Diaspora to the English Colonies
On the Origins page I discuss the distant origin of our family, from the Pontic steppes of Eurasian, then to the Alpine mountains in central Europe. At some point our ancestor emigrated to the southwest of England. The "English Heritage" page of this site explores the history of our family in the west country of England. On this page I describe the great diaspora of Shattockes from England. As English colonies in North America and Australia provided free land for agricultural workers and the new villages and towns made work available to Shattocke tradespeople, a massive exodus of Shattockes overseas ensued. Today 87 percent of Shattockes live outside of England, principally in former English colonies.
Note that I use the term "Shattocke" as a generic reference to the ancient members of our family, as well as modern descendants with spelling variants like Shaddick, Shaddock, Shattuck and Shadduck, to name a few.
The Great Diaspora
There was a huge diaspora of Shattocke families from England and Wales to the colonies from in the 19th century. A measure of the emptying of England of Shattockes in England can be found in the 1891 census in England. There were only 71 Shaddock, Shaddick and surname variant households recorded. The largest number of households were in Devon, with 21 households, followed by London with 18, and 7 households in each of Dorset and Somerset. Somerset, the original home of Shattockes in England was virtually hollowed out of Shattockes. But they were still in the English west country. Fifty-four or just over three quarters of the family lived south of London, even after the industrial revolution in farming made farm laborers and cottage workers leave largely agricultural Devon and Somerset, for jobs in the industrial north or for greener pastures in the new world where they could practice their farming skills.
Spread of Shaddocks and Shaddicks from North Molton South
Sheep grazing on the green hills near North Molton in Devon. Even today you see herds and herds of sheep around the former woolen town.
The only Shattocke village that shows a firmly established settlement of Shattockes in Devon is at its furthest point north, in North Molton. This was a major Shattocke village and I write extensively about it in the page devoted to it.
North Molton was an important wool trade village, with large grazing pastures for sheep in the nearby Exmoor forest and woolen trade in the village that enriched its citizen, providing money for the erection of the All Saints Church in the 1400s and other magnificent buildings. From the extensive records of Shattocke births, deaths and marriages in the local parish registry, Shattockes thrived there until the woolen trade declined in the middle of the 18th century. Dispersion of Shattockes from North Molton to villages in north Devon began in the early 17th century. See the North Molton page for a detailed account of this.
The Yarnscombe Shattockes, the Fremington Shaddicks, the Tawstock Shaddocks, and possibly the Culmstock Shattockes, descend from North Molton Shattockes. This genealogical paper trail is supported by the DNA studies we have made of the descendants of these major lineages. Descendants of North Molton families are more closely related to each other than to all other Shattockes, Parrishs or Byars. What is remarkable is that they seem to have dispersed from North Molton about the same time, between 1630 and 1640, although Shatticks and Shattocks continued to live in South Molton until the 19th century and in North Molton until the middle of the 18th century.
The dispersion from North Molton and South Molton suggests that Shattockes were largely involved in the woolen trade, and when that declined, they dispersed from the woolen centers and many became farmers or farm laborers. Some of them became impoverished.
The emptying of Shattocks from Somerset was a steady trickle. The earliest immigrants to the English colonies in America (Virginia, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts) were from Somerset Shattocks in the 17th century. Like north Devon, the flood of immigration occurred in the 19th century. The industrial revolution, crop failures and a faltering economy forced Shattockes to literally seek greener pastures.
Emigration to London
The first migrant from Somerset appears to have been in the late 16th century. Later there is a John Shattocke who appears in tokenbook for the St. Saviour parish of Southwark in 1601. He paid a tax to the local church, levied against people living in the parish. He may have been the same John Shattocke "of Southwark, smith" who appeared in court as a witness in a trial in 1614 against two other blacksmiths who apparently were accused of stealing iron. They may have been the ancestors of the Southwark, London Shattocks. In the various west Somerset Shattock genealogies, I discovered other Shattockes who left Somerset for opportunities in London, most abandoning the field as agricultural workers to become bakers, brewers, blacksmiths, carpenters and entrepreneurs in London. Examples that come to mind are the West Buckland Shattocks, who became very successful as butchers and suppliers to butcher shops in London and members of the Culmstock Shattockes who found work as carpenters and laborers.
Emigration from North Devon to the Colonies
In 1830 there was a widespread uprising among agricultural workers in England called the "Swing Riots." Wikipedia provides this account:
The Swing Riots were a widespread uprising in 1830 by agricultural workers in southern and eastern England. It began with their destruction of threshing machines in the Elham Valley area of East Kent in the summer of 1830, and by early December had spread throughout the whole of southern England and East Anglia. They were protesting agricultural mechanization and other harsh conditions.
As well as attacking the popularly hated threshing machines, which displaced workers, the protesters rioted over low wages and required tithes, destroying workhouses and tithe barns associated with their oppression. They also burned ricks and maimed cows. The first threshing machine was destroyed on Saturday night, 28 August 1830 and, by the third week of October, more than 100 threshing machines had been destroyed in East Kent.
The rioters directed their anger at the three targets identified as causing their misery: the tithe system, requiring payments to support the established Anglican Church; the Poor Law guardians, who were thought to abuse their power over the poor; and the rich tenant farmers who had been progressively lowering workers' wages while introducing agricultural machinery. If captured, the protesters faced charges of arson, robbery, riot, machine breaking and assault. Those convicted faced imprisonment, transportation, and possibly execution.
The Swing Riots had many immediate causes. Prof. J. F. C. Harrison believes that they were overwhelmingly the result of the progressive impoverishment and dispossession of the English agricultural workforce over the previous fifty years, leading up to 1830. In parliament Lord Carnarvon had said that the English labourer was reduced to a plight more abject than that of any race in Europe, with their employers no longer able to feed and employ them.
The name "Swing Riots" was derived from Captain Swing, the fictitious name often signed to the threatening letters sent to farmers, magistrates, parsons, and others. He was regarded as the mythical figurehead of the movement. ('Swing' was apparently a reference to the swinging stick of the flail used in hand threshing). The Swing letters were first mentioned by The Times newspaper on 21 October 1830.
Colin Shaddick, who is a Fremington, Devon descendant, the branch of the North Molton Shattockes Philip Shaddick belonged to, provides this information about a Philip Whaddick who got caught up in the Swing Riots.
The North Devon Journal, Thursday, January 12, 1831:
Swimbridge Riots -
Philip Shaddick, one of five people mentioned, was placed at the bar, for riotously assembling at Swimbridge on the 11th of December last. Mr Crowder opened the case for the prosecution, he stated briefly the charge against the prisoners, which was for unlawfully assembling at Swimbridge, and attempting to compel John Not, Esq. To lower his tithes: having stated the law upon the subject, he called. Phillip Shaddick was heard to say, when Lord Ebrington was holding him by his collar "don't break a poor man's jacket, which is already ragged." All the prisoners were found guilty and Philip Shaddick received a sentenced of 12 months imprisonment.
This is probably Richard Shaddick (1794-1869) son of the founder of the Fremington Shaddicks, John Shaddick and Mary Knill. He was born in Instow and died in Landkey. He was an agricultural laborer with eight children when he was sent to prison (one more born in 1833). This must have been especially harsh on his wife and children since agricultural laborers were poor and were paid on a daily basis rather than a salary. What a harsh life he must have had.
Working conditions, job opportunities and wages for agricultural workers in Devon was a main impetus for emigration of Devon families to the colonies.
Cliff Shaddock, my fifth cousin living in Ontario, made a pilgrimage to Devon some decades ago to find his distant Shaddock ancestors. He found very few. One day he was out walking when he came across an elderly drover and his sheep. He asked about Shaddocks. The drover told him they had "all left." The elderly man, who Cliff said was in his eighties, remembered there were quite a few around in his youth (the turn of the century), but they were now gone.
They had left by ship and railroad. The railroad in England allowed poor sons and daughters of poor farmers to find work in the mines and factories of Wales or in the industrialized towns in the north of England. British colonies drew farmers to the virgin wilderness or provided employment on established farms in English colonies.
Time has a way of erasing history, even in so recent a past as the first part of the nineteenth century. It was not until a couple of maritime historians, Basil Greenhill and his wife Ann Giffard, looked into the records that the massive immigration of North Devon farmers to Canada was fully appreciated (Westcountrymen in Prince Edward's Isle, Basil Greenhill and Ann Giffard, Toronto 1967). The Bideford town heritage site (Bideford 500) has some instructive metrics. The records Greenhill and Giffard examined were not official government records, which failed to account for the loss of a good portion of Devon farmers. Greenhill and Giffard found evidence of the migration in newspaper accounts and ships passenger lists. Between 1830 and 1841, records indicated that 2,250 people emigrated to North America from North Devon and another 3000 between 1842 and 1855. Since the emigration of many people never showed up in the records, they estimated that the real number was between 9,000 and 10,000 people. That may not seem like a lot of people until you consider that the population of the two biggest towns in North Devon in 1851, Barnstaple and Bideford, was 8,667 and 5,775 respectively (quoted by the Bideford 500 website). The population of my ancestral town, Burrington, Devon, was about 1,000 people. Even as far back as 1830 Devon towns were being depopulated through immigration.
From the Bideford 500 website: "In 1830 Thomas Burnard Chanter advertised in the North Devon Journal that his ships Collina, Calypso, Sappho and Euphemia had been “conveniently fitted up for Families and will take out passengers on moderate terms to Prince Edward Island, Cape Breton, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick” In the following year the North Devon Journal described some 5000 people lining the Quay and Long Bridge at Bideford to wave farewell to the Apollo, Calypso and Bacchus, bound for New York, St. Andrews (Newfoundland) and Montreal. (7) Such, it reported, “is the prevailing rage for emigration, that a female who had given birth to a child but three days before, would not be persuaded by the most urgent entreaties....to remain behind for another season."
What drove this transfer of agricultural workers from Devon to Canada, Australia and the U.S. was extreme poverty in English agricultural areas. By 1840 in England, there was a huge surplus of artisans and agricultural workers in Britain. The invention of the threshing machinery threw many out of work. Normally threshing the harvest was manual winter work agricultural workers could depend on. But the threshing machine took that work away. Unemployment increased as farms became mechanized, reducing the need for a large agricultural workforce and the artisans that supplied tools and clothing to agricultural workers. Cheap grain imports were driving down the price of grain, reducing the income of farmers, leading them to lay off workers and reduce purchases of such items as gloves (which family members made to supplement their income). On top of these economic forces came widespread crop failures between 1845 and 1847, which would have wiped out farmers already living on the financial edge. There was industrial and financial collapse. Business failures and widespread unemployment meant that young people had to look elsewhere to find the means to survive. The Rev. Lord Sidney Godolphin Osborne (1808-89) wrote an article about the plight of the poor in southern England, published in the London Times in 1846.
…..A family of five or six persons ought to have six gallons of flour a week, even if they have got a few vegetables from their garden-ground to help out now and then; but yet, when tailings of wheat are gone, they cannot, with these wages, buy any such quantity, and at no time will they have 1s a week left for clothes, candles, tea, butter, sugar, bacon, lard and so on. They seem surprised to be asked if they get it, and will tell you at once “that they do not know the taste of it.”
The agricultural worker in England during the hungry forties was near starvation.
What made the exodus from Devon necessary was poverty and starvation. What made it possible was cheap transportation to other parts of the world aboard wooden ships. There was a war between Britain and France in the early part of the nineteenth century.
In 1806 Napoleon declared a blockade against Britain in the Berlin Decree, closing all French controlled ports to British ships and declaring British goods liable to seizure. In the following year Russia, Prussia and Denmark joined the blockade under the terms of the Treaty of Tilsit. This effectively closed the Baltic Sea to British shipping and cut off Britain's main source of imported timber. Potentially, this could have been disastrous at a time when every ship was built of wood. The alternative source of supply was Canada and it was this that was now exploited by the shipowners and ship-builders of the Torridge estuary.
From Bideford 500 website.
Evidence that cheap transport to Canada enabled mass migration out of North Devon is found in the fact that emigration slowed to a small trickle when the timber trade with Canada slowed to a trickle. The era of the wooden ship with sails ended with the invention of the iron steamship. When timber tariffs were abolished in 1860, and cheap Baltic timber began to flow into Britain again, there was no more "last minute travel deals" to Canada.
Up to 1841 farmers could buy relatively cheap crown freehold land in Canada West (also called Upper Canada), or Ontario is it is now known. In fact some of the families whose stories I recount on this site must have taken advantage of this. (My fourth grandfather Thomas Shaddock's wife, Catherine Nichols, might have come from such an early pioneer family.)
“Settlers with means” were given the opportunity of buying crown land at public auction at the “upset price” of 5 shillings per acre or of buying a standard plot in an urban area at a price of £10. In the latter case the sale was made on the express condition that the purchaser erected “a stone, frame or brick house not less than 24 feet long and 18 feet wide within 2 years from the day of sale.”
From the Bideford 500 website
For those families that were literate, like some of our ancestors, the letters they exchanged speak of the misery in Devon, and the loneliness and hardships of life in Canada. The following account reveals why my ancestor Thomas Shaddock might want to travel one-way from the comfort of family and friends in Devon to certain hardship in Canada around the middle of the 19th century.
The North Devon Journal had the following illuminating comment: “About seven years ago, a young farm servant from a neighbouring village went to America leaving his sweetheart behind in a state that added nothing to the good reputation of either. When he had been there about a year, he sent home for the latter; she went out to him, and they were married. He now writes home that he has maintained his increasing family during that period, and has worked himself into a farm – not a hired one – but 50 acres of purchased land, to which 10 more are soon to be added. Besides the land, there is the stock enumerating 25 bullocks besides other animals wuth the rest of the etceteras of a farm. A few miscellaneous particulars were added, such as that they had to be their own tailors, in the spring to make their own candles and soap, etc. Suppose the couple has been married seven years ago in this country, where would they have now been with their half dozen children? Where would have been the acres, the bullocks, the sheep, the corn, the candles, and the soap. Not only would there have been nowhere for them, but instead there-of hopeless poverty, dirt, drudgery, the Union, and a pauper's grave.”
From Bideford 500 website
As we will shall see, this could have been written about my ancestor Thomas, as it reads like a thumbnail sketch of his life (without the pregnant girlfriend back in England!). In fact if you read the Bideford 500 emigration page you will see that the story of Shaddock and Shaddick emigration and new life in Canada closely parallels the story told on that page.
For another case history of a family driven by economic forces into extreme poverty, than arising out of it, see the history of the Tawstock Shaddocks.
The Shaddocks that emigrated to Canada in the early 19th century may never have left England if the war with France had not made timber from Canada a national priority for an island nation like Britain. The ships that transported timber to England from Canada were empty on the way back. So the enterprising owners of the ships offered cheap passage to desperate Devon farmers from the port of Bideford on the Devon coast to Canadian ports. It is very likely that our ancestor, Thomas Shaddock, booked passage aboard a ship in Bideford. The distance between the town where Thomas Shaddock was born and raised, Burrington, and Bideford was only 19 miles or 30 km.
At left is a wooden ship of the type he probably sailed on. Researchers at National Museums Liverpool (Information Sheet 64) tell us that virtually all ships transporting immigrants from England were sailing ships until the early 1860s.
Sailing ships took 35-42 days to cross the North Atlantic. Imagine being sea sick for 42 days.
From The Illustrated London News, July 6, 1850
Life in steerage below decks was rough. Their was little privacy. The ship was small and at the mercy of the weather because it was sail-powered. Unlike today's giant cruise liners, the ship was tossed about in the rough seas of the North Atlantic, making seasickness a particularly horrible condition of travel. There was the danger of being lost in a storm or running aground. And the primitive conditions were crowded and unhygienic, making disease one of the conditions of travel people feared and suffered from, even died from. In one report we find: "Of the 31,473 arrivals at Quebec till December 31st 1850...there were a total of 193 deaths on the voyage."
I have searched for passenger lists on these ships, but few lists have survived. It must have been a tremendous act of courage to take a risky journey to a distant, unknown land, knowing that when the shores of England faded away the passengers probably would never see their families again, would never afford to go back home again.
The ships that left Bideford with Shaddock family and other relatives took up to 42 days to reach Quebec. But the journey to Upper Canada did not end there. In the early days (1830s) was still 300 miles of relative wilderness to traverse, a journey that could take months. Even in the early 1850s after water and road transportation was improved, the final leg of the journey took immigrants into untouched wilderness where roads were practically nonexistent.
Eugenia Foster, an Illinois Shaddick family historian adds these notes:
The UK government was an active participant in recruiting English citizens to re-locate to British colonies, including Canada; hence, "assisted passage." It was cheaper for England to re-locate poorer citizens than to have them on the public-rolls.
All of the Shaddocks that I have tracked sailed from Liverpool, not the nearby port of Bideford. Liverpool is where the Allan Line sailed from. The Allan Line had a government contract to transport people. The Allan Line sent agents to villages throughout Devon to actively recruit people to emigrate. They would be allocated a certain amount of land. Without exception, these Shaddock/Shaddick immigrants are listed on the manifests of ships of the Allan Line.
This is how the Shaddocks must have been able to leave England because they certainly would not have been able to afford passage for their whole families. If they had been able to afford the passage, they undoubtedly would have left from nearby Bidefordinstead of traveling to Liverpool. And, it's not happenstance that they all traveled on the same ship line.
Indenture contract from 1737.
Another way that agricultural workers financed their trip to new opportunities in the colonies was by working under contract to farmers who were already established in the new world.
This system of indentured labour was already well established in England. Often seen on English census records in the 19th century, and on other records earlier, is the term "servant" or "agricultural servant." Servants worked under contract to the farmer. They lived on the farm and were fed by the farmer. The term of employment was either six months or a year. Agricultural day labourers returned from the field to their cottages and families. Servants were not allowed to marry or go home to their families. For the farmer, children provided a cheap source of labour. For the poor agricultural worker with a large family, hiring out their children relieved them of the burden of caring for them. For children, employment at the farm was a kind of apprenticeship system. And the income they earned gave them a financial stake they could use to establish their own families. In some cases it may have provided them with the money needed to emigrate and found their families in the colonies. Far from being uncommon, servitude represented up to 60 percent of the agricultural workforce according to Ann Kussmaul, author of Servants in Husbandry in Early Modern England (Cambridge, 1981). It is estimated that up to 75% of the immigrants to Virginia during its formation were indentured servants.
Before 1800, indentured servitude could amount to a form of slavery. From 1630 to the American Revolution, many poor agricultural workers from England were transported from their homes to the colonies as virtual slaves. One of the earliest records of a Shaddock in America was that of John or Jonathan Shaddock, who was described in a real estate document as a "servant" whose passage was to America was paid by his master, Sergeant William Sharp.
ELIZABETH PACKER, Widdowe, 950 acs. Henrico Co., 17 Aug. 1637, p. 454. E. upon 4 Mi. Cr., W. upon land of Seth Ward, S. upon the river & N. into the woods. Due in right of her late husband Serjant William Sharpe & Thomas Packer, whoe at their own costs & charges trans. 19 pers: Rich. Vase, John Thomas, Lewis Jones, Leonard Houghton, William Cooke, Peter Hudsey, Edward Jones, Jon. Ward, William Wooley, 2 Negroe servts. to Serjt Wm. Sharp, Thomas Blancks, Jacob Dewitt, John Haman, Andrew Pratt, Christ. Stevenson, Christ. Beare, Jon. Shaddock, Francis Stone, servants to Tho. Packer.
Cavaliers and Pioneers Abstracts of Virginia Land Patents and Grants 1623 -1800 - Nell Marion Nugent
In Higman, B. W. (1997). Knight, Franklin W., ed. General History of the Caribbean: The slave societies of the Caribbean, it is estimated that between half and two-thirds of white immigrants to the Americas were indentured servants. There may have been Chaddocks involved in this trade. We know that the Earl of Warwick commissioned a Captain Chaddock to transport settlers to Trinidad and Tobago. See my article on the Chaddocks Captains and the Forbidden Fruit. Some of the ships captains who transported goods and people between Britain and the colonies became involved in the trade of indentured servants. Farmers or craftsmen in the colonies needed workers, the sea captains might purchase the indenture contracts from English farmers and sell them to colony farmers. This explains why you see many young, single teenagers on ship's passenger lists.
The Napoleonic wars (1803-1815) made labour available for agricultural scarce so for youth coming to age at this time there was plenty of opportunities. There were even job fairs in local villages. But at the end of the wars families like the Burrington Shaddocks were burdened by huge numbers of children and farmers in the south of England began to employ day workers. While William Shaddock (1766-1856) was able to send his youngest children to school late into their teens, by the 1820s most children of poor day labourers were denied an education because they were hired out as young as seven or eight years old.
For the children of poor farmers, servitude offered a path to adulthood and their own families. But economic and technological forces began to destroy this path for many of the children of our ancestors. Many of them chose to voluntarily travel far from their birthplace to find opportunity in the north of England or in the colonies.
To read about the lives of English apprenticed labourers in the 1830s, read this first hand account by William Hornsey Gamlen in 1788, a gentleman farmer. For an account from a female servant's perspective, read this account by Mary Puddicombe published in 1843.
Trewman's Exeter Flying Post - Thursday, November 29th, 1810
Ran Away, on the 24th of October last, William Shaddick, a parish apprentice, from Mr Joce of Bratton, Chittlehampton. He wore away a dark blue jacket, with yellow gilt buttons; a stripe Manchester waistcoat, and corduroy breeches. Her is 5 feet 2 inches high, sandy hair, grey eyes, round favoured, fresh complexion, and has the mark of a large seale on his stomach. If any recruiting party will seize him, and take him to the nearest press gang, shall be entitled to the full reward; and on producing a certificate of the same, to Mr Joce, his indentures will be given up. Any person employing him will be prosecuted. As witness my hand.
Life in the Colonies
The future must have look dim for the children of farmers in Devon in the 19th century. They took a leap of faith in moving away from the support of their families in England in favor of a distant promise of a better life. Indeed most of them would face a harsh life in Canada, the U.S. or Australia where faith and mutual support would help them build a foundation for a new life. In fact there were so many Methodists in the Huron Tract in Canada that I think their immigration to Canada may indeed have been a "leap of faith."
Typical log farm house from the era. Courtesy Library and Archives Canada. This one was still standing in 1926.
The forests they turned into farms were sometimes so thick that they had to hack into them just to fell the trees. They had to clear the stumps, move rocks, build fences for livestock and shelters against the bitter cold and snow of winter before they could put the seeds and roots into the ground for food. The tools they had to hack the wilderness into productive farms were primitive. At first they lived in log houses constructed from the trees they leveled. The wood provided the fuel for fires to warm them during the icy blasts of Canadian winters. At first the floor was earth. The next year planks made by hand would be placed frozen on the floor so that when the wood expanded there would be no gaps. They fed off of ducks, geese, rabbits, venison and partridge. No medicine. No emergency helicopter rides to a regional hospital. No fruit and vegetable stands. No cellophane-wrapped Grade A beef or chicken. And worst of all, no smartphones to use to call back home to complain to relatives, no email to complain to a bureaucrat or utility company, no texting to loved ones or friends. Worst, no YouTube to search for illustrated instructions on how to tan leather or fashion shoes or make candles.
How precarious life must have been. Many died of disease. Or lost teeth and limb. Or watched their crop fail or have their chickens decimated by hungry predators. What roads there were would be difficult to travel. The weather made farming unpredictable.
This is why religion and the help of neighbours and other family members who had migrated with them was so important. This is why they did not pay attention to the ethnicity or religion of their neighbours whose help must have been welcome when disaster struck or the crop failed. Their religious gatherings provided much needed social contact in the loneliness and isolation of wilderness living. While many English settlers remained Anglicans, many of them joined local Methodist congregations either out of convenience or because Methodist preachers were more active in outreach. Methodist preachers were not funded by a Church back in England as were the Anglican clergy. They maintained a more intimate contact and were less authoritarian in their relationship with their congregations.
Christian Names Connect Shaddocks Across Seas
Shaddicks or Shaddocks and their surname variants are largely found in Devon, although you do find Shaddicks and Shaddocks in the county to the east, Somerset, where the Shattock spelling of the name predominates. The Shattocke name and its derivatives are also found in Dorset.
Paying attention to the geographical coordinates of family origins is crucial. When the main form of transportation was by horse or carriage, people did not move around a lot. Travelling through Devon in 1630, the antiquarian Tristram Risdon observed that the roads and pathways were: "Rough and unpleasant to strangers travelling those ways, which are cumbersome and uneven, amongst rocks and stones, painful for man and horse." There were no roads in Northern Devon up until 1750, just rough tracks for pack horses. The first roads came after that and were subject to tolls. Part of the problem is that local parishs were expected to keep up the cart ways in their area, but many neglected to do so. The "Tiverton Trust for Turnpikes" was a privately funded road from Exeter to Tiverton started in 1758 and was subject to tolls which investors used to recoup their costs, pay for maintenance and make a profit. The first stage coach (diligence) started in 1758 from Exeter in the south of Devon to Barnstaple in the north, a distance of about 50 miles. It took eight hours. It was not extended to Barnstaple in the west of northern Devon until 1818. The Coach ran from Barnstaple to Taunton in Somerset via the village of South Molton and Bampton in 1794. It was a distance of about 50 miles and took 24 hours. This maybe the Coach taken by my ancestor William Shaddock and his fiancée when they travelled from Burrington in northern Devon to Taunton to get married. They were married in April of 1795 so the trip would have been exciting for farmers who had probably never been more than 10 miles from their birthplace.
The difficulty of travel meant people were not very mobile. The tended to form small family networks in the tiny villages dotting the agricultural areas of England. Indeed the first settlers in the British or Australian colonies were farmers. This fact alone makes it unlikely that our ancestors were from an urban center like London as some people claim. Such urbanites would not have the farming skills required in the North American or Australian wildernesses. I found the same pattern of migration in my Smith relatives, who were from an urban area of England, Kidderminster, where they worked in carpet factories. When they immigrated to North America, they selected an urban counterpart, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Why? By the late 19th century Philadelphia had become the center of the textile industry in North America. People move to an area that provides an opportunity to make a living. Succeeding generations follow their relatives. This was the pattern of migration for our ancestors.
Christian and family names also provide links between immigrants and the villages or cities from whence they came. Among the names in villages in England in the early 19th century is a high incidence of certain names. All the Shaddocks I found in the tiny village of Burrington, Devon were related to each other. They descended from William and Sarah Shaddock. (William moved to Burrington from a neighboring town, Warkleigh.) And the Shaddocks in High Bickington, another town nearby, were related to those in Burrington. This is mirrored in Canada, with Shaddocks in western Ontario originating from Burrington, and Shaddocks in Toronto originating from villages nearby. We find family clusters at both ends of the migration route.
Furthermore there is an high incidence of the same Christian names in closely related families. When Linda Shaddock Rogers created the Carolina Shaddock family tree she found the same Christian names passed down generation after generation. When Jennifer Shaddock Dixon studied her Virginian ancestors, she found the same Christian names acting as a thread stitching the ancestors together in the absence of supporting documents. A standard tool in genealogical research is the study of Christian names of the succeeding generations of a family. The first born male tends to be given the name of his father in English tradition. The same is true of mothers and daughters. In fact, a from of this tradition often finds its way down to the current generation. Clinton Walter Shaddock, my first born brother, is named after his respective paternal great grandfather and maternal great grandfather. I am the second born and received the name of my maternal grandfather. This is what I call the "DNA of names."
Modern Distribution of the Descendants of the Ancient Shattockes
The modern distribution of the descendants of Shattockes tracks migration of Shattockes out of the south west of England in more recent times. What I have been calling the OnoMaps study was conducted at the University College London (UCL). They have been investigating the distribution of surnames in Great Britain, both current and historic. The data in this table is derived from telephone books and national electoral registers and shows the distribution of the Shattocke surname variants throughout the world as of 2005.
There are 13,334 people with a variation of the Shattocke surname as of 2005. Of course we do not know how many of those names are biological Shattockes or how many were biological Shattockes with another surname. So the estimate is very rough. But here is the crux of the matter: The population of the world was 6.49 billion in 2005. We are .0000002% of the world's population. Minuscule. As a family we are hanging on to a thread. Let's cherish each other.
The big surprise is that 7.916 or 68% of the descendants originated from the small Shattocke family of pilgrims that landed in Massachusetts, U.S.A. in the early 17th century. If you add in the Shadducks and Shadwicks to the Shattuck descendants, the ratio of descendants who are descended from American pilgrims rises to 71% The Shattucks (and their surname variants Shadduck and Shadwick) is the most prolific branch of the family. They literally obeyed the biblical mission to "go forth and beget."
The most frequent surname is Shattuck, followed by Shadwick, Shaddock, Shaddick, Shattock and Shadduck. Shattick seems to have been lost.
I should note that no Shadducks or Shadwicks have shown up in the DNA results of Shattockes or Parrishs. However only three or four each of the other names have sought DNA testing, so it may be the case Shadducks and Shadwicks just have not tested.
A comparison between the distribution of the Shaddock and Shaddick surnames in England shows where they migrated to in England during the great Shattocke diasporas.
There is a flow of Shaddocks out of Devon and Somerset west to London the area around it, and north. Many Shaddocks appear to have headed to the big city, looking for jobs. Some of my Yarnscombe Shaddock ancestors headed to the mining areas in Yorkshire.
There is a high concentration of Shaddicks in the south west of England, a significant migration to Wales where there were mining jobs and ship building jobs in the west of Wales. and some Shaddicks found work in the industrialized areas of Canada of England. The rest went over the seas to the British colonies.
This study gives perspective on what I have called the massive diaspora of the Shattocke family from Devon, Somerset and Dorset to other parts of England and to English colonies. Of the 11,500 living Shattocke descendants in 2005, 2,500 or 22% live in the U.K., 68% live in the former British colonies.