ORIGIN OF EARLY HOUGH FAMILIES FROM ENGLAND TO PA
By
Granville
W. Hough
In 1961, I was able to make two short visits to the British
Museum in London, which is the home of much of the archival material for the
British Isles. I was able to determine
several things in the short time I had.
The name HOUGH is found in several parts of the British Isles, and it is
pronounced differently in different areas.
It may be "how" or "hoe" or "hoff" in
Ireland, Northern England and Scotland, and Eastern England. It is specifically "huff" in
Cheshire and in the shires close by.
The origin of that group seems to have been a group of Flemish religious
refugees, who were settled about 1200 on the border with the Welsh to absorb
the shock of any uprising among those rebellious Welsh tribes. The list of descendants included the names
Hough and Ainsworth, the only two I now recall. I was able to determine that this branch of the family had done
well enough to have its own coat of arms.
The name had changed over the years to the form Hough, pronounced
"huff." There was no
indication that this family was related to, or even shared an origin with, the
families which became Hough in other parts of the British Isles. Of course, in the 300 to 400 years after
they were first settled in the Cheshire area, the family members from Cheshire
could have spread out. I'm inclined to
think they did not, and that the other families have different origins. I'd look for the origin of the phonetic
"huff" group in Flanders, not England.
Now, after thirty years of research in the U. S., I have never
met a HOUGH of English ancestry who traces back to the Cheshire area who was
not a phonetic "huff."
Conversely, anyone who knows that his HOUGH name has been
"huff" for several generations is probably a descendant of the
Cheshire group. Anyone of English
ancestry whose HOUGH name is "how" is likely of Irish or Yorkshire
origin. Anyone of English ancestry who
is HOUGH but pronounces it to rhyme with cough is likely of Eastern English
origin, possibly from the Dane invasion before the time of Alfred the
Great. There are Scottish families,
too, who more often than not spell their name as Haugh, and it rhymes with
cough.
There are Norwegian HOUGH families, and they go along with the
"cough" rhyme. The German and
Austrian families seem to be somewhat like the big German HOFF family. The "hoe" families mostly came
early from the Netherlands to New York and New Jersey, as were Houghtaling,
etc, before shortening to Hough, pronounced "hoe." There are some large family of German origin
which settled in MD and PA and spread out from there. They spell the name Hough and pronounce it "hoak,"
though some have opted for "hoaf" or "hoe" in later
generations. These families seem to
have been Hauck and Hofe in their earliest German records, giving rise to the
variations of "hoak" and "hoaf." There may have been an English group which used the
"hoe" approach, as the name HOUGHTON is pronounced like Hoe-ton. At some time this English name applied to
those who lived in a place called Hough.
So, I conclude that the only family that I can connect with in
England is the Cheshire group which has been phonetically "huff" for
several hundred years. What it was
before, and what is was in Flanders seems beyond recall. I can establish no relationship of this
group in Cheshire to families from Ireland, Scotland, Yorkshire, Eastern
England, or to other European countries.
It certainly does not seem to have been in England until several
generations after William the Conqueror came from Normandy. If there is a name in the Doomsday Book, I
do not know what it would be; and I specifically do not know how one would
recognize it was an ancestral form of HOUGH.
When William Penn began his effort to settle Quaker families to
PA, he was able to convince numerous families in the Cheshire area of the
opportunities. There were HOUGH
families among these Quakers, and there were other HOUGH individuals who seemed
sympathetic to the Quaker approaches, though they were not particularly active
in the meetings. Seven or eight of
these individuals came to PA between 1681 and 1683. They were John and Hannah, and their infant son John; Richard;
John; Samuel; Thomas; Francis; and Michael.
O. L. HOUGH studied the available records for these persons and
published the results in 1975 as Hough in Bucks County, Pennsylvania,
1683-1850. Based on the same kind
of reasoning I used above, he concluded they were all related but that none
seemed to be brothers. The PA records
simply do not indicate any such relationships.
Specifically, though, John was not brother to Richard. Richard is known to have had a brother,
John, who stayed in Maclesfield, near Chester.
Michael did not sign his name as Hough, but as Huff, which would indicate
he was somewhat removed from the others.
He died in 1687. One other person,
Stephen HUGH, probably died soon after arrival, as his widow remarried in the
12th month, 1684/85, to Thomas Norbury.
It is questionable that he was a HOUGH at all. The same can be said for Walter HOUGH, who was an overseer of
Highways in 1680 in what was later Bensalem Twp of Bucks Co. As he came earlier than the Cheshire
families, he may have had a different origin.
There was also a William HOUGH who on the 26th day, 4th mo, 1684,
received warrant for survey of a Philadelphia lot between Front St., Swamp, 2d
St, and Enoch. No other records have
been found for him and he did not seem to be a Quaker. Some people have mentioned a Daniel HOUGH as
an early arrival, but the source of their information is not known. In view of the traditions of some HUFF/HOUGH
descendants of the PA/NJ families, it would be very useful to find some records
of an early Quaker Daniel HOUGH of PA and NJ.
If copies of Hough in Bucks Co, Pennsylvania... are still
available, they can be obtained from Mary Rachak, 4439 S. Lowell Blvd, Denver,
CO 80236. If not now available,
microfilm copies can probably be obtained from the LDS Family History
Center. I'm sure Lou donated a copy to
that library.
I was able to correspond with Capt. Earl P. Huff (Hough
and/or Huff Families in England and America) before his death, and he
wanted to establish that his ancestor, Michael HUFF of MD and PA, was descended
from the PA Quaker group. He had no
direct line to this group, and there had been a John HOUGH transported to MD at
about the same time the Quakers were settling in PA. The only real connection he had was that there had been a Michael
Huff among the Quakers, and 100 years later, there was a Michael Huff who was
his ancestor.
I can say that Capt Huff was in no way satisfied with his
lineage of the family in England, and he wanted me to work on it. I was in Thule, Greenland, when we were
corresponding, and he died before I got back to research. The lineage which he outlined was the best
he could do with the available information.
I could see that much more primary data was required before it could be
quoted as a proper lineage. That is
what I hold today. There is no
authentic, proven lineage for any Hough of English origin more than one or two
generations before the person who came to America. Further, I have done no English research, and I do not plan to do
any. But I can recognize proof of a
lineage when I see the documentation for it.
In recent years, more information may have become available from English
parish registers and other sources. For
those who are interested, Capt. Huff placed his book in the Library of
Congress, and he specifically did not copyright it so that others could get
copies made without reservation. The
Librarian of the Library of Congress will copy the book, or any part of it, for
the normal fee for such work, which I believe is 25 cents per page.
I would say the information in Virkus, or in Colonial
Families of the United States, is as accurate as the donor wanted it to
be. The compilers could check the entry
for logic, but generally did not require detailed proof. So I would use those sources with caution.
There is some evidence that families from the early Quaker
arrivals later went to NC.
Specifically, Daniel and Joseph, sons of John and Hannah, were together
in NC by about 1736. Later Joseph
settled in Anson Co, NC, near Samuel HOUGH, who had settled in Anson Co, by
1748. It is thus possible that some of
the early settlers in PA who disappeared from the records there went to
NC. Of course, there were 33 monthly
meetings of Quakers in NC, mostly from PA; but these HOUGH families did not
seem to be members in NC. Later, there
were several families in Stokes and Surry counties who were active
Quakers. Their descendants believe they
were grandchildren of John and Hannah.
2 Feb 1993.