no image
Privacy Level: Open (White)

Mary Isham (Randolph) Keith

Mary Isham Keith formerly Randolph
Born [date unknown] in Tuckahoe, Henrico County, Colony of Virginiamap [uncertain]
Ancestors ancestors
Wife of — married about 1732 in Colony of Virginiamap [uncertain]
Wife of — married about 1733 in Colony of Virginiamap
Descendants descendants
Died after in Leeds Parish, Fauquier County, Colony of Virginiamap
Profile last modified | Created 27 Jan 2012
This page has been accessed 9,232 times.
This profile lacks source information. Please add sources that support the facts.
US Southern Colonies.
Mary (Randolph) Keith resided in the Southern Colonies in North America before 1776.
Join: US Southern Colonies Project
Discuss: southern_colonies

Contents

Biography

Mary Isham Randolph is the daughter of Thomas Randolph and Judith Fleming. She is reported to have been born at Tuckahoe, her father's estate in Henrico County[1], but the presumed birth place and birth date cannot be readily documented because the "Parish of St. James, to which [Tuckahoe] belonged, was not established until 1720, and no Parish Register, containing statistics of births, marriages and deaths, etc., was kept prior to the year 1756..."[2].

Mary Isham married the Rev James Keith in about 1733, a date inferred from the birth of their first child, James Keith, in 1734[3]. She bore him eight children, all of whom lived to adulthood. Mary Isham lived decades after Rev James Keith's death in the early 1750s, appearing as late as August 1772 in Prince William County Court [4]. There is no documentation of her date of death nor is there documentation for her alleged burial under the chancel of Elk Run Church, Hamilton Parish, where Rev James Keith had served as Minister.

Children

The children of Rev James Keith and Mary Isham Randolph are listed below, as indexed by Robert Isham Randolph[5] from Index #23, Mary Isham Randolph.

Index Number Name b. dates, d. dates Married
23 Mary Isham Randolph m. James Keith
231 James Keith m. ______ ______
232 John Keith m. ______ Doniphan
233 Thomas Keith m. Judith Blackwell, b.1759, d.1867
234 Alexander Keith
235 Isham Keith
236 Mary Randolph Keith b. 4/28/1737, d. 9/19/1808 m. 1754, Col. Thomas Marshall
237 Elizabeth Keith b. 1745, d. 1821 m. 1766. Edward Ford, b. 1738, d.1814
238 Judith Keith m. James Key


Research Notes

An “Elopement Story” is sometimes included in accounts of Mary Isham Randolph and her early life. The purported elopement made its first published appearance in William McClung Paxton’s 1885 biography of John Marshall. That “Legend of the Randolphs” was expanded in Jean Edward Smith’s 1996 biography to name Enoch Arden as eloper and first husband of the twice-married Mary Isham. An elaboration of the 1885 legend and refutation of “Enoch Arden” as Mary’s first husband can be followed at The Elopement Story[6].

A more recent interpretation of the legend alleges Arthur Browder as eloper and first husband of Mary Isham. Elaboration of that interpretation and its allegation can be followed at Arthur Browder.


Sources

  1. Jefferson Randolph Anderson, “Tuckahoe and the Tuckahoe Randolphs,” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 45, No.1 (1937): 70.
  2. Jefferson Randolph Anderson, “Tuckahoe and the Tuckahoe Randolphs,” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 45, No.1 (1937): 55. It must be noted that Anderson is the very reporter of Mary Isham's birth "at Tuckahoe."
  3. Birth year is inferred from the statement in the obituary of James Keith's death "in the 90th year of his age" (Intelligencer (Lexington, Va.), 30 Oct 1824 Intelligencer (Lexington, Va.), 30 Oct 1824 Obituaries, Henley Index, Library of Virginia). http://www.lva.virginia.gov/).
  4. Where she signed an agreement that, after Rev James Keith's demise, son Thomas Randolph Keith would "support and maintain the said Mary Isham Keith in a decent and Genteel Manner" (Fauquier County Deed Book 5, 1772-1774, p.212).
  5. Robert Isham Randolph, The Randolphs of Virginia — A Compilation of the Descendants of William Randolph of Turkey Island and His Wife Mary Isham of Bermuda Hundred, Chicago: 1936? pp. 77-105.
  6. Acknowledgment: Some of the material presented in the story here first appeared in Gail Raney Fleischaker's "Correcting and Expanding the Record of the Rev. James Keith of Hamilton Parish," Magazine of Virginia Genealogy, Vol. 55, No. 4 (November 2017).




Sponsored Search by Ancestry.com

DNA Connections
It may be possible to confirm family relationships. It is likely that these autosomal DNA test-takers will share some percentage of DNA with Mary: Have you taken a test? If so, login to add it. If not, see our friends at Ancestry DNA.


Comments: 27

Leave a message for others who see this profile.
There are no comments yet.
Login to post a comment.
In the Research Notes section above, the Purported Elopement subsection relies on several passages from Smith's biography of John Marshall, but it's not clear in the posted material what is quoted from Smith and what is inserted commentary. The Elopement Story subsection relies on “Excerpts from "Randolph Dissertation" (source not cited) and material "entered by Lynda Hull" (without source), again with nothing to distinguish between quoted material and added commentary.

The first item under Research Notes names Arthur Browder as Mary Isham Randolph’s purported first husband, and the following Elopement Story serves as an introduction to that allegation. Smith’s version in Purported Elopement claims “Enoch Arden’ as Mary Isham Randolph’s first husband.

Because these two versions of the elopement story go in two different directions, I would like to propose re-organizing the Resource Notes section of this profile accordingly: First, a summary, explanatory Research Note regarding Smith’s version with a link to a separate free-space page where it would be elaborated and refuted; second, a summary, explanatory Research Note regarding Browder’s version with a link to its elaboration at Arthur Browder.

Sounds reasonable. Please mark up any direct quotes from sources in blockquotes with a citation.
posted by Ken Spratlin
Research Notes above have been amended accordingly. Blockquotes with citations at the free-space The Elopement Story.
posted by Gail (Raney) Fleischaker
edited by Gail (Raney) Fleischaker
As Mark Browder commented earlier (https://www.wikitree.com/photo/jpg/Randolph-911), this portrait is not of Mary Isham Randolph. I have unchecked "Primary Photo" at both the Randolph-911 and Randolph-581 (to which -911 defaults) but to no avail.

Any help in getting this photo removed would be greatly appreciated.

I added Beverly-161 to the "In this image" list & removed Mary Randolph, which has resulted in this profile having the default image as the primary photo.
posted by Liz (Noland) Shifflett
So can you undo having the default image as primary photo for Mary Isham Randolph?
I'm sorry. I thought that's what you wanted - to remove the portrait of Susannah Beverly from being the primary photo for this profile of Mary Isham Randolph. If a primary photo has not been selected for a profile, the default image will display. You can designate another image as the primary photo, but I do not know of an appropriate portrait of her in WikiTree.
posted by Liz (Noland) Shifflett
Yes, removal of the portrait of Susannah Beverly as primary photo for Mary Isham Randolph is exactly what I/we wanted. i apologize for not understanding your process in this.

Thanks for getting the primary photo removed.

Randolph-3467 and Randolph-581 appear to represent the same person because: They should be merged as they have the same identity. The purported marriage to Arthur Browder needs to be reviewed for reliable sourcing, but does not effect that they have the same identity.
posted by Ken Spratlin
US Southern Colonies Project adding project management (PMP) and project protection (PPP) as co-manager—duplicated, disputed relationships.

Please continue to manage normally, and review US Southern Colonies Project Editing Guidance before editing.

posted by Ken Spratlin
Randolph-3467 and Randolph-581 appear to represent the same person because: They are the same person.
posted by Mark Browder
Randolph-3467 and Randolph-581 do not represent the same person because: Randolph-3467 was created as conjectured wife of Arthur Browder and claimed mother of Isham Browder -- with no documentation for either relationship.
Randolph-3467 and Randolph-581 do not represent the same person because: They should be merged as they have the same identity. The purported marriage to Arthur Browder needs to be reviewed for reliable sourcing, but does not effect that they have the same identity.
posted by Ken Spratlin
Thank you for clarifying WikiTree procedure, Ken. I've 'approved' the merger as you suggest.
I posted the marriage date at Keith-694, noting in the biography that it was inferred:

"It is presumed that James Keith and Mary Isham Randolph were married about 1733, a date inferred from the birth of their first child, James Keith, in 1734[11]."

posted by Gail (Raney) Fleischaker
edited by Gail (Raney) Fleischaker
Paxton states that they were married on March 2, 1735.
posted by Mark Browder
Paxton offers no documentation for such a claim.
You offer no documentation for 1733 either. Sorry. And Paxton is at least a very old source, unlike "John Marshall: Defender of a Nation", published in 1996. But, at least it is obvious that they were not married in 1732 when she was married to her first husband.
posted by Mark Browder
edited by Mark Browder
Correct, I offer no documentation for 1733, as I have none. I stated that the 1733 date was inferred, based on the birth of Keith's and Mary Isham Randolph's firstborn.

Unfortunately, Smith's "John Marshall: Defender of a Nation" is also a secondary source, citing no primary sources for events in Rev James Keith's or Mary Isham Randolph's life. See my Comment below dated 24 October 2022.

Is there a reliable source for the marriage in "about" 1733 that was added. The biography also says "When Mary joined Keith is not recorded but she married him without her family's approval about 1736."

Both should be moved to research notes if not reliably sourced, or estimated with method of estimation stated in the research notes.

posted by Ken Spratlin
I already read them. But if you are going to point out that Paxton offers no documentation for a certain claim, you can't at the same time present an undocumented claim, even if you qualify it with a statement, and expect anyone to accept it. In fact, I don't even know where the source for James W. Keith's birth date is. Does he have a tombstone? Is there a church record. He very well may have been born a little bit earlier than believed. That's just an aside since the couple, acc. to Paxton, were not married until after he was born.
posted by Mark Browder
What's posted here as Elopement Story and Research Notes provides a cautionary tale in the use of secondary sources. The fabled story begins with Paxton's (1855) narrative, continues with Beveridge's (1916) reference to "the legend," and finally repeated and embellished by Jean Edward Smith in his 1996 biography of John Marshall, quoted above. I followed the trail of that story's origin and development and was able to refute it, published as part of "Correcting and Expanding the Record of the Rev. James Keith of Hamilton Parish," Magazine of Virginia Genealogy, Vol. 55, No. 4 (November 2017), pp257-276; digital images, Ancestry.com (Media)..
posted by Gail (Raney) Fleischaker
edited by Gail (Raney) Fleischaker
Actually, the story begins with William Byrd's primary source of 1732. The story is not refuted at all. Oh, and as for secondary sources, "John Marshall: Defender of a Nation" may not even qualify for that.
posted by Mark Browder
edited by Mark Browder
Isham-1108 and Randolph-581 appear to represent the same person because: same husband and child, no sources provided to support last name of Isham, yet Randolph-581 is sourced and indicates the LNAB shown. Primary sources should be added to prove a different LNAB as shown on Isham-1108
posted by Robin Lee
Randolph-2277 and Randolph-581 appear to represent the same person because: a duplicate line was recently created. please merge.
posted by Liz (Noland) Shifflett
Randolph-706 and Randolph-581 appear to represent the same person because: I think these two profiles are for the same person.

Featured Auto Racers: Mary is 20 degrees from Jack Brabham, 20 degrees from Rudolf Caracciola, 13 degrees from Louis Chevrolet, 14 degrees from Dale Earnhardt, 31 degrees from Juan Manuel Fangio, 15 degrees from Betty Haig, 19 degrees from Arie Luyendyk, 17 degrees from Bruce McLaren, 13 degrees from Wendell Scott, 16 degrees from Kat Teasdale, 14 degrees from Dick Trickle and 18 degrees from Maurice Trintignant on our single family tree. Login to see how you relate to 33 million family members.