Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture

Uncommon Sense—the blog

What’s in the Name (Omohundro)?

· June 21st, 2016 · 9 Comments

by Karin Wulf

Over the years people have wondered about the name “Omohundro.”  Many have asked about the derivation of the name itself and about why the OI carries the name. But there are always questions, too, about how the Omohundro name might be connected to the early Virginia economy that was dependent on the exploitation of enslaved people. That last question—not addressed on the OI’s website as the others are– and the conversations it has prompted over the last months (and in particular at the annual meeting of the OI’s Executive Board and Council in early May 2016) are the impetus for this post.

This is an overdue season of reckoning for many institutions complicit in the economy of transatlantic slavery and in other, often related, economies of oppression and dispossession. As institutions of higher education have recently and prominently wrestled with how to address and learn from their histories, historians have played an important role just in the last year at such places as Harvard Law School and Georgetown University, and more than a decade ago at Brown University. President of the Mellon Foundation Earl Lewis wrote about how “we cannot exorcise the past without confronting it fully.”  These confrontations are not meant to resolve a difficult history, but rather to engage it; the American Historical Association’s Executive Director Jim Grossman observed that it is incumbent on us “to keep that past in direct conversation with the present.”

Founded in 1943 as the Institute of Early American History & Culture, the OI was renamed in 1996 to mark a bequest from Malvern Hill Omohundro Jr (known as M. H.) and his wife, Elizabeth “Libby” Overbey Omohundro. M. H. had been a student at William & Mary in the 1920s, but did not complete his degree; accounts suggest that the urgency of Depression-era family economics took him to New York to begin a business career. He came back to Richmond and was in first the fine arts trade and then real estate, both ventures he joined in with his brothers. M. H. began supporting the OI in the 1970s; my predecessor as Director, Ron Hoffman, and his, Thad Tate, each enjoyed getting to know him. With the money he made after the Depression, M.H. was generous to the OI as well as other organizations.

M.H. did not build his twentieth-century fortune on slavery or the slave trade, but the history of a privileged Virginia family is often connected in any number of ways to the economy that privileged them. M. H.’s paternal great-uncle, Silas Omohundro, was a Richmond-based slave owner and slave trader. After working for the large slave-trading firm of Franklin & Armfield in Alexandria, Silas resettled in Richmond, where he operated “a middling slave trade from a boardinghouse and private jail.” Silas and others of his family began to buy extensive real estate in Virginia and elsewhere; fraught and ultimately litigated contracts among family members during and after the Civil War as well as controversy over the settlement of his estate suggest the complexity of his finances.

Silas owned but also married, had children with, and willed the bulk of his estate to Corinna Hinton Omohundro. His accounts are held at the Library of Virginia, and a number of scholars have used these and other sources including court cases instigated during the estate settlement to write about Silas, his business, and his family. In this space you’ll shortly hear from Alexandra Finley, a Ph.D. student here at William & Mary and a dissertation fellow at the McNeil Center for Early American Studies; she wrote an M.A. thesis on the Silas Omohundro family and is now completing her dissertation on the racialized entwining of sex, family, and finance in antebellum Virginia.

The Omohundro family was, like so many others, implicated in the economy of slavery through both owning and trading human beings as commodities. On the eve of the Civil War more than a quarter of free families in Virginia owned slaves. The Omohundro Institute is not named for someone who directly participated in slavery. Still, the name rightly challenges us for its echo of privilege founded on racial hierarchy and a legacy, if not the wealth itself, of that privilege.

But the Omohundro name also challenges us for reasons that are historically and culturally specific–namely, because in a western European tradition we “name” families patrilineally. The Omohundro Institute must consider the implications of Silas Omohundro’s history because his great-nephew, his brother’s grandson, shared that name. Thinking about the historical context of family histories and family memories is a research interest of mine; I’ve written about the ways that eighteenth-century British Americans wrote and performed their families’ stories and that the state compelled family histories through legal and other practices. As interesting to me as the ways that early modern people construed family connections are the ways that we continue to think about the significance of lineage.

In 1951 M.H.’s father, Malvern Hill Omohundro, Sr. published a weighty tome, almost 1300 pages, The Omohundro Genealogical Record;  The Omohundros and allied families in America; blood lines traced from the first Omohundro in Westmoreland County, Virginia, 1670, through his descendants in three great branches and allied families down to 1950. In this Genalogical Record Omohundro noted that Corinna Hinton Omohundro was Silas Omohundro’s third wife, though her age and maiden name were incorrect and her race and enslaved status were unremarked.

Of course all families are more than a patriline. M.H.’s maternal great-aunt, Elizabeth Van Lew, was, in the words of her principal biographer, Elizabeth Varon, “a rare elite white southern abolitionist.” Van Lew headed a Union spy ring in the Confederate capital of Richmond during the Civil War and in the assessment of George Sharpe, the Union’s head of military intelligence, “for a long, long time she represented all that was left of the power of the U.S. government in the city of Richmond.” Varon observes that Sharpe’s was “a remarkable statement for a nineteenth-century man to make about a nineteenth-century woman.”

The Van Lews came from Philadelphia, and Elizabeth was educated there—it’s cited as a source of her antislavery views. Elizabeth Van Lew’s legacy as an abolitionist and insurgent during the war was extended afterwards. As the appointed postmaster in Richmond, she employed black men and women much as she had done during her days as a spymaster. But her record on race is not straightforwardly progressive either. She too owned slaves; she may have been influenced by their views, and she may have secretly freed many. She was also enthusiastic about schemes to send formerly enslaved people back to colonies in Africa, and she may or may not have sent one of her most trusted allies among her slaves, Mary Richards, to Liberia and then called her back into slavery and service as a spy. Maggie Lena Walker was born in Van Lew’s house, where her mother had been a slave, was likely freed and remained for a time to work as a cook.

Does it make a difference that the OI’s Mr. Omohundro shared a family background with both slaveowners and abolitionists, a slave-trader and a Union Spy in the capital of the confederacy?  I think it does, not because Silas Omohundro’s slave-trading is somehow balanced by Elizabeth Van Lew’s abolitionism, but because both are emblematic of the many ways that ideologies of race saturated the early American past. It reminds us that as historians the most important, urgent work we do is to conjure the past contexts that have shaped our own. There are not single or linear paths from the past to our present or future, but there are critical dynamics that have shaped who and what we are as individuals, communities—and institutions.

The Omohundro Institute has a long tradition of supporting and publishing scholarship exploring important and varied histories of race and slavery in early America. In the October 2012 William and Mary Quarterly Annette Gordon-Reed reviewed the OI’s 2nd edition of Winthrop Jordan’s White over Black:  American Attitudes Towards the Negro, 1550-1812. Gordon-Reed first read White over Black a few years after it was first published by the OI in 1968 during a Texas summer when she was only twelve years old. “White over Black was the first serious history book I had ever read,” she wrote, “and it suggested to me a model of how one might go about writing history.”

Not every work of scholarship can claim to have inspired such a precocious reader, and one who would write Pulitzer-winning scholarship herself on race, slavery and the American national founding, but Jordan’s and other OI books and the extensive scholarship published in the WMQ have informed and inspired scholars and scholarship for seven decades. Supporting scholars and scholarship is what the OI does and does best—it is our core mission. Supporting scholars and scholarship on the rich diversity of Vast Early America has been an increasingly important priority. The challenge and the opportunity of reflecting on the Omohundro legacy, however, requires us to ask what more we can do, and what we can do differently.

The Omohundro Institute is an institution with a history; it is also a community with enormous potential. In the next months I will be sharing with you some of what this community is doing in reflection and with respect for that history. This will include a different form of fellowship support, and a local project on race and slavery. It will include ongoing conversations here and elsewhere on our website, at our conferences, and in our publications about the many forms of diversity and the many histories of which our scholarship is, and as scholars we are, a part.

The OI’s 75th anniversary in 2018 is always in my sights. M. H. made a substantial contribution to the Omohundro Institute for its 50th anniversary, the language of which is quite simple:  he wanted this gift to serve “the most pressing needs” of the organization. It is a pressing need, as we aim toward 2018, to be good historians not only of the early American past, but of our own organization. I have no doubt that we will look back to this moment and find that we did some things of enduring value, and others that we wish we had done better. The mistake I am determined we will not make is to leave these issues unexamined.

9 Responses

  1. Terry Meyers says:

    I’ve done some work for the Lemon Project at W&M as the College examines its own (sometimes surprisingly complicated) involvement with slavery and segregation, and had looked into any connection of Mr. Omohundro and a fortune based on slavery. I thought the connections were remote enough that I didn’t pursue things, but am pleased to see this scrupulous examination of important issues.
    The history of the William and Mary Quarterly in its origin and early decades would surely be interesting to explore too–I briefly mention that history in an essay I published in the W&M Bill of Rights Journal, “Thinking about Slavery at the College of William and Mary.”

  2. Christopher Faulkner says:

    I am a member of the Omohundro family, though my name is removed several times. I possess one of the original Omohundro Genealogical Record books and received a letter many years ago about someone working on an updated Genealogy. Are you aware of any new such version either published or currently being compiled?

    Thank you very much!

  3. Nancy Preas Rhoads says:

    I too would love to know if an updated book is in the works, Richard Omohundro from Westmoreland, Va is my ancestor too. We are the Fluvanna Line, Richard I, II, III and then William Omohundro. My father was mentioned in Malvern’s book but his grandparents were not correctly named.

  4. Nancy Preas Rhoads says:

    P.S. I would love to know more about my Martha Creasy who married William Omohundro. Malvern mentions their family bible, where might we find that?

  5. Owen Weaver says:

    I am a member of the Omohundro line and I would love to have a copy of the Omohundro Genealogical Record. I need to learn more! My family resides in Roanoke , Va and has for several generations. My father, grandfather and great-grandfather all carried the Omohundro name. I recently discovered one of my best lifelong friends here in town is an Omohundro too. We would love to have the updated book for research. Please keep us informed of the OI anniversary! We might make a field trip! Thank you so much for you attention!! Sincerely, Owen Weaver

  6. Louise Wood says:

    Speaking of early American history, am I correct that chattel slavery evolved about 1660 at the time VA was an English colony, under English rule? Am I also correct that at its founding, chattel slavery did not yet exist in VA, and the earliest settlers of VA (including people like Richard Omohundro) likely did not cross the Atlantic with the intention of owning slaves? Am I also correct that the primary focus of the American Revolution was, and had to be, becoming free from English tyranny, and that, while it might have been nice, including the abolition of slavery in that struggle was unfortunately not possible? Am I also correct that chattel slavery officially existed in the former North American English colonies from about 1660 until 1786 (when the US Constitution was finally ratified by all the original colonies), a period of about 126 years? Am I also correct that chattel slavery existed in the newly formed United States from 1786 until the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863, a period of about 77 years? Based on the length of time under English rule vs American rule, it seems like chattel slavery was more of an English problem than an American problem. Just wondering, since it never seems this is mentioned.

  7. Nancy Pelletier says:

    I am also a descendant of Richard Omohundro. My grandmother (who chose to NOT purchase a book) and my mother and uncles are mentioned in that book (although some names are misspelled). Please keep me in mind if they ever, EVER decide to reprint or update and print the book with Omohundro genealogy.

    I would like to know whether ANYONE ever determined the origin of the Omohundro family? I know the author of the book never made that determination at the time of printing. He speculated on various possible origins. I am hopeful of finding out “the rest of the story” someday for our family’s records.

    So glad to have found this site today. Thank you.

Leave a Reply