1649 - 1656); Toby was a raider on the colony, killing in 1622, 350 colonist, destroying the towns Ironworks, stated to have been born in East Sussex, England, c. 1616, died in Richmond, Richmond City, Virignia at Battle of Bloody Run, 1 January 1656. Toby West is the son of Governor Thomas West, '3rd Baron de la Warr' who was the son of Thomas West, '2nd Baron de la Warr' and Anne Knollys, Toby's mother was Rachel 'Matachanna' Powhatan Croshaw.

Children of Cockacoeske and Toby West are Susannah Swann, Jane Totopotomoi West Harrison, Joseph West.

When Pocahontas traveled to England, in 1616, she resided at Lord de la Warr's country estate in Blackhurst Park, Sussex, England. Rachel 'Matachanna' is stated to have gone with Pocahontas to England.

On the journey or in England, it is stated, Rachel did take up a relationship with Joseph Croshaw the son of Captain Raleigh Croshaw, a founder of Jamestown, also of Bermuda.

It is stated, Cockacoeske had a liasion with Colonel John West II, son of Governor John West who was the son of Thomas West, '2nd Baron de la Warr. They had a child, Major John West.

Colonel John West II was married to Ursula 'Unity' Croshaw West, half sibling of Cleopatra their children are, Sarah Anne West Fox, Nathaniel West, John West.

Capt. Lt. -Col. Nathaniel West so of John West II and Ursula 'Unity' Croshaw was a member of the House of Burgesses of the British Colony and Dominion of Virginia for King William County (1703 - 1705). Nathaniel was married to Martha Woodward a.k.a. Macon, she was married first to Gideon Macon, with children Elizabeth Macon, Gideon Macon, Ann Macon, Martha Macon Jones, William Macon, John Macon, James Macon. Martha married a 3rd time to William John Biggars, with a child named William J. Bigger, James Bigger (?). Children of Nathaniel West and Martha were Unit West Dandridge, Francis West, Thomas West, John William West.

Unity West Dandridge born c. 1702/03, West Point, King William perhaps York County, Virginia, is buried in Aylett Graves at Fairfield Plantation, was married to Colonel William Dandridge II, of Hampton, King William County, appointed to the Governor's Council by King George I, 1 June 1727, taking his seat on the 11th of September 1727.

William was a surveyor of the 'Dividing Line' of Virginia and North Carolina. He owned a wharf and a ship, worked as a merchant. Resided on the bank of the Pamunkey River opposite his younger brother, John Dandridge, Jr. of Elsing Green.

Michelle Obama is claiming descendance from John Dandridge's father George through an African/Indian 'freeborn' slave.

The children of Unity West and Colonel William Dandridge II are Martha West Dandridge Aylett, Elizabeth Dandridge Claiborne, Mary West Dandridge Campbell, William Dandridge, Anne Dandridge, Nathaniel West Dandridge. Martha West Dandridge married Philip Aylett son of William Aylett and Anne Taylor.

Regarding the 1619 project. My ancestors came to Swansea Massachusetts and were a 'component' of the Quaker settlement, though it appears they were here well before Quaker's began to use slaves in the Plymouth Colony, or northern colonies.

My ancestors were not here to take on slaves, they were here to survive, not due to persecution of religion but with intent to escape the conditions of the 'royal kingdom' which they were descendants of with Wales royal family.

The ancestors prevalent in the Jamestown Colony were here to plant tobacco and began trade with Indians of the North American continent before slaves.

Recorded history reflects that it wasn't until twelve years later that a shipped arrived near Jamestown, that held captive person that were headed to South America from Africa and the ship was pirated. These deported persons from Africa, found their way to North America due to the captain of the ships looking for victuals they then became indentured or person of servitude, and the slave trade began.

What wharf did they arrive on, these slaves? Was it the wharf owned by Colonel William Dandridge II?

This is a Jamestown Colony story right? There is nothing written about the twenty years prior and the interaction with my ancestors, my family, colonist, the relation to the main characters of the colonies or the Indian Tribes or even King George I who had Colonel William II and two others survey the Dividing Line.

2600:6C47:A07F:D84B:5868:6DD9:ABD3:FB62 (talk) 17:43, 26 May 2024 (UTC)Queen Regent of Plum Tree Memory Family - Genealogy

References

1619 project has nothing to do Jamestown

Adding that paragraph is a blatant attempt to distract from the actual fact that both Jamestown and Roanoke predate 1619 and therefore discredit the entire premise that slavery is the foundation of America. It’s politics and opinion—not history. 2601:196:8702:FBF0:39B8:1A87:9320:77AC (talk) 07:23, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Adding what paragraph? Also, there are no mentions of The 1619 Project in this article. Largoplazo (talk) 07:50, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Ok, it's not the "1619 Project" per se but the idea that slavery existed at the very beginning of the first American colonies is spurious at best.

The Mayflower landed on November 11, 1620, and the Pilgrims would have had nothing to do with slavery or indentured servants. The Pilgrims (and most early Christians who migrated here) would not have anyone else do their work here.

The other, earlier colonists (Jamestown, Roanoke) were dirt poor; they had no possessions or money to trade to pay for slaves. Many colonists were fleeing something from the Old World to start a new life here in North America or the "West Indies".

Now, if you also look at the history of Jamestown, about 80% of the colonists died from starvation in 1610 and temporarily abandoned the colony. They needed another ship to resupply with food and more people. Slaves were not imported until much later when they had more money/trade goods and more interest from Europe were placed in colonizing the area.

The "1619 Project" is a specific left-leaning documentary project that states that the ONLY reason that the United States existed was because of and for the further promulgation of black African slaves. This does not consider that the first "indentured servants" were actually from Ireland. Great Britain conquered Ireland; debtors, criminals, and such folk were given the choice of prison or migrating to North America as 'indentured servants'. These men and women were slaves since they didn't have much choice.... either prison or servitude. 73.35.211.62 (talk) 03:12, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

My apologies; I should have reinforced the earlier facts. This article states that a British privateer ship captured a Portuguese slave ship ("Sao Joao Bautista"), including their cargo of 20 African slaves. As per this article, the 20 Africans were used as part of an "indentured servant" program to help with farming. The slaves were not purchased by the British government or the colonists per se but captured by a privateer and given to work the colony.

According to claims from the "1620 Project", the colonies main purpose and function were to utilize African slaves to help build America. In the documentary author's eyes, slavery was and is the main reason that America existed.

20 Africans brought by chance encounter does not make a paradigm change. Yes, there was the institute of slavery in the 13 colonies later, but their whole lives (the colonists) and raisson d'etre were not to further African slavery.

That statement and idea is part of a movement by left leaning people to change our nation's history. 73.35.211.62 (talk) 03:30, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

The second paragraph of the article spells everything out regarding the advent of slavery to Jamestown. Slaves were brought there in 1619. The 1619 Project chose its name based on that. As far as I can tell, your grievance appears to be over the 1619 Project and its name, and you're using this article only as a context for your criticism. If so, this isn't the place for it. Talk pages are only for discussing the state of and improvements to the associated articles. See WP:TALKNO. Largoplazo (talk) 10:21, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Agree that devoting the entire second paragraph to slavery seems like undue weight. Jamestown is most notable for being the first English settlement in North America, and only secondarily as the site of the first slaves imported in to the English colonies. The article as written suggests that Jamestown's primary function was as a slave port, which isn't the case.

Not going to speculate about the motives of authors. Jbt89 (talk) 03:35, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Quebec City in See Also

User:Aboudaqn, in response to your edit summary, no, I don't believe that being established within a year of each other is enough for it to be obvious to anyone why Quebec City is a obvious entry, let alone an obvious sole entry, in a See Also list for Jamestown, Virginia. There are many ways in which, while reading about one topic, one might find other topics to be related and of interest for similar reasons, but I don't imagine anybody reads an article on a city and thinks "It would be interesting to read about another city whose date of establishment happens to be within a year of the date of establishment of this city even if they have no connection to each other." And anyone who follows the link and reads Quebec City is likely to be surprised at the lack of any indication of its relevance. Largoplazo (talk) 23:45, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

That's an interesting opinion. As for mine, when I happened across this fact of almost same founding dates, I found that very interesting – so, to satisfy both parties, I added the detail next to the wiki-link. Pax? Aboudaqn (talk) 18:01, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

No, I still disagree. Settlements were founded in North America routinely throughout the 16th and 17th centuries and beyond. Two of them coinciding in the same year is nothing remarkable, and in this case it isn't the same year. It doesn't connect them, it's just happenstance. It's like putting Quebec under the "see also" for Pennsylvania because it starts with the next letter. Largoplazo (talk) 19:03, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Was Quebec the first city founded by the French in mainland North America? That'd be a logical reason for it to be in the see also, but I don't know if it's the case. Jbt89 (talk) Jbt89 (talk) 03:37, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Date of May 14, 1607

In the third sentence, "May 4, 1607 O.S." is incorrect. It should read May 14, 1607 O.S. A New Style date for the establishment of the colony would actually be May 24, 1607.

https://www.loc.gov/item/today-in-history/may-14/ 71.193.82.55 (talk) 17:30, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 29 June 2026

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Overwhelming support in favour of this being the PTOPIC. (closed by non-admin page mover) –Maltazarian ^{ᚾparley$\lor$investigateᛅ} 17:16, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

---

• Jamestown, Virginia → Jamestown
• Jamestown → Jamestown (disambiguation)

– Jamestown, Virginia, is the primary topic. It has over 50% of pageviews of "Jamestown" topics put together (first ten here), and nearly 60% of identifiable clickthroughs out of the disambiguation page. It is "highly likely—much more likely than any other single topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined—to be the topic sought" for the term "Jamestown". It is also, more importantly in this case, the primary topic by long-term significance. As the first permanent English colony in the New World, its success contributed to later British colonization of the Americas, including directly leading to the formation of the United States and Canada. Jamestown's government, the Virginia General Assembly, was the first representative government in the New World, and served as a model for what eventually became the United States Congress and much of the American political system. The arrival of the first slaves in Jamestown in 1619 marked the start of chattel slavery in the Americas, which of course has had and continues to have enormous consequences. This Jamestown's historical importance far surpasses all others.

As an aside, I don't believe WP:USPLACE is applicable here. USPLACE specifically applies to "populated places" and Jamestown ceased to exist in 1699. The article is written entirely in the past tense, and doesn't include any of the basic information you'd expect out of a city article. Also, other early colonies don't use the USPLACE format, including Roanoke, Massachusetts Bay, and Plymouth. I don't see any particular reason why Jamestown would be beholden to USPLACE. Ladtrack (talk) 19:24, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

• Support, does seem to be the PRIMARYTOPIC by page views and long-term significance.--Ortizesp (talk) 19:55, 29 June 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose Too many other Jamestowns. Just because it is the most famous, doesn't mean it is primary topic by itself - esp. as it is usually mentioned together with "Virginia" or "colony" in the same phrase. So current title improves recognizability. All your examples (Roanoke, Mass Bay, Plymouth) us "X colony" format. Is that you're proposing? Wouldn't object to bringing it up to the top of the disambiguation page. Walrasiad (talk) 00:47, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

  Just because it is the most famous, doesn't mean it is primary topic by itself I wasn't referring to fame, I was referring to significance, which is a part of the primary topic guideline. This Jamestown is the most significant.

  All your examples (Roanoke, Mass Bay, Plymouth) us "X colony" format. Is that you're proposing? No, not exactly. Those articles use "Colony" because of disambiguation purposes, which is pretty clearly needed because they're not the primary topic (maybe Roanoke is but that's a separate matter). This article, like Carolana for example, doesn't need disambiguation. All I meant by listing other early colonies is that USPLACE doesn't apply here just like it doesn't apply for them. The examples perhaps could've been better and I should've been more clear but this is what I meant by that.

  So current title improves recognizability. Adding disambiguation will almost always increase recognizability, but that's not a good reason to add unnecessary disambiguation to every article. The one person in a million that doesn't know what a Canada is will be able to understand better if we titled the article Canada (country), and everybody else will be certain that they've reached the right page if we used that title, but we don't do that because it's unnecessary. Another part of the criteria is concision, which says that "The title is not longer than necessary to identify the article's subject and distinguish it from other subjects." Jamestown, Virginia is twice as long as Jamestown, which would be a big concision improvement. A good hatnote should ameliorate any possible confusion over what article this is. Ladtrack (talk) 01:57, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

I give WP:RECOGNIZABILITY much greater weight. This not a contest for abbreviation. It's about what's best for readers. It seems "Jamestown, Virginia" or "Jamestown colony" serves them a lot better.

I am always wary of numbers in such cases, because this is a very US-centric topic, and the US is a country with very large population with internet connection. So relative country population is often all these numbers reflect, not necessarily general recognizability outside the US, or across the world.

If the name was rarer, I'd have less wariness. But there are just far, far too many "Jamestown" entries, and the edge too slight.

At any rate, "Jamestown" and "Virginia" are almost always conjoined in context - you rarely see one without the other. Indeed, they are often even synonymous and interchangeable in historical writings. It's probably a good idea to leave them together.

I have written on American colonization quite a bit. And I wouldn't be sure what a stand-alone article with this title is about, unless I am sure we're talking in the context of the US or US history. Article titles have to stand without context and be recognizable without it. It needs "Virginia" or "colony". Removing it reduces recognizability quite a bit, with no real gain to readers. Walrasiad (talk) 02:24, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

Well, if you're discounting both primary topic criteria, I doubt we'll come to an agreement on this. Just for clarity, though, over two-thirds of the Jamestowns on the disambiguation page are American topics and most of them are named after this one. Ladtrack (talk) 05:10, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

WP:RECOGNIZABILITY is the core criteria for article titles. I take that very seriously. I am also taking WP:PRECISION and WP:NATURAL seriously, both of which also justify the inclusion of "Virginia". Above everything, I'm taking the interest of readers seriously. I am not treating it as a contest. I try to assess the proposal on its own merits. And, in this case, I see costs to readers, and don't really see the benefits.

"Jamestown, Virginia" or "Jamestown colony" is instantly recognizable. "Jamestown" alone is ambiguous. I just don't see how that helps readers. The term "Virginia" or "colony" is usually found in most phrases pertaining to it - it is a natural disambiguator.

Yes, many are current American towns. No, they're not named after it. Most Jamestowns are named after King James, or, more often, a local founder-resident whose name happened to be James (as you will see if you click on those pages, and check their etymologies). Walrasiad (talk) 08:59, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

• Support. Because Jamestown [the settlement on the river island] is now an archeological site (and no one lives there), it reminds me of a similar article, Henricus. There is also St. Mary's City, Maryland (similar situation). Calling it a "colony" might confuse people with the Colony of Virginia. StevePrutz (talk) 14:30, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

There is a different article on the current archaeological site: Historic Jamestown. It's one of the links on the disambiguation page which will be shunted further away with this proposal. Walrasiad (talk) 16:13, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

Historic Jamestown is very prominently linked in the lead of this article, and is also clearly a subtopic of this article. In general, the titles of Jamestown, Virginia, Jamestown Settlement, and Historic Jamestown are all confusing since any one of these names could conceivably apply to the original settlement, the museum, and the archeological project. It's unfortunate that this happened but it is what it is. Ladtrack (talk) 16:22, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

And forcing readers looking for these sites to scroll through a long text article rather than a quick list is better because ....? Walrasiad (talk) 17:25, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

This proposal won't make that better or worse. It was merely an issue I noticed. Perhaps afterwards we can adjust the titles of the other two to be better but that would be a different matter. Ladtrack (talk) 18:31, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

• Support. This is the right solution. WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and it removes the disambiguation which is unnecessary isn't ideal for a historic site of this kind.--Cúchullain ^t/c 03:47, 1 July 2026 (UTC)
• Support Per nom, I agree entirely and have no opposition to it. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:36, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

• Support per nom. As it appears to be the primary topic.

YeetV4 (talk) 17:43, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.