no image
Privacy Level: Open (White)

William (Pasley) Paslay (abt. 1630 - 1690)

William Paslay formerly Pasley aka Paisley [uncertain]
Born about in New Kent, Colony of Virginiamap
Ancestors ancestors
[sibling(s) unknown]
Husband of — married 1661 in New Kent,virginiamap
Descendants descendants
Died at about age 60 in St. Peter's Parish, New Kent, Virginiamap
Problems/Questions Profile manager: Cary Richards private message [send private message]
Profile last modified | Created 14 Apr 2011
This page has been accessed 2,607 times.

Contents

Biography

William Pasley, born about 1630, in York County, Virginia. New Kent county was formed from the county of York in 1654, and it seems that the parish of St. Peter’s was established about the same time.

William's eldest son, Robert Pasley, born October 16, 1668, named his son William Pasley, born July 26, 1696, in St. Peter's Parish, New Kent, Virginia. [1]

William Pasley, born about 1630 away February 17, 1690, in New Kent County, Virginia and was relieved of his Church Duties. [2]

Research Notes

Potential wives of William Pasley include Mary Ripley (?) and Frances Hammond (?) See also http://www.robertwilbanks.com/genealogy/pasley/pasleywilbanks.html for further descendants

Alternative names for the descendants of this family include Pasley and Paslay. [3] [4]

Even though the headstone for DAR Patriot, Captain Robert Paslay spells the surname Paslay, [5] DAR records for all Pasley and variants are found under the spelling of the name as "Paisley" with the disclaimer, "As such, the DAR assigns a single standard surname that covers variant spellings of similar surnames. While the surname may appear incorrect, this does not mean it is in error. This spelling system ensures that patriots are not established under more than one spelling." For this reason, an "Other Last Name" of Paisley is added to the profile, although it was not actually used by this family.

Sources

  1. "Virginia Births and Christenings, 1584-1917", database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:VRR4-3JM : 28 January 2020), Ro. Pasley in entry for William Pasley, 1696
  2. The Vestry Book of Saint Peter's, New Kent County, Virginia, From 1682-1758, Published by The National Society Of They Colonial Dames of America In the State of Virginia, Parish Record Series, No. 3, William Ellis Jones, Book & Job Printer, Richmond, Virginia 1905.
  3. Find A Grave: Memorial #143281753 James Crocker Pasley
  4. Find A Grave: Memorial #169362889 Austin Paslay
  5. Find A Grave: Memorial #144181963 Capt Robert Paslay

Acknowledgments

  • This person was created through the import of Olin LaVern and Darlene Thomas.ged on 14 April 2011
  • Thank you to Sissy Kennedy for creating Pasley-35 on 7 Aug 13






Is William your ancestor? Please don't go away!
 star icon Login to collaborate or comment, or
 star icon contact private message the profile manager, or
 star icon ask our community of genealogists a question.
Sponsored Search by Ancestry.com

DNA Connections
It may be possible to confirm family relationships with William by comparing test results with other carriers of his Y-chromosome or his mother's mitochondrial DNA. However, there are no known yDNA or mtDNA test-takers in his direct paternal or maternal line. It is likely that these autosomal DNA test-takers will share some percentage of DNA with William:

Have you taken a DNA test? If so, login to add it. If not, see our friends at Ancestry DNA.



Comments: 5

Leave a message for others who see this profile.
There are no comments yet.
Login to post a comment.
Paisley-735 and Pasley-4 appear to represent the same person because: This person is connected to himself as his father!?
posted by Janne (Shoults) Gorman
Does anybody have any sources for any of this? The parents look very very much like the usual attempt to get a royal ancestry out of thin air.

A disconnect has already been proposed, long ago. I propose to do that if nobody has any good reason not to.

posted by James McDonald
I have seen no evidence of this connection. There is a great deal of related evidence suggesting William Peaseley and Ann Calvert resided in London and left no heirs at all.

In the Calvert Papers (Vol. III, Pg. 23) a letter from Leonard Calvert to Sir Richard Lechford has the following line from May 30, 1634:

"My brother Peasley who dwelleth in a part of Mr Gages new house in Lincolnes Inns fielde; right against the Cock-pit play-house..."

This appears to indicate William Peaseley remained in London and was residing there rather than in Massachusetts or Maryland.

If we fast-forward within the Calvert Papers (No. 1, Pg 266), then we find this from Governor Charles Calvert to Cecilius, Lord Baltimore in a letter dated April 26, 1673:

"I have taken notice of Mr. Whites rent paid yor [R is in subscript in text] in England, the Warrant of the 26th November in favour of My Aunt Peaseley as yett has done her noe Service, haveing not been able to dispose of any of those Lands which that Warrant Impowered mee to sell for her..."

This further indicates Anne Calvert Peaseley was widowed and still resident in London. If there was a connection between "Aunt Peaseley" and William Pasley/Peaseley of New Kent, Virginia, then it stands to reason that he would have been in charge of selling Peaseley lands in Maryland. He was very much alive in 1673 and one can logically assume he would have been the primary inheritor of those properties from the proposed father William Peaseley Sr.

Further searching for William Peaseley Sr uncovers this item from the Maryland Historical Magazine of 1906. On Page 22, it mentions the difficulty in finding some trace of Peaseley in the records. But it notes the following...

"The P. C. C. was searched in vain for some trace of William Peaseley, son-in-law of Sir George Calvert. Two Peaseley wills were found in the period from 1642 to 1682 and they are here given in abstract to facilitate further search along this line."

Neither will appears to be the William Peaseley connected to the Calverts. One abstract mentions a William "Peislie" of Buckinghamshire without noting his still-living wife Anne, while the second abstract mentions a spouse named Anne as the wife of a John "Peisley" of Oxfordshire.

It strikes me the William Pasley/Peasley or Virginia is not connected directly to William Peaseley and Anne Calvert. The Massachusetts connection is also very dubious because the last thing a prominent Catholic family would want is to reside under the watchful eye of the Puritans. Being Baptist in Boston and surroundings in the 1600s was a pretty rough experience. I can't imagine how well a Catholic would do making a similar attempt to live there at that time and place.

posted by Richard Stalcup
Hi parents resided in New England, how could he be born in Virginia? It appears he has incorrect parents and should be detached from them. Also he is shown to be born after the death of his mother. [DB Errors Project]
posted by Bobbie (Madison) Hall
Pasley-4 and Peasley-110 appear to represent the same person because: Based on family information
posted by Ann (Thompson) Johnson

Pending merges › William Paisley (1630-1690)

P  >  Pasley  |  P  >  Paslay  >  William (Pasley) Paslay