Population Volatility in Pequea Township, 1720-1726

Watchers
Article Covers
Places
Pequea Township, 1721-1726

Contents

Welcome to the Old Chester Tapestry
……………………..The Tapestry
Families Old Chester OldAugusta Germanna
New River SWVP Cumberland Carolina Cradle
The Smokies Old Kentucky

Old Chester
Tapestry
Data
Maps
Library
History
Culture
Index

Documentation

See:

Eschleman's Original paper
Eschleman's Lists for Early Lancaster County for discussion.
Index to Eschleman's Tax Assessment Lists for Lancaster County
Eschleman's Tax Assessments for Pequea Township, Lancaster County, 1720-1726
Population Volatility in Pequea Township, 1721-1726
Population Volatility in Conestoga Township, pre-1718-1826



Introduction

The following discussion is based on Eschleman's Tax Assessments for Pequea Township, Lancaster County, 1720-1726. The lists for Pequea Township include data for 87 personsrecognized as "distinct" individuals. Some persons are listed in different years under somewhat different spellings of their name. As an example, John Barger who is present in most years, is presumed to be the same individual whose name is given as "John Parger" in the 1724 tax assessment.

Discussion

Background

The tax assessments for Pequea Creek Township represent the persons who owed taxes in the area shortly after the formation of the township. Generally speaking, the persons oweing taxes were the individuals living on the land, not necessarily land owners. In some tax records for the period "Non-Residents" are specifically identified. Since it was the occupiers of the land that were taxed, and not the owners per se, [Source needed!] non-resident listings probably indicate that the land was unoccupied, or occupied by paid laborers. Renters, if present, would have been responsible for the taxes themselves. "Freemen" are also commonly identified in the tax assessments, and represent non-land owning male adults (over the age of 16. [Check age limit]. In the case of the Pequea Creek assessment, neither non-residents, nor freeman are shown. This probably means that everyone shown either owned land, or was renting land from someone else. It may also be that some of them were simply "squatting", perhaps on otherwise unclaimed land.

Population size

The following table provides a summary of the number of persons assessed in Pequea Creek Township between 1720 and 1726.

Persons Present in lancaster Township Tax Assessment by years
Year pre
1718
1718171917201721 1722 1724 1725 1726
Conestoga77141173173208161247218289
Pequea262842 48 18 31
Donegal-92525563
Total77141173173236265345292383

Note that the overall population, as reflected in the numbers of persons listed in the tax assessment) increases more or less steadily. This reflects the growth in what at the time was a frontier settlement. However, while the overall trend is upward, there is some variation, and occassional dips.

  • Conestoga, 1721-1722
  • Donegal, 1722-1724
  • Pequea, 1724-1725

These dips are partially explained by changes in who was included in various townships at different times. A close examination of the persons listed in each township shows that some persons are shown alternating between townships. Multiple moves back and forth between townships seems unlikely, and this probably appears in the records because either the tax collectors were unsure of the boundaries of the newly form townships, or perhaps those boundaries were not firmly established. The large decrease in listed persons in Pequea tax assessments from 1724 to 1725 (73%) may reflect a loss of data, rather than an actual difference in population.





Volatility


Significance