CHAPTER I
GENEALOGICAL
“This family of the Ludingtons,” says Gray in his genealogical work on the nobility and gentry of England, “were of a great estate, of whom there was one took a large travail to the seeing of many countries where Our Saviour wrought His miracles, as is declared by his monument in the College of Worcester, where he is interred.” The immediate reference of the quaint old chronicler was to the Ludingtons of Shrawley and Worcester, and the one member of that family whom he singled out for special mention was Robert Ludington, gentleman, a merchant in the Levantine trade. In the pursuit of business, and also probably for curiosity and pleasure, he traveled extensively in Italy, Greece, Turkey, Egypt and Syria, at a time when such journeyings were more arduous and even perilous than those of to-day in equatorial or polar wildernesses. In accord with the pious custom of the age he also made a pilgrimage to Palestine, and visited the chief places made memorable in Holy Writ. He died at Worcester at the age of 76 years, in 1625, a few years before the first colonists of his name appeared in North America. The exact degree of relationship between him and them is not now ascertainable, but it is supposable that it was close, while there is no reason whatever for doubting that the American Ludingtons were members of that same family “of a great estate,” whether or not they came from the particular branch of it which was identified with Shrawley and Worcester.
For the Ludington family in England antedated Robert Ludington of Worcester by many generations, and was established elsewhere in the Midlands than in Worcestershire. Its chief seat seems to have been in the Eastern Midlands, though its name has long been implanted on all the shires from Lincoln to Worcester, including Rutland, Leicester, Huntingdon, Northampton, and Warwick. There is a credible tradition that in the Third Crusade a Ludington was among the followers of Richard Cœur de Lion, and that afterward, when that adventurous monarch was a prisoner in Austria, he sought to visit him in the guise of a holy palmer, in order to devise with him some plan for his escape. Because of these loyal exploits, we are told, he was invested with a patent of nobility, and with the coat of arms thereafter borne by the Ludington family, to wit (according to Burke’s Heraldry): Pale of six argent and azure on a chief, gules a lion passant and gardant. Crest, a palmer’s staff, erect. Motto, Probum non penitet.
Authentic mention of other Ludingtons, honorable and often distinguished, may be found from time to time in English history, especially in the annals of Tudor and Stuart reigns. In the reign of Henry VIII a Sir John Ludington was a man of mark in the north of England, and his daughter, Elizabeth Ludington, married first an alderman of the City of London, and second, after his death, Sir John Chamberlain. In the sixteenth century, the Rev. Thomas Ludington, M.A., was a Fellow of Christ Church College, Oxford, where his will, dated May 28, 1593, is still preserved. In the next century another clergyman, the Rev. Stephen Ludington, D.D., was married about 1610 to Anne, daughter of Richard Streetfield, at Chiddington, Kent. Afterward he was made prebendary of Langford, Lincoln, on November 15, 1641, and in June, 1674, resigned that place to his son, the Rev. Stephen Ludington, M.A. He was also rector of Carlton Scrope, and archdeacon of Stow, filling the last-named place at the time of his death in 1677. His grave is to be seen in Lincoln Cathedral. His son, mentioned above, was married to Ann Dillingham in Westminster Abbey in 1675.
It will be hereafter observed in this narrative that the family name of Ludington has been variously spelled in this country, as Ludington, Luddington, Ludinton, Ludenton, etc. Some of these variations have appeared also in England, together with the form Lydington, which has not been used here. These same forms have also been applied to the several towns and parishes which bear or have borne the family name, and especially that one parish which is so ancient and which was formerly so closely identified with the Ludingtons that question has risen whether the parish was named for the family or the family derived its name from the parish. This place, at one time called Lydington, was first mentioned in the Domesday Book of William the Conqueror, where it was called Ludington—whence we may properly regard that as the original and correct form of the name. It was then a part of the Bishopric of Lincoln and of the county of Northampton; Rutlandshire, in which the place now is, not having been set off from Northampton until the time of King John. The Bishop of Lincoln had a residential palace there, which was afterward transformed into a charity hospital, and as such is still in existence. In the chapel of the hospital is an ancient folio Bible bearing the inscription “Ludington Hospital Bible,” and containing in manuscript a special prayer for the hospital, which is regularly read as a part of the service. The name of Loddington is borne by parishes in Leicestershire and Northamptonshire, that of Luddington by parishes in Lincolnshire and Warwickshire (the latter near Stratford-on-Avon and intimately associated with Shakespeare), and that of Luddington-in-the-Brook by one which is partly in Northamptonshire and partly in Huntingdonshire; all testifying to the early extent of the Ludington family throughout the Midland counties of England.
The earliest record of a Ludington in America occurs in 1635. On April 6 of that year the ship Hopewell, which had already made several voyages to these shores, sailed from London for Massachusetts Bay, under the command of William Bundock. Her Company of eleven passengers was notable for the youthfulness of all its members, the youngest being twelve and the oldest only twenty-two years of age. Seven of them were young men, or boys, and four were girls. One of the latter, whose age was given as eighteen years, was registered on the ship’s list as “Christiom” Ludington, but other records, in London, show that the name, although very distinctly written in that form, should have been “Christian.” Concerning her origin and her subsequent fate, all records are silent. In John Farmer’s “List of Ancient Names in Boston and Vicinity, 1630-1644,” however, appears the name of “Ch. Luddington”; presumably that of this same young woman. Again, in the Old Granary burying ground in Boston, on Tomb No. 108, there appear the names of Joseph Tilden and C. Ludington; and a plausible conjecture is that Christian Ludington became the wife of Joseph Tilden and that thus they were both buried in the same grave. But this is conjecture and nothing more. So far as ascertained facts are concerned, Christian Ludington makes both her first and her last recorded appearance in that passenger list of the Hopewell.
The next appearance of the name in American annals, however,—passing by the mere undated mention of one Christopher Ludington in connection with the Virginia colony,—places us upon assured ground and marks the foundation of the family in America. William Ludington was born in England—place not known—in 1608, and his wife Ellen—her family name not known—was also born there in 1617. They were married in 1636, and a few years later came to America and settled in the Massachusetts Bay colony, in that part of Charlestown which was afterward set off into the separate town of Malden. The date of their migration hither is not precisely known. Savage’s “Genealogical Register” mentions William Ludington as living in Charlestown in 1642; which is quite correct, though, as Mr. Patrick aptly points out, the date is by no means conclusive as to the time of his first settlement in that place. Indeed, it is certain that he had settled in Charlestown some time before, for in the early records of the colony, under date of May 13, 1640, appears the repeal of a former order forbidding the erection of houses at a distance of more than half a mile from the meeting house, and with the repeal is an order remitting to William Ludington the penalty for having disobeyed the original decree. That restriction of building was, of course, a prudent and probably a necessary one, in the early days of the colony, for keeping the town compact and thus affording to all its inhabitants greater security against Indian attacks. It seems to have been disregarded, however, by the actual building of some houses outside of the prescribed line, and in such violation a heavy penalty was incurred. By 1640 the law became obsolete. Boston had then been founded ten years. The colonies of New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Connecticut had been settled and organized. And three years before the Pequods had been vanquished. It was therefore fitting to rescind the order, and to let the borders of Charlestown be enlarged. We may assume that it was with a realization that this would speedily be done that William Ludington, either at the very beginning of 1640 or previous to that year, built his house on the forbidden ground, and thus incurred the penalty, which, however, was not imposed upon him; and we may further assume that it was this act of his which finally called official attention to the obsolete character of the law and thus brought about its repeal. In the light thus thrown upon him, William Ludington appears as probably a man of considerable standing in the community, and of high general esteem, else his disregard of the law would scarcely have been thus condoned.
Reckoning, then, that William Ludington was settled in his house in the outskirts of Charlestown—on the north side of the Mystic River, in what was later called Malden—before May 13, 1640, the date of his arrival in America must probably be placed as early as 1639, if not even earlier. He remained at Charlestown for a little more than twenty years, and was a considerable landowner and an important member of the community. Many references to him appear in the old colonial records, with some apparent conflicts of date, which are doubtless due to the transition stage through which the calendar was then passing. Most of the civilized world adopted the present Gregorian calendar in the sixteenth century, but it was not until 1751 that Great Britain and the British colonies did so. Consequently during most of our colonial history, including the times of William Ludington, the year began on March 25 instead of January 1, and all dates in the three months of January, February and March (down to the 24th) were credited to a different year from that to which we should now credit them. In many cases historians have endeavored to indicate such dates with accuracy by giving the numbers of both years, thus: March 1, 1660-61. But in many cases this has not been done and only a single year number is given, thus causing much uncertainty and doubt as to which year is meant. There were also other disturbances of chronology, and other differences in the statement of dates, involving other months of the year; especially that of two months’ difference at what is now the end of the year. Thus the birth of William Ludington’s daughter Mary is variously stated to have occurred on December 6, 1642, December 6, 1642-43, February 6, 1643, and February 6, 1642-43. Also the birth and death of his son Matthew are credited, respectively, to October 16, 1657, and November 12, 1657, and to December 16, 1657, and January 12, 1658. There is record of the purchase, on October 10, 1649, of a tract of twenty acres of land at Malden, by William Ludington, described in the deed as a weaver, from Ralph Hall, a pipe-stave maker, and also of the sale of five acres by William Ludington to Joseph Carter, a currier. The deed given by Ralph Hall is entitled “A Sale of Land by Ralph Hall unto William Luddington, both of Charlestowne, the 10th day of the 10th moneth, 1649,” and runs as follows: