1765 Tory/Patriot Carol Dean

Carol is a member of a major geneological organization which records and documents families who can be traced as direct descendants to America’s Revolutionary War. She will be entering this ensemble into a contest with the organization that will judge her on the basis of her depth of knowledge, research verification, design, & production.

Mary Pegram was a real person. While much of her stories and details have been documented, there are still gaps to interpret. This is the challenge of the project; to fill in the spaces of information to interpret what a real woman in history would have thought, how she would have acted, and what she would have worn.

The bulk of the effort will be on understanding Mary’s personality, preferences, access to goods, and position in the world at a time where her loyalties would have been divided. The rest of the effort will be in maintaining absolute authenticity which means reproduction fabrics, bones, and methods of construction which means each and every stitch must be made by hand.. and preferably by candle or day light.

Mary Scott (Baker) Pegram, 1765-1778

This project will be Revolutionary War interpretation at competitions, public “stand up” presentations (“Revolutionary Striptease”), & for in-school educational programs teaching about clothing & culture of the era. The character being depicted was a real person and ancestor of the performer:

b. Nov 12, 1723; d. June 30, 1779 at age 56

Self portrait by woman of 1765 much like Mary


Little is known about Mary or her husband, because records prior to 1791 were destroyed in a fire that burned the Dinwiddie Courthouse in Dinwiddie County, Virginia where her story takes place. Later, Sheridan’s army in the Civil War burned it again, along with all the records of adjacent counties.

Mary was born in England, of Colonel Daniel Baker and (name unknown) the daughter or Sir Foliad Griffith. Both parents were of English nobility, and you can presume “Colonel” was a purchased rank as was typical of the time.

1851, 2nd build of the Dinwiddie Courthouse with all of Mary’s records. Burned again during he War Between the States

In about 1740, Colonel Baker was assigned by Prince George (King George would go into exile in 1811 due to “insanity”, this was actually the “Georgian Period” and a crossover between the two Kings) to be on the Governor’s Council of Dinwiddie County in Virginia in the new Colonies. Appointed by The Crown, he came on a ship with his family, and settled in Petersburg, VA. Mary would have been 17 years old.

Edward Pegram was born in 1722 (died in 1816 at age 72) in York County, VA, although oral histories have him arriving alongside the Governor and the Bakers into Williamsburg, VA, having been born in England also. He was a “commoner”, and the record has been corrected.

Williamsburg, VA where Mary & Edward met, then to live in Petersburg until their farm, Bonneville was built

Edward had just finished an apprenticeship as a brickmason in the Petersburg, VA area in 1737, when the Governor selected him on behalf of The Crown to be the Governor’s Surveyor. The job included civil engineering, surveying, and masonry, but at that time was also a type of “tax collector” for the king.. since a surveyor would travel and know the land and property boundaries. A surveyor also had access to inside, or otherwise private information regarding land and property ownership, so he was key in issues involving land and property on behalf of The Crown.

In 1740, as surveyor, Edward worked closely with Colonel Baker, as they both sat on the King’s Council. There he met Mary Baker; one would guess at government function such as a dance or tea (women would not have been allowed in meetings). Oral histories tell the following story about their marriage. This is written in the 1789 “William & Mary Quarterly” publication as well as passed down in handwriting by family members:

“Edward fell in love with the daughter, Mary, and she with he, and asked for her hand before the father and brother. Said parties refused his suit entirely and vehemently, because Pegram was ‘socially beneath them’.”

This 1743 couple is much like Mary & Edward would have been at the time of their marriage

“But Pegram was physically and mentally strong with undaunted courage and was not disposed to yield to their whims. He took Mary to a private place where he asked her again , who agreed to marry in spite of her family” (she was 18 and he was 19) “… he advised the family he would come and take her from the house. On the day appointed, he appeared and took her from the house, mounted her on the horse behind him, and carried her to a parson and they were married.”

From his position as surveyor, Edward knew where the best land was, and arranged with an English civil engineer named Slaughter in Dinwiddie County, Virginia (just south of Petersburg) to find 10 miles square of farmland which he made into a plantation. History records on this land “he settled and prospered and soon became a wealthy and influential member of the county”.

Colonel William Baker of the 12th Virginia infantry (shown here as a Major), might be a relative, but is most likely of the Bakers that were not related to Mary

There is no record of military service for Edward himself, although his son entered service in the Revolutionary War, and became a Captain in the Continental Army. One can only assume, with an English wife who had been abandoned by her family, and who was an intimate of The Crown, that loyalties were divided or neutral approaching and during the Revolutionary War.

At the time of the War, Edward and Mary were residing on their plantation, called “Bonneville”. The house was a late Georgian style with Flemish chimneys, with Regency furniture. The doors had 6 panels forming a cross, which verbal history says was because of the superstition that it kept witches away.

Tax records indicate Edward was still living at Bonneville in 1796, and had 40 slaves (and many cows according to his eventual distribution at his death). Interesting by note, all his property was taken by the government at his death, and his grandson bought it back. The family maintains that farm to this day.

Bonneville was much like this Dinwiddie County plantation called Battersea, although Bonneville was of stone construction

The farmland wore out due to lack of crop rotation, fertilizer, and erosion control, and so many descendants moved to Tennessee and North Carolina to farm and to present date have plantations in those areas.

The family of 1744 America dressed up for portraits

In March 1865, 2 battles near the end of the Civil War were fought on the Pegram Bonneville property. Locally known as “The Pegram Battle”, it was part of Sherman’s march which also destroyed the nearby town; “Battle of Chamberlayne’s Bed” aka “battle of Dinwiddie Courthouse”. Confederates were flanking a Major Sheridan attack against the Union calvary corps, and trapped Union soldiers upstairs in the house where they killed them. Generations later were pulling musket balls out of the walls of the Bonneville house.

The average family of 1765 had 8 children

Edward and Mary had a son in 1742, less than a year after their marriage. It is assumed they were still living in or near Williamsburg at that time. It was after Edward retired from service to The Crown (date unknown), that they moved to Bonneville.

Mary and Edward Pegram had 11 children:

  • William: b. 1742, d. 1787
  • Mary: b. 1744 died in infancy
  • Edward: b. 1746 some have his birthdate as 1772 d. 1816. Was a juror in 1807 in the trial of Aaron Burr, who killed President Alexander Hamilton in a duel
  • John: b. 1748 d. 1814 Became Major General John Pegram.. confusing in history in the Continental Army (indicating their Patriot leaning, but having maintained his surveyor commission, would assume Edward Sr. walked a fine line, while his children embraced the Patriot cause).
  • Elizabeth: b. 1750 married, but no death record
  • Sallie: b. 1753 married, but no death record
  • George: b. 1755 married, but no death record
  • Baker: b. 1758 d. 1830 was a Major in the Revolutionary War
  • Daniel: b? died in infancy
  • Ann: b. 1762 married, but no death record
  • Danel: b. 1767 d. 1815

In 1777, the time of depiction, the young son Baker (her family namesake, so supposedly a special son to the mother) married Mary Manson, and they had a son in 1778. This child was named Edward after his grandfather, which has caused much confusion in oral histories of the family.

In 1778, Mary’s youngest child would have been 11 years, and her eldest 35.. quite a spread, and with many grandchildren, the house was probably full.

Colonial families, and most especially farming families kept the extended family and many children nearby to help run the farm


Mary would have had a firm English accent (Bristol region) mixed with a southern twang of Virginia, but one would guess she would have tried to hide her accent somewhat to embrace her new country, since she had given it all up to marry. It would seem despite her being banned from her own family, that having 11 children, the relationship was quite good between Mary and Edward their entire lives.

One bit of history mars the pretty picture of a perfect wife and family. Very little is “primary source” documented about any of the family beyond birth, death, and property ownership records, because of the records being burned in the Civil War. The few court documents which exist describe a man of the era who might not have been our romantic ideal.

In 1742, at the beginning of their marriage, a group of records show Edward “serving papers” on landowners and collecting “50 shillings”; presumeably as part of his job for The Crown.

As this 1780’s portrait shows, parents wealthy enough to have servants or slaves did not deal with all of the daily discipline and process of raising children

In 1748, he was called to suit in the death of a runaway slave that was owned by John Jones (a neighbor who shows up in later discussions about political meetings as a friend). Edward beat the neighbor’s slave to death when he caught the slave on his property, and was ordered to pay Jones 40 pounds (English currency) and to “give prayers for relief” (apology).

This speaks of the era, the culture, and Edwards and Mary’s place in society as plantation owners who believed slaves were property. Her background in nobility would have her comfortable in this, as she came from a strict social hierarchy. One would guess they were “social snobs”, and worked to keep their status clear of lower classes.

While Mary would have probably tried to be neutral since she came from England, her marriage to an American born colonist most likely had her loyalties to the Patriotic cause, but that didn’t matter since women had no voice in politics at the time anyway and were considered to be of whatever mindset her husband was
Events of the day such as the Boston Massacre shown here, would have impacted their lives in everything from the ability to trade goods to how they were expected to behave socially

One could also surmise they had “issues” with The Crown, and her family. Mary’s mother disinherited Mary and her family completely, but Mary’s father, Daniel Baker, and her brother reappear in 1780 after the death of Mary in a story about the emissary of John Wesley, the founder of the Methodist Church in England. The relationship with members of the churches picks up the story of the family.


From what we know about English/Scottish migration to the colonial US, many were escaping prosecution because they were protestants. The year 1740, when Mary came from England, was just before the 2nd Protestant Uprising in Scotland and England, when conflict and trouble was just gaining a foothold with the English King (with George, and then with Charles).

Part of this migration due to persecution in Europe were the Methodists. Unfortunately, when they came to an English held colony that was not yet the United States (pre-revolutionary), they were still persecuted. Methodists were considered Anglicans which the King hated. The governor and other officers of The Crown, including Mary’s father Colonel Baker, were required to commiserate with the King, and exile Methodists and all considered Anglicans in the new colonies the same as in Europe.

John Wesley (founder of the Methodist church) sent Francis Asbury as am emissary to evaluate and work to improve the situation for “our brethren in America”. Edward & Mary’s father and brother, against the wishes of the English king, it would appear united in the cause to help the Methodists.

Cumberland Church in Kentucky, founded by Pegram heirs, divided the Presbyterian into 2 sects; one which was strictly consevative, and the other which embraced the newer ideals of freedom in America
Sappony Church in Dinwiddie county remains today as a testimony of the support for the Anglicans who came to America to escape religious persecution, only to find it in America too

Private records show Edward & Colonel Baker held a private meeting in Edward’s Bonneville house in 1780 for elite society, and hosted another public meeting with 400 attendees in Bushnells’ Chapel in Petersburg, VA. As this would be nearing the end of the Revolutionary War which officially ended in 1783, one could assume at least the father’s side of Mary’s formerly English family had completely embraced the new United States of America, and supported the Patriots against the Crown.

Interesting side note: To this day, most Pegrams are Methodists, although many, especially those who moved to Kentucky and Tennessee.. and later further west into Illinois and Missouri, became extremely conservative Presbyterians or Episcopalians. There is an extended side of the family 3 and 4 generations past Edward and Mary, where the Pegram/Baker progeny join (author’s) Harris/McClure English/Scottish relatives (who also arrived in about 1740 to the Colonies) in leading the split between the Presbyterian Church in the Bowling Green, KY region. These combined families continued the very strict, Anglican practice, while most of the new Americans were become less structured and disciplined in their religion.


At the death of Mary’s father Daniel, her mother married a wealthy man from New York City named Patrick Oglesby. The daughter of this second marriage, Mary’s half sister, married and returned to live next door to Edward and Mary’s Bonneville property. From this point, the two families, the Baker/Oglesbys and the Pegrams, returned to intermarry and continue a (confusing for geneologists) line which crossed back and forth in land ownership in Dinwiddie County, Virginia.

At present most documents regarding this family are tied to the Dinwiddie County Pegram descendants, and are tied to the West Virginia or Virginia Regiments of the Revolutionary War where the children and eventual cousins of Mary and Edward’s cousins would have fought together.

The significance of the “Scott” part of Mary’s name, and as she named several of her children is not known. It was rare that a mother could get a surname such as that used legally, so she must have had some “clout” somewhere. There was a predominant family of the James Scott heritage living in Dinwiddie County, but they were not related.

Mary died in 1779, some records say 1780 at age 53, so it was not in childbirth. There is no record as to the cause of her birth.

Typical family “at tea” in 1776

Click to go to Carol’s Historical Research Time & Place Page (next)

Click to go to Carol’s Historical Research on Character & Fashion Page

Click to go to Carol’s Design Development Page

Continue below to see the FINAL PRODUCT


Silk Tea Ensemble 1765-1775


Final fabric selections (left to right) silk ribbons for trim, striped taffeta silk, vanilla silk for petticoat 1 and cloak lining, green silk for quilted petticoat 2, linen/cotton for embroidered underpetticoat, kerseymere for cloak, hand crocheted fichu in background
Fabrics as per first image plus silk handpainted fan, feathers, and decorations for “bird’s nest” hat
Close-up of hat and bodice decorations

Completed Garments


Chemise, muslin, hand sewn, with gussets, gores, and string tie

Entirely hand made, it includes hand whipstitched inside eyelets for adjustment and underarm gussets.

Chemise modified

Inner Petticoat

Inner Petticoat Modified


Stays Modified


Paniers Modified


Outer Petticoat

Robe de l’anglaise en forreau a la polonnaise

Worn with the fichu and flower in this manner is indicative of the 1740’s fashion era. It is typical an older woman would hold on to her previous style
This is entirely hand sewn, taking 90 hours for the outer robe, 30 for the petticoat, and another 20 for the stomacher. With undergarments and structures, the entire ensemble took over 100 hours of specific research and 300 hours of construction
Details include hand kilting with scalloped and rough cut (using a roller blade) edges
The bodice has a unique linen facing which leaves the linen exposed for pinning so the silk will not be torn. Everything is pinned ultimately into the stays using these reproduction pins that are more like small finishing nails
Fabric covered metal buttons are used as decoration on the stomacher, but for real function on the bodice. There is a small button on the inside which holds the silk ribbon which is used to tie the skirt of the robe up into the polonnaise shape
The bodice is carefully pleated by hand and is cut with the center back continuous from neck to hem. The remaining skirt is pleated off the center. This is why the stripes match in the center, but are offset the rest of the way around. The bottom pleated skirt is actually angled on the bodice so that it will hang straight with the stripes completely vertical all around the hem regardless of paniers, drapes, or angled bodice
A straight paralell skirt to the floor is desired for this year, and is accomplished through draping on the body with all understructures in place
Sleeve construction is very interesting as the location, number, and depth of pleats is fit to the specific body. We had to add an extra shoulder facing to pull the shoulder closer to the body
The robins help bring the bodice to a tight fit, and everything is pinned into the stomacher – as in the stays stomacher AND the robe’s decorative stomacher
Double scalloped ruffles and hand kilting with handmade covered buttons ornament the sleeves and have no function at all
A removeable linen crocheted cuff is basted inside the main sleeve. These feature the bird motifs on bonnet and fichu

Fichu & Flower

The fichu is white bleached linen with hand cotton crochet in a bird and bow pattern. The (reproduction) silk hydrangea is also on the bonnet

Fichus of the later 1765 era were crossed and tucked inside the inner petticoat or stays, while the earlier versions for the 1730’s and ’40s were worn outside the robe as Carol does (for modesty and older women)


Worn between the cleavage, instead of eyewear, women wore little mono glasses, magnifiers, and in Carol’s case, a miniature and working AUTHENTIC telescope! All is hung around the neck on a silk ribbon

Head and Toe


Bonnets got crazy. Carol’s features a full nest for two life sized birds and their 3 unhatched eggs, tucked under an hydrangea leaf and set among silk flowers and feathers. Silk ribbons adorn front and back, while the entire buckram base is lined and padded with silk for comfort. She wears this “akilter”.
Components include a shaped buckram base – all sewn on by hand
Carol wears silk clocked over the knee stockings with reproduction ACCURATE 1760’s pumps with brass buckles
Carol wears a “Duchess” wig which reproduces the period hairstyle, but this is only a small height compared to those of the era (which were wigs too)


Click to go to Carol’s History of Fashion of the time Page

Click to go to Carol’s Design Development Page

Click to go to top of this page

Click to go to The Buff