* These three brothers were responsible in great part for the establishment of Dudleytown in Cornwall, Connecticut.

Abiel Dudley (1710-1799) was the second son of Joseph Dudley who moved from Guilford to Cornwall, purchasing a parcel of land from Nehemiah Messenger in 1744 (not from Thomas Griffis, as is widely reported (Tax List, 1748, Cornwall, Litchfield County, CT)).  Abiel fell on hard times following the decline in industry around Cornwall and his property was seized and sold by township officials.  He was "warned out" of town and later became the charge of various selectmen who bid the lowest amount for a year of Abiel's care.  He died in November of 1799 at the age of 89.

Gideon Dudley (1706- ?) was the first son of Joseph Dudley who moved from Saybrook to Cornwall, purchasing a parcel of land (from whom is not mentioned) and appearing on landowner records in 1748.  He fathered three children, Gideon, Jr., Joseph and Elizabeth.  In 1765, Elizabeth died in Cornwall at the age of 13 and in 1766, both sons died also, Gideon, Jr. at 17 and Joseph at 11.

Barzillai Dudley (1725 - ?) was the eighth and final son of Joseph Dudley who moved from Guilford to Cornwall, purchasing a parcel of land from his brother Abiel in 1744.  In 1748, he purchased more land in Cornwall (again, from whom is not mentioned) and in 1750, he married Sarah Carter.  He fathered two daughters, Sibe in 1750, and Sarah in 1752.  Five years later, Barzillai joined Captain Lyman's Company in the French and Indian War for 14 days.  Upon his return, shortly thereafter, he departed Cornwall, no longer appearing on Cornwall Tax Records after 1758.

The Truth About The "Curse"

If you are a believer in the "Curse of Dudleytown" then you must be quite familiar with the above individuals.  According to most of the paranormal websites and sources, the so-called "curse" was initiated in 1510 at the execution of Edmund Dudley.  While some websites and sources never really properly explain who or what actually cursed the Dudley family, most will vaguely imply that a "curse" was placed upon Edmund's head.  From source to source, the story varies as to the implications of the curse, as well.  Some state that "horrors" would be visited upon Edmund's descendents.  Others state that "death" would surround them.  Still others (like the ever-trusted news source, The National Enquirer) state that "Satanists in the royal court placed the curse on the Dudley family."  NOTE:  Why Satanists were even in the court of the royal family or why they had a vested interest in protecting the King against an evil-doer like Edmund Dudley is still a mystery and one wonders at the sources of the article writer (unnamed) who dug up this mysterious information that seems unable to be located anywhere else in the world outside of an obscure publication ("They Found A Way:  Connecticut's Restless People") from 1938.  One would assume that Satanists (by the very nature of what virtues they followed, namely Satanism) would get down on their knees and hail someone like Edmund Dudley for his dastardly deeds, not curse him.  Regardless, in the many dozens of hours of research done by Creepy Connecticut staffers, Edmund Dudley is a virtual non-entity in historical notes, having written the "Tree of Commonwealth Treatise" while imprisoned in London Tower (a work that was actually a plea for mercy to the current king, Henry VIII, son of Dudley's former lord).  It is difficult enough finding information about his everyday life, let alone information on an elusive "curse" that is apparently not important enough to mention in any historical volume anywhere in the world.  But, throwing caution to the wind, we trudged on, assuming that the vast majority of historical research was somehow wrong and continued on with the assumption that Edmund Dudley was, indeed, cursed by "someone or something".

We move on to the next Dudley in line for the "horrors" of the "curse", John Dudley.  While it is very true that John was not a nice person, it appears that the "curse-followers" failed to pick up on his more dispicable acts during his later life.  Most paranormal sources point to his attempt to steal the crown by marrying off his son, Guildford, to the Lady Jane Grey.  If attempting to seize power during a royal power vacuum is curse-worthy, then we will boldly state, for the record, that nearly every person in history who has been in power somewhere in the world must also have been cursed, because nearly every person in history who has been in power has attempted to seize control of a crown, regency or presidency in one way or another.  John Dudley may have been licking his lips in anticipation of seizing the crown, but this act is hardly curse-worthy.  In our estimation, the curse-worthy attrocities were his crimes against the brothers, Lords Seymour and Somerset.  Yet, these crimes are not even remotely referred to in any paranormal research.  Additionally, John's son, Guildford, is consistently and universally referred to as "Guilford" in all the paranormal write-ups, which makes us suspicious of two things:

1.  If all the paranormal sources are using the name "Guilford" in its misspelled form, then it is fair to assume that they are all merely copying from other paranormal sources, rather than applying themselves to research on their own, and;

2.  This misspelled form of the proper name, Guildford, may explain why the "curse-followers" have pointed to a false descendency between William Dudley of Guilford, Connecticut, and Governor Thomas Dudley of Massachusetts (who claimed to have been of the Sutton-Dudleys of England, in direct descendency to Edmund).  But we're getting ahead of ourselves.

Once the axe falls upon the neck of John Dudley, it must follow that all five of his sons are cursed as well.  NOTE:  Interestingly, not one paranormal source worries about the curse implications upon John's daughters.  Yes, it's true!  John also had three daughters (Jane, Mary and Catherine) a fact somehow missed in their research.  Apparently, only the male descendents were cursed and not the females (somebody --- quick --- call the National Enquirer --- this could be another "curse" angle!)

Regardless, Guildford was beheaded, along with his father, John, and his bride, the Lady Jane Grey.  John's other four sons, Henry, Ambrose, John and Robert, are not mentioned as having been in that same prison with their brother, yet they were.  Henry was killed in the Spanish service in the Netherlands several years following his pardon and release from prison.  He was thirty-four years old (an age in those days that was considered old).  Paranormal researchers were also a bit lazy in their research as they didn't even seem to be able to unearth either Henry's, Ambrose's or John's names!  Will Georgantas of fortunecity.com http://members.fortunecity.com/meddybemps/buzz.html must have noticed this and, instead of digging a bit deeper to find his name, chose to write this little blurb:

     "The remaining Dudleys laid low for a few generations, not getting into too much trouble other than bringing an unidentifiable strain of the plague to England from France (Lord Guilford's brother's little uh-oh) which killed thousands of troops and English peasants."

The many historical errors aside, paranormal sites and sources seem to band together in a pseudo-brotherhood of misinformation in which they all seem to unwittingly participate.  Most of the writers have the best intentions in mind:  to illuminate the subject with historical fact.  Unfortunately, they are all copying down false information and, some, are even adding their own little "facts" that are, in turn, copied down somewhere else.  This is a very dangerous business.

That brings us to Ambrose's death, which is mentioned in nearly every paranormal essay as having occurred through his contracting the plague when, in fact, his death happened decades later when his gangrened leg was amputated.  During those decades, he remained in high favor with the queen.  Hardly worthy of a curse!  Interestingly, Georgantas claims that an "unidentifiable strain" of the plague was brought back to England.  What doctor, one wonders, actually wrote in his memoirs that this "strain" was unidentifiable, especially considering the fact that doctors in those days weren't even aware of the concept of "strains" and "viruses".

John, Jr., appears to have married and had no children.  His death was not important enough to be recorded in the annals of the Dudley line.

And poor Robert . . . his only curse was that his true love, Elizabeth (who incidentally spurned him over and over) was responsible for the death of her own sister, after which he died of old age in 1588.  And just for the record, he later married and had children.  Also, hardly worthy of a curse!

Now, here is where things get vague and dicey.  Captain Roger Dudley, who appears to have NO DIRECT LINK to Edmund Dudley (where the "curse" originated) was father to Thomas who is said to have come to the colonies and was appointed Deputy Governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony under Governor Winthrop.  To be fair, however, according to the website, Descendants of Richard Waite and Lucy Marvin Griswold, http://www.robforrest.com/waite/ancestry-dudley/thomas-dudley.html that non-link has not been definitely proven.

     "There has been much debate among historians and some genealogists concerning descent of the Massachusetts Dudleys from the famous Barons Dudley of England.  Suffice it to say that Rev. Samuel Dudley, oldest son of Thomas, claimed such descent during his lifetime and apparently was not challenged."

Thomas Dudley often used the arms of the Barons Dudley to seal legal documents bearing his signature.  It was a serious offense under English law to use arms under false pretenses.  Yet, we are still stymied by the simple fact that no genealogical study has proven the link.  Claims are one thing, proof is another.  Also, we must take into account the fact that the colonies were a long way away from the mother country.  That being said, and also the fact that Governor Dudley was a powerful man, it is not surprising that someone would illegally use the royal arms, even without a direct link.  Who was going to arrest the governor?

Regardless, there is another note of importance on this website:

     "HIS [Thomas Dudley's] RELATIONSHIP TO DUDLEYTOWN:  Ed and Lorraine Warren say that Gov Dudley was an Uncle to the Dudleytown brothers (see "Ghost Hunters" [the Warren's book]) and that he was "hacked to death in the vicinity of Dudleytown, and the murderer was never caught."  As we can see, the Warrens never did any research into their claims.  Gov Dudley died 84 years BEFORE the first Dudleytown brother set foot there, and that he died of natural causes in Roxbury."

The significance of the above statement is that the Warrens (Connecticut's most famous demonologists/ghost hunters) had visited Dudleytown decades ago and felt a "demonic" presence there.  In order to validate their "feelings" and to prove the "curse" theory (as well as expound upon the Sterry/Garrigus claims in their 1938 publication) the Warrens had to first prove that the Dudleys of Dudleytown fame were direct descendents to Edmund.  While that proved difficult (fully well aware that the Dudley brothers' father, Joseph, grandfather, William, Jr., and great-grandfather, William were not linked in any way to the Barons Dudley) they opted to "create" or blindly accept the "creation" of an imaginary genetic link between the Governor Thomas Dudley and the brothers.  Even if this link were established by some astounding stretch of the imagination, it would still only prove one thing:  that the brothers Dudley (who helped found Dudleytown) were related to a man who may or may not have had a direct link to Edmund.  NOTE:  In over 3,440,000 website searches, NOT ONE yielded any proven genetic link between the former Governor, Thomas, and William Dudley of Guilford.  Furthermore, the ridiculous story that was concocted about Thomas Dudley being "hacked to death in the vicinity of Dudleytown" (particularly when death records in Boston state that he died of natural causes in Roxbury) was a major faux pas that the Warrens most likely believed would never be investigated, researched or challenged.  The chances that the Governor of Massachusetts even heard of this miniscule frontier settlement (let alone visited it) are astronomically preposterous.

NOTE:  It is now believed that the Warrens mistakenly took the Governor's place of death, Roxbury (an historical section of Boston, Massachusetts) and confused it with the town of Roxbury in Litchfield County, Connecticut.  Taking into account its close proximity to Cornwall (only two towns to the north) it's possible that the Warrens opted to make this the place of death of the Governor.  As for the "hacked to death" story, one can only guess as to the origins of that fairytale.  There are a few options that logical-thinking people can choose between:

A.  The Warrens read the account somewhere and chose not to research its validity, but presented the lie, nonetheless;

B.  The Warrens were told the story and chose not to research its validity; or,

C.  The Warrens completely fabricated the story, thinking that no one else would research its validity.

In any case, the Warrens are ultimately at fault for either concocting the story or for propagating the lie, two literary crimes against the paranormal society at large (the same society that holds them up in such high standings). 

This brings us to William Dudley.  Here's another line from Will Georgantas' story of the "curse":

     "Always extremely sensitive to knowing when they weren't wanted, some Dudleys then jumped ship which, oddly enough, actually made it to the colonies.  William Dudley settled in Guilford.  His great grandsons, Abiel and Barzillai Dudley, moved to remote Cornwall in 1748 and were soon followed by other members of the clan and their collective curse."

Interestingly, Mr. Georgantas makes the leap in logic that William is directly related to Edmund, but manages to steer clear of naming the actual person(s) by vaguely referring to them as "some Dudleys".  I can only assume that Mr. Georgantas was convinced that the Dudleys fled when they didn't feel wanted because of some strange personal insight or conviction that he possessed but which was not visible in historical documents, for nowhere in our research did we discover an event where the Dudleys actually fled when in trouble.  On the contrary, John Dudley actually went to his accuser, Mary, Queen of Scots, voluntarily before he was arrested.  His eldest son, Henry, geared up and went off to war, and Ambrose returned to England from the wars in France to live out the rest of his life there.  In fact, IN ALL INSTANCES, not one Dudley family member in the 1500-1600s fled his "troubles".  As for the "jumped ship" statement, I am curious to know which Dudley actually performed this feat, because there would have been absolutely no conceivable reason for any of the Dudleys to "jump ship" if the vessel was already headed for the shores of the New World.

As for John, Jr., he never left England, nor did he ever really run into any legal problems.

And, according to a hazy historical account at Curbstone, http://www.curbstone.org/index.cfm?webpage=79 Robert Dudley is the actual direct link to the Dudleys of Dudleytown:

     "Still another of Guilford Dudley's brothers, the Earl of Leicester, became a favorite of Queen Elizabeth and never lost his head, but even he finally felt obliged to leave England, under mysterious circumstances, never to return.  It was Leicester's direct descendant, William Dudley, who was the first to come to Connecticut, settling in Guilford (where else?), on the shores of Long Island Sound."

The writer goes on to say:

     "People say that the curse transported by William Dudley across the Atlantic to Connecticut lay dormant for a while after his descendants moved to Dudleytown."

Obviously, this unnamed writer is quoting reliable sources when he refers to curse experts as "People", but I'm not quite sure if he actually did his homework in checking out these "people's" stories.  You see, Robert, Earl of Leicester, never left England under mysterious circumstances (he died of old age in England in 1588) but he did provide two offspring, one illegitimate.  The legitimate son died at 2 years old (hardly able to provide offspring) and the illegitimate by the name of Robert, Jr.  Robert claimed the titles of both Earl of Warwick and Duke of Northumberland, but neither were recognized by the Parliament due to the fact that his father never married his mother.  Robert, Jr. moved to Italy and had two sons, Carlo and Enrico.  Carlo, in turn, had three more children, but that line ended there, for none of these grandchildren produced offspring.  Therefore, none of these went on to become a direct link to William (who, by the way, never claimed descendency from the famous Dudleys).  Phew!

Additionally, the writer states that William settled in Guilford, Connecticut and follows that statement with the words, "where else?", obviously insinuating that the elder William specifically chose Guilford because it matched the name of his supposed past relative.  As shown above, Guildford Dudley has had his first name misspelled in multiple paranormal documents which is the primary reason why staffers here at Creepy Connecticut fervently believe that this imaginary link between William and Edmund Dudley was initially concocted.  It may very well have been an innocent mistake, but has now expanded into a terribly mismanaged myth, not the least of which has been fully supported by the Warrens, regardless of the actual documented truth.  For the record, Guildford's mother's maiden name was . . . wait for the dramatic music . . . Guildford!  Which may explain his strange first name.

Of the three Dudley brothers who helped found Dudleytown, two of the three are difficult to pin down as far as date of death.  What is generally agreed upon is that all three of them died of natural causes, Abiel having died at the ripe old age of 89.  In a day and age when 60 was very old, 89 was actually considered ancient, particularly with all the cases of small pox, yellow fever, cholera and tuberculosis wiping out entire populations of people throughout New England in the 1600-1700s (has anyone ever wondered what other curses are floating around in New England, considering the many hundreds of people who perished due to epidemics over the span of three hundred years?)  And through some strange and unexplainable mutation of the Dudleytown "curse", it altered to then represent having not only cursed the Dudleys (for as we can see, the Dudleys really didn't have that unusual of a history overall, only three of them dying prematurely in two hundred years) but now moved on to those who simply resided in Dudleytown.  You see, without a proper amount of death and destruction in the lives of the Dudley descendents (the exaggerations and lies notwithstanding) it was warranted that "curse-followers" created another outlet for their beliefs.  In order to keep the myth of the "curse" alive, the "curse-followers" began shifting the story from its origins of having affected only the Dudley descendents to now affecting Dudleytown itself.

The Mutation Of The "Curse"

All paranormal sources cite chapter and verse recitations of so-called "famous" people who were affected by the "Curse of Dudleytown".  When going through the "famous" names of the people who were affected by the "curse", we have actually only uncovered one.  He was Horace Greeley, distinguished editor of the New York Tribune, who later ran against a very popular Ulysses S. Grant for the presidency.  Greeley was overwhelmingly defeated.  The "curse" supposedly affected him and his wife, Mary Young Cheney, born and raised in Dudleytown.  When he lost his bid for the presidency, she reportedly became so depressed that she killed herself.  He died a month or so later.  We discovered an interesting bit of history about Mary Young Cheney as well:

     "Greeley had a long, but unhappy, marriage to Mary Cheney Greeley, a sometime Suffragette.  Mary Cheney Greeley believed in spirits and was a rigorous adherent of The Graham Diet.  Mrs. Greeley doted on one son to the extent that an infant daughter died from neglect.  The eventual death of that son was devastating to Mrs. Greeley." (Yahoo Articles Cache)

Let's see . . . she had a long, unhappy marriage, she lost a son and a daughter . . . and she committed suicide because of a "curse"?  I think it's safe to say that she committed suicide as a result of depression.

In actuality, the most famous of the "curse" recipients never set foot in Dudleytown at all.  In fact, neither did his wife.  Mary Young Cheney was neither born, nor raised in Dudleytown, as has been widely mis-reported.  How this myth got started is anybody's guess, but the fact is that she was born in Litchfield, Connecticut on October 20th, 1811 (Litchfield Vital Records, volume 2, page 12).  Our guess is that because there were other Cheney's in the vicinity of Cornwall, paranormal investigators assumed that Mary was also in this vicinity.  In fact, they placed her smack-dab in the middle of Dudleytown for the pure purpose of amassing more supposed evidence.