no image

Thomas Lacy

Privacy Level: Open (White)
Thomas Lacy aka Lacey
Born about in New Kent County, Virginia Colony
[sibling(s) unknown]
Husband of — married [date unknown] [location unknown]
Died about in Manakin, Hanover County, Virginia
This page has been accessed 502 times.



Thomas Lacy

Confusion About Which Thomas Lacy Was the Immigrant

Published accounts, including the Compendium of American Genealogy by Virkus, have confused Thomas Lacy, father and son, "Thomas Lacy, from Eng. to Va., 1702, m Ann Burnley."[1] This statement is now dis-proven. Thomas Lacy who married Phoebe Rice was the immigrant.[2] Subject of this profile, Thomas Lacy II, the son, was born in Virginia and married Ann Burnley. This is proved by a document written c. 1850 by Rev. William Sterling Lacy which recorded the words of "old William Rice" in about 1828 or 1829.[2] Rice definitely stated that Thomas Lacy was engaged to Miss Rice, daughter of Thomas Rice, in Wales, and then preceded (by a few years) the Rice family to Virginia, where the couple married.[2] "Old William Rice" was a grandson of the immigrant, Thomas Rice.[2]


Thomas was born c. 1684 at New Kent County, Virginia.[2] He was a son of Thomas Lacy and "Miss" Rice (possible given name Phoebe).[2] [3]


According to the record in a Bible which belonged to Rev. William Sterling Lacy, Thomas married in 1704/6 at new Kent County, Virginia to Ann Burnley (spelled "Ann").[2]

Authenticated records for these children of Thomas and Anne Burnley:[4][2]

  1. Thomas (III)
  2. William
  3. Stephen

Circumstantial evidence for these children:[4]

  1. Elkanah
  2. Nathaniel
  3. Elliott
  4. Phoebe (tentatively)

There certainly may have been other children, especially daughters, of whom we have no current knowledge.[4]

Death and Legacy

Thomas died c. 1727 at Manakin, Hanover County, Virginia.[citation needed]


  1. Virkus, Frederick A., editor and Albert Nelson Marquis, The Abridged Compendium of American Genealogy; First Families of America; a Genealogical Encyclopedia of the United States, (Vol 1, page 673) Chicago: A.N. Marquis & company, 1925-, Web accessed September 7, 2014
  2. 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 Lacey, Elton, "SECOND GENERATION: Thomas II LACY", March 5, 2000, Web accessed September 7, 2014
  3. Crawford, M. Angela, "Portrait of a Pioneer Family: The Lacys of Union County", SouthArk South Arkansas Community College, Web accessed September 7, 2014
  4. 4.0 4.1 4.2 Lacey, Elton, Thomas Lacy I of New Kent and Hanover Counties, Virginia, Web accessed September 7, 2014

See also:

  • Hazel Potter Lawler, The Stephen Lacy Family of Goochland County, Virginia with forebears, descendants and allied families, Fredricksburg, Virginia, 22401, (c) Hazel Potter Lawler, 1981. (This book contains all the descendants, well documented, for the Thomas Lacy family)

More: Family Tree & Genealogy Tools

Searching for someone else?
First: Last:

Do you have a GEDCOM? Login to have every name in your tree searched. It's free (like everything on WikiTree).

No known carriers of Thomas's Y-chromosome or his mother's mitochondrial DNA have taken yDNA or mtDNA tests.

Have you taken a DNA test for genealogy? Login to add it.

  • Login to edit this profile.
  • Private Messages: Contact the Profile Managers privately: Greg Rose, Mary Lacy, and George Berthelson. (Best when privacy is an issue.)
  • Public Comments: Login to post. (Best for messages specifically directed to those editing this profile. Limit 20 per day.)
  • Public Q&A: These will appear above and in the Genealogist-to-Genealogist (G2G) Forum. (Best for questions directed to the wider genealogy community.)

On December 31, 2014 at 16:58GMT Cynthia Billups wrote:

Lacy-804 and Lacy-247 appear to represent the same person because: Same name, same parents, same birth place. The birth date in 247 has a source. Birth date in 804 has no source. Neither profile has a source for death date (will look for one).

But this should not hold up the merge. Please approve if you agree these two profiles represent the same person.


On December 20, 2014 at 21:31GMT Cynthia Billups wrote:

I wonder if you might consider removing the roman numerals from the various Thomas Laceys? They could cause confusion and duplicates, because other researchers assign different numbers to the same persons. The WikiTree convention is to use roman numerals only if the profiled used them in their own lifetime.

L  >  Lacy  >  Thomas Lacy