The standard church historians of colonial Virginia knew almost nothing about William Agar, rector of an ecclesiastical unit of the established Church of England from 1767 to 1775.1 Secular scholars have provided very little additional information.2 Both writers and readers of the history of the colonial church of Virginia have been largely uninformed about Agar’s education, clerical career, military chaplaincy, published sermons, and marital problems in England before he came to Virginia. Unfortunately, Virginia’s records on Agar are very sparse. He was not a prominent minister but he served the Church of England, an important social and religious institution in the Old Dominion, for almost a decade. For scholars to make valid generalizations about the colonial clergy and church of Virginia, which they sometimes feel compelled to do, accurate and complete data about individual parsons is imperative. Agar merits some attention.
Despite this attempt at deception the bishop of Lincoln ordained him deacon on 18 February 1733/34 and priest on 21 December 1735. He began his clerical career as curate of Potton, Beds and then of Wragby where he was also master of the Free School with an annual stipend of £20. On 10 February 1737/38 he assumed the plural position as rector of Biscathrope and vicar of North Kelsey, St. Nicholas; on 1 June 1743 he added the responsibilities of South Kelsey, St. Mary’s but he relinquished the North Kelsey assignment in 1755. All of his cures were in Lincoln County on the North Sea in central England.4 His multiple clerical positions suggest that he may have had connections with the leadership of Lincolnshire diocese.College records provide some information about Agar’s background. The editor cautions the reader that “the name should be Agar,” not Agur. Born in 1709 or 1710, he was the son of Thomas Agar, a husbandman, and was a native of Redcar, Cleveland in Yorkshire, England. He attended the preparatory school of Mr. Oakley in nearby Kirkleadam and on 27 June 1729 St. John’s College, Cambridge admitted him sizar. He took his baccalaureate degree in 1732. Then, apparently hoping to continue his studies toward an M. A. degree, he applied for a scholarship which was limited to natives of Richmondshire. But he was not a native of that shire so he submitted “a false certificate of baptism from the Marske Church in Richmond.” Thereupon the college ordered that “his name [be] erased from the college rolls.”3 What this specifically entailed is not clear because his name and the usual biographical data remain listed in the St. John’s College records.
Agar made his residence at South Kelsey, in the rectory on the glebe, and on 30 April 1738 he leased “the parsonage house, glebe and tithes” of Biscathorpe to John Green for three years for £47 5s per annum; Green was apparently his curate. In 1751 charges were filed against Agar for “omission to perform divine service at Biscathorpe.”5 How the issue was resolved has not been determined.
During the Seven Years War Agar held the position of chaplain of the 20th Regiment of Foot. Evidently his parishes granted him a leave of absence. While stationed with his unit in Dorset County on the English Channel in 1756 and 1757 he delivered sermons to the soldiers, fourteen of which he published the next year with the title: Military Devotion, or the Soldier’s Duty to God, His Prince and His Country. In his correspondence to Richard Terrick, the bishop of London and the diocesan of the colonial churches, Agar noted that he had also served with his regiment in France and Germany.6
Marital problems greatly disrupted Agar’s life in the mid 1760s. On 20 November 1764 he married Elizabeth Thompson in the parish church of Spalding in Lincoln County. William wrote that he was a widower and was “forty-five or thereabouts” (actually he was fifty-five or thereabouts) and that Elizabeth was a widow aged “twenty-four or thereabouts.” She was the relict of Major Thomas Thompson but William’s previous spouse has not been identified. For a few weeks they cohabited but after “several Disputes and Misunderstandings . . . occasioned by [Elizabeth’s] unsociable Temper & lewd Behaviour,” according to William, they separated in January 1765. In a few months Thomas Suttoll, a wine merchant in York, and Elizabeth formed a relationship and in August 1765 they went to Scotland and reportedly were married there according to the laws of Scotland. In about four days they returned and made their abode in several locations in York County. The disappointment and embarrassment over the failed marriage disturbed Agar to the point that he removed to the colonies in mid-1765 . Agar explained to Bishop Terrick that his “inclination to travel” had been prompted “by an unlucky accident in my family affairs which perhaps was ordered by providence to my own good and that of hers.” 7
Agar had no specific employment prospect in mind when he made his exit from England but he had an association with the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel [SPG] and an acquaintance with the bishop of London and archbishop of Canterbury. Sometime in the summer or early autumn of 1765 he found himself in Cambridge, Massachusetts. On 1 May 1766 he reported to the SPG that at “the instance” of Governor Francis Bernard and the parishioners he had agreed to officiate at the Cambridge church which had no missionary or minister at the time. In the letter he also disclosed something of his depressed state of mind. He had accepted the responsibility, though he “feared from the Weight of my misfortunes, I should not be capable doing myself and [the governor] credit, but would rather hide my head in woods and forests than appear in public.”8
The opportunity for Agar in Cambridge was temporary. On 24 February 1766 word came from the archbishop of Canterbury that he wanted the vestry to “continue Mr. Agar in the service of the Cambridge mission until the church is supplied with a missionary, should no exception arise on your part to Mr. Agar’s character, conduct, or connections.” The archbishop’s language hints that there was some concern about Agar’s emotional stability. In a few months the SPG assigned a permanent missionary to the Cambridge station.9
Agar was not interested in becoming the long-term Cambridge missionary. On 20 April 1766 he informed Bishop Terrick that he was temporarily supplying the mission but “was determined to see the Country” before he “requested a regular mission.” He described Massachusetts as a “pleasant country, well inhabited by a sensible, well bred [and] learned people, not inferior to most parts of our Mother Country.” The “great misfortune” was that the people were mostly Congregationalists or Presbyterians and “some of their Ministers have by their haranguing promoted . . . riots and Tumults” which “render it dangerous to speak or preach up Loyalty and Subjection.” It appears Agar preferred to “preach up Loyalty and Subjection.” Perhaps it was the Stamp Act that was giving rise to a spirit of protest. Agar favored the appointment of a colonial bishop who should confine himself to ordination and confirmation. It is thought that Agar filled the pulpit in Cambridge from the first Sunday in October 1765 until the latter part of 1766.10
In a few months Agar appeared in Philadelphia. On 14 November 1766 Richard Peters, a prominent clerical and civic figure, reported to Bishop Terrick that Agar had come “out of curiosity to see this town” with a recommendation by Governor Bernard. Peters thought the governor was “an old acquaintance” of Agar. The people of St. Paul’s church invited the visitor to preach and then offered him the office of rector of the parish,
indicating that he had made a good impression with his trial sermon. Before he accepted Agar asked Peters “what the situation of St. Paul’s church was.” After Peters reviewed its history Agar declined the offer to become St. Paul’s minister.11
Williamsburg, Virginia was Agar’s next destination. From there on 26 January 1767 he advised Bishop Terrick that he had accepted a parish near enough to Williamsburg for him to function as professor of mathematics at the College of William and Mary . He asked the bishop to honor him with a letter of recommendation and justified his request by stating that the prelate was “no stranger to my classical knowledge and I presume my Mathematical ability may not be inferior to many in this Part.” The bishop may have complied but a year later James Horrocks, president of William and Mary, informed the bishop that he was not aware of Agar’s application.12 A very recent comprehensive search of the college records by an archives specialist has failed to find any evidence that Agar in fact became professor at William and Mary.13
In the meantime Governor William Tryon of North Carolina informed the SPG on 30 April 1767 that Agar was his acquaintance and friend “of long standing,” and that if he were interested he could have a mission in his province. The SPG did offer the opportunity to his friend, but as Tryon later learned, Agar did “not think it an object for him to change his situation while he remains in America.” The implication was that Agar intended to remain in the New World for only a brief period.14 Agar had not relinquished his titles to the two cures in Lincoln County. Tryon had been an officer in the 1st Regiment of Foot Guards and it seems probable that the two had contacts during their military careers.
The parish Agar had accepted was Nottoway in Southampton County and he applied for a license to officiate in Virginia which the bishop of London, the diocesan, granted on 21 June 1768. The parish was thirty miles or more south of Williamsburg, making it difficult if not impossible for him to act as both professor and rector. In the Old Dominion the Church of England was established by law and was viable without the support of the SPG. His chief duty was to conduct Sunday services in the several worship centers. They were Oberry’s church, the Seacock chapel, and the Nottoway chapel. The Oak Grove church may no longer have been in use and it is thought that the Millfield church was built during the Revolution after Agar’s departure.15 He was to serve communion at least three times a year, to catechize the children, and to record all marriages, births, and deaths in a parish register. The vestry, the administrative board of the parish, recorded the minutes of its periodic meetings in a vestry book. The register and vestry book, which may have contained valuable information about the parish and minister, have been lost or destroyed.
A minister’s annual salary, according to law, was 16,000 pounds of tobacco plus 1,800 pounds for cask and shrinkage. The parish vestry had the authority to collect the tobacco from the parish tithables. All free males over sixteen and all male and female slaves over sixteen were considered to be tithables. The vestry was also to provide a farm or plantation, called a glebe, of at least 200 acres with a suitable rectorate and outbuildings for agricultural purposes. Nottoway’s glebe consisted of 270 acres and after the passage of the Confiscation Act in 1802 the overseers of the poor sold it for $1,020.16 . In 1769 Agar owned a slave named Pompay who was about fourteen, according to the county justices; thus he was not a tithable. In 1770 Agar owned only two slaves, Peter and Sara, making it unlikely that he had enough labor to manage production on the glebe. No doubt he collected rent from a lessee. For officiating at baptisms, weddings, and funerals the minister was entitled to perquisites. The tobacco, glebe, and perquisites enabled the minister to enjoy a comfortable, although not affluent, standard of living.17
There is no evidence that Agar participated in local clerical affairs. He did not take part in the Fund for the Relief of Distressed Widows and Orphans of Clergymen which was organized in 1754 and functioned successfully until 1780. The clergy met each spring at the College of William and Mary, heard morning and afternoon sermons, and contributed their pledged fees. Trustees of the fund then distributed the money to orphans and widows of clergymen. The Williamsburg newspapers published the names of the participants each year, but unlike many of his peers, Agar did not preach a sermon at the annual meetings of subscribers or act as a trustee of the fund.18
Nottoway’s parson did not attend any of the several clerical conventions the commissary, the bishop of London’s representative in Virginia, scheduled during his incumbency. Nor did he involve himself in the controversy of the early 1770s when some of the Virginia clergy attempted to petition the king for an American bishop.19
In contrast to many of his associates, Agar did not help candidates seeking holy orders. To the bishop of London a would-be priest was to present testimonials of his character from local clergymen as well as a title, a firm promise of clerical employment after ordination. The records of the several bishops of London, the Fulham Papers, which have been indexed, reveal that one minister provided eight ordinands with recommendations; others helped from three to six with supporting statements, and many gave at least one character reference. Often a minister would also supply the title by appointing the applicant as his curate. Agar did not assist candidates in this way.20
In June 1773 Agar placed a notice in one of the Williamsburg gazettes, announcing that he intended “to embark for England next month” and that a “clergyman whose conduct would render him agreeable to the vestry and parishioners for one year, may have [a] genteel proposal from me.” His purpose in England was to complete a legal marriage separation from Elizabeth . In preparation, Agar had officially appointed William Campey, an attorney, called a proctor, on 11 July 1771 to represent him during the divorce proceedings he planned to initiate after reaching York County. Evidently the vestry had agreed to grant him a leave of absence on the condition that he find a suitable interim parson. The minister who accepted the “genteel proposal” was William Andrews who had just arrived in Virginia from New York where he had been an SPG missionary. Evidently Andrews was entitled to the tobacco, perquisites, and benefits from the glebe during Agar’s absence.21
Agar’s legal action against Elizabeth took place in the ecclesiastical court at York in February 1774 where William sought “a Divorce or Separation from Bed and Board by reason of Adultery” from his wife, Elizabeth. They agreed that they had legally married in 1764 but Elizabeth did not admit that she had lived in adultery. In his testimony William reviewed their courtship and marriage and recalled that on the night of their wedding they had consummated the marriage by “carnal copulation” in the house of Elizabeth’s father, Thomas Rome. They then “lived and cohabited together for several months,” (actually only seven weeks), first in York and then in Lincoln County. Separation began about 10 January 1765 when Elizabeth took up residence in a boarding house and marriage with Thomas Suttoll followed in August in Scotland and, William charged, they continued to cohabit thereafter in several locations in York County.22
To strengthen his case William deposed that he “was piously, soberly, & virtuously brought up & educated by his parents and always was and now is a person of a sober, modest, chaste, & virtuous Life & Conversation and was and is commonly accounted, reputed, and taken so to be by his Relations, Friends, and acquaintances.” Elizabeth, on the other hand, according to William “was & is a person of low, profligate, and adulterous Life & conversation & was & is commonly accounted, reputed, & taken so to be among her Relations, Friends, & Acquaintances.”23
To establish the legal fact that Elizabeth had committed adultery the court called a number of witnesses. Five women who had been their servants at various times testified that Thomas and Elizabeth Suttloff had lived together as man and wife and that they had seen them “in naked Bed together” on many occasions. They had heard Elizabeth say that she had a living husband named Agar. Elizabeth told one servant that she had a husband living called Agar who, “she used to say in a laughing manner, was a pretty kind of gentleman,” apparently implying that he was a male homosexual. Another servant heard Elizabeth say she “had another Husband living but they were never betwixt Sheets together and she did not know whether he was man or woman.” An apothecary deposed that in August 1771 he was sent for to attend Elizabeth and as “a man midwife” delivered her of a dead child. A surgeon, also acting as “a man midwife” asserted that he delivered Elizabeth of a dead child in October 1772. The implication of course was that Elizabeth had been living in adultery. The husband and wife who operated the boarding house where Elizabeth had lodged in 1765 testified that Thomas and Elizabeth had gone to Scotland and had there entered into a marital alliance.24
Elizabeth and her proctor, Joseph Buckle, apparently did not present any witnesses. The central dispute involved sex. William averred that “carnal copulation” had occurred on the wedding night but did not insist that sexual relations had continued. Elizabeth remarked that they had never been “betwixt Sheets together” and jested that William was a homosexual . Elizabeth’s defense, a recent scholar has reasoned, may have been that “her existing marriage was null and void” because “she had never consummated the union with William.”25 Agar’s sexual performance may not have been satisfactory from Elizabeth’s perspective, but he was a widower and had evidently cohabited with his first spouse until her demise. The evidence does not permit a firm conclusion about William’s sexual preferences or deficiencies.
The surviving record of the divorce case may be incomplete, for there is no verdict or judgment to be found. From another source, however, it is clear that the court, for reasons unknown, did not grant a divorce. Several documents presented to the court identified Agar as rector of South Kelsey, St. Mary’s and Biscathorpe, indicating that he had retained title to his cures while in America. Most likely Agar had assigned the parochial duties to curates.
Agar returned from England about mid 1774 and resumed his ministerial duties in . Nottoway Parish. On 16 June 1775, however, he alerted the readers of a Williamsburg gazette that “I intend for England soon.” It was the standard notice that creditors were to make known their demands and debtors to settle their accounts. His decision to depart so soon after his return seems unusual. Agar was surely a Loyalist who wanted to avoid the revolutionary issues arising in Virginia. He had many deep roots in England but almost no personal connections to Virginia . His patriotic and nationalistic attachment to his homeland is made clear in his sermons which have survived . There may well have been additional factors, such as failing health, which induced him to return to England. There he reestablished his residency in the parish house of South Kelsey and resumed personal charge of his parishes.26 .
Life was ebbing away for the clerical returnee. In September 1776, at the age of about sixty-six, he died at Redcar in Yorkshire, his place of birth, probably while in the care of family members. Agar left no will and the available record of his probate is very incomplete. In December 1776 the ecclesiastical court of York named Elizabeth administratrix of Agar’s estate; the court identified her as “Elizabeth the now wife of Thomas Suttoll late Elizabeth Agar widow Relict.” This suggests that Elizabeth had remained William’s spouse until his death and not long thereafter had married Thomas Suttoll according to English law. The court ordered Thomas Suttoll and two other inhabitants of York to make an inventory of Agar’s personal property, after they had posted proper bond. Elizabeth was to file a “true and perfect Inventory” by 20 July 1777 and a report of her administration by 20 January 1778. Nothing more about the estate has been found and the quantity and value of the property is not known. The court did not identify Agar’s heirs but Elizabeth apparently was the chief beneficiary. It seems strange that Elizabeth, who refused to live with her husband and whom Agar tried to divorce, should administer his estate and inherit a portion of his property.27 Elizabeth evidently considered her marriage to be null and void during William’s lifetime but legal and valid upon his death.
Little about Agar’s ministry in Nottoway Parish is known to have been recorded. Local histories do not mention him and current local history buffs know nothing about him at all.28The Southampton County records have a few brief references about him. In 1769 the County Court accused him with “concealing one tithe.” If the charge was correct Agar was trying to evade a portion of his taxes. Most likely there was some question about the age of one of his slaves but how the issue was resolved is not recorded. The next year Agar sued Benjamin Clifton for slander and defamation of character and a jury found the defendant “guilty of speaking false malicious & defamatory words” about the plaintiff and awarded the latter twenty shillings.29 Unfortunately the slanderous statement was not recorded but the incident indicates that Agar was rather sensitive about his character and reputation.
None of Agar’s Virginia sermons or texts has survived and no contemporary is known to have left a comment about his preaching or officiating. If judged by his printed fourteen sermons to the soldiers of the 20th Regiment of Foot, his performance in the pulpits of Nottoway Parish was more then acceptable. He was not an absentee sort of chaplain as the English military clergy often were. As recent scholars have concluded, the sermons indicate that he was “conscious of the responsibilities of his office.”30 Perhaps he viewed his Virginia ministerial duties in a similar committed manner. For the titles and texts of his fourteen sermons, see the appendix to this article.
The average length of his published fourteen sermons was twenty-one pages and each included on average about 4,300 words . He apparently delivered them during Sunday morning worship services and edited them for publication. They reveal that Agar had received a good classical education; his word usage and sentence structure were excellent and his thoughts were clearly expressed. He demonstrated good literary ability. The sermons contained many Biblical quotations and references to fables, the Greek and Roman classics, and historical figures and events. His style was somewhat bombastic and grandiloquent and the contents, to the modern reader, rather dull and repetitious . Agar made no distinction among God, prince, and country; they were one indivisible unit which demanded the soldier’s unquestioning devotion. There was nothing new, unique, or original in his pronouncements. His general theme seemed to be the condemnation of vice and the glorification of virtue, from a military officer’s perspective. Agar’s purpose no doubt was to discourage vice and immorality, to instill moral and ethical discipline among the soldiers, and to promote courage, bravery, and heroism. The vices included complaints, profanity, disobedience, cowardice, desertion, and mutiny; the latter two seemed to be akin to unpardonable sins. The virtues were the antitheses to the vices. He had no admonitions for the fellow officers of his regiment.31 .
The year Agar’s sermons appeared in print an unidentified reviewer recorded the following brief scathing critique of his publication:
Notwithstanding the good design that appears to have animated the pious Author of this work, we can say little more in its commendation. Mr. Agar seems to have a warm head, as well as a warm heart; and upon the whole, we cannot but think he would do well to drop his acquaintance with the press, and confine his inclinations to do good, within the limits of his majesty’s twentieth regiment of foot, and the rectories of South Kelsey St. Mary’s, and Biscathrope, in Lincolnshire.32
Agar had what might be considered an ulterior motive in publishing his book. In the introduction he included his letter to the bishop of London in which he tried to enlist his support for the adoption of uniform prayers for military chaplains.33 The title of his appendix read: “Reasons for a Concise Form of Prayer for our Army in Camp . . . with Psalms, Lessons, and Collects Selected; Also Prayers for Sick in Hospitals, Wounded in the Field, or for a Soldier under Sentence of Death by a Court Martial.” He included arguments in favor of uniform prayers and he also had suggested composed prayers for various occasions and situations.34
The appendix reveals that Agar had corresponded with the bishop of Croydon who thought uniform prayers were a good idea, and with the bishop of York who promised “to give the whole a Perusal.” Agar had also exchanged letters with Thomas Herring, the archbishop of Canterbury, and had sent him his manuscript or book in an attempt to solicit his assistance and he included the latter’s response in the appendix. Because of poor health the archbishop had read only the “prayers” and could “find nothing contrary to the Establishment of the Church of England.” Both Agar and the archbishop expressed concern that “Enthusiasm” was creeping into the army. Agar wrote that at one of his camps Methodist preachers had “harangued the vulgar and inferior Soldiers.” Presumably uniform military prayers would discourage such intrusions by dissenting clergymen. The church leaders soon lost interest in Agar’s proposal.35
Although the record is not as complete as one might wish, it can be said that Agar had two contrasting ministerial careers. Evidence suggests he was a capable and committed minister and chaplain in England. His printed sermons and proposal for uniform military prayers give the impression that he was energetic and ambitious. He had a wide circle of connections and apparently was friendly and outgoing. He became good friends with the future governors of Massachusetts and North Carolina and corresponded in friendly terms with bishops and the archbishop. The bishop of Lincoln placed him in charge of two and even three cures. His appointment as military chaplain signifies that he had links with the military leadership. He may have been equally competent in the pulpit in the Old Dominion, but he developed no known significant relationships with leading figures there. He did not participate in local church or public affairs and he left a very sparse record in Virginia. He seems to have withdrawn from society and to have preferred a solitary life. One explanation may be that he intended his American sojourn to be brief and thus had no long-term interests in the New World. More importantly, however, his failed marriage seems to have dampened his personality and to have sapped his vigor and motivation.
1 William Meade, Old Churches, Ministers and Families of Virginia, 2 vols. ([Philadelphia, 1857] Baltimore, 1966), 1:307-08; Edward Lewis Goodwin, The Colonial Church in Virginia; with Biographical and Other Historical Papers, Together with Brief Biographical Sketches of the Colonial Clergy in Virginia (Milwaukee, 1927), 245; George MacLaren Brydon, “The Clergy of the Established Church in Virginia and the Revolution,” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 41 (1933): 19.
2 Joan R. Gundersen, The Anglican Ministry in Virginia, 1723-1766: A Study of a Social Class (New York 1989), 236; John K. Nelson, A Blessed Company: Parishes, Parsons, and Parishioners in Anglican Virginia, 1690-1776 (Chapel Hill, N. C., 2001), 303.
3 Admissions to the College of St. John the Evangelist in the University of Cambridge, Part III: July 1715—November 1767, edited with notes by Robert Forsyth Scott (Cambridge, 1903), 61, no. 43; the author gratefully acknowledges the assistance of David Clark, Professor of Chemistry (emeritus), The University of Nebraska at Kearney, in translating two Latin sentences.
4 Admissions to the College of St. John, 423; e-mail, Adrian Wilkinson, Collections Officer, Lincolnshire Archives, to the author, 18 August 2010.
5 The National Archives, Access to Archives, DD/T/97/180, 30 April 1738, DD/T/97/186, 1 May 1749, DD/T/97/195, 1751, DD/T/97/196, 1751,www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/A2A/records.aspx?cat=157.
6 William Agar, Military Devotion, or the Soldier’s Duty to God, His Prince and His Country, Containing Fourteen Sermons Preached at the Camps Near Blandford and Dorchester A. D. 1756 and 1757, With an Appendix . . . (London. ); Agar to Bishop Terrick, 20 April 1766, Fulham Papers in the Lambeth Palace Library, 40 vols. (Ann Arbor, MI, 1963), 6:58-59.
7 William Agar’s Divorce Papers, 1774, photocopies, Borthwick Institute, University of York, Heslington, York; Joanne Bailey, Unquiet Lives, Marriage and Marriage Breakdown in England, 1660-1800 (Cambridge, 2003), 154; The author wants to thank Joanne Bailey for her assistance in acquiring copies of Agar’s Divorce Papers; Agar to Bishop Terrick, 20 April 1766, Fulham Papers, 6:58-59.
8 Calvin Redington Batchelder, A History of the Eastern Diocese, 3 vols. (Boston, 1910), 2:40.
9 A Sermon on the Re-Opening of Christ Church, Cambridge, Mass., Preached on the Twenty-Fourth Sunday after Trinity, November 22, 1857; with a Historical Notice of the Church by the Rev Nicholas Hoppin, Rector (Boston, 1858), 39-40.
10 William Agar to Bishop Terrick, 20 April 1766, The Fulham Papers, 6:58-59; Batchelder, A History of the Eastern Diocese, 2:40.
11 Richard Peters to Bishop Terrick, 14 November 1766, Fulham Papers, 8:27-28.
12 William Agar to Bishop Terrick, 26 January 1767 . James Horrocks to Bishop Terrick, 29 March 1768, Fulham Papers, 8:27-28, 14:107-08, 137-40.
13 E-mail, Steven M. Bookman, University Archives Specialist, Earl Gregg Swem Library, University of William and Mary, to the author, 11 May 2010.
14 William Tryon to Rev. Daniel Burton, Secretary of the SPG, 30 April, 1767, 10 June 1768, 20 March 20 1769, William L. Saunders, ed., The Colonial Records of North Carolina, 10 vols. (Raleigh, 1886-90), 7:458, 786, 8:12-13.
15 Goodwin, The Colonial Church in Virginia, 245; George Carrington Mason, “The Colonial Churches of Isle of Wight and Southampton Counties, Virginia,” William and Mary Quarterly, 2d ser., 23 (1943): 41-63.
16 William W. Hening, ed., The Statutes at Large, Being a Collection of All the Laws of Virginia, from the First Session of the Legislature, in the Year 1619, 13 vols. (New York, Philadelphia, and Richmond, 1819-23), 6:88-90; Southampton County Deed Book, No. 10 (1802-1805), reel 5, 84-85, Library of Virginia, Richmond;
17 Southampton County Order Book (1768-1772), 117, reel 26, Library of Virginia, Richmond; Gary M. Williams, contrib., “Southampton County, Virginia Tithables, 1770,” The Virginia Genealogist 22 (1978): 244.
18 William Stevens Perry, ed., Historical Collections Relating to the American Colonial Church, 5 vols. (Hartford, CT, 1870-89), 1:414-28; Lester J. Capon and Stella F. Duff, comps., Virginia Gazette Index, 1736-1780, 2 vols. (Williamsburg, 1950).
19 Gundersen, The Anglican Ministry in Virginia, 218-25; Frederick V. Mills, Sr., Bishops by Ballot: A Eighteenth-Century Ecclesiastical Revolution (New York, 1978), 85-129.
20 Gundersen, Anglican Ministry in Virginia, 43; William Wilson Manross, comp., The Fulham Papers in the Lambeth Palace Library: American Colonial Section, Calendar and Indexes(Oxford, 1965).
21 Rind’s Virginia Gazette (Williamsburg), 24 June 1773; Agar’s Divorce Papers; Southampton County Order Book (1768-1772), 427, reel 26, Library of Virginia, Richmond; Otto Lohrenz, “”The Discord of Political and Personal Loyalties: The Experiences of the Reverend William Andrews of Revolutionary Virginia,” Southern Studies: An Interdisciplinary Journal of the South 24 (1985): 377.
22 William Agar’s Divorce Papers.
24 Ibid; The Oxford English Dictionary, 2d ed., comp. by J. A. Simpson and E. S. C. Weiner, vol. 12 (Oxford, 1989), 440.
25 Bailey, Unquiet Lives, 154.
26 Purdie’s Virginia Gazette (Williamsburg), 16 June 1775; Admissions to the College of St. John, 423.
27 William Agar’s Estate Papers, photocopies, Borthwick Institute, University of York, Heslington, York.
28 Letter, Katherine K. Tutsell, Southampton County Historical Society, Courtland, Virginia, to the author, 3 June 2010.
29 Southampton County Order Book (1768-1772), 119, 213, 304, 356, 427, reel 26, Library of Virginia, Richmond.
30 Alexander Crawley Dow, Ministers to the Soldiers of Scotland, a History of the Military Chaplains of Scotland Prior to the War in the Crimea (Edinburgh, 1962), 226, 235; see also Paul E. Kopperman, “Religion and Religious Policy in the British Army, 1700-96,” Journal of Religious History 14 (2007): 391.
31 Agar, Military Devotion, 1-291.
32 Monthly Review 19 (1758): 207-08.
33 Agar to the bishop of London, no date, Agar, Military Devotion, 2-5.
34 “Reasons for a Concise Form of Prayer for Our Army in Camp, As in Other Protestant Countries in Time of War, Especially Prussia and Sweden, Addressed to Our Pious Legislature; with Psalms, Lessons, and Collects Selected; Also Prayers for Sick in Hospitals, Wounded in the Field, or for a Soldier under Sentence of Death by a Court Martial,” the appendix in Agar, Military Devotion, i-xxxii.
35 Ibid., iv-xxxii.
Titles of Sermons and Biblical Texts
Sermon 1: On the Duty of Prayer, Psalm 103:2-5
Sermon 2: On the Desire of All Men to Die the Death of the Righteous,
Whether in the Field, Amidst the Waves, or on Our Pillows, Numbers 23:10
Sermon 3: The Vanity of Rash Swearing and What Oaths Are Legal, Matthew 5:34-36
Sermon 4: On the Horrid Crime of Perjury by Desertion, Cowardice or Mutiny, Text the same
Sermon 5: On a Willing Submission to Governors, Not Out of a Servile Dread of Punishment, But from the Fear of God, Romans 13:1
Sermon 6: Sober Advice to the Inferior Soldier, to Do No
Violence, and Be Content with Their Wages, Luke 3:14
Sermon 7: Fortitude Founded on Religion, with an Explanation of True Courage or False: Designed before the Day of Battle, Joshua 23:6
Sermon 8: On the Fallacy of Pleasure, Pursued by the Gayer Part of the World, Psalm 1:1, 2
Sermon 9: On the Fallacy of Pleasure, &c, Text the same
Sermon 10: Give Me Neither Poverty nor Riches, &c, Proverbs 30: 7-9
Sermon 11: Part II, Text the same
Sermon 12: On Sobriety and Vigilance in All Stations, I Peter 5:8
Sermon 13: Liberty Bounded by Law and Conscience, the Greatest Blessing, Galatians 5:13
Sermon 14: Natural or Right Reason an Insufficient Guide: An Answer to Free Inquirers, Corinthians 2:5