John Hawkins Timeline

John Hawkins Timeline

We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

  • 1532 - 1595

    The life of Sir John Hawkins, slave trader and then treasurer of the Royal Navy.

  • 1562 - 1563

    John Hawkins' first expedition to transport slaves from West Africa to the Americas.

  • 1564 - 1565

    John Hawkins' second expedition to transport slaves from West Africa to the Americas.

  • 1567 - 1568

    John Hawkins and Francis Drake lead an expedition to transport slaves from west Africa to the Spanish West Indies. The fleet is attacked at San Juan D'Ulloa.

  • c. 1578

    John Hawkins is appointed treasurer of the Royal Navy and begins its expansion and modernisation.

  • Jul 1588 - Aug 1588

    Sir John Hawkins is the rear-admiral, third in command of the English fleet which defeats the Spanish Armada.

  • Aug 1595

    John Hawkins and Francis Drake lead an unsuccessful expedition against Spanish ships and settlements in Panama and the Caribbean.

  • 12 Nov 1595

    John Hawkins dies of illness on a voyage to the Caribbean.

Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Hawkins, John (1532-1595)

HAWKINS or HAWKYNS, Sir JOHN (1532–1595), naval commander, second son of William Hawkyns (d. 1553) [q. v.], and younger brother of William Hawkyns (d. 1589) [q. v.], was born at Plymouth in 1532, a date which seems established by the evidence of the legend on a contemporary portrait ( Hawkins , frontispiece), and of the inscription formerly on a tablet in the church of St. Dunstan's-in-the-East, in which his years, at his death in 1595, are said to have amounted to ‘six times ten and three’ ( Stow , Survey of London, vol. i. lib. ii. p. 45). He was admitted a freeman of Plymouth in 1556 ( Worth , p. 251). He was bred to the sea, and while quite a young man made ‘divers voyages to the isles of the Canaries,’ where he learned ‘that negroes were very good merchandise in Hispaniola, and that they might easily be had upon the coast of Guinea.’ The last of ​ these voyages was probably in 1561. He had already, in or about 1559, married Katharine, daughter of Benjamin Gonson, treasurer of the navy, the son of William Gonson, treasurer of the navy before him and captain of the Mary Grace in 1513, when Hawkyns's father was presumably master of the Great Galley. With the assistance of his father-in-law and of other influential friends, including Wynter, another principal officer of the navy [see Wynter, Sir William ], who became ‘liberal contributors and adventurers,’ he fitted out three good ships, and sailed from England in October 1562. After touching at Teneriffe, he passed on to Sierra Leone, and there obtained, ‘partly by the sword and partly by other means,’ which included the plundering of Portuguese vessels (Portuguese depositions in State Papers, For., July 1568), ‘three hundred negroes at the least, besides other merchandises which that country yieldeth,’ and ‘with that prey he sailed over the Ocean sea unto the island of Hispaniola,’ at the several ports of which, ‘standing always upon his guard, and trusting the Spaniards no farther than that by his own strength he was able still to master them,’ he sold his English wares, and all his negroes. ‘He received, by way of exchange, hides, ginger, sugars, and some pearls,’ with which he loaded his own three ships, besides freighting ‘two other hulks with hides and other like commodities which he sent into Spain.’ He arrived in England in September 1563 ( Hakluyt , Principal Navigations, iii. 500).

The Spanish laws against unlicensed trading to the Spanish colonies were very stringent, and the two ships which Hawkyns sent to Seville were seized as smugglers. Hampton, the companion of Hawkyns's voyage, who had taken charge of them, would have been thrown into prison had he not hastily fled the country. Hawkyns and his friends were anxious to recover the ships and their confiscated cargoes, and did not scruple to assert that they ‘were driven to San Domingo by force of weather, where they had desired license of the judges of the island to sell certain slaves, to victual themselves, and to pay their men’ (Cal. State Papers, For. 1563, No. 1465, 8 Dec.) All this, however, availed them nothing. Six months later the English ambassador at Madrid wrote to Hawkyns, advising him to come to terms with some favourite of the king, by the promise of four thousand or five thousand ducats (ib. 1564–5, No. 545, 5 July 1564) but nothing seems to have been recovered. Hawkyns estimated the loss at about 20,000l. but the profits of the voyage were still very large.

A second expedition on a larger scale was speedily set on foot. Foremost among the adventurers were the Earl of Pembroke and Lord Robert Dudley, afterwards Earl of Leicester. The queen was induced to lend the Jesus, a ship of seven hundred tons, which had been bought from Lubeck in the reign of Henry VIII ( Derrick , Memoirs of the Royal Navy, pp. 9, 11), a loan which probably involved an interest in the expedition. In the Jesus, with his former ship the Solomon, and two smaller vessels, Hawkyns sailed from Plymouth on 18 Oct. 1564, and arrived at Teneriffe on 7 Nov. Here the Spaniards were no longer friendly, and it was with difficulty that the ships were permitted to refit. Coming on the coast of Africa, the natives were everywhere hostile. On 27 Dec. Hawkyns attacked a town, where he hoped to make many prisoners, but was repulsed with the loss of seven men slain and twenty-seven wounded, taking away only ten negroes. Other attempts were more fortunate, and on 29 Jan. 1564–5 the ships sailed from Sierra Leone, having on board a ‘great company of negroes,’ but ill provided with water. Calms and baffling winds made the voyage long. When at last, on 9 March, they came to Dominica and landed in search of water, they ‘could find none but rain-water and such as fell from the hills and remained as a puddle in the dale, whereof they filled for the negroes.’ At Burburata, on the coast of Venezuela, where they first attempted to trade, leave was refused, strict orders having been sent from Spain prohibiting all traffic with any foreign nation. Hawkyns wished to argue the point, but the orders were positive so on 16 April he landed ‘a hundred men well armed, … with the which he marched to the town wards,’ and so constrained the governor to come to terms after which a satisfactory trade was opened, and a good many of the negroes were disposed of. At Rio de la Hacha they were met by the same prohibition. Hawkyns again attempted argument, not unmixed with falsehood he said that ‘he was in an armada of the queen's majesty's of England, and sent about other her affairs, but, driven besides his pretended voyage, was enforced by contrary winds to come into those parts.’ As the Spaniards still refused, Hawkyns sent them word ‘to determine either to give him license to trade, or else stand to their arms.’ On 21 May he landed ‘one hundred men in armour’ with two small guns, the fire of which produced the desired effect, without any actual collision. After this the traffic proceeded quietly enough, and the whole cargo was disposed of within ten days. They then sailed northwards, ​ passed the west end of Cuba, through the Gulf of Florida, and so along the coast of the mainland, looking for some place to water.

In the river of May, now St. John's River ( Winsor , Hist. of America, ii. 264–5), they found a French colony, commanded by M. Laudonnière, in a state of destitution. Hawkyns relieved their immediate wants, and offered to carry them to France but Laudonnière declined, not knowing, he says, ‘how the case stood between the French and the English,’ and doubting also lest Hawkyns might ‘attempt somewhat in Florida in the name of his mistress.’ Finally, he agreed with Hawkyns for the purchase of one of his small vessels, with a quantity of provisions and stores, giving a bill for the price agreed on for he was afraid, he says, to pay in silver, ‘lest the queen of England, seeing the same, should be encouraged to set footing there.’ At the same time he bears witness that Hawkyns ‘won the reputation of a good and charitable man, deserving to be esteemed as much of us all, as if he had saved all our lives’ ( Markham , p. 69). By doing this, however, Hawkyns had incurred a serious risk the homeward voyage was prolonged by contrary winds they ran short of provisions, and were for a time in great danger, from which they were relieved by a large take of cod on the banks of Newfoundland, and afterwards by falling in with a couple of French ships, from whom they purchased sufficient for their needs. On 20 Sept. they arrived at Padstow, after a voyage described as ‘profitable to the venturers, as also to the whole realm, in bringing home both gold, silver, pearls, and other jewels great store’ (ib. p. 64). On 23 Oct. the Jesus was received again into the charge of the queen's officers, the Earls of Pembroke and Leicester paying 500l. for the expense of refitting her. No mention is made of the further profit which accrued to the queen.

The success of these two voyages brought repute to Hawkyns as a skilful and prudent commander, and won him favour in influential quarters. Arms were granted to him: sable, on a point wavy a lion passant or in chief three bezants: and for a crest, a demi-Moor, proper, in chains. The enormous profits suggested new voyages. The Spaniards, keenly sensible of the danger which these expeditions caused to their monopoly, represented the matter so strongly to the queen, that she was compelled to put on the appearance, at least, of prohibiting them. Hawkyns had intended to sail again in the following year, but was prevented by the council, who bound him over not to go near the West Indies nor to break the laws of the king of Spain (Cal. State Papers, Dom. 13, 31 Oct. 1566). He accordingly gave up the intended voyage, though possibly his ships went under some other commander. De Silva, the Spanish ambassador, alleged that they did go trafficked, smuggled, and plundered, and returned ‘loaded with gold and silver’ ( Froude , viii. 67) but the statement was based on vague rumours, and seems extremely doubtful. In 1567 Hawkyns resolved upon another voyage, and this time met with no hindrance. The queen, indeed, seems to have been personally one of the adventurers, so far, at any rate, as lending the Jesus for the voyage but this assuredly did not confer on Hawkyns any claim to be considered an officer in the queen's service.

While Hawkyns was at Plymouth preparing for his voyage, some Spanish ships from the Low Countries came into the Sound and stood on, apparently meaning to go into Catwater, where Hawkyns, with his ships, was lying. Hawkyns considered that in the small and already crowded harbour there was no room for them, and, not to lose time in expostulation, stopped their advance by firing at them. They immediately struck their flag and anchored outside, where the next day some private ship, Dutch or English, laying the admiral on board, rescued a number of prisoners who were being carried to Spain but of this Hawkyns protested he had no knowledge till afterwards. The Spaniard wrote to his ambassador the ambassador sent an angry representation to the queen Hawkyns was called on to explain, and the affair was smoothed over diplomatically. But from first to last, no mention was made of the insult to the English flag, which, according to the incorrect story written many years afterwards by Hawkyns's son, was the immediate cause of the dispute ( Markham , p. 119 cf. State Papers, For., De Silva to the Queen, 6 Oct. (? N.S.) 1567 ‘De Wachene to — 23 Oct. (? Sept.) 1567 State Papers, Dom. xliv. 13 Hawkyns to Cecil, 28 Sept. 1567 Froude , viii. 68–9). Long before the question was settled, Hawkyns sailed from Plymouth on 2 Oct. in command of a squadron consisting of, besides the Jesus, the Minion, another queen's ship, and four smaller vessels one of the latter was the Judith, commanded by Francis Drake [q. v.], a kinsman, possibly a nephew of Hawkyns, with whom he was now for the first time associated.

As in the previous voyages, Hawkyns went to Sierra Leone, took part in native wars, assaulted and set fire to a native town of eight thousand inhabitants, plundered Portuguese vessels to the amount, it was deposed, in wares and negroes, of more than ​ seventy thousand gold pieces (State Papers, For., December 1568, f. 90) and finally, having obtained some five hundred negroes, sailed for the West Indies. Again he had a tedious voyage to Dominica again he forced his trade on the Spaniards at Rio de la Hacha, where he sold two hundred of the negroes. Without any further resort to arms he and his companions disposed of their wares along the Spanish main. At Cartagena the governor proved more strict, and as their ‘trade was so near finished,’ and the hurricane season coming on, they left the coast on 24 July ( Markham , p. 73), intending, it is implied, to pass up the coast of Florida, as in the former voyage, and so home. But early in August, off the west end of Cuba, according to Hawkyns's own story, a storm lasting four days ‘so beat the Jesus that we … were rather upon the point to leave her than to keep her any longer yet, hoping to bring all to good pass, sought the coast of Florida, where we found no place nor haven for our ships because of the shallowness of the coast.’ ‘A new storm, which continued other three days,’ finally drove them into ‘the port which serveth the city of Mexico, called San Juan de Lua’ (ib.)

The truth of Hawkyns's explanation of his going to San Juan de Lua is extremely doubtful. Several times before he had attributed his presence in a Spanish port to ‘force of weather,’ as soon as it appeared likely that he might be called to account for being there. It is far from improbable that he again did so on this occasion, when it was more than ever necessary for him to make out a plausible case. For so far from ‘their trade being near finished’ when they reached Cartagena, we know that they had on board at San Juan de Lua fifty-seven negroes ‘optimi generis,’ each valued at 160l., or a total of 9,120l. (Schedule of property lost, State Papers, Dom. Elizabeth, liii.), and that they had previously made inquiries as to the price of slaves at Vera Cruz. The inference is that Hawkyns had predetermined to sell the negroes there, and that the storm—if there was one—merely gave colour to his usual pretext.

On 16 Sept. he anchored his squadron in the narrow harbour, now more familiarly known as Vera Cruz, which is formed by the low-lying little island of San Juan, opposite to the town, and backed by wide-extending shoals (cf. Dampier , Voyages, vol. ii. pt. ii. p. 125). The next day the fleet of Spain, consisting of thirteen great ships, appeared outside, and Hawkyns sent word to the general that he would not suffer him to enter the port without a pledge for the maintenance of peace. He was, he says, quite able to have kept him out, but did not venture to do so, ‘fearing the Queen's Majesty's indignation in so weighty a matter.’ The Spanish fleet represented a value of nearly two million sterling, and there was no other port on the coast in which it could shelter in the stormy season. After three days' negotiation and the interchange of pledges of peace and amity, the Spanish fleet entered the port on the 20th ( Markham , p. 76 Hawkyns's Deposition, State Papers, Dom. Eliz. liii.) Unfortunately we have only Hawkyns's own account of this negotiation, as well as of what followed. According to him the English scrupulously observed the conditions, while the Spaniards' hearts were filled with treachery from the first. He admits, indeed, that he thoroughly mistrusted the Spaniards and it is certain that the Spaniards looked on Hawkyns and his men as dangerous smugglers and pirates. It is thus impossible to say exactly how the quarrel broke out but on the morning of the 24th a fierce encounter began. Hawkyns, caught in the crowded harbour at a terrible disadvantage, defended himself most stubbornly, but the odds against him were too great. The Spaniards landed large numbers of men on the island, made themselves masters of the battery which Hawkyns had constructed there, and turned its fire against the English ships. One of the smaller vessels was sunk, two others were captured, the Jesus was dismasted and helpless Hawkyns's one hope was to defend her till nightfall, and then in the dark to get her treasure and provisions on board the Minion and put to sea. The Spaniards anticipated him they sent down two fireships, which threatened both the Jesus and Minion with instant destruction. The Minion, which was at the time alongside the Jesus, made sail without waiting for orders. Hawkyns and some of his shipmates sprang and got on board her others apparently managed to reach her in a boat the rest, remaining on board the Jesus, were made prisoners when the Spaniards took possession of the ship and all the treasure on board, amounting to about 100,000l., the result of the previous traffic. The Minion and Judith alone succeeded in getting to sea. Their rigging was shattered, they had lost their anchors, and they were short of provisions. The two ships parted company in the dark, each apparently having as much as she could do to look out for herself. The Minion had about two hundred men crowded together on board, with insufficient provisions, clothes, and bedding and, after enduring extreme privations for about three weeks, finding no relief nor possibility of obtaining supplies, ‘our people, being ​ forced with hunger, desired to be set a land whereunto,’ says Hawkyns, ‘I concluded’ ( Markham , p. 79). A hundred of them were therefore landed in the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico and having taken on board some water, the Minion with the others and ‘the little remains of victuals’ put to sea on 16 Oct. As she ran into colder weather ‘our men, being oppressed with famine, died continually and they that were left grew into such weakness that we were scantly able to manœuvre our ship and the wind being always ill for us to recover England, determined to go with Galicia in Spain’ (ib. p. 80). On the last day of December they arrived at Ponte Vedra, near Vigo. There the men ‘with excess of fresh meat … died, a great part of them’ but Hawkyns, getting the Minion round to Vigo, was assisted by some English ships lying there, entered some fresh hands, and sailed on 20 Jan. 1568–9. On the 25th he anchored in Mount's Bay Drake, in the Judith, had arrived with the news five days earlier.

Hawkyns's first idea was to fit out another expedition to the Spanish main, to release his comrades left behind at San Juan de Lua and in the Gulf of Mexico, and to avenge his own losses. But his reputation was under a cloud the adventurers had lost their money the queen had lost her ship and neither were prepared to send him out again, at any rate until his conduct had been strictly inquired into. Cecil, too, looked with no friendly eye on the trade in negroes, or the semi-piratical adventure of which Hawkyns was accused and Elizabeth realised that Spain would not always be tolerant of her connivance at this illegal traffic. Hawkyns was forbidden to go on his proposed voyage or to attempt the release of his friends by force. He was compelled, therefore, to search for other means.

The Spaniards, enraged at the stoppage of the Genoese ducats on their way to the Duke of Alva, were at this time meditating an invasion of England they believed that a great many English were disaffected to the queen's government, and were anxious to find out what support they might expect from the malcontents. At least as early as August 1570, and probably some months earlier, Hawkyns made overtures to Don Gueran de Espes, the Spanish ambassador, spoke bitterly of the ingratitude of the government, and asked Gueran to interest himself in obtaining the release of the prisoners. Gueran suggested to the Spanish government that it might be worth their while to win this man to their side by acceding to his request. The suggestion met with no response but Hawkyns, still hoping to gain his end, led Don Gueran to believe that he was willing to enter the Spanish service, and to carry over with him the best of the queen's ships and of the English sailors. Finding that his negotiations did not advance, he despatched George Fitzwilliam, who had been with him in his second voyage (ib. p. 64), into Spain, to communicate directly with the king. Fitzwilliam was authorised to say that Hawkyns was a faithful son of the church, that he was looking forward to the time when the queen should be overthrown, that he was ready to pass over to the king's service, bringing with him the English fleet the men would follow where he led the king need only pay their usual wages, and advance the money necessary for the equipment of the ships for himself he desired nothing beyond the release of a few prisoners at Seville who were not worth the cost of keeping ( Froude , ix. 510–11). Philip, at first incredulous, began at last to entertain Hawkyns's offers. He desired Fitzwilliam, as a proof of his sincerity, to bring him a letter from the Queen of Scots, explaining what she wanted done. With the connivance of Burghley, with whom Hawkyns was in communication all along, Fitzwilliam had an interview with Mary, and received the requisite papers, which enabled Burghley to track out the Ridolfi plot. Philip's suspicion was disarmed. He liberated the prisoners at Seville, and gave them ten dollars each that they might not arrive in England penniless he sent Hawkyns 40,000l. for the equipment of the promised ships, together with a patent constituting him a grandee of Spain. The whole intrigue was dirty enough and though Hawkyns entered into it primarily to recover the liberty of his imprisoned shipmates, and secondarily, to further Burghley's political ends, he was also keenly sensible of the value of the 40,000l., which he regarded as part compensation for his losses (ib. ix. 509–520). While this negotiation was going on, Hawkyns seems to have been engaged in another with an exactly opposite purpose. On 25 May 1571 Walsyngham, then ambassador at Paris, wrote to Burghley that he was desired by Count Louis of Nassau to move the queen ‘to license Hawkyns underhand to serve him with certain ships,’ and this was repeated in almost the same terms on 12 Aug. (Cal. State Papers, For. Ser. 1569–71, Nos. 1729, 1920 Digges , Compleat Ambassador, pp. 103, 126). There can be little doubt that Count Louis had a previous understanding with Hawkyns but it does not appear that the queen gave the requisite license, or that Hawkyns engaged in this service.

It was about this time that Hawkyns received an augmentation to the arms already granted in 1565—on a canton or, an escallop ​ between two palmer's staves sable. He was also member for Plymouth in the parliament of 1572. On 11 Oct. 1573 he had a narrow escape of his life, being stabbed, as he was riding along the Strand in company with Sir William Wynter, by one Peter Burchett, a gentleman of the Middle Temple, who, in a fit of fanatical fury, mistook him, as he said, for Sir Christopher Hatton [q. v.] Hawkyns was dangerously wounded. The queen sent her own surgeon to attend him, and was desirous of having Burchett hanged forthwith by martial law but that, she was persuaded, was illegal. On 12 Nov., however, he was hanged on a gibbet erected on the spot where he had stabbed Hawkyns, his right hand being previously cut off and nailed overhead ( Stow , Annals, ed. Howe, p. 677 Strype , Annals, Oxford edit. vol. ii. pt. i. p. 427 Strype , Life of Parker, Oxford ed. ii. 327 Wright , Queen Elizabeth and her Times, i. 492 Soames , Elizabethan Religious History, p. 197).

Shortly before this Hawkyns had succeeded to the office of treasurer of the navy, previously held by his father-in-law, Benjamin Gonson, the reversion of which had been secured to him some years before. To this were presently added the duties of comptroller of the navy and these important functions he exercised during the remainder of his life. His experience as a seaman and shipowner enabled him to appreciate and adopt many improvements in the building and rig of the ships of the navy. He made them more weatherly, by lowering the huge castles at the bow and stern, and faster, by increasing their length, and so giving them finer lines. He also introduced chain pumps, boarding nettings, a new sheathing, the use of the bowline, and the method of striking topmasts. Of some of these improvements he was possibly the inventor. Others were probably due to, among others, Richard Chapman, a private shipbuilder at Deptford, whose yard was in close proximity to that of the navy, and with whom Hawkyns was for many years more or less directly in partnership. This partnership, and the almost uncontrolled power then exercised by the treasurer of the navy, gave rise to a suspicion that, with two yards so conveniently situated, Hawkyns worked them both to his pecuniary advantage. It was alleged that ships in Chapman's yard were built of government timber, and fitted out with government stores that Hawkyns bought timber at a low rate, and sold it to the queen at a considerable advance that he passed off inferior hemp and other articles as the best, and entered them as such in his accounts that when at the point of death, after he had been stabbed by Burchett, he had made his will, and at that time had not above 500l. to dispose of, and that since then he ‘was greatly enriched by his underhand management,’ and had accumulated a considerable fortune by his ‘unjust and deceitful dealings’ (State Papers, Dom. Eliz. cciv. 16, 17, 18, 21 Lansdowne MS. vol. lii. cap. 43). It is not correct to say that these charges were put aside as idle calumnies ( Markham , p. xiii). They were not, indeed, formally inquired into but Burghley quietly satisfied himself that they were not unfounded, and drew up a set of stringent regulations, intended to prevent such abuses in future, noting on the rough draft in his own hand, ‘Remembrances of abuses past: John Hawkyns was half in the bargain with Peter Pett and Matthew Baker,’ the mastershipwright and storekeeper respectively in Deptford dockyard (Cotton MS. Otho E. viii. 147 cf. State Papers, Dom. Eliz. cciv. 18 D'Ewes , Compleat Journal … throughout the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, p. 519 a). It seems very probable, however, that these charges, irresponsibly made, were much exaggerated. Monson, who knew a great deal of what was going on, refers to Hawkyns as ‘perfect and honest in his place,’ in comparison with the reformed administrations of the succeeding reign ( Churchill , iii. 332) and in 1588 the ships fitted out by Hawkyns were equal to the very severe service they were called on to perform. On 21 Feb. of that year Lord Howard wrote to Burghley that, as Hawkyns was ordered to the court ‘to answer in the matter of his bargain for the navy, he could testify that the ships were in excellent condition’ (Cal. State Papers, Dom.) and in the August following, the thorough efficiency of the ships afforded undoubted proof that they were not, as had been alleged, caulked with rotten oakum, or rigged with twice-laid rope.

When the fleet was mustered for the defence of the country against the Spanish Armada, Hawkyns was captain of the Victory, one of the new ships which had been built at Deptford under his own supervision. While at Plymouth he commanded in the third post under the lord admiral and Drake, and was a member of the council of war which the admiral consulted ‘on every question of moment’ (State Papers, Dom. Elizabeth, ccxi. 37, Howard to Walsyngham, 19 June). When the fleet was extended from Scilly to Ushant in three divisions, Hawkyns had command of the inshore squadron towards Scilly (ib. ccxii. 18, Howard to Walsyngham, 6 July). As rear-admiral he took an active part in the several engagements with the Spanish fleet in the Channel, beginning 21 July and especially in that off the Isle ​ of Wight on the 25th, on the evening of which day, in acknowledgment of his gallant conduct, he, together with Frobisher (or Frobiser) and Lord Thomas Howard, was knighted by the lord admiral on the deck of the Ark. When on the next day the fleet was joined by the squadron of the Narrow Seas under Lord Henry Seymour [q. v.], Hawkyns, falling into the fourth place, became vice-admiral of Howard's division, and in the early part of the decisive action off Gravelines on the 29th would appear to have had the actual command of the centre during Howard's temporary absence [see Howard, Charles, Earl of Nottingham ] beyond all question the Victory fully shared in the glories of the day.

When the accounts for wages, provisions, and equipment had to be settled, Hawkyns obtained the assistance of his brother-in-law, Edward Fenton, who was appointed his deputy ‘to enable him to draw up his accounts’ (Cal. State Papers, Dom. 14 Dec. 1588). It is true enough that Hawkyns complained of the work as burdensome, and that Elizabeth and her ministers exercised a supervision which he thought offensive but those who have condemned the queen's conduct in this matter have apparently not known that she had clear reasons for doubting Hawkyns's integrity. That the payments were made out of Hawkyns's own pocket is contrary to certain fact (ib. 16 Jan. 1589 Hist. MSS. Comm. 12th Rep. App. pt. i. p. 12, October 1588).

About this time Hawkyns, in conjunction with Drake, is commonly said to have instituted the fund long known as ‘The Chest at Chatham.’ As treasurer of the navy he would naturally be consulted in such a business, and Drake was the right hand of the lord admiral but their share in the matter has been much exaggerated. Instituted the fund certainly was, and was continued as a distinct charity for the relief of maimed and wounded seamen, till the beginning of the present century in 1814 its revenues were finally united with those of Greenwich Hospital. The chest, from which it derived its name, was moved to Greenwich in 1845, and is still preserved in the museum of the Royal Naval College. Early in 1590 Hawkyns was associated with Frobiser in the command of a squadron sent to the coast of Portugal ‘to do all possible mischief’ to the enemy, and especially to look out for the annual Plate fleet. This, however, having timely warning, did not appear and the expedition returned to Plymouth without having accomplished anything, ‘and thus,’ wrote Hawkyns to Burghley on 31 Oct., ‘God's infallible word is performed in that the Holy Ghost said, “Pawle dothe plant, Apollo dothe watter, but God gyvethe the increase”’ (State Papers, Dom. Elizabeth, ccxxxiii. 118). It is said that the queen on reading the letter ejaculated, ‘God's death! This fool went out a soldier and has come home a divine.’

Hawkyns passed the years immediately following on shore. In November 1591 he was one of the commissioners ‘for taking account of the prizes taken at sea during the summer … and of the proper proportions to be assigned to her Majesty’ (Cal. State Papers, Dom.) proof sufficient that he had not forfeited the queen's confidence. On 8 July 1592 he wrote to Burghley that he had his leg hurt at the launch of the Swiftsure (ib.) He was at this time also engaged in the building and organising the still existing ‘Sir John Hawkyns's Hospital’ at Chatham, which was built in 1592, though the charter was not granted till two years later. Towards the end of 1594 he was again called on to serve at sea, in an expedition ordered to the West Indies, under the command of Sir Francis Drake, and fitted out at the joint cost of the queen, Hawkyns, Drake, and possibly other minor adventurers. After many delays this fleet left Plymouth in August 1595, by which time the Spaniards were well informed of its destination and its force. It thus disappointed expectation but Hawkyns did not witness the failure. He died at sea off Porto Rico on 12 Nov. 1595. His death was doubtless due to the effect of the West Indian climate on a man no longer young, and with a constitution already weakened by former hardships and by attacks of fever and ague, one of which in 1581 had brought him to death's door ( Hawkins , p. 43n.) Four days before his death, feeling his strength failing, he added a last codicil to his will, in which, after directing restitution to be made to any man whom he had injured, he continued: ‘For the faults or offences which I have or might have committed against her Majesty, I do give unto her 2,000l. (if she will take it), for that she hath in her possession of mine a far greater sum which I do release unto her. This I mean with God's grace to perform myself, if he of his mercy send me home.’

Hawkyns was buried at sea, but in accordance with his will a monument was erected to his memory in the church of St. Dunstan's-in-the-East, in which parish he had resided for thirty years, and to the poor of which, as well as a Plymouth and of Deptford, he bequeathed a sum of 50l. In addition to the Latin inscription on the monument, another in English was shown on a mural tablet. These with the church perished in the great fire but the inscriptions have been preserved ​ by Stow (Survey of London, vol. i. lib. ii. p. 45). In the English verses there is an error, presumably of transcription, which makes them unintelligible. According to Stow—

Dame Katharine his first religious wife
Saw years thrice ten and two of mortal life,
Leaving the world the sixth, the seventh ascending.

Married should probably be read for mortal in the second line, the third line implying that at her death she was between 42—6 times 7—and 49—7 times 7. Sir Richard Hawkyns [q. v.], her son, was born in or about 1561 or 1562, and Dame Katharine died after a lingering illness in the first days of July 1591 (Hist. MSS. Comm. 12th Rep. App. pt. i. pp. 14, 15). By the special permission of her husband she executed a will on 23 June 1591 ( Drake , p. xi Hawkins , p. 72). Hawkyns married secondly Margaret, daughter of Charles Vaughan of Hergest Court in Herefordshire, but had by her no issue. She died in 1619. Besides his son Richard, a ‘base son’ is spoken of as captain of the ship sent out to countermand Drake's orders in 1587 (Lansdowne MS. vol. lii. cap. 43). Neither the name of this ship nor of her captain can now be traced, nor yet any other mention of this ‘base son’ and it has been suggested that the expression merely refers to Richard, the legitimate son, whose conduct may have been disapproved of by the writer of the manuscript, a man full of rancour towards Hawkyns and his family.

Hawkyns's reputation no doubt stands higher than it otherwise would have done by reason of his association with Drake, not only in the last voyage, which proved fatal to both, but in the defeat of the Armada and in their cruel experience at San Juan de Lua. But the characters of the two men were very different. While Drake was winning fame and fortune by unsurpassed feats of daring, Hawkyns was enriching himself as a merchant, shipowner, and admiralty official, whose integrity was suspected. ‘He had,’ says a writer who claims to have known him well, ‘malice with dissimulation, rudeness in behaviour, and was covetous in the last degree’ (R. M., probably Sir Robert Mansell, in Purchas his Pilgrimes, iv. 1185 Lediard , Naval History, p. 312). But, whatever his faults, history has condoned them, rightly considering him one of the great men who broke the power of Spain, and established England's maritime supremacy.

So-called portraits of Hawkyns are not uncommon, but few seem genuine. Of these one is in the Sir John Hawkyns's Hospital at Chatham, where it is said to have hung ever since the hospital was first built. Another now in the possession of Mr. C. Stuart Hawkins of Hayford Hall, Buckfastleigh, Plymouth, has not an unbroken tradition, but is believed to be genuine: it bears the arms of Sir John Hawkyns and the date ‘Ætatis suæ 58 Anno Domini 1591.’ It was exhibited in the Armada exhibition at Drury Lane Theatre in October 1888, and is reproduced as a frontispiece to Miss Hawkins's ‘Plymouth Armada Heroes.’ A group, said to be Drake, Hawkyns, and Cavendish, ascribed to Mytens, has been at Newbattle, the seat of the Marquis of Lothian, for at least 250 years. A copy, presented by the seventh Marquis of Lothian, is in the Painted Hall at Greenwich. Other portraits, such as the miniature ascribed to Peter Oliver, now belonging to the Countess of Rosebery, or the ivory bust belonging to the Rev. B. D. Hawkins ( Hawkins , pp. 17, 76), both of which were lent to the Drury Lane exhibition of 1888, cannot be identified with Hawkyns, and are, more especially the miniature, utterly unlike the better authenticated portrait. The name, though now commonly written Hawkins, was by Sir John himself, as well as by his brother William, his son Richard, and his nephew William, invariably written Hawkyns. The Spaniards, their contemporaries, preferred Aquinas or Achines, or occasionally Acle: in Portuguese Latin it appears as de Canes.

[The several lives of Hawkyns are meagre and unsatisfactory. They include Campbell's in Lives of the Admirals, i. 410 Southey's, in Lives of the British Admirals, vol. iii. Worth's, in Transactions of the Devonshire Association for 1883, and Miss Hawkins's, in Plymouth Armada Heroes. This last, however, gives some interesting copies or abstracts of original papers, including the wills of Hawkyns and his two wives but the author seems not to have known of Hawkyns's last codicil, dated 8 Nov. 1595. The will was proved twice once in 1596, as he had left it in England, and a second time in 1599, with this later addition. Hakluyt's accounts of the three voyages to the coast of Africa and the West Indies are included in the Hawkins' Voyages, edited for the Hakluyt Society by C. R. Markham, under whose name they are here referred to Froude's Hist. of England (cabinet edit.) Drake's Introduction to Hasted's Hist. of Kent Western Antiquary (passim). The writer would also acknowledge some notes supplied by Dr. H. H. Drake.]

John Hawkins

John Hawkins, the head of one of the nation&rsquos oldest literary agencies and who represented Joyce Carol Oates, Gail Godwin and Harry Crews, died on November 13th at the age of 72.

Born in 1939 in Seattle, Washington, John Hawkins grew up in Kennett Square, PA. He graduated from Harvard in 1962 and received a master&rsquos degree in international relations from the University of Pennsylvania in 1964. He worked in banking for a few years at Banker&rsquos Trust, but in 1966, John Hawkins was persuaded by his father-in-law to join the firm of Paul R. Reynolds Inc, which had been established in 1893 by his wife&rsquos grandfather, Paul Revere Reynolds. He became president of the company in 1980 and changed the name of the firm to John Hawkins & Assoc. in 1985.

&ldquoJohn Hawkins was a beloved friend to his writers, warmly sympathetic, supportive and shrewd in his judgments, gifted with a wonderful sense of humor,&rdquo said Joyce Carol Oates. &ldquoHe was both gentlemanly and totally contemporary. And he loved books both as reading experiences and works of art.&rdquo

&ldquoJohn was one of the old school who made into the present.&rdquo said Dan Halpern, Joyce&rsquos longtime editor at Ecco. &ldquoHis goodwill, humor, intelligence and love for literature was evident in every phone call I had with him for twenty years.&rdquo

Over the course of his 45 year career, he represented Alex Haley, James Clavell, Thomas McGuane, E. Lynn Harris, Steve Martini and Robert Parker. In 1976 he negotiated what is reputed to be the publishing industry´s first million dollar contract for James Clavell´s THE NOBLE HOUSE, the same year that Alex Haley´s international bestseller ROOTS was published, which he also represented.

&ldquoJohn sold my first novel 43 years ago this December,&rdquo said Gail Godwin. &ldquoI have had many publishers and editors since, but John and I have stayed together. He was an ardent and subtle master of representing a client, and throughout close to half a century I have always felt that he was completely on my side.&rdquo

He is survived by his brother Richard Hawkins and his nephews, Graham and Spencer Hawkins.

What Was the Triangle Trade?

Print Collector / Getty Images

  • American History
    • Basics
    • Important Historical Figures
    • Key Events
    • U.S. Presidents
    • Native American History
    • American Revolution
    • America Moves Westward
    • The Gilded Age
    • Crimes & Disasters
    • The Most Important Inventions of the Industrial Revolution

    In the 1560’s, Sir John Hawkins pioneered the way for the triangle involving enslaved people that would take place between England, Africa, and North America. While the origins of the trade of enslaved people from Africa can be traced back to days of the Roman Empire, Hawkins voyages were the first for England. The country would see this trade flourish through more than 10,000 recorded voyages up through March 1807 when the British Parliament abolished it throughout the British Empire and specifically across the Atlantic with the passage of the Slave Trade Act.

    Hawkins was very cognizant of the profits that could be made from the trade of enslaved people and he personally made three voyages. Hawkins was from Plymouth, Devon, England and was cousins with Sir Francis Drake. It is alleged that Hawkins was the first individual to make a profit from each leg of the triangular trade. This triangular trade consisted of English goods such as copper, cloth, fur and beads being traded in Africa for enslaved people who were then trafficked on what has become to be known as the infamous Middle Passage. This brought them across the Atlantic Ocean to then be traded for goods that had been produced in the New World, and these goods were then transported back to England.

    There was also a variation of this system of trade that was very commonplace during the colonial era in American History. New Englanders traded extensively, exporting many commodities such as fish, whale oil, furs, and rum and followed the following pattern that occurred as follows:

    • New Englanders manufactured and shipped rum to the west coast of Africa in exchange for enslaved people.
    • The captives were taken on the Middle Passage to the West Indies where they were sold for molasses and money.
    • The molasses would be sent to New England to make rum and start the entire system of trade all over again.

    In the colonial era, the various colonies played different roles in what was produced and used for trade purposes in this triangular trade. Massachusetts and Rhode Island were known to produce the highest quality rum from the molasses and sugars that had been imported from the West Indies. The distilleries from these two colonies would prove to be vital to the continued triangular trade of enslaved people that was extremely profitable. Virginia’s tobacco and hemp production also played a major role as well as cotton from the southern colonies.

    Any cash crop and raw materials that the colonies could produce were more than welcome in England as well as throughout the rest of Europe for trade. But these types of goods and commodities were labor-intensive, so the colonies relied on the use of enslaved people for their production that in turn helped to fuel the necessity of continuing the trade triangle.

    Since this era is generally considered to be the age of sail, the routes that were used were chosen due to the prevailing wind and current patterns. This meant that is was more efficient for the countries situated in Western Europe to first sail southward until they reached the area known for the “trade winds” before heading west towards the Caribbean in lieu of sailing a straight course to the American colonies. Then for the return trip to England, the ships would travel the 'Gulf Stream' and head in a Northeast direction utilizing the prevailing winds from the west to power their sails.

    It is important to note that the triangle trade was not an official or rigid system of trade, but instead a name that has been given to this triangular route of trade that existed between these three places across the Atlantic. Further, other triangle-shaped trade routes existed at this time. However, when individuals speak of the triangle trade, they are typically referring to this system.

    John Hawkins Timeline - History

    William Moseley, II born c1630 in England/Holland died 1671 in Norfolk County, VA married Mary Gookin, daughter of John Gookin

    1. A. Edward Moseley - born 1661 - died 1736 in Princess Anne County, VA.
    2. B. William Moseley, III - born c1665 - died 1699 in Princess Anne County, VA.
    3. C. John Moseley - born c1670 - died 1740 in Princess Anne County, VA.
    4. D. Elizabeth Moseley - married William Armistead.

    Arthur Moseley born c1635 in England/Holland died 1703 in Lower Norfolk County, VA married 1) c1658 to ____ Corker 2) c1663 to Sarah Hancock, dau of Simon & Sarah Hancock 3) c1680 to Ann Hargrave, dau of Richard Hargrave

    1. A. Joseph Moseley - born c1660 - died 1713
    2. B. Benjamin Moseley - born c1662 - died 1717

    While we do not know the exact origins of Robert Moseley, Sr. of Elbert County, GA whose line is discussed here, his great-granddaughter, Talutha Marion Ann Moseley Cook, wife of Joseph Thomas Cook, Jr. of Texas, was quoted in an account written by Joseph Thomas Cook, Jr. around 1900 as having the following origins: "With Texas now more or less at peace and everybody prospering I began to think about a home of my own. In the neighborhood adjacent to Cook's Fort a family named Mosely had settled. They had recently come from Georgia where several of their children had been born. They sprang from staunch old English stock, originating in Staffordshire and such was the pride of earlier members of the family in their ancestry that they named their old home in Virginia "Rolleston Hall" after the ancient residence that had housed their family for generations in England. The American members of the family were quiet, self reliant people, a little stubborn, perhaps, but well bred and unostentatiously wealthy. The daughters were charming. I had gone with one of the daughters of Elisha Mosely a good deal, whenever the Indians and Mexicans left me any time at all to think of romance. After feeling that the country was safe to live in, and that I could be sure of providing for her, I determined to ask Talutha Marion Ann Mosely to be my wife."

    Obviously, early tradition in the family was that these Moseleys were descendants of William Moseley of Lower Norfolk County, VA but despite repeated attempts, this connection has not been made. The Moseleys of Norfolk were a large family spreading into several eastern Virginia counties and have never been fully documented. Published accounts of this family differ as to its make-up so it is possible that Robert Moseley, Sr. of Elbert County, GA was a descendant.

    The other Moseley family of Virginia were in Essex County and share many of the given names of Robert Moseley, Sr.'s descendants. Descendants of this line settled in Bute County, North Carolina near where Robert Moseley, Sr. is first found but no connection has ever been established, at least by me. The following records have been accumulated on this family:


    Will of Henry Moseley - dated March 26, 1655 - proved Sept 20, 1656 - wife Anne son John son Henry. Orphans account, cattle allowed to son John, dau Anne, son William, April 13, 1657.

    Will of John Lyngey - dated Aug 1, 1667 - proved ? - "sons-in-law" William, John and Henry Moseley Thomas Harding's oldest boy.

    Will of John Moseley - dated May 18, 1668 - proved Nov 19, 1669 - brothers William and Henry Moseley Cousin Thomas Harden Cousin Anne Harden Robert Penell and his wife. Witnesses - Henry Moseley, Robert Penell, Jane Penell.


    Will of William Moseley - proved 1700

    Estate of Robert Moseley - inventory - 1707

    Estate of William Moseley - inventory - 1707

    Will of Benjamin Moseley - dated Nov 7, 1709 - probated Dec 10, 1709 - son William Moseley, under 18 wife Elizabeth Moseley daughter Mary Moseley "dau-in-law" Elizabeth Catlett (wife's dau) two nephews William and John Moseley. Wife Elizabeth executrix. Witnesses - Samuel Dry, William Moseley, William Silver. WB - pg 260.

    Will of Elizabeth Moseley - dated Oct/Dec 20, 1709 - probated Feb 10, 1710 - son William Moseley dau Mary Moseley dau Elizabeth Catlett, all 3 under 18 brother Samuel Thompson executor brothers Edward Moseley, John Hawkins, William Thompson. Witnesses - Edward Moseley, Samuel Dry, William Thompson. WB - pg. 273.

    Estate of John Moseley - inventory - 1717

    Will of Edward Moseley - dated Jan 23, 1726/7 - probated June 20, 1727 -plantation to Elias Newman "for want of heirs" estate to be divided between William Moseley, son of Benjamin AND Benjamin Moseley, son of Robert after decease of wife Elizabeth Moseley friend James Alderson wife Elizabeth executrix. Witnesses - Stephen Chenault, William Hunt, John Stokes. WB 4, pg. 204.

    Will of John Moseley - proved 1736

    Estate of Benjamin Moseley - inventory - 1737 WB 6, pg. 283.

    Will of Elizabeth Moseley - dated ? - proved Nov 20, 1739 - nephew Elias Newman Martha Newman, dau of Elias. WB 6, pg. 208.


    Land patent to Benjamin Moseley dated Nov 2, 1705, Essex County, 640 acres on south side of Occupation Creek about 1 mile from creek joining Richard Coleman. Granted 1656 to Richard Lawson, deserted & now granted to BM. For importing 13 persons including "Elizabeth Dennis".

    October 2, 1731 - William Moseley of Goochland County, VA to Robert Brooke of Essex County, VA "whereas Edward Moseley late of the Parish of St. Anns in the County of Essex" by his will did declare that after the decease of his wife Elizabeth Moseley, all his land should be for William Moseley, son of Benjamin Moseley and whereas "the said William Moseley, the son of the said Benjamin Moseley is since dead without issue of his body", the right now belongs to "William Moseley, party of these presents as nephew and heir at law to the said testator Edward Moseley". For 22 pounds, William Moseley sells his right of inheritance to Robert Brooke "immediately when it shall happen after the death of the said Elizabeth Moseley, widow of the testator". Witnesses - Robert Rose, Thomas Hawkins, Elias Newman.

    July 6, 1732 - Tobias and Jane Ingram of Essex County, VA to Robert & Phebe Brooke of Essex County, Ingram having a parcel of 333 acres in St. Anns Parish and Brooke having 2 parcels (299 acres & 175 acres in St. Anns), "the said Tobias Ingram and Robert Brooke are minded and willing to exchange the said lands". Said parcel of 333 acres being part of a 400 acre parcel "formerly sold and conveyed by one William Moseley, deceased, to Tobias Ingram, decd, grandfather of the said Tobias Ingram, party to these presents, by deed dated Aug 17, 1657", and afterwards confirmed to Thomas Ingram, father of said Tobias, by Edward Moseley, son and heir of the said William Moseley by deed dated Feb 12, 1712.

    March 28, 1749 - William Moseley of Beaufort County, NC, only son of William Moseley, decd, who was the son of Benjamin Moseley, the son of Robert Moseley, decd, of Essex County, VA, gives power of attorney to Robert Brooke of Essex, to recover from Henry Crittenden of Essex all property he possesses as late guardian of the abovesaid William Moseley, the son of Benjamin Moseley.

    From these records and the research of others, the following family structure has been constructed on these Moseleys:

    Henry Moseley born c1614 in England married Anne _______ died 1656 in Northumberland County, VA
    I. William Moseley born c1638 in VA married Martha Brasseur died 1676 in Rappahannock County, VA

    • A. William Moseley - born c1660 in VA - married Hannah Hawkins - died 1700 in Essex County, VA -
      1. Martha Moseley - married William Thompson, Jr.
      2. William Moseley - see later
      3. John Moseley - died 1717, unmarried and without issue.
    • B. Edward Moseley - born c1663 in VA - married Elizabeth ____ - died 1727 in Essex County, VA.
    • C. Elizabeth Moseley - born c1665 in VA - married John Hawkins.
    • D. Robert Moseley - born c1668 in VA - married ?? - died 1707 in Essex County, VA - Issue:
      1. Benjamin Moseley (1703-1737) - only heir William Moseley who died young without issue.
    • E. Benjamin Moseley - born c1671 in VA - married Elizabeth Thompson - died 1709 in Essex County, VA - Issue:
      1. William Moseley
      2. Mary Moseley

    II. Henry Moseley, Jr. born c1640 in VA

    III. Anne Moseley born c1642 in VA married Thomas Harding who died 1674 in Rappahannock County, VA

    IV. John Moseley born c1645 in VA died 1668 in Northumberland County, VA

    From here, this Moseley line spread to North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama and beyond. The following family is attributed to William Moseley, Jr. above:

    William Moseley, son of William and Hannah (Hawkins) Moseley born c1690 in Essex County, VA married c1721 to Elizabeth ______ died c1770 in Bute County, NC

    I. William Moseley, III - born c1724 - married Sarah ____ - living in what became Edgefield District, SC in 1790.

    • A. William Moseley
    • B. John Moseley, Jr.
    • C. Jesse Moseley - born March 20, 1757 in Goochland County, VA
    • D. James Moseley - born Jan 26, 1760 in Goochland County, VA - married Patsy Archer - died 1805 Warren County, NC.
    • E. Elizabeth Moseley - married Augustine Patillo.
    • F. Mary Moseley - born May 23, 1766 in Goochland County, VA - married Benjamin Kimbell.
    • G. Nancy/Ann Moseley - born July 5, 1769 in Goochland County, VA - married ____ Gunn.
    • H. Joseph Moseley

    III. Thomas Moseley - born c1728 - married Mary ____ - died South Carolina.

    IV. daughter Moseley - born c1732 - married William Sessums - went to Edgefield District, SC.

    • A. Benjamin Moseley - died 1795 in Edgefield District, SC.
    • B. Mary Moseley - married Derrick Holsenbeck.
    • C. John Moseley
    • D. Elizabeth Moseley - married Edward? Vann.
    • E. Sarah Moseley - married ____ Hagood.
    • F. Martha Moseley - married Malachi Stallings.
    • G. Edward Moseley - born April 5, 1771 - married Martha Butler - died May 20, 1834 in Montgomery County, AL.
    • H. Susannah Moseley - married ____ Adams
    • I. Rachel Moseley - married Thomas Davis.
    • J. Anna Moseley - born July 22, 1778 - married Eleazer Jeter - died Oct 26, 1847 in Montgomery County, AL.
    • K. Lydia Moseley - married 1) Elisha Moseley 2) Luke Williams - died 1843.
    • L. Robert S. T. Moseley - married Rebecca Smith-Adams - died 1829.
    • M. Jesse Moseley - born March 21, 1784 in Baldwin County, GA - married Mildred Copeland - died 1827 in Morgan County, GA.
    • N. Daniel Moseley - married March 8, 1809 to Sarah Copeland - died 1856.
    • O. Penelope Moseley - married John Copeland - died 1845.
    • P. Gracey Moseley - married D. Young.
    • Q. Thomas Moseley - married Dec 13, 1814 to Nancy Smedley - died 1820.
    • A. Mary "Polly" Moseley - married ____ York.
    • B. William Moseley - married Rachel ____ - died 1811 in Lincoln County, GA.
    • C. Elizabeth "Betsy" Moseley - married William Paradise who died 1809 in Lincoln County, GA.
    • D. Sarah "Sally" Moseley - married ____ Mooney.
    • E. Benjamin Moseley, Jr. - married Lettice Noland? - died 1797 in Lincoln County, GA.
    • F. Mildred Moseley
    • G. Jonathan Moseley

Another early Georgia Moseley was Alexander Moseley of Greene County, GA who died there in 1799. An Alexander Moseley witnessed the will of Benjamin Moseley above of Wilkes County in 1793 so he may have been closely related to the above family. The inventory and appraisal of the estate of Alexander Moseley was presented in Greene County on June 17, 1799. Appraisers were William Melton, Ellis West and James Hanes. Bonds were taken on Joseph Moseley and Joseph Ashbrook June 18, 1799 in connection with Alexander's estate. The following is a breakdown of some of his descendants.

Alexander Moseley born c1750 probably in Virginia died 1799 in Greene County, GA

  1. Frances B. Moseley - born c1815 in GA - married March 26, 1844 in Putnam County, GA to Junius A. Wingfield.
  2. Joseph A. Moseley - born c1817 in GA - married Caroline L____.
  3. Albert Oscar Moseley - born c1819 in GA.
  4. Augustus W. Moseley - born c1823 in GA.
  5. Benjamin Felix Moseley - born c1826 in GA.

III. Polly C. Moseley - married ____ Myrick - died 1846 in Putnam County, GA.

V. Nancy Moseley - married ____ Houghton. Please feel free to browse in our Family Library

This page was last updated on Saturday, June 19, 2021 at 06:49 AM EDT .

This timeline shows the major infection control measures and re-openings undertaken by states after the first COVID-19 cases appeared in the United States, alongside the number of new cases and deaths in each state over the same time period.

Dots on the timeline indicate key events in each state – closings (in red), openings (in green) and other policy changes and events (in grey). Clicking on a dot will display event details below the chart. Additionally, the PREVIOUS and NEXT buttons move users through key events by day, allowing them to be viewed in chronological order. The timeline can be viewed against either new cases or new deaths. To see current cumulative case and death counts and daily counts for days with no policy events, click here.

Johns Hopkins experts in global public health, infectious disease, and emergency preparedness have been at the forefront of the international response to COVID-19.

This website is a resource to help advance the understanding of the virus, inform the public, and brief policymakers in order to guide a response, improve care, and save lives.

Historical dates

1592 First recorded sighting on August 14, by English sea captain John Davis in the ship ‘Desire’.

1594 First recorded claim on February 2, by Richard Hawkins for Queen Elizabeth I

1690 First recorded landing made by English navigator, Captain John Strong in his ship the ‘Welfare’. He named the channel dividing the two main islands ‘Falkland Sound’ after Viscount Falkland, then Treasurer of the Royal Navy.

Over the years several French ships visited the Islands, which they called Les Iles Malouines after the French port of St. Malo.

1740 Lord Anson passed the Islands on an exploration voyage and urged Britain to consider them as a preliminary step to establishing a base near Cape Horn.

1764 The French diplomat and explorer, Louis Antoine de Bougainville, established a settlement at Port Louis on East Falkland.

1765 Unaware of the French settlement, Commodore John Byron landed at Port Egmont on West Falkland and took possession of the Islands for the British Crown.

1766 Captain John MacBride established a British settlement at Port Egmont.

The Spanish Government protested about the French settlement and Bougainville was forced to surrender his interests in the Islands in return for an agreed sum of money. A Spanish Governor was appointed and Port Louis was renamed Puerto de la Soledad, and placed under the jurisdiction of the Captain-General of Buenos Aires then a Spanish colony.

1770 British forced from Port Egmont by the Spanish.

1771 Serious diplomatic negotiations involving Britain, Spain and France produce the Exchange of Declarations, whereby Port Egmont was restored to Britain.

1774 Britain withdrew from Port Egmont on economic grounds as part of a redeployment of forces due to the approaching American War of Independence, leaving behind a plaque as the mark of continuing British sovereignty.

1786 Lieutenant Thomas Edgar RN charts West Falkland island.

1811 The Spanish garrison withdrew from Puerto de la Soledad. At this time, South American colonies were in a state of revolt against Spain.

1816 The provinces which constituted the old Spanish vice-royalty declared independence from Spain as the United Provinces of the River Plate. Spain refused to recognise any such independence.

1820 A Buenos Aires privateer claimed the Falkland Islands in what was probably an unauthorised act – which was never reported to the Buenos Aires government. No occupation followed this.

1823 A private attempt was made to establish a settlement on the Islands, but this failed after a few months. The organisers requested the Buenos Aires government to appoint one of their employees the unpaid ‘Commander’ of the settlement.

1825 Britain and the Government of Buenos Aires signed a Treaty of Amity, Trade and Navigation without including and recognition of territory or legal rights.

1826 Louis Vernet, a naturalised citizen of Buenos Aires (originally French with German connections), undertook a private venture and established a new settlement at Puerto de la Soledad, having first informed the British Consul.

1829 Buenos Aires announced a claim to the Falkland Islands based on inheritance from Spain. Luis Vernet was appointed unpaid Commander of Soledad and Tierra del Fuego. Britain registered a formal protest, asserting her own sovereignty over the Falkland Islands.

Vernet made the first of several approaches to Britain then to re-assert its sovereignty over the Islands. Earlier he had got the British Consul in Buenos Aires to countersign his land grants.

1831 Vernet seized three American sealing ships, in an attempt to control fishing in Falkland waters. In retaliation, the US sloop ‘Lexington’ destroyed Puerto de la Soledad, and proclaimed the Islands ‘free of all government’. Most of the settlers were persuaded to leave on board the ‘Lexington’.

1832 Diplomatic relations between the US and Argentina broke down until 1844. Supporting Britain, the US questioned the claim that all Spanish possessions had been transferred to the Government of Buenos Aires and confirmed its use of the Falklands as a fishing base for over 50 years. The US declared that Spain had exercised no sovereignty over several coasts to which Buenos Aires claimed to be heir, including Patagonia.

Buenos Aires appointed an interim Commander to the Islands, Commander Mestivier, who arrived in October (with a tiny garrison and some convicts). Britain’s Minister protested once more.

December 20, Commander Onslow, aboard Clio, returned to Port Egmont and rebuilds the fort.

1833 Commander Mestivier had been murdered by his own men by the time Captain Onslow sailed from Port Egmont in the warship ‘Clio’ and took command of Port Louis for Britain. The remains of the garrison from Buenos Aires left peacefully.

Buenos Aires protested, only to be told: “The British Government upon this occasion has only exercised its full and undoubted right … The British Government at one time thought it inexpedient to maintain any Garrison in those Islands: It has now altered its views, and has deemed it proper to establish a Post there.”

Since this time, British administration has remained unbroken apart from a ten week Argentine occupation in 1982.

1845 Stanley officially became the capital of the Islands when Governor Moody moved the administration from Port Louis. The capital was so named after the Colonial Secretary of the day, Edward Geoffrey Smith Stanley, 14 th Earl of Derby.

1914 Battle of the Falkland Islands, one of the major naval engagements of the First World War in which British victory secured the Cape Horn passage for the remainder of the war.

1947 The Falkland Islands are listed at the United Nations as a Non-Self Governing Territory (NSGT) subject to the UN’s decolonisation process.

1960 UN Resolution 1514 grants the right of Self-Determination to all peoples of NSGTs.

1965 United Nations Assembly passed Resolution 2065, following lobbying by Argentina. This reminded members of the organisation’s pledge to end all forms of colonialism. Argentine and British Governments were called upon to negotiate a peaceful solution to the sovereignty dispute, bringing the issue to international attention formally for the first time.

1966 Through diplomatic channels, Britain and Argentina began discussions in response to UN Assembly pressure.

1967 The Falkland Islands Emergency Committee was set up by influential supporters in the UK to lobby the British Government against any weakening on the sovereignty issue. In April, the Foreign Secretary assured the House of Commons that the Islanders’ interests were paramount in any discussions with Argentina.

1971 Communications Agreement was signed by the British and Argentine governments whereby external communications would be provided to the Falkland Islands by Argentina.

1982 On 2 April Argentina invaded the Falkland Islands and diplomatic relations between the two nations were broken off. Argentine troops occupied the Islands for ten weeks before being defeated by the British. The Argentines surrendered on 14 June, now known as Liberation Day.

1990 Diplomatic relations between Britain and Argentina were restored.

1999 At the instigation of, and with the involvement of, Falkland Islands Councillors, a Joint Statement was signed between the British and Argentine Governments on 14 July. This was designed ‘to build confidence and reduce tension’ between the Islands and Argentina. Two Councillors from the Islands witnessed the signing on behalf of the Falkland Islands Government.

2009 Following almost ten years of discussion and negotiation, a new Constitution for the Falkland Islands took effect on 1 January 2009. Marking an important milestone in the history of the Falkland Islands, the new Constitution provides enhanced local democracy and internal self-government, and enshrines the right of self-determination.

2013 Referendum held in March, overseen by international observers. Falkland Islanders voted to determine their future, 99.8% of the electorate voted YES to maintaining current political status as a British Overseas Territory.

To speak to a Falkland Islands Government representative in London, please call:
+44 (0)20 7222 2542

To speak to a Falkland Islands Government representative in Stanley, please call:
+500 27451

John Hawkins

(1532–95). English adventurer and admiral John Hawkins was one of the bravest and most daring of Elizabethan England’s bold seamen. He was the first to defy Spain’s power in the West Indies. As a merchant, he made many voyages to initiate trade with the New World.

John Hawkins (or Hawkyns) was born in Plymouth in 1532, the son of a wealthy sea captain. In his youth he went along on trading trips and heard of the riches that lay across the western sea. In 1562 he sailed to Africa, where he captured 300 people to sell as slaves. He transported this human cargo to Santo Domingo, in the West Indies, and traded them for pearls, hides, ginger, and sugar. Although the colonists had been forbidden by Spain to trade with any other nation, they were eager to buy slaves. Hawkins’ second voyage two years later was equally profitable, but a third trip met disaster off the coast of Mexico in 1568. Accompanied by his cousin Francis Drake, Hawkins had already broken Spanish law by selling his cargo of slaves in the Caribbean islands. After they sought refuge for their six ships in the harbor of Veracruz, an armed Spanish fleet attacked. Only the vessels commanded by Hawkins and by Drake were able to escape.

For 20 years Hawkins remained at home in the service of Queen Elizabeth I. As treasurer and controller of the navy, he built up Britain’s fleet, preparing to challenge Spain over supremacy of the seas. He armed the vessels more heavily and redesigned them to make them faster. He also introduced inventions that he had tested in practical experience at sea. In the great battle in which the Spanish Armada was defeated in 1588, Hawkins served as a vice admiral. He was knighted for gallantry.

In 1595 he sailed with Drake on what was to be the last voyage for both. Hawkins joined the expedition hoping to rescue his only son, Richard, who was held captive by the Spanish in Lima, Peru. Hawkins died at sea on Nov. 12, 1595, near Puerto Rico

Providing an archive for the data patterns we noticed throughout the COVID crisis

Q&A: Data May Be Universal, but Context and Format Are Not

Dr. Sara Bertran de Lis explains the evolution of COVID-19 data collection efforts, applauding states for their work while recommending changes needed to improve policy making and public communication.

Demographic Data Disarray Hurts COVID-19 Policies

Demographic data would be a powerful weapon in the fight against COVID-19, allowing states and cities to provide more targeted outreach and aid to vulnerable populations. This data is not provided to local governments and the public in a uniform, detailed manner, which makes it impossible to know how COVID-19 is differently affecting the diverse populations in our nation.

Q&A: Securing Our National Public Health Defense

Dr. Jennifer Nuzzo says data scientists and public health officials should play a greater role in preparing the nation for future crises.

We Need a Daily Data Dump

Some states are discontinuing daily public updates on COVID-19 data in favor of a slower reporting cadence. The shift will hinder the ability to provide the real time analysis needed to monitor the pandemic, including the emergence of variants.

Holy Bible John

Regrettably, a many Pastors and Bible teachers in our churches go on and preach superficial, shallow, light weight, flimsy messages and their congregation hardly grow in biblical knowledge and understanding. Preachers love to give us'moral essays' and'warming affirmations' because supposedly, if we truly love people this is what we will do. Regrettable it seems, if God's men and women are falling through the cracks'for a lack of knowledge' so long as we're positive and loving to all. In truth, the more relevant we become to the world, the less relevant we're to the world.
Years ago, I was speaking on the life, resurrection, death and burial of Christ Jesus, and a retired minister and powerful preacher of Scripture, who had been a minister for forty years, marched up and reproved me vigorously over some interesting points I made and he referred to 1Ti 1:4'Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.' I humbly asked him if I was preaching anything of a heretical nature in any way, to which he replied"No". I continued on to describe that in the case of that particular Scripture, it was not speaking to examining the Bible but to the false teaching and philosophy of Gnosticism, but he would not accept it. Let me ask, how can a forty year minister & worker in the Gospel, not know and understand about a thing that probably half the books of the New Testament refer to?
How can he study and preach the Bible fully without being familiar with a thing that was so influential in the New Testament church? And then how can the congregation hope to understand these things and be in a position to interpret their Bible properly, if they're not told?
Let's us as instructors and preachers sew together the fragments of the Bible and God's plan into a complete picture that our people are able to draw on for the rest of life, helping them to understand God, His Eternal Plan, the role of the Church and ways to better translate the Bible to live by.
It's not hard to do, and it is not boring if we're prepared to put in a bit of study with prayer and fervor, and just perhaps you can utilize a Bible Timeline as well.
For added information concerning a Bible TimeLine go over to our Bible TimeLine Chart site and read up on the biblical study tool.

Other Tags: Biblical Timeline From Adam To Jesus, Adam To Jesus Timeline, Nehemiah Timeline, Catholic Church Timeline, Chronological Order Of The Bible Chart, Timeline Of New Testament Books

Watch the video: SIR JOHN HAWKINS (December 2022).

Video, Sitemap-Video, Sitemap-Videos