The state of education in colonial Virginia.

Vejnar, Robert J., III

Not all of those living in the South during the colonial and antebellum periods regarded education as an institution in which the North held a monopoly or as an institution that served the needs only of the wealthy. In fact, throughout this period many Virginians of average means expressed not only an interest, but had the resources to ensure that their children received an education that would enable them to function well in an agrarian society that embraced republican principles.

What exactly constituted a proper education depended upon who did the defining. A number of colonial Virginians regarded a child's education as adequate if he learned some sort of trade, the rudiments of the Anglican faith, and perhaps how to write his name. Parents addressed the trade issue by instructing their children themselves, or apprenticing the youngster to a master craftsman. Religion had a role in education as well, and often a child acquired that religious component through attending Sunday services at the local Anglican Church. Writing one's name might prove more difficult, but the skill could be passed on from parents--provided they possessed the ability themselves--or brief instruction from a tutor or Anglican minister.

Those colonial Virginians who had the financial means could seek a more traditional English education for their children, one that included instruction in reading, writing, Greek, and Latin. But furnishing a child with that level of education proved more difficult. It would require a teacher skilled in those subjects--and such individuals did not always find the frontier colony that enticing. And to support a teacher required money, shelter, food, etc. Very few families living in 17th and 18th century Virginia could afford to hire a teacher on their own, which meant that parents or guardians would have to pool their funds in order to have enough to hire someone. But the widely dispersed population and few compact settlements in colonial Virginia made it difficult to gather children into a' school. The dispersed population problem was indeed daunting. In the seventeenth century, for example, Jamestown served as the colony's capital from its founding in 1607 until the seat of government moved to Williamsburg in 1699. During that period the colony's population grew from an estimated 350 in 1610 to approximately 58,560 by 1700 (1). As the seventeenth century progressed, a growing number of the population lived outside of either colonial capital, which naturally meant that most Virginians lived on plantations and small farms dispersed across the countryside. As Philip Alexander Bruce, the authority on that period of Virginia history, has stated, prior to 1650 the average patent granted in the colony was less than 500 acres, and after 1650 the average was over 600 acres. Families scattered throughout the countryside on such large tracts inhibited the formation of communities necessary to draw enough students to support schools. (2) By comparison, New England developed numerous towns in the seventeenth century, which made it easier to create and support public schools. (3)

Despite such obstacles, some colonial Virginians pushed ahead with efforts to educate their youngsters as best they knew how. Even the Virginia Company of London expressed an interest in educating the children of Native Americans living in the colony. In 1618, the Company informed newly appointed governor Sir George Yeardly that it intended to create "a college for the training up of the Children of those Infidels in true Religion[,] moral virtue and Civility[,] and for other godly uses." (4) Had not the Indian uprising of 1622 occurred, killing over three hundred settlers along the James River, the college probably would have come into existence, and thus would have edged out Harvard as the oldest college in colonial North America.

It is appropriate to begin the discussion of education in Virginia with the college, because it shows that religious instruction played a part in education. The Anglican Church served as the official religion of colonial Virginia. In accordance with English practice, at first under the authority of the Virginia Company of London and later under royal administration, the entire colony was partitioned into parishes. From 1607 to 1785 (the General Assembly disestablished the Anglican Church in 1786), 177 parishes had been created in Virginia. (5) Each parish had at least one church, normally placed in a convenient location so that all English inhabitants of the colony could easily travel to Sunday services. In some cases where the parish covered too broad an area, thus making it extremely difficult for people to travel to services in a reasonable amount of time, the colonists constructed smaller churches, called chapels-of-ease, for those living too far from the parish church. Colonists who failed to attend divine services faced the certainty of punishment. (6) That secular and religious officials went to such lengths to ensure that houses of worship were within easy traveling distance for everyone in the colony underscored the importance of religion in English culture. The Anglican Church bore the responsibility for ensuring religious conformity, for without it chaos would likely ensue.

While church and state worked together to provide for the religious instruction of colonial Virginians, no such cooperation existed when it came to educating children in reading and writing. Instruction in such secular subjects remained under the purview of individuals. While there is no way to determine with any degree of certainty exactly how many of colonial Virginia's children received instruction in reading and writing, the records reveal that numerous Virginians displayed a keen interest in giving children in this raw colony an education, and these Virginians developed numerous ways during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries to provide children with an education.

One did not need to be a tobacco baron in order to pay for a child's formal instruction. Some who possessed only moderate wealth used what few assets they possessed to finance their children's instruction. In the precarious times of colonial Virginia, parents who feared that they might not live to see to their children educated provided for it in their last will and testament. Rebecca Starke, a widow of some means, wanted to be laid to rest knowing that her son James would receive some sort of instruction in reading and writing after her death. Her will, dated July 12, 1711, stipulated that part of her estate should be set aside to finance at least "two years schooling out of my little estate" for James. (7) While other parents passed on land, livestock, debt, or in some cases nothing to their children, Rebecca Starke chose instead to pass on the gift of learning. Her example did not go unnoticed by her oldest son, William. Unfortunately the records do not indicate what sort of education William had received, but it seems probable that he, too, received some sort of instruction. With his mother's actions serving as an example, he worked to provide for the education not only of his immediate family but also for the inhabitants of the parish in which he resided. In 1711 he set aside "a Quarter of an acre of land" from his estate so that "a scoule forever and for no other yuse but for a public scoule to educate children now lying in York Hampton parish ..." could be established. (8)

A little farther north of the Starke's homestead, in what is today part of Lancaster County, Clement Thresh of Rappahannock took steps similar to the Starkes. He had a step-daughter whom he must have loved quite dearly, for after he died he wanted enough of his estate sold to provide the girl with at least three years of schooling. (9) Even when a last will might not specifically state that part or all of the deceased's estate should be utilized for educational purposes, it could be altered to make such a provision. Shortly after Mann Page's father died, the son in 1744 petitioned to, and received permission from, the General Assembly to sell part of the patriarch's estate and use the proceeds to underwrite the education of Mann Page's brothers and sisters. That the colonial legislature took the unusual step of altering a last will and testament reveals that the solons in Williamsburg could be sympathetic to education. Perhaps in their thinking, enlightened young minds made better citizens. (10)

But suppose a parent or parents died intestate? Could the church or state intervene to see to the child's intellectual as well as physical well being? The answer is yes. And in fact very early in the colony's history the state sanctioned an arm of the Church, the parish vestry, with supervising the care of orphans. Twenty-four years after the first settlers landed at Jamestown, the House of Burgesses passed an act dealing with the education of orphans. Apparently a sizeable number of guardians and overseers of the poor (those who had traditionally exercised immediate responsibility over orphans) had by 1642 so egregiously neglected their duties that the legislature stepped in to remedy the situation. It passed legislation that year requiring those responsible for orphans' estates to render an annual report of their actions to their respective county court commissioners. It also required that the overseers or guardians ensure that their charges received instruction "in Christian religion and in rudiments of learning...." If the overseers or guardians failed to comply with the law, county court commissioners would take over control of the cases and assume responsibility for the care of those children. (11)

At least two conclusions can be drawn from this example. First, the legislature clearly believed it to be within the purview of its powers to require, at least in the case of orphans, that those responsible for their upbringing also see that such children acquire a basic education. An educated youngster would make a more productive, valuable member to the community. Next, the legislature saw nothing unusual in mandating that religion be included in the proposed instruction. An education lacking religious instruction really would not be an education at all.

But orphans were not the only ones who might receive instruction in reading, writing, and the Anglican faith. Indeed, many who entered the ranks of indentured servitude requested that their contracts include a provision requiring their future master to see to it that the servant would be given the opportunity to acquire a little book learning as well. It is surprising that indentured servants, whose contract usually required laboring for a master for several years, on average between four to five, were able to include this clause into the agreement. Yet cases exist to substantiate the claim. Historian Philip Alexander Bruce uncovered numerous examples. (12)

One of these examples is the case of Richard Allen of Gloucester County. Richard was about twelve years old when in 1700 his mother, Susanna, contemplated indenturing him out to learn a trade. Yet the loving mother refused to permit her son to be indentured unless the contract included a provision for his education. She engaged the services of her local churchwardens to negotiate the details. Eventually Susanna signed a contract whereby Richard would serve William Bernard until he reached the age of twenty-one. And Mr. Bernard agreed to Mrs. Allen's demand to provide Richard, at some point during the nine-year agreement, with at least three years of schooling. While this example does not reveal what exactly Richard would be taught in those three years, it does show that the church sometimes played a role in the process, and thus one might extrapolate that Mr. Bernard would include instruction in religion as part of Richard's schooling.

The above cases demonstrate the willingness on the part of the colonial government and church to oversee the physical and intellectual well being of orphans and indentured servants. But those were not the only instances in which the state or church intervened to ensure a child's mental or spiritual development. Examples exist showing that colonial government, with the aid of the Anglican Church, interceded on the behalf of children when their families failed to provide for their children's physical well being. In doing so, a door sometimes opened which might permit the child to gain a limited amount of education as well.

In 1727 the General Assembly enacted legislation requiring local courts, with the aid of "the churchwardens of the said parish[,]" to take custody of youngsters whose parents could not adequately provide for their physical needs. The courts then apprenticed the children out to responsible men and women who would teach them a trade. The law required these surrogate parents to attend Sunday services with the youngsters, and to teach them the basic principles of Christianity. (13) Obviously the burgesses enacted this legislation in order to lessen the financial burden indigent families placed upon the larger community. Children apprenticed out could at least be made to work and thus help earn their keep. They also would be removed from a bad environment, their parents' household, and thus have less time to mimic improper role models. But the important principle established by this act was that the legislature believed religion important enough to require it as part of children's education.

But many youngsters did not have to wait until a parent died or became indigent before they might gain access to the rudiments of learning. Colonial Virginians also relied-upon other more traditional means of educating children. A private academy presented itself as an excellent means to nurture a child's intellect. Considering the frontier conditions of seventeenth century Virginia, one might expect to encounter few such institutions. Yet, strangely enough, quite a number existed. The Virginian Robert Beverley (ca. 1673-1722) gave the impression in his History and Present State of Virginia that colonists had constructed numerous schools up through 1705, the year his History was published. In many instances wealthy planters took the initiative to build schools for their children's use. Once opened, the planter might then permit neighborhood children to attend. Depending on the planter's preferences, such children might attend gratis, or would have to pay some tuition. To ensure the survival of these institutions, the gentry often endowed them with land or other property. Once established, control of the schools sometimes passed to the county courts or to the parish vestry. In cases where no wealthy planters built schools, sometimes Virginians of average means banded together to construct schools where children could meet to "learn upon very easie Terms." (14)

The schools went by at least two different names. In his study of seventeenth century Virginia, Philip Alexander Bruce referred to them as "old field schools" because they were constructed "in some old field, long abandoned to pine and broom-straw, which occupied a central location. (15) People also referred to them as "free schools," as Beverley did. But one should remember that "free school" did not necessarily mean students attended gratis (although some did). As defined by historian George Maclaren Brydon, a free school meant merely that it was "free of restrictions holding it to a definite purpose or particular group...." So theoretically, anyone who could afford the tuition could send his child. (16)

When one plows through the references to these institutions one discovers that often, these schools had a religious connection in some way. Some individuals, motivated in part by a spirit of Christian charity, established schools. In some instances these academies incorporated a limited amount of religious instruction into the curriculum. Oftentimes, as Bruce maintained, a Protestant minister established a school as a means to augment his income. (17) The Reverend Mr. Dunn, rector of Westover Parish in Charles City County, started his own neighborhood school in April of 1711. Unfortunately for his students, the enterprise remained in operation for only a few weeks (why it stayed open for only a short time the records do not reveal). (18)

The Symms Free School serves as the earliest example of a 17th century colonial academy. Mr. Benjamin Symms used his last will and testament to set aside property he owned in Elizabeth City County (today a part of the city of Hampton) for the creation of a free school there. The House of Burgesses gave its approval to the proposal in early 1643. What was the connection to Christianity in this case? The words the burgesses used in the legislation provide some insight. In their eyes Mr. Symms' magnanimous action emanated out of a "godly disposition." They also hoped that Symms' act of generosity would cause others to duplicate his "like pious performances." (19) A number of people did just that.

In 1655 a gentleman named Captain John Moon, who resided in Isle of Wight County, felt motivated to do something to enlighten the minds of children in his neighborhood. Again, using the last will and testament as a means to an end, Captain Moon called for the executors of his will to set aside part of his estate to establish a school where "poor fatherless children" could attend. Moon likewise included a role for the church to play in his enterprise, asking that the parish's overseers of the poor, along with Moon's own children, act as trustees for the school. To ensure the institution's continued existence, the Captain stipulated in his will that the increase from his cattle herd (which he left as an endowment to the proposed school) be sold off periodically and the funds then used to finance part of the school's needs. (20)

A few years after Moon's school opened, Thomas Eaton of Elizabeth City County decided that upon his death his estate would be used to create an academy, too. His last will and testament called for the executors to set aside five hundred acres of land for a school building (apparently they were to sell a portion of the land and use the proceeds to help finance the school's construction). In addition to Eaton's bequeathal of real estate, he also said that the "houses, edifices, orchards, ... Two negroes[,] ... Twelve Cows and two bulls, Twenty Hoggs young and old, one bedstead, a table, a cheese press, twelve milk trays, and Iron Kettle contayning about twelve gallons, pot rack and pot hooks, Milk Pailes, water tubs & powdering tubbs" be sold and the money used to hire a teacher. The Anglican Church also played a part in this endeavor, for Eaton asked that the parish minister and churchwardens serve on the board of trustees of his proposed school. His academy would provide a tuition-free education to any poor white child living within Elizabeth City County. (21)

By leaving the bulk of his estate to fund a school's construction and provide for its maintenance certainly leads one to believe that Thomas Eaton had a genuine love of education and acted out of Christian charity. Analyzing the language of the will should allay one's doubts as to the latter claim. After Eaton addressed the will "[t]o all Christian people to whom these presents shall come," he hinted that God's love for him motivated him to pass that love along by building a school for the county. (22) Eaton could have asked anyone to serve on the proposed school's board, but the fact that he asked agents of the church to do so implies an interest to ensure that the academy promoted Christian principles.

In one case, a family established a school in order to honor the memory of a deceased child. James and Mary Whaley's son Matthew (his mother called him "Mattey") died as a youngster in 1705. Naturally the Whaleys were heartbroken over their son's death. They soon looked for some way to keep his memory alive, show how much they loved their son, and help provide local children with access to an education. They did all three by erecting a school in their son's memory.

Perhaps his parents had some sort of formal instruction themselves, for before his death they undertook to give little Mattey an education at home. Apparently the boy so greatly enjoyed the schooling he received at his parents hands that they thought they could best honor his memory by building and naming a school for him, thus allowing other children to benefit from the education that Matthew so treasured. Shortly after the boy's death James and Mary developed plans to build not only a school but also a small house for the attending master to live. The records do not reveal how many youngsters benefited from the Whaley's act of generosity, but numerous children living in York County must have attended the institution for at least a brief period during their adolescence.

After James Whaley's death, his widow sought some way to ensure the school's survival long after her own departure. Thus in her own last will and testament Mary "bequeath[ed] to the minister and church Wardens" of Bruton parish (where the school was located) the schoolhouse, the small teacher's residence, ten acres of land surrounding the school, plus an endowment of "Fifty pounds sterling" for the institution's future use--a sizeable sum of cash for the period. The Whaley's gave the institution a solid foundation by endowing it with land and money, but they also attempted, it seems, to ensure the institution's connection with Christianity by giving the local minister and churchwardens control of it. One could surmise then that Mary Whaley wanted to guarantee some role for religion in the school she left behind. (23)

But did one have to wait until someone died before building a school? After all, if one undertook the task while alive he could witness for himself that his children received proper instruction. If the benefactor felt especially generous, he could open the doors to any child whose parents expressed a willingness to help defray the cost of learning. Landon Carter of Sabine Hall in Richmond County followed that plan.

Landon Carter was the son of the extremely wealthy Robert "King" Carter of Corotoman in Lancaster County. Landon inherited a sizeable portion of his father's estate when the patriarch died in 1732. Several factors might have played a role in Landon Carter's decision to build a school in his county. First, he obviously wanted to see his own children educated. As a youngster Landon had spent several years in England with two brothers studying at a private academy. By all accounts he received a good education, and he obviously wanted to pass on the benefits of formal education to his own children. But apparently Landon did not cherish the thought of sending them abroad to accomplish that goal. (24) To educate them on the plantation would require a schoolhouse and a teacher, so at some point before the outbreak of the American Revolution, Carter developed a plan to erect a local academy. The school would train boys "in English, Writing, Arithmetick, Latin & Greek and such other branches of useful learning as shall hereafter be judged necessary." Since Carter underwrote the cost of the institution, he deemed himself entitled to dictate every detail. Thus, the proposed academy would never have more than forty boys under its roof at any one time. The school would have two masters: one for languages and one for regular English instruction. Each master would have responsibility for no more than twenty boys at a time. And what must be assumed to be a gesture designed to demonstrate that Carter possessed a sense of Christian charity, he stipulated that twelve of the forty boys could come from "the poorer sort of children whose parents are not able to bear the expence [sic] of an Education...." (25) If his school ever had as many as forty boys the records do not indicate. By 1770 he had hired at least one teacher. (26) He later indicated that some of his grandchildren attended classes there. (27)

Other options existed if one did not want to build his own school. Exceptionally wealthy colonists could have their children educated in England, and numerous families did just that. Take the case of the Hills of Shirley Plantation in Charles City County. Family tradition claims that around 1700, Edward Hill III sent his two oldest daughters to England to receive formal instruction. Mr. Hill undoubtedly did this at great personal sacrifice. Not only could this be extremely expensive, but parents also had to deal with the emotional trauma of not seeing their children for extended periods of time. In Edward Hill's case he rarely saw either of his daughters again, for both married while in England and remained there for the rest of their lives. (28) One can also surmise the emotional distress the children experienced by being separated from parents. And the idea of traveling three thousand miles across the ocean to live in a strange land, and hoarding with family or family friends whom they had never seen before obviously would not set well with most children.

Some might find it amazing that daughters were sent abroad for schooling, much less sons. Nevertheless colonial Virginians did it, and in the case of Edward Hill he might have gotten the idea from his neighbor William Byrd I of Westover. Byrd was the patriarch of what would emerge into a politically powerful family during the late seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Desiring the best possible education for his daughter, and convinced that she "could learne nothing good here, in a great family of Negro's," Byrd finally relented to his wife's demands and in 1684 sent their young Ursula to England for schooling. One can surmise how the child reacted to being informed that she would be separated from her mother and father for months if not years. Yet her fears might have been calmed somewhat when she realized that she would not be among strangers while in England, for she would be joining her brother and sister who had preceded her for the same reason. It seems all of the children initially lived with their maternal grandfather, Warham Horsmanden, while there. (29)

For the most part the Byrd correspondence reveals little information on what the children were taught or how they fared in England, although some details do emerge in the letters, especially in the case of Byrd's son, William Byrd II. The elder Byrd had decided early on that to prepare the boy to inherit the father's wealth and growing political influence in the young colony, the youngster would have to go to England for schooling. There he would obtain the kind of instruction that would enable him to handle his future responsibilities in Virginia. (30) The senior Byrd seemed pleased when he learned that his little boy had enrolled at the Felsted Grammar School in Essex, which had an excellent reputation. Byrd even took the time to write the school's master, Christopher Glasscock, informing him how pleased he was to know that little William had been "placed under so worthy a tutor." (31) To impress upon the little boy how fortunate he was to have access to an English education, the father also addressed a letter to him, admonishing little William to count himself lucky to have a father who could place the child "with so good a master" as Glasscock. He also sought to motivate the boy to use his time well, to study hard and "bee carefull to serve God as you ought, without which you cannot expect to doe well here or hereafter." (32)

The elder Byrd placed a great and heavy burden upon his son. Yet the little boy was not the only one to feel encumbered by the situation. Those who took on the responsibility of acting in loco parentis also could feel burdened. Again, the Byrd family serves as an example. By 1691 the elder Byrd's brother-in-law, Daniel Horsmanden, had assumed responsibility for Byrd's children while they continued their education in England. It did not take long, though, before Daniel Horsmanden began wishing that he had not agreed to care for the children because of the expense involved. The elder Byrd, once apprised of the situation (and not wishing for his children to be viewed as a burden nor wishing see their education interrupted), sent a letter to his brother-in-law apologizing for the trouble caused him. He then assured him that he would as quickly as possible search for other acceptable care for his offspring. (33)

If parents desired their children to pursue professional training, such as in law or medicine, they had little choice but to send their young men abroad. Of course this was an expensive endeavor, but if a wealthy family sought to gain high colonial office for a son, legal training at one of the English Inns of Court proved indispensable. William Byrd I obviously was well pleased when he learned that his son William had entered the Middle Temple by the fall of 1692. (34) Robert "King" Carter likewise provided for the legal education of his son John at the same institution. (35)

As the seventeenth century turned into the eighteenth, another education option emerged for those families of means in His Majesty's Old Dominion: the College of William and Mary. Although the English monarchs chartered the school in 1693, the idea of planting an institution of higher learning in Virginia dates back to the colony's early years. Motivated by the desire to convert Native Americans to Christianity, the Virginia Company of London in 1618 proposed building a college about forty miles up the James River from the settlement in Jamestown. The Company's directors selected a site for the school in present-day Henrico County, and they endowed the school with 10,000 acres. The following year King James I authorized the realm's bishops to start collecting money for the institution. By the end of that year the Church raised a reported 1500 [pounds sterling] for the project. With plenty of land and money, the colony's General Assembly, in its very first gathering in 1619, told the Company that work on the school could begin anytime. The burgesses also requested that the Company send suitable laborers to commence the project. If construction had begun, the institution would have preceded Harvard by at least a decade. The local Indians, though, did not care to be proselytized. In 1622 they launched a devastating attack on English settlements along the James River. Nearly 350 colonists died in the raids. Plans for the college died with them.

Decades passed before Virginians reconsidered the idea of establishing a college. By 1689 a select few expressed interest in establishing an institution of higher learning. The Reverend Doctor James Blair, who had arrived in Virginia in 1685 to assume responsibility of a parish in Henrico County, proved to be a powerful advocate for the proposed school. Marrying into the wealthy and politically powerful Harrison family opened the way for him to gain access to the solons in Jamestown and later Williamsburg (the colonial capital moved there in 1699), and he used that access to lobby for a college. The other driving force behind the college turned out to be lieutenant governor Francis Nicholson. Planning for the college began in earnest after his arrival in 1690. According to an observer at that time, Nicholson's motivation stemmed in part from his desire to endear himself to the English bishops. (36) After all, what could be more endearing to English clerics than to establish an Anglican college in Virginia?

In 1691, both Nicholson and Blair, with the backing of the General Assembly, began lobbying efforts in England. Blair traveled to London to personally persuade the king and queen of the necessity of a school. The proposed Virginia institution would consist of three divisions: "a Grammar School, for teaching the Latin and Greek Tongues: a Philosophical School, for Philosophy and Mathematicks: and a Divinity School, for the Oriental Tongues and Divinity." (37) The school could take care of a student's entire educational needs without his having to leave the colony. The idea appealed to the monarchs, and in 1693 William and Mary issued a charter for the college that would be named in their honor. While divinity was just one part of the college, the king and queen were taken with its importance, and emphasized in the charter the role religion was to play both in the school and in Virginia. And with a proper Anglican college in the colony, Virginia could produce a steady supply of ministers to fill the many vacant parishes. (38)

The early years of operation were rough ones for the College of William and Mary in Virginia (its official title). Construction began on the main building in 1695, and was completed a few years later. Unfortunately the structure caught fire and burned in October 1705, leaving only the outer walls and foundations intact. It would not be completely rebuilt until some eleven years later. One of its former faculty members, writing some thirty years after the institution received its charter, had to acknowledge that money for the fledgling school was in short supply, and the quality of instruction was never quite what it should have been. Nevertheless the school pushed onward. It eventually had a president and six masters on the faculty. The college would also assume the burden of ministering to local Indian children by erecting a special school (known as the Brafferton) for them, something that had originally been planned for decades earlier. (39)

While the College of William and Mary never became part of a colony-wide effort to provide all of Virginia's children with a basic education, it was a welcome addition nevertheless. Once the college and grammar school were built, parents, provided they could afford both tuition and the loss of their child's labor at home, could send them to an institution that could boast of university trained faculty and a strong religious affiliation that would work to cultivate children's intellectual and moral development.

One final option remaining for those who hoped to see their offspring receive an education: hire a tutor. Several advantages came with this choice. Children did not have to travel any distance to go to school, for the classroom remained either in or very near the home. Parents also knew exactly what the tutor taught, or could dictate what they wanted their children to learn. Since the tutor often lived on the plantation with the family, the parents could come to know the moral character of the tutor and thus be assured that he set the right moral example for the youngsters.

How exactly did one go about obtaining a resident teacher? Inquiring of friends, family, or business associates if they knew of any suitable candidates seemed a logical place to start. Robert "King" Carter relied upon the latter two sources in his search for a tutor in 1720. Although Carter had sent some of his sons to England to study, he evidently had a change of heart when it came to his younger children. He wrote to his oldest son John, who at this time attended lectures on law at the Middle Temple in London, to solicit his aid in the matter. The elder Carter had two young daughters and a son at home with him at Corotoman, and he needed "a schoolmistress for them--a grave woman of about forty years of age, that hath both been well educated and is of a towardly disposition to make it her business to be their tutoress." Why Carter specifically requested a woman is unknown and unusual. Men almost always filled such positions. Perhaps he wanted some one who could serve as a mother figure for the youngsters. Nevertheless, Carter promised that the candidate would receive from him "reasonable yearly wages," and hoped to use her services from four to five years. (40) Not relying solely upon his law-student son to undertake this task alone, Carter also wrote to his English factors, Micajah and Richard Perry, to enlist their help in the search for a suitable woman to do the job. In addition to the requirements he had given to John, Carter asked the Perrys to make sure any potential candidate was "well bred" and had a "good reputation." (41)

Naturally, Robert Carter wanted someone who could do a good job of teaching and who could also serve as a proper role model for his children. And what exactly went into making one "well bred" or of "good reputation"? Proper grounding in the Protestant faith no doubt played a sizeable part in making someone a reputable person. Carter said as much in a letter to a schoolmaster in England, Mr. William Dawkins. Written the same day as his letter to the Perry brothers, Carter implied that the Anglican faith had an instrumental role in molding one into a moral person. Thus the Anglican religion should have a prominent role in educating his children. Stating his case bluntly to Mr. Dawkins, Carter said that "[t]he health of my sons and their improvement in learning and manners is one of the greatest blessings I can meet with in this world. Let others take what courses they please in the bringing up of their posterity, I resolve the principles of our holy religion shall be instilled in mine betimes; as I am of the Church of England way, so I desire they should be...." (42) But did one have to look abroad in order to find a qualified tutor? Sometimes a suitable candidate could be found closer to home. In fact if one was well educated and willing, he could act as a tutor for the family. William Byrd II serves as an example. Byrd had attended school in England as a youth, and had received a fine education. After his father's death Byrd inherited, among other property, Westover plantation on the James Riven It was there that he built the mansion that still stands today. But in April of 1710 Byrd's interests lay not in building a new home but in assuming responsibility for instructing two of his sister's children, Susan and Billy Brayne. Byrd had a lot of work to do with the Children, for upon meeting them he found their intellectual development "much below my expectation...." (43) He attempted to elevate their minds to the level he thought appropriate for their ages, but found the work difficult. In attempting to make up for lost time, he evidently pushed the children too hard (as some teachers throughout the ages have on occasion been guilty of), for little Billy staged his own rebellion of sorts. Byrd resorted to corporal punishment when Billy did not, in his view, adequately master his lessons. (44) By the fall of 1712 Billy apparently learned enough to prepare him for entrance into the College of William and Mary--or else Byrd just got tired of him and "promoted" him to college. In either case, the boy entered William and Mary that September. (45)

More often than not, though, parents did not rely upon a family member to tutor their children. As the colonies matured they began fostering their own institutions of higher learning such as Harvard, William and Mary, Yale, Princeton, and Hampden-Sydney. These colleges in turn always produced a few young men each year who sought to earn a little money through teaching. One such graduate of Princeton (known then as the College of New Jersey), Philip Vickers Fithian, arrived in Virginia in October of 1773 to serve as tutor to the children of Robert Carter III (grandson of Robert "King" Carter) of Nomini Hall in Westmoreland County. Historians know a great deal concerning Fithian's days as a plantation tutor because he kept a journal during his time of employment. The journal sheds considerable light on what life must have been like for an eighteenth century tutor on a large Virginia plantation.

Robert Carter III was extremely selective when it came to choosing a teacher for his eight children. Given the conditions in 1773, Carter did not want a teacher from Britain, fearing that a British tutor would impart British customs and mannerisms on his children. He seemed most interested that the tutor he hired be highly moral. In fact Carter later confessed to Fithian that he eliminated the College of William and Mary as an option for his boys because of the lax morals there (apparently professors who played cards and took a little alcohol left much to be desired). (46) Fithian would never be guilty of any such short-comings. In fact, having attended the Presbyterian college implied some level of intellectual achievement as well as a reasonable high level of morality. Carter therefore believed his safest option would be to hire a Princeton graduate to educate his children. Sometime in 1773 he wrote to Dr. Jonathan Witherspoon, president of the College of New Jersey, inquiring if he had any recent graduates willing to teach on a Virginia plantation. The New Jersey college's reputation for producing well educated and highly moral graduates permeated the colonies, for Robert Carter's proved to be just one of several planters who wrote to Witherspoon that year in search of suitable tutors for their children. (47)

Fithian met with Dr. Witherspoon on 9 August 1773, and the president read the letter that Carter had sent him. Fithian learned that he would be teaching eight children (five girls and three boys), who ranged in age "from five to seventeen years old." Carter desired someone who could instruct both the girls and boys in English language, but Fithian would also teach the boys Latin and Greek. Carter proposed paying him 35 [pounds sterling] sterling annually for his services. In addition to the money, Carter offered him free room and board (Fithian would take most of his meals with the Carters at the family table), and would allow Fithian to use Carter's library of several hundred books, something a good teacher and ministerial candidate (Fithian planned on becoming a Presbyterian minister) would find especially enticing. Carter's proposal also included feed and stable facilities for Fithian's horse, and the use of one of Carter's slaves as Fithian's personal servant. Impressed with the generous offer, the young man agreed to take the job. He would begin teaching that fall. (48)

Shortly after arriving at Nomini Hall, Fithian began his classroom duties. He recorded in his diary on 1 November 1773 where the children were academically as he commenced his duties:

 We began School--The School consists of eight--Two of Mr. Carters Sons--One
 Nephew--And five Daughters--The endest Son is reading Salust; Grammatical
 Exercises, and latin Grammer--The second Son is reading English Grammar
 Reading English: Writing, and Cyphering in Subtraction--The Nephew is
 Reading and Writing as above; and Cyphering in Reduction--The eldest
 daughter is Reading the Spectator; Writing; & beginning to Cypher--The
 second is reading next out of the Spelling-Book, and beginning to
 write--The next is reading in the Spelling-Book--The fourth is Spelling in
 the beginning of the Spelling-Book--And the last is beginning her
 letters[.] (49)

In his diary entry of 15 December 1773, Fithian recorded how a typical school day unfolded on the plantation:

 The manner here is different from our way of living in Cohansie--In the
 morning so soon as it is light a Boy knocks at my Door to make a fire;
 after the Fire is kindled, I rise which now in the winter is commonly by
 Seven, or a little after, By the time I am drest the Children commonly
 enter the School-Room, which is under the Room I sleep in; I hear them
 round one lesson, when the Bell rings for eight o'Clock (for Mr. Carter has
 a large good Bell of upwards of 60 Lb. Which may be heard some miles, &
 this is always rung at meal Times;) the Children then go out; and at half
 after eight the Bell rings for Breakfast, we then repair to the
 Dining-Room; after Breakfast, which is generally about half after nine, we
 go into School, and sit til twelve, when the Bell rings, & they go out for
 noon; the dinner-Bell rings commonly about half after two, often at three,
 but never before two.--After dinner is over, which in common, when we have
 no Company, is about half after three we go into School, & sit til the Bell
 rings at five, when they separate til the next morning; I have to myself in
 the Evening, a neat Chamber, a large Fire, Books, & Candle & my Liberty,
 either to continue in the school room, in my own Room or to sit over at the
 great House with Mr. & Mrs. Carter--We go to Supper commonly about half
 after eight or at nine & I usually go to Bed between ten and Eleven. (50)

The Carters seemed well pleased with the young man's performance. He stayed for about a year before he returned to New Jersey to be ordained by presbytery.

Just as interesting is the case of John Harrower, a Scotsman who taught school on George Daingerfield's Belvidera plantation, located several miles southeast of Fredericksburg on the banks of the Rappahanock River. The records are silent regarding Harrower's qualifications to teach, but the diary he kept shows that he had a certain amount of education. But what makes Harrower's case unique is that he taught school as an indentured servant.

By 1773, John Harrower had fallen upon difficult economic times. With his personal finances in shambles, but with a family to support, Harrower believed that his only hope survival lay in opportunities in one of the British colonies. On 26 January 1774, he recorded in his diary that he looked forward to journeying to Virginia where he hoped to find work as a teacher. (51) But lacking funds to finance the trip, his only hope of getting to the Old Dominion meant going as an indentured servant. Whoever purchased Harrower's indenture (thus paying for his voyage) upon his arrival in Virginia would have Harrower's services for several years. Even though Harrower wished to serve his time as a teacher, he had no guarantee that the person who bought his contract would use him that way, and he could just as easily find himself working a tobacco field or cutting timber.

Fortunately for John Harrower, Colonel George Daingerfield purchased his contract, and an amicable relationship began between the two. Harrower recounted in his diary entry for 23 May 1774 that

 [a]t 11 AM Mr. Anderson begged [me] to settle as a schoolmaster with a
 friend of his[,] one Colonel Daingerfield[,] and told me he was to be in
 Town tomorrow, or perhaps to night, and how soon he came he should acquant
 me. At some time all the rest of the servants were ordered ashore to a tent
 at Fredericksbg. and severall of their Indentures were then sold. About 4
 pm I was brought to Colonel Daingerfield, when we immediately agreed and my
 Indenture for four years was then delivered him and he was to send for me
 the next day. (52)

Shortly after arriving at Belvidera, Harrower commenced his teaching duties. He recorded in his diary on 27 May 1774, that he would teach the three Daingerfield boys (who ranged in age from four to ten years old) "to read[,] write and figure." (53) Harrower lived and taught in a small building on the plantation, located about "500 yds. from the Main house...." (54) His daily teaching routine mimicked that of Fithian's. Harrower held class "from 6 to 8 in the Morning, in the forenoon from 9 to 12 and from 3 to 6 in the afternoon." (55)

Like Fithian, John Harrower counted himself a religious man, a quality that Daingerfield likely prized. On his first Sunday at Belvidera, Harrower lamented in his diary that he could not attend church in nearby Fredericksburg because he lacked a saddle for his horse. (56) Yet he did attend church whenever he could. (57) He also made certain that instruction in religion made its way into the curriculum he taught by having the students read the Bible as part of their assignments. (58)

News of his school spread throughout the community, and soon nearby gentry families began negotiating with both Daingerfield and Harrower to place their children under the latter's tutelage. On 14 June 1774, Harrower recorded that two little girls from the neighborhood joined his class. Several days later another planter convinced Harrower to teach his three children. (59)

Harrower wrote to his wife on 14 June 1774, and explained to her his living and financial arrangements:

 I am obliged to continue with Coll. Daingerfield for four years if he
 insists on it, and for teaching his own Children I have Bed, Board, washing
 and all kind of Cloaths during the above time, and for what schollars I can
 get more than his Children I have five shillings currancy per Quarter for
 each of them[,] which is equall to four shillings Sterling, and I expect
 ten or twelve to school next week, for after I hade been here eight days my
 abilities and my behaviour sufficiently tried, the Colonel rode through the
 neighboring Gentlemen & Planters in order to procur scollars for me, so
 that I hope in a short time to make something of it. (60)

The above example reveals just how popular a schoolteacher could be in late eighteenth century Virginia. That Col. Daingerfield roamed the countryside looking for potential students for Harrower, and that the latter had plenty of pupils, demonstrates that colonial Virginians--at least those of financial means--eagerly sought to procure decent education for their children.

And what can one deduct from all of the examples given of education opportunities in colonial Virginia? First, one should realize that Virginians did make provisions to educate their children during this period. While the colony did not possess the kind of compact settlements that New England had, which made it easier for communities there to establish schools, Virginians did an admirable job with what they had. They created schools where they could and endowed them with property and cash. Parents used last wills and testaments to set aside portions of their estates to finance children's education. If they could afford to, they sent their young abroad for schooling, or else hired tutors to come to their homes to do the job.

Another point made clear by the examples is that religion played a role in education. Sometimes parents called for religious instruction in their children's curriculum. In other instances religious instruction was implied because of who did the teaching (a minister) or who supervised the school (the vestry). In the case of the College of William and Mary, it was founded as a branch of the Anglican Church, which naturally implied a very prominent role for religion in its curriculum.

One other point is that education was considered a private family matter, with the obvious exception of orphans or young indentured servants whose care and education were supervised by the government. Whether or not a child received an education generally remained the decision of the parents. No colonial law existed requiring parents to send their children to school, nor did any government-backed schools exist (with the exception of William and Mary).

The American Revolution caused all of these assumptions to be challenged, and the person doing the challenging was none other than the gentleman from Albemarle County, Thomas Jefferson. In the late 1770's he would propose a graduated statewide system of public instruction financed in part by property taxes. He also left Christianity completely out of his schools. Talk about revolutionary thought.

ENDNOTES

(1) Emily J. Salmon and Edward D. C. Campbell, Jr., eds., The Hornbook of Virginia History: A Ready-Reference Guide to the Old Dominion's People, Places, and Past, 4th ed. (Richmond, Va.: The Library of Virginia, 1994), 92.

(2) Philip Alexander Bruce, Institutional History of Virginia in the Seventeenth Century, vol. 1, An Inquiry into the Religious, Moral, Educational, Legal Military, and Political Condition of the People (New York: The Knickerbocker Press, 1910), 293-294.

(3) Lawrence A. Cremin, American Education: The Colonial Experience, 1607-1783 (New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1970), 180-183.

(4) Susan Myra Kingsbury, ed., The Records of the Virginia Company of London, Volume III (Washington: United States Government Printing Office, 1933), 102.

(5) Salmon and Campbell, 179-187.

(6) Records of the Virginia Company, III: 173.

(7) Abstract of Rebecca Starke's will in "Starke's Free School and `Justice of the Peace,'" William and Mary Quarterly, 1st series, 4, no. 3 (1896): 199.

(8) Abstract of William Starke's will, Ibid.

(9) Bruce, 1: 299.

(10) William W. Hening, ed., The Statutes at Large: Being a Collection of all the Laws of Virginia, from the First Session of the Legislature, in the Year 1619, vol. 5 (New York: R.&W.&G. Bartow, 1823), 280.

(11) Hening, 1: 260-261.

(12) Bruce, 1: 310-314.

(13) Hening, 4: 212.

(14) Robert Beverley, The History and Present State of Virginia, ed. Louis B. Wright (London, 1705; reprint, Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, published for the Institute of Early American History and Culture at Williamsburg, Va., 1947), 275-276.

(15) Bruce, 1: 331.

(16) George Maclaren Brydon, Virginia's Mother Church and the Political Conditions Under Which It Grew, vol. 1, An Interpretation of the Records of the Colony of Virginia and of the Anglican Church, 1607-1727 (Richmond, Va.: Virginia Historical Society, 1947), 199.

(17) Bruce, 1: 332.

(18) William Byrd II, The Secret Diary of William Byrd of Westover, 1709-1712, ed. Louis B. Wright and Marion Tinling (Richmond, Va.: The Dietz Press, 1941), 325, 348.

(19) Hening, 1: 252.

(20) Abstract of will in William and Mary Quarterly, 1st series, 5, no. 2 (1896): 113.

(21) Abstract of will in William and Mary Quarterly, 1st series, 11, no. 1 (1902): 19-20.

(22) Ibid.

(23) Abstract of will in William and Mary Quarterly, 1st series, 4, no. 1 (1895): 6-7, 13-14. A public school named in honor of Matthew Whaley still stands today on Scotland Street, just outside the boundaries of Colonial Williamsburg about two hundred yards from the Governor's Palace, in Williamsburg, Virginia.

(24) Jack P. Greene, ed., The Diary of Colonel Landon Carter of Sabine Hall 1752-1778 (Richmond, Va.: The Virginia Historical Society, 1987), 1: 3-4.

(25) Landon Carter, "[T]hat a school be erected & established forever in the Parish of Lunenbourg," in The Carter Family Papers, 1659-1797, in the Sabine Hall Collection, Library of Virginia, microfilm, reel 2.

(26) Greene, 1: 548.

(27) Ibid., 2: 780.

(28) Charles Hill Carter, Jr., interview by author, Charles City County, Va., February 1, 1993, notes in author's possession. Mr. Carter owns Shirley and is a direct descendant of Edward Hill III. Family legend has it that construction on the family-owned and occupied mansion began in 1723 when Edward Hill III began building the house as a wedding present for his daughter Elizabeth upon her marriage that same year to John Carter, oldest son of Robert "King" Carter.

(29) Marion Tinling, ed., The Correspondence of the Three William Byrds of Westover, Virginia, 1684-1776, vol. 1 (Charlottesville, Va.: The University Press of Virginia, published for the Virginia Historical Society, 1977), 32.

(30) Kenneth A. Lockridge, The Diary, and Life, of William Byrd H of Virginia, 1674-1744 (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, published for the Institute of Early American History and Culture, Williamsburg, Virginia), 12-13.

(31) Tinling, 1: 34.

(32) Ibid., 1:35.

(33) Ibid., 1: 152.

(34) Ibid., 1: 167.

(35) Charles Hill Carter, Jr. interview, 1993.

(36) Beverley, 97-98.

(37) Henry Hartwell, James Blair, and Edward Chilton, The Present State of Virginia, and the College, ed. Hunter Dickinson Farish (London, 1727; reprint, Williamsburg, Va.: Colonial Williamsburg, Inc., 1940), 68.

(38) Charter of the College of William and Mary in Hartwell et al., Present State, 72-73.

(39) Hugh Jones, The Present State of Virginia, From Whence Is Inferred A Short View of Maryland and North Carolina, ed. Richard L. Morton (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1956), 67-68.

(40) Robert Carter, Letters of Robert Carter, 1720-1727: The Commercial Interests of a Virginia Gentleman, ed. Louis B. Wright (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, Publishers, 1970), 33.

(41) Ibid., 22-23.

(42) Ibid., 25.

(43) Byrd, 197.

(44) Ibid., 204.

(45) Ibid., 578.

(46) Philip Vickers Fithian, Journal and Letters of Philip Vickers Fithian: A Plantation Tutor of the Old Dominion, 1773-1774, ed. Hunter Dickinson Farish (Charlottesville, Va.: The University Press of Virginia, 1957), 65.

(47) Ibid., 3.

(48) Ibid., 6-7.

(49) Ibid., 30.

(50) Ibid., 31.

(51) John Harrower, The Journal of John Harrower: An Indentured Servant in the Colony of Virginia, 1773-1776, ed. Edward Miles Riley (Williamsburg, Va.: Colonial Williamsburg, Inc., 1963), 17.

(52) Ibid., 40.

(53) Ibid., 42.

(54) Ibid., 41.

(55) Ibid., 42.

(56) Ibid.

(57) Ibid., 51.

(58) Ibid., 140, 150.

(50) Ibid., 46-47.

(60) Ibid., 54-56.

ROBERT J. VEJNAR, III is a Ph.D. candidate in history at Auburn University.