The Fork Church, A History

The FORK CHURCH Our History JOIN US TO LEARN MOREService every Sunday in Doswell, Virginia

CONTENTSThe Early Parishes of HanoverThe Church in the ForksWhere was the ChapelWhen was Fork Church BuiltThe Magnetic NorthThe Brick DustThe Contact LayerThe Rev. Zachariah BrookeThe Rev. William SwiftThe Appearance of Fork Church Circa 1738The Duties of a Colonial Parish VestryThe Virginia Statute of Religious FreedomThe Lean YearsThe Rube Goldberg RepairsThe Rev. John Cooke & Trinity ChurchAre there Burials Under Fork ChurchThe Renovations of 1835The CemeteryThe Tidewater MigrationThe Bread & The WineThe RectoryDr. Carter Burwell BerkeleyThe Boys of Hanover AcademyThe Short RectorsThe Rev. Horace StringfellowFork Church During the War Between the StatesFannie Doswell & St. Martin's ChapelThe Rev. Sewell Stavely HepburnFork Church in 1900The Renovations of 1913The Berger OrganThe Airwell Fires

THE EARLY PARISHES OF HANOVERIn 1654 New Kent County was formed from York County, which was oneof the eight original shires of the Colony of Virginia. The New Kentofficials governed an area that extended to the headwaters of thePamunkey and Mattaponi Rivers. Certainly this western land would havebeen sparsely populated, except by Native American Indians, and itwould not even have been very well explored by the European settlersuntil later in the seventeenth century. In addition to its duties ofestablishing counties, the General Assembly of Colonial Virginia wascharged with defining ecclesiastical borders for the Church of England.By 1679 the liturgical equivalent to New Kent County was named St.Peter’s Parish, and the current parish church, St. Peter’s, was in use by1704.The Anglican Church of the seventeenth century performed manyresponsibilities that have been assigned to governments today. The sizeof St. Peter’s Parish made it difficult to administer these duties. As ofJune 1, 1705, because of “Sundry and divers Inconveniencys” and “thelargeness of the Extent of said parish,” St. Paul’s Parish was dividedfrom the west side of St. Peter’s. In 1720 Hanover County wasestablished, using essentially the same boundaries as the recentlyformed parish. The chapel that predated Fork Church was built on thefrontier of St. Paul’s Parish. Then, in May 1726, again because of traveldifficulties, St. Martin’s Parish was formed, to include “All that part of St.Paul’s Parish lying in the fork of the Pamunkey (made by the junction ofthe North Anna and the South Anna rivers) together with all that part ofthe original parish lying north-west of Stone Horse Creek, which flowsnorth-east into the South Anna.”Soon population increases created the need for a larger church to servethe area of the Forks. The building we know as Fork Church wasconstructed in the early days of St. Martin’s Parish. Then, in 1742,Fredericksville Parish and Louisa County were formed to define thewestern border and complete the boundaries of the area that is stillrecognized as our parish and our county.

THE CHAPEL IN THE FORKSWe are forced to make many assumptions about the construction ofFork Church because the St. Martin’s Parish records do not survive.Paradoxically, we have more information about the predecessor buildingknown as the Chapel in the Forks. That structure was completed whilewestern Hanover County was under the ecclesiastical charge of St.Paul’s Parish, and the Vestry Books from St. Paul’s Parish survive. Theywere edited by Dr. Churchill Gibson Chamberlayne and published in1940 by the Library of Virginia.In a meeting on March 27, 1722, the vestry ordered the construction oftwo chapels, one at Allen’s Creek “on the South Side of the South River,and one … at or near one John Thomason’s in the Forks of our River.”Each chapel was to be 36 feet by 20 feet “framed work and well built.” Inthe currency of the day, 21,000 pounds of tobacco was authorized tofinish the two chapels, and 7,000 pounds of tobacco was authorized topay for their books and ornaments. Inspection of the finished chapelswas ordered on April 16, 1723. Over the next two years further fundswere appropriated for railing the Fork Church yard (3,200), tarring thetwo chapels (1,000), a chest for the Fork Chapel (150), and benches forFork Chapel (120). The total cost of the one chapel, then, is about17,970 pounds of tobacco, which is about one-half of the annual budgetof the parish, a very small sum by today’s building standards.

WHERE WAS THE CHAPEL?In 1957, while workers were excavating to install the heating system under thenortheast corner of Fork Church, they made a “startling” discovery. JudgeLeon M. Bazile, a noted local historian, was consulted, and the men describedto him a 15-inch brick wall and a large area covered with bricks. Headlines inthe May 30, 1957, Herald Progress declared that a 222-year-old mystery wassolved: the Ancient Chapel was located at last! All historical literature beforethis date stated that the chapel is believed to have stood not far from theexisting church, but no historian has challenged the judge’s conclusions sincethat time.With respect for the workers, who were relying on feeling more than sight inthe dark crawl space under the church, and certainly respectful of the agingJudge Bazile, who could only rely on their descriptions, it is now clear that thechapel has not been located. When the pews and floors were removed duringrenovations in 1997, we had a much better opportunity to observe and studythe long-hidden areas under the church. The brick wall was clearly a partially-abandoned portion of the structure of the existing church, and the brick pavingwas compacted brick dust remaining from the time of construction.It is not likely that the Chapel in the Forks contained a single brick. The 36-foot by 24-foot framed structure would have rested on timber piers. Therewould certainly not be a 15-inch brick foundation. Also, at a time when churchattendance was virtually mandatory, the chapel would not have been torndown before the church was ready for occupancy. There is no documentaryor physical evidence that the chapel burned. There is archaeological evidenceof two postholes, which could relate to the railing that was placed around thechapel by 1724. It is logical to assume that the site of the chapel is nearby, butfor now we are essentially back to our pre-1957 knowledge, with only thesuspicion that the two structures stood side-by-side for a brief period of time.

WHERE WAS FORK CHURCH BUILT?This, unfortunately, is one of our many mysteries. Because the early St.Martin’s Parish records do not survive, we have no primary documentarysources related to the construction of Fork Church. We tend to assume aconstruction date of 1735. After all, the church was significantly renovatedexactly a century later, when the vestry minutes and construction records werestill intact. Also, the community was expanding rapidly by this date, and therewas certainly the need for a parish church.The brick masonry is compared to that of Hanover Courthouse, which manyhistorians have dated 1735. Recent research by Carl Lounsbury, though,favors a date of 1740 for the courthouse. In his recent book, The Courthousesof Early Virginia, Dr. Lounsbury points out that construction of the courthousewas delayed at least two years by complaints and appeals from the inhabitantsof northwestern Hanover.Construction disputes seem to have been common in early Hanover County.On June 9, 1736, the minister and a few of the vestry of St. Martin’s Parishsigned a petition expressing dissatisfaction with the site chosen for a newchurch, so we know that construction of the church had not begun at that time.An advertisement in the Virginia Gazette for June 22, 1739, mentions anexisting church on a tract of land “10 miles above Hanover Court House on thesecond fork of the Pamunkey.” It is reasonable to assume that these twodocuments refer to our church, so they provide time brackets for itsconstruction. Allowing time to settle the issues and two years to complete thework, my favorite date for occupancy of Fork Church is circa 1739.

THE MAGNETIC NORTHAs early as the fifteenth century, navigators were aware that the compassprovided only an approximation of true north. Actually, in the year 1600, theneedle was aiming at a spot in the Arctic Ocean a thousand miles away fromthe North Pole. This magnetic pole has wandered extensively since that time.The first map of compass deviation was published in 1701, so by theeighteenth century it was possible for sailors to set their courses withaccuracy.Church builders also learned to pay attention to the magnetic deviation.Consistent with Medieval traditions, Episcopal churches, and many otherhouses of worship, are constructed with the congregation facing an altarplaced on the east side. But how concerned were colonial church builderswith the accuracy of this orientation? We can observe that early Virginiachurches, including Jamestown, Ware, Bruton Parish and Merchants Hope,are oriented more simply with reference to magnetic north. On the other hand,by the 1730s builders were more likely to place a foundation with correction forthe compass error.The compass orientation is potentially important for the archaeological study ofFork Church because posthole features found under the building are alignedwith magnetic north, while the church itself is constructed to align with truenorth. The postholes, then, may have secured the fence that we know wasinstalled around the Chapel in the Forks in 1724. This evidence supports theassumption that the chapel occupied space immediately next to the church.Some future research will either prove or challenge the theory.

THE BRICK DUSTDuring the 1997 excavation under Fork Church the layers of stratigraphy wereidentified on our log by letters, while the features or disturbances through thelayers were designated by Roman numerals. Perhaps the most significantlevel, Layer D, was a consistent, salmon-colored powder that accumulated toa depth of 4 inches midway between the aisle and each side wall and becamethinner, but did not disappear, as it approached the aisle and the walls. Thispowder was, in fact, an accumulation of dust from the cutting and polishing ofthe bricks by the masons as they created the exterior walls. The layer becamean important orientation feature for us because it defined the construction dateof the church. Any posthole or other feature that was sealed below Layer Dhad existed before the construction of the church, while a feature that piercedthis layer was created later than the date of construction. For example, an itemrelated to the period of the Chapel in the Forks would have to be sealed byLayer D.It’s fun to imagine the scene, circa 1738: a number of brick masons standinghigh on a rough-hewn scaffold creating a pink atmosphere below them as theydemonstrated their skills on this bold religious icon at the frontier of Europeansettlement. What a help they were to 20th century archaeology, too, bycreating Layer D.

THE CONTACT LAYERAs we mentioned in Note #6, the 1997 archaeological excavation uncovered alayer of brick dust from the construction of Fork Church. This brick dust sealeda thin brown loam layer with some interesting artifacts. A small, excavatedarea of “Layer F” produced over 30 quartz flakes, sometimes called “debitage,”that were byproducts of the manufacture of Indian arrow points and othertools.Sealed in the same layer was a Spanish silver coin, a ½-real, minted in MexicoCity during the reign of Charles II. Charles ruled over Spain from 1661 to1700, and it would not be unusual for Spanish coinage to be recognized aslegal tender in the colonies. The 8-real Spanish dollar became the famous“pieces of eight” in the eighteenth century.Layer F, then, defined the “contact period,” when European settlers and NativeAmerican Indians lived in close proximity of time and/or space.As soon as all artifacts are photographed and studied, they will be boxed andpresented to the vestry of Fork Church for permanent storage or display.

THE REV ZACHARIAH BROOKEIn October 1721 this well-educated and distinguished man became the firstparish minister of St. Paul’s. He had recently arrived from England, where hewas born in 1676. His father and two brothers were Anglican priests.By 1724 the parish included two churches and two chapels. The chapels wereAllen’s Creek and our Chapel in the Forks. Rev. Brooke preached in the twochurches on Sundays and, for an extra 8,000 pounds of tobacco per year,gave nine weekday sermons per year at each chapel. When St. Martin’sParish was established in 1726, a new rector was assigned, and Rev. Brookestayed with St. Paul’s Parish. Undoubtedly Rev. Zachariah Brooke was thefirst minister to conduct a service at the location of Fork Church.Thanks to Rev. Charles Joy, whose “Biographical Sketches” written in 1976provide a primary source of information for some of these History Notes.

THE REV WILLIAM SWIFTWilliam Swift was born in London in 1696 and was ordained priest (“grantedthe Kings Bounty”) by the Bishop of London on December 20, 1719. In May1722 he married Diana Hodgkin at St. Dunstons Parish Church of London.When his first child was born in 1723, Swift was serving the church inBermuda. In 1728 he came to Virginia, and Gov. Gooch sent him to be the firstminister of the new St. Martin’s Parish. At that time the parish included theChapel in the Forks, Allen’s Creek Chapel and a “mountain chapple” in what isnow western Louisa County. Rev. Swift did not live to see the construction of adesignated parish church. He died in 1734, but his wife, Diana, and children,William, Thomas, Richard and Mary, continued to live in the parish.

THE APPEARANCE OF FORK CHURCH CIRCA 1738If we could pierce the dimension of time and visit the church of St. Martin’sParish in 1738, what would we see? The overall exterior appearance isfamiliar, except there are no porches, so decorative brickwork is visible on thewall above each entrance. The North and East facades are uninterrupted [thechimney and access door come 220 years later] and, of course, there is nocemetery.The paneling and hardware around both entrances reflect the highest qualityof workmanship offered by local artisans. As we pass through the frontentrance we enter immediately into the nave area. The gallery exists above,but there is no partition forming a room on either side. The pews are box-style, with tall sides and with bench seats around the interior perimeter of eachcompartment. Any heat is provided in vessels brought by members of thecongregation for use in their personal boxes. Light is provided by sunshineand candles. A familiar pulpit is positioned on a square box high above thepews between the third and fourth windows on the North side of the church,with steps down to the chancel. [There are two vertical shadows that are stillvisible in the plaster where the pulpit had been attached to the wall.] Thegallery has a level floor, and is used for servants. No musical instrument canbe seen. There is only a pitchpipe to keep the congregation in tune. Thecommunion railing is square and massive.Back to the present, with electricity, heat and even a little plumbing, we canappreciate how much remains similar or unchanged from the builder’sconcept. We can still touch much of the original material.

THE DUTIES OF A COLONIAL PARISH VESTRYColonial Virginia parishes were governed by the General Assembly of thecolony. In the days before the American Revolution, many responsibilities thatwe now ascribe to local, state or federal governments were performed insteadby the churches. Actually, a large part of a parishioner’s church donation, ortithe, was used to fund these community services.One of the vestry’s secular responsibilities was “processioning,” whereappointed men would walk property lines with adjacent neighbors to confirman understanding of the boundaries between them. The General Assembly of1662 provided that each vestry should divide its parish into precincts andappoint “at least two intelligent honest freeholders of each precinct to see suchprocessioning performed.” The law also stated that “bounds three timesprocessioned should be considered settled and determined forever.”Roads were surveyed, cleared and maintained by the local vestries. Propertyholders who would benefit from the improvements were ordered to contributelabor for these efforts. “In Obedience to an order of Court dated may 20th1720 Ordering Thomas Stanley to Clear a Road, from Ceder Creek to the roadthat goes to new market Mill, its Ordered, that the said Stanley have all theTithables between Newfound river, & Ceder Creek, until he Comes to theGang, Belonging to Mr. John Glenn.”The church compensated individuals who provided housing for an elderly orinfirmed person or an orphan. An example from 1706: “Ordered, that WilliamStephens has Six hundred pounds of good Sweet Tobacco Convenient, forkeeping Susannah Copes, one whole year.” An example from 1717: “Orderedthat Richard Anderson have 1000 Tobacco Convenient, for keeping MaryClark one year from this time, to this time twelve months, and if he make aCure of her foot & Leg, to have five hundred pounds Tobacco more.”When all disbursements were determined, the vestry assessed each memberfor his share. For the year 1736 the net payout for St. Paul’s Parish was38,415 pounds of tobacco, and there were 1,332 “tithables” in the parish. Eachmember was assessed 29 pounds of tobacco, “only theres a Ballance of 213,to lie in the Church Warden’s hands till next year.”

THE VIRGINIA STATUE OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOMThomas Jefferson’s eloquent opposition to the established church wasexpressed by the statute that he drafted in 1777 and presented to the GeneralAssembly of Virginia on June 12, 1779. It finally became law, with JamesMadison’s leadership, on Jan. 16, 1786. The statute declared that “no manshall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, orministry whatsoever,” and that “all men shall be free to profess…their opinionsin matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, oraffect their civil capacities.”This “Disestablishment” destroyed the position and authority of the AnglicanChurch in Virginia. No other law has had a more harmful effect on so manyparishes and parish properties in the Commonwealth. Churches and glebeproperties were abandoned or sold to emerging denominations. In somecounties the overseers of the poor were instructed to seize the personalproperty owned by the parishes, including “Plate, Bells, Books andOrnaments,” and sell these to offset general county taxes.For two generations after the American Revolution, a sharp decline in totalmembership was evident in every local Episcopal congregation. Because ofthe lack of resources and leadership, the surviving church buildings sufferedfrom neglect, and evidence of this neglect remains visible in the fabric oftoday’s historic religious structures.

THE LEAN YEARSThe colonial years at Fork Church concluded under the leadership of Rev.Robert Barret, who had previously been head of the Indian School at theCollege of William and Mary. He had served as rector for a very long time by1786, the date of disestablishment of the Anglican Church in Virginia, and,being at least 73 years of age, he retired soon after.Rev. Peter Nelson succeeded Rev. Barret and served until about 1808 whenhe left to become a member of the Baptist church. Rev. Mr. Talley of St. Paul’sbecame a Universalist. For several years Fork Church had no rector, and Rev.Mr. Boggs of Spotsylvania visited both St. Martin’s and St. Paul’s Parishes toconduct services occasionally. Bishop Meade refers to Boggs’ efforts byexplaining “so low was the condition of the church, and so few disposed torespond, that he used to read only such parts as needed no response, and notall of them.”The Protestant Episcopal Church of Virginia suffered another attack afterdisestablishment, when the General Assembly passed legislation to seizeproperty formerly held by the Anglican Church. The logic of this law was thatthese properties were purchased with money levied by taxes (tithes) oncitizens. Church lands and other properties were placed in the hands of countyoverseers of the poor, and these individuals occasionally were the principalbeneficiaries of the revenues earned. Vacant church buildings wereappropriated for use by other denominations.The year 1812 is often considered the beginning of the resuscitation of theEpiscopal Church in Virginia. Still, in 1824 it was reported that there were onlyseven male communicants among all three churches in the St. Martin’s Parish.

THE RUBE GOLDBERG REPAIRSReuben Lucias Goldberg, inventor and artist of the 20th century, would notappreciate being identified with the 18th century improvisations that supportedthe Fork Church floor for well over a century. Some of our repairs could beconsidered outlandish enough, but they were less practical and far less cleverthan Rube’s “inventions.”The original construction of Fork Church included two parallel brickfoundations that extended on both sides of the aisle and then all the way to theeast side under the altar. These walls supported sills that held the joists onwhich the floor rested. At some point sections of these foundation walls wereremoved, and it appears that the same bricks were used to raise the level ofthe floor by adding two more brick courses to the remaining parts of the walls.More bricks were used to make piers to raise the sills along the outside walls.These piers were crudely stacked and provided irregular support, and whenthey were finally replaced in 1997, there was evidence of several subsequentefforts to adjust and reinforce them.The reason for these changes to the interior foundation is unclear, and there isno available evidence to determine a date for the alterations and repairs. Allwe can say is the quality of the work implies a time during the “lean years,”when the church had little able help and few resources to make what musthave been necessary structural adjustments. The pews were held up by faith,and little else..

THE REV JOHN COOKE & TRINITY CHURCHJohn Cooke was born in 1801 in St. Mary’s County, Maryland, and was amember of the second graduating class of the Theological Seminary inAlexandria. After serving briefly as deacon in Petersburg he was appointed toSt. Martin’s Parish. Rev. Cooke began his ministry here in 1825, and, thanksto his youth and energy, Fork Church and its congregation began a gradualrecovery from the apathy that characterized the first quarter of the century.On April 28, 1831, at Airwell, he married a young widow, Elizabeth EdmoniaBerkeley, the daughter of Thomas and Elizabeth Churchill of Wilton, MiddlesexCounty. He designed a house and built it on a tract of land already known asDewberry, and they moved there in 1833. In the following year Mr. Cookeresigned as rector, and from then on he devoted most of his time toexperimental agriculture at Dewberry and to the management of his wife’s vastestates. He also visited other rural counties to perform services for manyEpiscopal congregations that had no ministers.Trinity Church, which was constructed while Mr. Cooke was rector, stands asevidence of the recovery of support for the Episcopal doctrine during his timein charge of the parish. Mr. Cooke died in Henrico County in December 1861.His wife continued to be a faithful member of the parish until she died atAirwell on June 28, 1888. Their remains are interred beneath the pulpit ofTrinity Church.

ARE THERE BURIALS UNDER FORK CHURCH?Rev. John Cooke and his wife, Elizabeth, are buried beneath nearby TrinityChurch. Are there any burials under Fork Church? We know of none, but giventhat the early parish records do not exist, we cannot be sure.Burial locations can be determined archaeologically from soil disturbances. Inthe limited 1997 excavations, there was no evidence of any such disturbance,but the excavators did not have access to the area under the altar whereremains would most likely be placed. A brief examination under the altar arearevealed nothing but extensive groundhog activity, so no conclusions could bedrawn from this visual search.There will be no need or opportunity to pursue a search for physical remains inthe near future. In the meantime, though, we can try to make a list of all likelycandidates for the honor and then attempt to determine if their burial locationsare known. Our most likely decedent would be a well-liked rector who wasserving until the time of his death or who retired and remained prominent inthe community. We can identify the place of internment for all who meet thesecriteria, so for now we must assume that there are no human remains thathave been placed in this sacred location.

THE RENOVATIONS OF 1835Fork Church was certainly in need of repair by 1834, when Rev. William V.Bowers was ordained priest and became rector of St. Martin’s Parish. In aletter dated March 16, 1877, now held by the Virginia Historical Society, hedescribes the necessary repairs that were made to the church immediatelyafter his arrival:The back end wall was cracked and an iron bar was inserted in the wall fromside to side. A new roof was put on, and the plastering (which was very muchfallen) was thoroughly repaired and the whole wall whitewashed. The pewswere after the old English style of boxes with seats all around and so deep, orhigh, that only adult’s heads could be seen above the tops of them. Thesewere all taken out, the floor cleaned and repaired, and the pews in theirpresent form… replaced, being constructed of the old materials. The pulpit &chancel were entirely removed. The present “tub” pulpit stood on an unsightlysquare box which was a receptacle for dust and trash. The pulpit was placedon the present support, its depth was lessened, and had new flights of stairsput up, and was hung with purple or blue tapestry. The old chancel railing wassquare, massive, & made of pine or poplar, the desk & communion table of thesame material, all in the plainest style, without hanging drapery…. The floor ofthe gallery was altered and newly seated and the underneath of it partitionedoff, and a robing room made on the north side, there being none before. Thewindows were generally repaired and largely reglazed. The church was notpainted without or within and I think never had been up to that time.Thanks to Rev. Bowers, we know a great deal about the early configuration ofthe church. For example, this is our primary source for the description of theoriginal pews. It is also confirmation that the replacement pews were madefrom the original material.

THE CEMETARYIn the few cities and towns that existed in colonial Virginia, churchyards wereused as the final resting places for distinguished citizens, paupers, and allbetween. Outside of the population centers, though, Virginia’s economic andsocial life revolved around the farms and plantations, and each family wouldmaintain its own graveyard on its own property. This tradition continued ascommon practice through much of the nineteenth century. Church burialsbecame more common with the advent of the memorial parks, such asHollywood in Richmond, and the trend toward community graveyardscontinued as properties were less likely to be held by multiple generations ofthe same family.The earliest stone at Fork Church, at least the first that we know of, marks thegrave of Capt. Thomas Price, born Oct. 29, 1754, died December 21, 1836.Capt. Price lived at Coolwater, where he raised 12 children with his wifeBarbara Winston Price. Thomas, Barbara and at least one daughter, Ann PriceCallis, are interred inside the brick wall on the east end of the church structure.Another daughter, Elizabeth Randolph Price, is buried in the Dabney lot.Even though the cemetery became an integral part of the Fork Churchlandscape, families were expected to maintain their own lots. In about 1918Heyward Hunter assumed responsibilities for the common maintenance of theproperty. With financial help from Thomas Nelson Page, grass was planteduniformly and graveled walkways were placed. Rev. Philip Mason establisheda separate cemetery fund, and in 1959 the first certificates of lot ownershipwere issued.Today the cemetery is divided into 20 sections, with additional space forexpansion to the East and South. Section 5 defines the area dedicated tounknown Confederate soldiers. Section 14 exists on some maps, but hasnever been used. There are just under 500 known burials, with about 290 lotsunused and another 111 unsold.Erratum:To correct a sentence in Parish History Notes #18, it is not known whereElizabeth Randolph Price (1784-1873) is buried. It is a later descendent,Elizabeth Price Dabney (1854-1925), who is interred with the Dabneys. Thankyou to Mrs. Nancy Houston of Charlottesville for spotting my error.

THE TIDEWATER MIGRATIONMarkers in the Fork Church cemetery pay tribute to members of manyprominent families of colonial Tidewater Virginia. Soon after the AmericanRevolution, as soil on the original properties was becoming exhausted by theover-planting of tobacco, branches of these families looked to the Piedmontregion for new land to till. What we know as Old Ridge Road joined other lanesthat linked through New Kent and James City Counties from Yorktown beforethe end of the 17th century, defining a natural migration route.The tidewater families most represented in the Fork Church cemetery areNelsons and Pages, with about 33 gravestones. These two names have beenclosely allied for many generations. In fact, seven children of Gen. ThomasNelson, signer of the Declaration of Independence, married members of thePage family. The Nelsons had lived at a house called “York,” now known asthe Nelson House, in Yorktown. Gen. Nelson moved to Hanover County anddied at “Mont Air” a poor man, after exhausting his wealth for the Revolution.His body was returned to Yorktown, but his wife Lucy is buried in thiscemetery. Other stones mark the graves of Capt. Thomas Nelson, nephewand son-in-law of Gen. Nelson, Capt. Nelson’s wife, Judith, daughter of Gen.Nelson, and at least four of their children.The Pages of St. Martin’s Parish are descended from Governor John Page of“Rosewell,” Gloucester County. Francis Page, the fifth son of Gov. Page, livedat “Rug Swamp” with his wife, Susan, fourth daughter of Gen. Nelson. Francisand Susan are buried at this cemetery, as are two daughters and a son, Maj.John Page, and his wife, Elizabeth Burwell Nelson, who is a daughter of Capt.Thomas and Judith Nelson. Rosewell Page (1858-1939) of Oakland and hiswife Ruth Nelson represent the next generation, and the Oakland Pagescontinue from there. Another early marker defines the resting place of JudithCarter Page, youngest daughter of Gov. Page, who married Dr. RobertNelson, youngest son of Gen. Nelson and Chancellor of William & MaryCollege.Other familiar colonial names in the cemetery are Berkeley, Burwell, Churchill,Dabney, Digges, Grymes, Noland, Pendleton and Taylor, all representing earlyimmigrations from Europe to the tidewater region. Though these are 19th and20th century burials, they echo the colonial history of eastern Virginia.

THE BREAD & THE WINERules of the Church of England (Canon XX of 1604) specified the use of “asufficient quantity of fine white bread and a good wholesome wine” for thesacrament of Holy Communion. Household bread, in the shape of loaves orrolls, was used from the days of the Chapel in the Forks through most of thenineteenth century. By the turn of the twentieth century the household breadhad been replaced by the familiar wafer-bread. Today the CavanaghCompany of Greenville, Rhode Island, produces 20 million wafers per week,still following historical liturgical guidelines.Claret, or simply “red wine” to most church officials, was traditionally used asthe communion beverage. The wine was served in an “unmixed chalice,”meaning water would not be added. Interestingly, there is one knownexception to the claret rule. Madeira was used at Fork Church for a period oftime around 1760. In the 1970s a Madeira communion was offered by Rev.Charles Joy in commemoration of this unique circumstance.

THE RECTORYThe earliest rectors of St. Paul’s and St. Martin’s Parishes were paid in poundsof tobacco “in lieu of Glebe.” By the time of construction of Fork Church,however, a house on 350 acres near Oakland was identified as the ParishGlebe. The Rev. Robert Barret, who served as rector from 1738 to 1786, livedthere and farmed the land. The Rev. Peter Nelson, who was rector in 1789and served until about 1808, also lived at the Glebe. We might assume thatthis property was sold soon after 1808, before the end of the “lean years” ofthe Episcopal Church. There is no further mention of the Glebe in churchrecords. The Rev. John Cooke lived at Airwell, the home of his bride ElizabethEdmonia Berkeley, until completion of Dewberry, to which they moved in 1833.The Rev. William V. Bowers became rector in 1834 and lived at Edgewood,then owned by Dr. Carter Berkeley. On June 2, 1840, the vestry authorized thepurchase of 101 acres of farmland adjacent to Fork Church from ClementHarris for $6.00 per acre. A Parsonage was authorized later that year, andJames Hanes and Thomas T. Duke were to build it. On July 1, 1842, thebuilding was completed on that property at a cost of $776.40. In 1906 tworooms and two porches were added after a fund drive raised $340.00 for theproject.The initial occupants of the rectory were the Rev. Bowers and his family. InOctober 1842 his daughter Frances was the first child born at the Rectory.Frances Bowers became the wife of the first Bishop of South Florida and themother of a future Bishop of Indiana

DR. CARTER BURWELL BERKELEYThis is a brief account of the life of Carter Burwell Berkeley, a devout andhighly admired member of the Fork Church congregation during the earlynineteenth century:He was born at Airwell on February 20, 1768, and performed his early studiesunder the tutelage of a Mr. Bell, an Irish scholar, in a small log cabin nearOffley Mill. His higher education was completed in 1793 with the receipt of adegree in medicine from the University of Edinburgh.Dr. Berkeley returned to Virginia and practiced medicine from his old homeuntil his marriage to Catherine Spotswood Carter. In the year of their wedding,1796, they built Edgewood, which was to remain his residence and office wellbeyond her death. Each Sunday neighbors were invited to dine at Edgewoodafter church services, and this event became a grand social and intellectualtradition along Ridge Road.It was Dr. Berkeley’s philosophy to practice faith and medicine together. Onepatient described waking late one night during a serious illness to find Dr.Berkeley kneeling by her bed and praying for her recovery. According to BriefBiographies of Virginia Physician, by L. B. Anderson (1889), a patient wasquoted as saying “We prefer Dr. Berkeley to anyone else, because what hefailed to accomplish by his medical skill he would secure by his prayers.”On Sunday morning, November 3, 1839, Dr. Berkeley was involved with hisduties as chief warden when he was asked by two other doctors to visit a sickman as early as possible. “He was introduced into the room of the patient, andseating himself by the bed, gently grasped the wrist to feel the pulse. Not aword was uttered, not a movement was made, except to incline his head, aswas his custom during profound thought.” In time the other doctors found thatlife has passed from the good doctor. “Thus, like the faithful sentinel, he fellwith his armor on, and in the exercise of the noble functions of his highcalling.”

THE BOYS OF HANOVER ACADEMYLewis Minor Coleman founded Hanover Academy in 1850 but left the area in1859 to become Chair of the Latin Department at the University of Virginia.Upon Coleman’s departure, Hilary Pollard Jones became headmaster.Through his marriage to Claudia Marshall, the granddaughter of Chief JusticeJohn Marshall, Jones became a member of the Episcopal Church. Jonestreated his students like members of the family. He dined with them and theyeven shared his tobacco. In his school “there were two rules: ‘Be a gentleman’and ‘Know your lessons.’”The boys of the Academy are said to have assembled and marched to ForkChurch every Sunday. They sat in the rear on the right side of the isle, andtheir initials, as well as carvings of images of bottles and hands of cards, arestill visible on the pews in that area of the church. Anne Macdonald alwaysdenied that “HH” bore any relation to her father, Heyward Hunter, whograduated from the Academy with its final class in 1889.

THE SHORT RECTORSIt might be considered irreverent to classify a member of the clergy in this way,but two of the most successful rectors of St. Martin’s Parish were height-challenged.Rev. William Augustus Alrich was born in Wilmington, Delaware, in 1836. Afterserving as a military chaplain during the Civil War he was ordained priest in1868. He was called from Fairfax County to St. Martin’s in 1869. Two yearslater his wife died in childbirth at the Rectory, and she is buried in thechurchyard. His second wife was Mary Berkeley of White House, Old RidgeRoad. Mr. Alrich was known as a very short man with a big heart, serving theparish during the difficult period of reconstruction.Rev. John Philips was rector of St. Martin’s Parish from 1815 to 1824, duringthe period of reawakening in the Episcopal Church. According to BishopWilliam Meade, “His person was the most diminutive I ever saw or heard in thepulpit, but it was remarkable for its quickness and energy of action. Herequired to be elevated on a high block or platform to be seen at all in thepulpit. When praying in private houses he always knelt in the chair, not by it.”In 1824 Rev. Philips was reassigned to a parish in Lunenburg County. BishopMeade also related the circumstances of his death: “While riding in a plainconveyance with Mrs. Philips, who always drove him about, as she did manyother things for him, he expired without her knowledge, until, stopping at atavern to water the horse which carried them, it was discovered that he wassitting by her side a lifeless corpse.”A Fork Church legend describes the minister who fell off of his platform whilepreaching, “Soon you will not see me.” This tale must refer to one of thesegreat men.

THE REV HORACE STRINGFELLOWRev. Horace Stringfellow was born at The Retreat, a home overlooking theRapidan River, on November 9, 1799. He attended law school and soonbecame attorney for the Commonwealth at Madison Court House. In aseemingly abrupt career change, he and his wife, Louisa Gibbs Strother,moved to Alexandria, where he attended Virginia Seminary.After his ordination in 1835 and a brief assignment at Old Chapel in Millwood,Virginia, he became rector of Trinity Church in Washington, D.C. While atTrinity he was described as “a grave and godly man of patriarchal appearance,without any of the arts of oratory, but sound in doctrine and rightly dividing theword of truth as he saw the truth.”In 1847 Rev. Stringfellow was called to St. Paul’s Church in Petersburg andremained there until the church burned in 1854. Then he moved to HanoverCounty and served as rector of St. Martin’s Parish through the tumultuoustimes of the Civil War.The recently constructed St. Martin’s Rectory was already in disrepair whenthe Stringfellow family arrived. Apparently an apple tree was growing betweenthe roof and a decaying window. So Rev. Stringfellow built Forest Hill,modeled after his boyhood home, two miles west of Fork Church on Old RidgeRoad. The house is still known by some as “Parson Stringfellow’s.”Thomas Nelson Page described him as “A tall distinguished looking man whobelieved in conversion and preached it with a vigor of tone and gesture whichwas not without effect.”Although he retired from the clergy in 1866, he continued to live at Forest Hilluntil near his eightieth year, when age and health issues persuaded him tomove to Ashland. He lived among friends there until his last day, December26, 1883.

THE FORK CHURCH DURING THE WAR BETWEEN THE SATESA popular tradition notes that Fork Church was used as a hospital at somepoint during the Civil War. However, there is no mention of any such use inthe comprehensive “Official Records” published after the conflict. Because ofits remoteness from Confederate medical centers, it is unlikely that the churchprovided any convalescent facilities for wounded soldiers. On one occasion,however, Fork Church was near the front lines of the battle.For a few days in May 1864, General Grant and the Army of the Potomacfaced General Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia in a stalemate along theNorth Anna River. As a result of several engagements there were significantcasualties on both sides, but Union troops withdrew to the north of the riverand southern units moved to Hanover Junction (now Doswell) along theVerdon Road. A Union cavalry officer reported that all bridges over the LittleRiver had been destroyed, so it is not likely that casualties would have beenbrought to Fork Church.Certainly the congregation provided support and assistance throughout theconflict. At Trinity Church on Sunday, August 11, 1861, Rev. HoraceStringfellow responded to a plea from the medical purveyor of the ConfederateStates, proposing that ladies of every church in the Confederacy collectblankets and ship them to Richmond. In May 1863 at the Sixty-Eighth AnnualCouncil of the Protestant Episcopal Church in Virginia, Rev. Stringfellowreported that St. Martin’s families had provided contributions of $1,750 tosoldiers and $1,200 to “Fredericksburg sufferers,” after the bloodyengagement five months earlier. Mr. Stringfellow had four sons in theConfederate Army. They all survived the conflict.Section 5 of the Fork Church Cemetery was designated for Confederatesoldiers, but there are no markers in that area, nor is there record of anyburials there.

FANNIE DOSWELL & ST. MARTIN'S CHAPELA young Frances Ann Sutton, daughter of James T. Sutton and Mary Oliver,married Thomas W. Doswell of Bulfield, near Hanover Junction. For a periodof time in the second half of the nineteenth century, the Doswell stable wasfamous in Eastern horse environments. Lavish events were held at theBullfield race track, now overgrown but still visible from the air.“Fannie” Doswell, as she was called, was a pious woman who regularlyprovided quarters at Bullfield for traveling ministers and bishops. Her mostsignificant project was the construction of a small wooden Victorian chapelnear Hanover Junction, now Doswell, for railroad worker who lived in the area.After years of fund raising, especially at the horse racing functions, the smallchurch was completed in 1878, and named St. Martin’s Chapel, being withinthe borders of St. Martin’s Parish. Because of the main source of funding, thisoriginal building was also known as “the turfmen’s church.”For the next twenty years Fannie Doswell was the superintendent of theSunday School at St. Martin’s. Thomas W. Doswell died in 1890, and in 1898Fannie moved to Charlottesville, where she lived until her death in 1903. Theywere both buried in Richmond’s Hollywood Cemetery. The original chapelburned in 1944. The current St. Martin’s Church stands near the site of thefulfillment of Fannie Doswell’s dream.