I've hesitated for quite some time to write about Christopher Nation. The reason is not that I am not proud of him. The reason is that I am not sure of his wife's maiden name. So I'll get this out here early, in case someone wants to read only the first paragraph of this blog. Some sites say his wife was Elizabeth Sharpe, and some say his wife was Elizabeth Swaim. Some say he was married to both, but none give a date for a second marriage. At this point I lean toward our connection being the Swaim one, but I am more than willing to look at documentation for either marriage, or for both. I just want to know the truth.
But back to what we do know: Christopher Nation was born in 1717 in Upper Freehold, Monmouth County, New Jersey to John and Bethiah Robbins Nation. He was one of at least seven children born to the couple. They apparently traveled down through Virginia, with possibly a stop of several years there, before moving on to what was then Guilford County, North Carolina, where John and Bethiah both died.
Somewhere along the line, Christopher married Elizabeth, whatever her name was. Christopher was the father of at least nine children, including our ancestor, Joseph. Although we typically focus more on colonial history from the middle Atlantic and New England states, life was lively in North Carolina, too. During the French and Indian War, North Carolina had to protect the frontier against native American attacks. Christopher was a lieutenant in the militia and by 1766 was a captain. He is mentioned as being a part of the "Regulator" movement in the early 1770's, but this was more likely to have been his son, Christopher, born about 1744. At any rate, our Christopher suffered no ill effects from his son's rebellion.
He seems to have stayed out of the Revolutionary War, although by now he would have been in his middle fifties. He's not listed as a patriot on the DAR website, nor is he listed as a Tory in the list of men from Guilford County who were subject to having their estates confiscated for being a Tory (supporting the British against the Americans who were fighting for independence). Randolph County was formed from Guilford County in 1779, and his name is on the first tax list for that county, in 1779.
He was a planter and possibly a delegate to the state assembly, although this could have been the son Christopher, in 1789. At any rate, we can see that he raised his family well, to have American values. Although he was not a Quaker (note his military record), he seems to have associated with Quaker families, perhaps tracing back to his time in Frederick County, Virginia or even further back to his time in New Jersey. I haven't yet found church records for him, nor have I found a burial location.
Christopher died November 11, 1799 in Randolph County, NC. In his will, he leaves almost everything to his oldest son, Abraham, leaving one shilling each to his other surviving children. Perhaps Abraham had been promised the home place and Christopher helped the other children get established or purchase land as the need arose. I haven't found an inventory yet, so I don't know whether Christopher had slaves or not. He seems to have been a farmer with mostly smaller tracts of land, 120 acres at the end of his life, so perhaps he didn't "need" slaves. He may have hired labor to help put the last crops in and harvest them, or perhaps his sons and sons in law were able to help.
So the questions are: Who was his wife when our ancestor was born? What religion, if any, did he practice? Did he contribute in any way to either side in the Revolutionary War? What were his experiences during the French and Indian War? Did his family have to worry about attacks from the Native Americans? I need to read more about North Carolina during this time period, as we have several families who were in this area during the 1700s. It's another part of our family history to explore.
Our line of descent is:
Christopher Nation-Elizabeth possibly Swaim
Joseph Nation-Jerretta Vickery
Elizabeth Nation-Christopher Myers
Phoebe Myers-John Adam Brown
Phoebe Brown-Fremont Holbrook
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Tuesday, December 31, 2019
Friday, December 27, 2019
Holbrook line: Nathan Foster 1700-1753
This will be another short post about a man almost lost to history. Nathan Foster was born in Ipswich, Massachusetts Bay Colony on May 17, 1700 to Abraham (also seen as Abram) and Mary Robinson Foster. His great grandparents, Reginald and Judith Wignol Foster, were the original immigrants, and he was of the second generation actually born on this side of the ocean. Nathan's parents,
Abraham and Mary, were older than average when they married. Abraham was 34 and Mary was 28. Nathan was one of three known children born to the couple. Since both lived many years after the birth of their children, one wonders whether there were difficulties related to their age that prevented other children. At any rate, this was a small nuclear family.
It's believed that Nathan left Ipswich (or Topsfield, some say) to go to the new settlement of Stafford, Connecticut about 1720. Since Nathan wasn't yet of age to live by himself, he may well have lived with one of the early families there, while he learned all the ins and outs of farming. That family may well have been that of Josiah and Sarah Doty Standish, for on November 23, 1724 he married their daughter, Hannah. (Yes, when I first saw that Standish name, I was excited because I suspected it would lead me back to Captain Myles Standish, and it did. I had to do some research to learn that Doty was also a Mayflower name.)
We don't know whether the young couple stayed with their in-laws for a few years, but that would have been a common custom, while Nathan began earning his own living and building a home for his new bride. Nathan and Hannah had at least eleven children together, born from 1725 to 1749,
That's pretty much what I know about Nathan's life. He died May 26, 1753 in Stafford, apparently rather suddenly. I say that because he didn't leave a will. His estate wasn't settled until 1763, when the youngest of the children was 14 and probably an apprentice with some other family or a citizen. His inventory doesn't tell us much about his life. He did have a few books, and some farm animals and farm equipment. His land holdings were not large, about 30 acres, plus a "small house" and rights in the commons and the cedar swamp. His household goods were barely adequate for the family he was raising, and he had few farm animals. It leads me to wonder whether he worked for someone else, either in the fields or doing other labor intensive work. At any rate, we wouldn't say that he was well off financially. There are other records from 17693 explaining exactly how his land was divided, with oldest son Nathan getting a double share.
I hope to someday find and read the town records for Stafford. They may provide more insight into Nathan's life. I'd like to know his occupation, whether he held any town offices (this was a small town, so one would think he must have at least been a fence viewer at some point), whether he went on any military expeditions, and whether he was a faithful member of a church. I'd also like to know where he was buried, although I suspect it was the Old Stafford Street cemetery. It would be nice to know that for sure, too.
The line of descent is
Nathan Foster-Hannah Standish
Nathan Foster-Elizabeth Lansford
Jude Foster-Lydia M.
Betsy Foster Josiah Whittemore
Mary Elizabeth Whittemore-Joseph Holbrook
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Abraham and Mary, were older than average when they married. Abraham was 34 and Mary was 28. Nathan was one of three known children born to the couple. Since both lived many years after the birth of their children, one wonders whether there were difficulties related to their age that prevented other children. At any rate, this was a small nuclear family.
It's believed that Nathan left Ipswich (or Topsfield, some say) to go to the new settlement of Stafford, Connecticut about 1720. Since Nathan wasn't yet of age to live by himself, he may well have lived with one of the early families there, while he learned all the ins and outs of farming. That family may well have been that of Josiah and Sarah Doty Standish, for on November 23, 1724 he married their daughter, Hannah. (Yes, when I first saw that Standish name, I was excited because I suspected it would lead me back to Captain Myles Standish, and it did. I had to do some research to learn that Doty was also a Mayflower name.)
We don't know whether the young couple stayed with their in-laws for a few years, but that would have been a common custom, while Nathan began earning his own living and building a home for his new bride. Nathan and Hannah had at least eleven children together, born from 1725 to 1749,
That's pretty much what I know about Nathan's life. He died May 26, 1753 in Stafford, apparently rather suddenly. I say that because he didn't leave a will. His estate wasn't settled until 1763, when the youngest of the children was 14 and probably an apprentice with some other family or a citizen. His inventory doesn't tell us much about his life. He did have a few books, and some farm animals and farm equipment. His land holdings were not large, about 30 acres, plus a "small house" and rights in the commons and the cedar swamp. His household goods were barely adequate for the family he was raising, and he had few farm animals. It leads me to wonder whether he worked for someone else, either in the fields or doing other labor intensive work. At any rate, we wouldn't say that he was well off financially. There are other records from 17693 explaining exactly how his land was divided, with oldest son Nathan getting a double share.
I hope to someday find and read the town records for Stafford. They may provide more insight into Nathan's life. I'd like to know his occupation, whether he held any town offices (this was a small town, so one would think he must have at least been a fence viewer at some point), whether he went on any military expeditions, and whether he was a faithful member of a church. I'd also like to know where he was buried, although I suspect it was the Old Stafford Street cemetery. It would be nice to know that for sure, too.
The line of descent is
Nathan Foster-Hannah Standish
Nathan Foster-Elizabeth Lansford
Jude Foster-Lydia M.
Betsy Foster Josiah Whittemore
Mary Elizabeth Whittemore-Joseph Holbrook
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Tuesday, December 24, 2019
Allen line: Matthew Bellamy 1677-possibly 1752
Once again there are mysteries and questions about an ancestor. We know when he was born, and lots of people think they knew when he died, but since the only will I've located in that time period was for his son and not himself, I'm not quite convinced.
Matthew Bellamy, the second Matthew Bellamy of whom I've written, was born February , 1677-78 or possibly 1676, at Killingworth, Connecticut. The reason I say possibly is that some sites give his birth date as 1676, and at Saybrook, under the idea that he and his sister Mary were twins. I haven't proven or disproven that yet. The date and location I've given first are those published in the New England Historical and Genealogical Register volume 61, page 339. Regardless, it is accepted as established that his parents were Matthew and Bethiah Ford Bellamy. Matthew the younger was one of at least five children in his family.
Matthew senior was an educated man, a schoolmaster, so we can only assume that our Matthew learned to read and write, but we know nothing further of his education. He was living in Wallingford by 1696, and that is likely where he met his first wife. We have two marriages for Matthew. His first wife, whom he married September 26, 1705 was Sarah Wood. The couple had six children together, but Sarah died on March 8, 1721, about 6 weeks after the birth of her last child. Matthew remarried quickly, on May 30, 1721 to Mary Johnson, daughter of Samuel Johnson. They had five children together.
The article I mentioned above says that he owned an interest in the copper mines at Wallingford, and may have worked there. I don't find anything to document that, but I did find a petition he presented to the General Assembly in 1721-1722, asking to be licensed for a house of entertainment, for the benefit of the miners who worked at the mine. The article doesn't state whether or not this was approved, so more research needs to be done to verify that. He was apparently looking for a way to better support his family, as his occupation up to this point had been that of a weaver. (On a tax list for 1701, he was charged at a value or "grand rate" of 22 pounds, which was less than most of the town, although of course he was still quite young at that time.) I wonder how Mary thought she would be able to help him, with 6 young step-children and two of her own on the way (she would have twins in February of 1722).
Surprisingly, because most of our early ancestors have been Puritans, it appears that the Bellamy family was of the Church of England, as his name is on a petition to the Bishop of London asking for more pastors for the area.
I've not yet located anything to make me think that Matthew was involved in any of the border wars during Queen Anne's or King William's wars of the late 1600 and early 1700s, but he would have been of the right age for the duty and we can't yet rule out the possibility.
I've not located a will for Matthew yet. There is one for Matthew Bellamy from 1754, but this is his son Matthew, not ours. The Bellamy family was prominent in Wallingford for some time, with some of Matthew's grandsons serving in the Revolutionary War, one a noted Episcopalian pastor, and others of honorable professions. Even though our Matthew may not have died a wealthy person (which is my supposition, not a fact, since I haven't seen a will or inventory), he must have given his descendants a strong sense of character and duty. Mary died before Matthew, on March 8, 1721, and Matthew's date of death is given as June 7, 1752.
The line of descent is
Matthew Bellamy-Mary Johnson
Hannah Bellamy-John Royse
Elizabeth Royse-William McCoy
James McCoy-Nancy Lane
Vincent McCoy-Eleanor Jackson
Nancy McCoy-George Allen
Edward Allen-Edith Knott
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
Their descendants
Matthew Bellamy, the second Matthew Bellamy of whom I've written, was born February , 1677-78 or possibly 1676, at Killingworth, Connecticut. The reason I say possibly is that some sites give his birth date as 1676, and at Saybrook, under the idea that he and his sister Mary were twins. I haven't proven or disproven that yet. The date and location I've given first are those published in the New England Historical and Genealogical Register volume 61, page 339. Regardless, it is accepted as established that his parents were Matthew and Bethiah Ford Bellamy. Matthew the younger was one of at least five children in his family.
Matthew senior was an educated man, a schoolmaster, so we can only assume that our Matthew learned to read and write, but we know nothing further of his education. He was living in Wallingford by 1696, and that is likely where he met his first wife. We have two marriages for Matthew. His first wife, whom he married September 26, 1705 was Sarah Wood. The couple had six children together, but Sarah died on March 8, 1721, about 6 weeks after the birth of her last child. Matthew remarried quickly, on May 30, 1721 to Mary Johnson, daughter of Samuel Johnson. They had five children together.
The article I mentioned above says that he owned an interest in the copper mines at Wallingford, and may have worked there. I don't find anything to document that, but I did find a petition he presented to the General Assembly in 1721-1722, asking to be licensed for a house of entertainment, for the benefit of the miners who worked at the mine. The article doesn't state whether or not this was approved, so more research needs to be done to verify that. He was apparently looking for a way to better support his family, as his occupation up to this point had been that of a weaver. (On a tax list for 1701, he was charged at a value or "grand rate" of 22 pounds, which was less than most of the town, although of course he was still quite young at that time.) I wonder how Mary thought she would be able to help him, with 6 young step-children and two of her own on the way (she would have twins in February of 1722).
Surprisingly, because most of our early ancestors have been Puritans, it appears that the Bellamy family was of the Church of England, as his name is on a petition to the Bishop of London asking for more pastors for the area.
I've not yet located anything to make me think that Matthew was involved in any of the border wars during Queen Anne's or King William's wars of the late 1600 and early 1700s, but he would have been of the right age for the duty and we can't yet rule out the possibility.
I've not located a will for Matthew yet. There is one for Matthew Bellamy from 1754, but this is his son Matthew, not ours. The Bellamy family was prominent in Wallingford for some time, with some of Matthew's grandsons serving in the Revolutionary War, one a noted Episcopalian pastor, and others of honorable professions. Even though our Matthew may not have died a wealthy person (which is my supposition, not a fact, since I haven't seen a will or inventory), he must have given his descendants a strong sense of character and duty. Mary died before Matthew, on March 8, 1721, and Matthew's date of death is given as June 7, 1752.
The line of descent is
Matthew Bellamy-Mary Johnson
Hannah Bellamy-John Royse
Elizabeth Royse-William McCoy
James McCoy-Nancy Lane
Vincent McCoy-Eleanor Jackson
Nancy McCoy-George Allen
Edward Allen-Edith Knott
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
Their descendants
Friday, December 20, 2019
Holbrook line: John Trumbull 1670-1751
This is another case of the glass being half full. We have some information about John, but not enough to really let us think we know him, or even much about him. Like many in his generation, he is more shadow than substance. But still...there is this information.
John was born November 27, 1670 in Rowley, Massachusetts to Joseph and Hannah Smith Trumbull. Joseph and Hannah soon moved to Suffield in what would finally be determined to be Connecticut, in time for Joseph to be considered a proprietor there. John would have been only five years old when King Philip's War broke out, and the family is believed to have left Suffield for a time. Joseph would have served at least in the militia, but I've not yet found record of it. John would have been the "little man" of the family during this crisis.
I don't know whether John ever served in the military, except I do know training bands were required so he was at least theoretically able to serve in any of the military expeditions and native American scares of the late 1600's and early 1700's. He married Elizabeth Winchell, daughter of David and Elizabeth Filley Winchell, in Suffield on September 3, 1696. He was a little older than normal for a first marriage, but he likely had been helping care for his younger brothers and sisters.
John, whose name is spelled Trumble in the town records, was probably low on the social status scale. Most of the town offices that he held were relatively low level-fence viewer, surveyor of highways (indicating at least a basic education), and on a committee to make sure all hogs were "yoak'd and ring'd". He cast several dissenting votes in town meetings, some having to do with land grants and at least one having to do with paying a "rate" (tax) to pay a "writing scoller" in addition to the usual schoolmaster. By 1722 he was appointed to a committee to see to it that the pews were made, and in 1725 was trusted with the office of constable. This was a civic responsibility that many tried to avoid, as in involved collection of rates, and if he were unable for any reason to collect, that he could be held to account. Sure enough, in 1728 there was discussion about his failure to collect rates from two men, one of whom was by then deceased.
We're not told the assignment of the pews in the meeting house, but later John was given permission to change pews with a man who had been assigned the second pew. Usually these front pews were based on wealth, but sometimes exceptions were made for people who were elderly, or/and hard of hearing, and that may be the case here.
Some of his land was appropriated for a highway, and typically he would have received land elsewhere in compensation, although I haven't found record of that. His land was on Feather Street, which may have been land inherited from his father, and also noted (I'm not sure whether this was separate land, or a different description) as being the Allyn Land at the Ferry. His son was a ferryman, so John may or may not have also held that occupation.
Find a Grave states that this couple had eight children. I am unable to verify that but it could well be true. If his estate records could be located, that would be most helpful, both as to heirs and to the size of his estate, perhaps as to the land he owned and an occupation. Was he an employee of the iron works, or was he a farmer? We simply don't know at this point. We do know that he died January 3, 1751/52, when he would have been in his early eighties. So he was part of the "hardy pioneer stock" from whom we descend.
Oh, one other descendant is John Wayne, the actor. He is John Trumbull's sixth great grandson, making him, I believe, a seventh cousin once removed to my generation.
The line of descent is:
John Trumbull-Elizabeth Winchell
Hannah Trumbull-Medad Pomeroy
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stannard
Libbeus Stanard-Luceba or Euzebia Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
John was born November 27, 1670 in Rowley, Massachusetts to Joseph and Hannah Smith Trumbull. Joseph and Hannah soon moved to Suffield in what would finally be determined to be Connecticut, in time for Joseph to be considered a proprietor there. John would have been only five years old when King Philip's War broke out, and the family is believed to have left Suffield for a time. Joseph would have served at least in the militia, but I've not yet found record of it. John would have been the "little man" of the family during this crisis.
I don't know whether John ever served in the military, except I do know training bands were required so he was at least theoretically able to serve in any of the military expeditions and native American scares of the late 1600's and early 1700's. He married Elizabeth Winchell, daughter of David and Elizabeth Filley Winchell, in Suffield on September 3, 1696. He was a little older than normal for a first marriage, but he likely had been helping care for his younger brothers and sisters.
John, whose name is spelled Trumble in the town records, was probably low on the social status scale. Most of the town offices that he held were relatively low level-fence viewer, surveyor of highways (indicating at least a basic education), and on a committee to make sure all hogs were "yoak'd and ring'd". He cast several dissenting votes in town meetings, some having to do with land grants and at least one having to do with paying a "rate" (tax) to pay a "writing scoller" in addition to the usual schoolmaster. By 1722 he was appointed to a committee to see to it that the pews were made, and in 1725 was trusted with the office of constable. This was a civic responsibility that many tried to avoid, as in involved collection of rates, and if he were unable for any reason to collect, that he could be held to account. Sure enough, in 1728 there was discussion about his failure to collect rates from two men, one of whom was by then deceased.
We're not told the assignment of the pews in the meeting house, but later John was given permission to change pews with a man who had been assigned the second pew. Usually these front pews were based on wealth, but sometimes exceptions were made for people who were elderly, or/and hard of hearing, and that may be the case here.
Some of his land was appropriated for a highway, and typically he would have received land elsewhere in compensation, although I haven't found record of that. His land was on Feather Street, which may have been land inherited from his father, and also noted (I'm not sure whether this was separate land, or a different description) as being the Allyn Land at the Ferry. His son was a ferryman, so John may or may not have also held that occupation.
Find a Grave states that this couple had eight children. I am unable to verify that but it could well be true. If his estate records could be located, that would be most helpful, both as to heirs and to the size of his estate, perhaps as to the land he owned and an occupation. Was he an employee of the iron works, or was he a farmer? We simply don't know at this point. We do know that he died January 3, 1751/52, when he would have been in his early eighties. So he was part of the "hardy pioneer stock" from whom we descend.
Oh, one other descendant is John Wayne, the actor. He is John Trumbull's sixth great grandson, making him, I believe, a seventh cousin once removed to my generation.
The line of descent is:
John Trumbull-Elizabeth Winchell
Hannah Trumbull-Medad Pomeroy
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stannard
Libbeus Stanard-Luceba or Euzebia Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Tuesday, December 17, 2019
Holbrook line: Samuel Sumner 1638-who knows? Not what I expected to find!
Well, you never know. You just never know, and that's what makes genealogy so fascinating. Who would think that a man in his later fifties would just pull up stakes from Dorchester, Massachusetts Bay Colony, and transport himself, his wife, and most of their thirteen children, mostly adults, to Dorchester, South Carolina? These kinds of surprises just keep me going.
To start at the beginning, Samuel Sumner was born May 18, 1638 in Dorchester, Massachusetts Bay Colony to William and Mary Swift Sumner. (Some sites list his mother as Mary West but I don't find evidence for that-yet.) He was one of at least seven children born to this couple, and he was raised to be a good Puritan.
Samuel married Rebecca Staples, daughter of John and Rebecca Borrobridge Staple, at Dorchester, Massachusetts Bay Colony, on March 7, 1659. The couple had thirteen children together, and were apparently faithful members of the church, There were two men from Dorchester named Samuel Sumner who went on the "Canada" expedition in 1690, under Captain John Worthington. One was a sergeant and one an ensign. One returned, one didn't. This expedition had tried to capture Quebec from the French but were not successful.
As good Puritans, Samuel and Rebecca were among those who went with Rev. Joseph Lord to the settlement they named Dorchester in what was then Berkeley County, South Carolina. They were dismissed from the church November 1, 1696, to go south. Assuming they left soon after, that might have been a rough trip, traveling south by ship in early winter. It's 962 miles by road so would probably have been further than that by boat. This was still hurricane season, so it is by God's mercy and grace that they made it safely.
It's not known why the New England church decided to start a daughter church in South Carolina. Perhaps they were aware that the Anglican church also wanted to develop the area. Maybe it was population pressure, where they were already running out of land in the New England Dorchester. It doesn't appear to be a church split at all. But Samuel, whose parents had pioneered in Dorchester, now became a pioneer and immigrant of sorts in South Carolina.
I don't know anything about his life in South Carolina, or his death. I found a tentative, undocumented death date for Rebecca of 1710. Life along the Ashley River would have been very different from Massachusetts, and there were many illnesses that took the lives of these early settlers, from smallpox to malaria to other southern fevers. They wouldn't have had much exposure to malaria or the other fevers in the north, so perhaps it was one of these diseases that took one or both of them.
I haven't yet found his will or inventory, nor anything that really states his occupation. However, whatever his occupation in the north, when he settled in South Carolina, he would have become a farmer first and foremost. Crops had to be raised, families needed to be fed. We aren't told, or at least I haven't found, what material assistance they may have been given by the church, to help feed them until the first crops came in. We do know that the settlement only lasted about 45 years. When it closed, some of the congregation moved south to Georgia, some stayed in place and some went back "home" to Massachusetts.
Samuel and Rebecca's daughter, Rebecca, had married Ephraim Wilson and they did not travel south with most of the family. So our line continued in New England but still, this is intriguing and unexpected 225 year old "news". You never know what you don't know until you find out you don't know it!
The line of descent is:
Samuel Sumner-Rebecca Staples
Rebecca Sumner-Ephraim Wilson
Samuel Wilson-Elizabeth Hawes
Rebecca Wilson-Jonathan Wright
Molly Wright-Amariah Holbrook
Nahum Holbrook-Susanna Rockwood
Joseph Holbrook-Mary Elizabeth Whittemore
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Fun fact: This South Carolina settlement appears to be within a stone's throw of the home of my brother in law. Both have a Summerville, SC address now. We've been there, and didn't know of the family connection at the time.
To start at the beginning, Samuel Sumner was born May 18, 1638 in Dorchester, Massachusetts Bay Colony to William and Mary Swift Sumner. (Some sites list his mother as Mary West but I don't find evidence for that-yet.) He was one of at least seven children born to this couple, and he was raised to be a good Puritan.
Samuel married Rebecca Staples, daughter of John and Rebecca Borrobridge Staple, at Dorchester, Massachusetts Bay Colony, on March 7, 1659. The couple had thirteen children together, and were apparently faithful members of the church, There were two men from Dorchester named Samuel Sumner who went on the "Canada" expedition in 1690, under Captain John Worthington. One was a sergeant and one an ensign. One returned, one didn't. This expedition had tried to capture Quebec from the French but were not successful.
As good Puritans, Samuel and Rebecca were among those who went with Rev. Joseph Lord to the settlement they named Dorchester in what was then Berkeley County, South Carolina. They were dismissed from the church November 1, 1696, to go south. Assuming they left soon after, that might have been a rough trip, traveling south by ship in early winter. It's 962 miles by road so would probably have been further than that by boat. This was still hurricane season, so it is by God's mercy and grace that they made it safely.
It's not known why the New England church decided to start a daughter church in South Carolina. Perhaps they were aware that the Anglican church also wanted to develop the area. Maybe it was population pressure, where they were already running out of land in the New England Dorchester. It doesn't appear to be a church split at all. But Samuel, whose parents had pioneered in Dorchester, now became a pioneer and immigrant of sorts in South Carolina.
I don't know anything about his life in South Carolina, or his death. I found a tentative, undocumented death date for Rebecca of 1710. Life along the Ashley River would have been very different from Massachusetts, and there were many illnesses that took the lives of these early settlers, from smallpox to malaria to other southern fevers. They wouldn't have had much exposure to malaria or the other fevers in the north, so perhaps it was one of these diseases that took one or both of them.
I haven't yet found his will or inventory, nor anything that really states his occupation. However, whatever his occupation in the north, when he settled in South Carolina, he would have become a farmer first and foremost. Crops had to be raised, families needed to be fed. We aren't told, or at least I haven't found, what material assistance they may have been given by the church, to help feed them until the first crops came in. We do know that the settlement only lasted about 45 years. When it closed, some of the congregation moved south to Georgia, some stayed in place and some went back "home" to Massachusetts.
Samuel and Rebecca's daughter, Rebecca, had married Ephraim Wilson and they did not travel south with most of the family. So our line continued in New England but still, this is intriguing and unexpected 225 year old "news". You never know what you don't know until you find out you don't know it!
The line of descent is:
Samuel Sumner-Rebecca Staples
Rebecca Sumner-Ephraim Wilson
Samuel Wilson-Elizabeth Hawes
Rebecca Wilson-Jonathan Wright
Molly Wright-Amariah Holbrook
Nahum Holbrook-Susanna Rockwood
Joseph Holbrook-Mary Elizabeth Whittemore
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Fun fact: This South Carolina settlement appears to be within a stone's throw of the home of my brother in law. Both have a Summerville, SC address now. We've been there, and didn't know of the family connection at the time.
Friday, December 13, 2019
Holbrook line: Michael Lunsford 1700 ish to 1756
I really don't know enough about Michael to write a post, but I'm going to at least give a few details about him. He is a mystery in that he was born about 1700, but I am unable to find any hint of identity for his parents. At this point, I am wondering if he was the immigrant, but I have no evidence of that, just a lack of evidence for parents.
The first time he leaves a record is on November 9, 1727, when, as Mickel Lunsford, he is married to Elizabeth Hackben in East Bridgewater, Plymouth County, Massachusetts. Elizabeth Hackben is also a mystery as to who she was. Perhaps both of them had come to Massachusetts as indentured servants, but that is purely my speculation. I intend to keep searching until I find four parents for this couple.
I know very little of Michael's life for the next 29 years after his marriage. He and Elizabeth had three known children, all girls. At some point, they left Bridgewater and moved to Stafford, Hartford County, Connecticut. Ir is at that location that we find his name on a list dated May 5, 1756, from Mansfield, Connecticut, stating that these 48 men, including a "Mickel Lunsford", had been mustered in to the military for an intended expedition against the French at Crown Point. The planned expedition didn't take place, and we are left wondering whether this is our Mickel Lunsford or not. He wrote his will April 12, 1756, perhaps in anticipation of leaving with his companions. Or perhaps this is not our Mickel Lunsford at all. Perhaps our Mickel was already sick.
The will was exhibited June 7, 1756, which conflicts with a printed death date of June 8, 1756. At present, I can't explain the discrepancy. The will was pretty straightforward He left the use of everything, real and personal, to his wife until or unless she remarried. Then it was to be divided equally between his three daughters. One daughter, Mary White, was to receive 40 shillings, apparently when the will was probated.
We don't know what his cause of death was. There were influenza like illnesses and also dysentery that were common causes of death that year. If he had marched with the troops for any length of time, he would have been exposed to any number of camp diseases. We just don't know.
Judging from his probable age at his marriage in 1727, he was probably in his early fifties when he died. An inventory was taken June 25, 1756. Michael owned 52 acres of land and a dwelling house, a gun and 5 books, various farm animals, and other basic household and farming equipment. The total value of the estate was a little less than one hundred twenty pounds.
This is all that I currently know about Michael. I would love to know more about his life and especially I would love to know where he came from, and who his parents were. The same goes for his wife Elizabeth. But for now, we will have to be content with the knowledge that Michael and Elizabeth lived the kind of lives we all want to live, just quietly raising a family and planning for their future.
The line of descent is:
Michael Lunsford-Elizabeth Hackben
Elizabeth Lansford-Nathan Foster
Jude Foster-Lydia M
Betsy Foster-Josiah Whittemore
Mary Elizabeth Whittermore-Joseph Holbrook
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
The first time he leaves a record is on November 9, 1727, when, as Mickel Lunsford, he is married to Elizabeth Hackben in East Bridgewater, Plymouth County, Massachusetts. Elizabeth Hackben is also a mystery as to who she was. Perhaps both of them had come to Massachusetts as indentured servants, but that is purely my speculation. I intend to keep searching until I find four parents for this couple.
I know very little of Michael's life for the next 29 years after his marriage. He and Elizabeth had three known children, all girls. At some point, they left Bridgewater and moved to Stafford, Hartford County, Connecticut. Ir is at that location that we find his name on a list dated May 5, 1756, from Mansfield, Connecticut, stating that these 48 men, including a "Mickel Lunsford", had been mustered in to the military for an intended expedition against the French at Crown Point. The planned expedition didn't take place, and we are left wondering whether this is our Mickel Lunsford or not. He wrote his will April 12, 1756, perhaps in anticipation of leaving with his companions. Or perhaps this is not our Mickel Lunsford at all. Perhaps our Mickel was already sick.
The will was exhibited June 7, 1756, which conflicts with a printed death date of June 8, 1756. At present, I can't explain the discrepancy. The will was pretty straightforward He left the use of everything, real and personal, to his wife until or unless she remarried. Then it was to be divided equally between his three daughters. One daughter, Mary White, was to receive 40 shillings, apparently when the will was probated.
We don't know what his cause of death was. There were influenza like illnesses and also dysentery that were common causes of death that year. If he had marched with the troops for any length of time, he would have been exposed to any number of camp diseases. We just don't know.
Judging from his probable age at his marriage in 1727, he was probably in his early fifties when he died. An inventory was taken June 25, 1756. Michael owned 52 acres of land and a dwelling house, a gun and 5 books, various farm animals, and other basic household and farming equipment. The total value of the estate was a little less than one hundred twenty pounds.
This is all that I currently know about Michael. I would love to know more about his life and especially I would love to know where he came from, and who his parents were. The same goes for his wife Elizabeth. But for now, we will have to be content with the knowledge that Michael and Elizabeth lived the kind of lives we all want to live, just quietly raising a family and planning for their future.
The line of descent is:
Michael Lunsford-Elizabeth Hackben
Elizabeth Lansford-Nathan Foster
Jude Foster-Lydia M
Betsy Foster-Josiah Whittemore
Mary Elizabeth Whittermore-Joseph Holbrook
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Tuesday, December 10, 2019
Holbrook line: Joseph Holbrook 1683-1750
Joseph Holbrook, our ancestor, lived a quiet life, but thankfully left a few clues behind him so that we have some idea of his life. He was born May 8, 1683, in Mendon, Massachusetts to Peter and Alice Godfrey Holbrook. Joseph was of the fourth Holbrook generation to set foot in America. His father was also born in Massachusetts Bay Colony, and his grandfather and great grandfather were the immigrants of the family.
Joseph grew up with his ten siblings in Mendon, but eventually the town started getting crowded, and younger sons weren't likely to receive as much land or other parental help as the older brothers. Joseph married Mary Cook, daughter of Nicholas and Joanna Rockwood Cook, on December 19, 1710, in Mendon and they apparently lived there for a few years. Joseph's name, however, was on a petition asking to have the town of Bellingham formed in 1729. I haven't figured out yet whether Joseph's land was actually in what became Bellingham, or whether he had to physically move to go to Bellingham. At any rate, he lived out the rest of his days in Bellingham, without making many waves.
He was a husbandman, a farmer who owned his own land, and he had nine children to support. So he worked hard, as did Mary. There is a story that he was a Baptist, but I've not found anything to substantiate that yet. Stories that he rode to New Jersey to get a professor for Brown University in Rhode Island apparently confuse our Joseph with another, perhaps his son Joseph, because Brown University wasn't founded until 14 years after our Joseph died. However, we know that son Jesse was a Baptist, jailed for refusing to pay taxes to the state church, so perhaps Joseph was indeed Baptist, or became one in his later years.
Bellingham was a small town. in 1739, Joseph was one of only fifty men living within town boundaries who were eligible to vote in the town elections. He may or may not be the Joseph who was town clerk, and who was selected as town treasurer in 1743. The son Joseph was born in 1714, so may have been a little young for such a responsibility, but it's hard to tell from the references I've seen. He wasn't referred to as Senior or Junior, as Deacon or any other title.
Joseph died in Bellingham April 25, 1750 intestate, without a will. His widow Mary asked that son Joseph be appointed administrator and that was approved. A partial inventory, not totalled, is found on American Ancestry. It looks like his estate was valued at over 350 pounds, with several tracts of land, husbandry tools, five beds, a Bible and other books included. Mary lived until 1766, so she had the worry of watching several of her sons fighting in the French and Indian War. She was undoubtedly a strong lady, as Joseph was a strong man.
The story of the Holbrooks touches many parts of our nation's history. Joseph was a part of that, and when I think of him, I will think of him as just that, part of our family history as well as our nation's history.
The line of descent is:
Joseph Holbrook-Mary Cook
Jesse Holbrook-Abigail Thayer
Amariah Holbrook-Molly Wright
Nahum Holbrook-Susanna Rockwood
Joseph Holbrook-Mary Elizabeth Whittemore
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen.
Joseph grew up with his ten siblings in Mendon, but eventually the town started getting crowded, and younger sons weren't likely to receive as much land or other parental help as the older brothers. Joseph married Mary Cook, daughter of Nicholas and Joanna Rockwood Cook, on December 19, 1710, in Mendon and they apparently lived there for a few years. Joseph's name, however, was on a petition asking to have the town of Bellingham formed in 1729. I haven't figured out yet whether Joseph's land was actually in what became Bellingham, or whether he had to physically move to go to Bellingham. At any rate, he lived out the rest of his days in Bellingham, without making many waves.
He was a husbandman, a farmer who owned his own land, and he had nine children to support. So he worked hard, as did Mary. There is a story that he was a Baptist, but I've not found anything to substantiate that yet. Stories that he rode to New Jersey to get a professor for Brown University in Rhode Island apparently confuse our Joseph with another, perhaps his son Joseph, because Brown University wasn't founded until 14 years after our Joseph died. However, we know that son Jesse was a Baptist, jailed for refusing to pay taxes to the state church, so perhaps Joseph was indeed Baptist, or became one in his later years.
Bellingham was a small town. in 1739, Joseph was one of only fifty men living within town boundaries who were eligible to vote in the town elections. He may or may not be the Joseph who was town clerk, and who was selected as town treasurer in 1743. The son Joseph was born in 1714, so may have been a little young for such a responsibility, but it's hard to tell from the references I've seen. He wasn't referred to as Senior or Junior, as Deacon or any other title.
Joseph died in Bellingham April 25, 1750 intestate, without a will. His widow Mary asked that son Joseph be appointed administrator and that was approved. A partial inventory, not totalled, is found on American Ancestry. It looks like his estate was valued at over 350 pounds, with several tracts of land, husbandry tools, five beds, a Bible and other books included. Mary lived until 1766, so she had the worry of watching several of her sons fighting in the French and Indian War. She was undoubtedly a strong lady, as Joseph was a strong man.
The story of the Holbrooks touches many parts of our nation's history. Joseph was a part of that, and when I think of him, I will think of him as just that, part of our family history as well as our nation's history.
The line of descent is:
Joseph Holbrook-Mary Cook
Jesse Holbrook-Abigail Thayer
Amariah Holbrook-Molly Wright
Nahum Holbrook-Susanna Rockwood
Joseph Holbrook-Mary Elizabeth Whittemore
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen.
Friday, December 6, 2019
Holbrook line: Benjamin Clough of Boston 1694-1744
It's exciting and it's scary to find information that casts doubt on what has long been believed to be true. This post will raise doubts about some parts of Benjamin's life and answer some questions about other parts.
First, Benjamin's parents are given as Benoni and Hannah Merrill Clough, of Salisbury in Essex County, Massachusetts. It's true that they had a son Benjamin. The John Clough family history says that Benjamin, son of Benoni, when to Kingston, New Hampshire, where a Benjamin Clough certainly lived and died, and was a Revolutionary War patriot. However, the Benjamin Clough in New Hampshire is not ours. His wife's name is wrong, as are the children, and the death date, and just about everything about that Benjamin. Also, that Benjamin's father, as listed on DAR records, was Cornelios Clough. Cornelios possibly had two wives, as there are two different names given as the New Hampshire Patriot's mother.
Because of the Thweng records, we know that Benjamin was a blacksmith, and that he acquired several parcels of land on Sheafe Street and also on Hull Street, starting in 1720. In the deeds he is almost always referred to as blacksmith, to avoid any confusion as to other Benjamin Clough's, apparently. He was constable of Boston in 1727 and 1728, so he was respected. In fact, on his tombstone he is noted as "Mr."
Benjamin and Faith had at least five children together, and Benjamin would have worked hard to support them, catechize them, and find them jobs and spouses. In 1738, the town took one of Benjamin's houses and "improved" it to be a hospital, during a smallpox epidemic. We're not told how Benjamin was repaid, or whether this was a permanent confiscation. At the time, the house was on the west edge of town.
Benjamin wrote his will June 18, 1744 and it was entered into probate on July 31, 1744. In it, he disposes of his real estate, leaving much of it to his wife during her widowhood. He also gives her "his" Negro woman Jenny and Jenny's child called Violet, as well as all his household goods. When his inventory is taken, there is very little mentioned in the way of household goods, just a couple of desks and some books, among other things. His total estate, which does not mention the slaves, was valued at a little over 309 pounds.
He is buried at Kings Chapel cemetery (not affiliated with the church of that name), and ironically, I may have been there without understanding its significance to our family. When I took a tour of the Freedom Trail in 1998, this was one of our stops. I was not actively interested in genealogy at that time and had no idea that ancestors had lived in Boston, but I appreciated the history and the fact that the cemetery was being cared for, all these years later. The stone gives Benjamin the honorific of "Mr." and says that he died July 6, 1744, aged 53 years and 11 months. So if that age is correct, Benjamin was actually born in 1690, and therefore likely not the son of Benoni and Hannah.
So we have a quandary. Who was Benjamin Clough, the blacksmith in Boston who was our ancestor? His first child's name was Joseph, but I don't know if that is a clue or not. I'd love to figure out who his parents are, and I'd also like to know whether he was involved in any military expeditions. Did he stay a faithful member of the church? I'd love to find out more about him, but at least we have this much.
The line of descent is:
Benjamin Clough-Faith Hart
Lydia Clough-John Whittemore
Josiah Whittemore-Lucy Snow
Josiah Whittemore- Betsy Foster
Mary Elizabeth Whittmore-Joseph Holbrook
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
I'm so grateful to American Ancestors and to Ancestry, who each had good information in their databases. These men who were colonial ancestors, but not necessarily immigrants, are difficult to trace!
First, Benjamin's parents are given as Benoni and Hannah Merrill Clough, of Salisbury in Essex County, Massachusetts. It's true that they had a son Benjamin. The John Clough family history says that Benjamin, son of Benoni, when to Kingston, New Hampshire, where a Benjamin Clough certainly lived and died, and was a Revolutionary War patriot. However, the Benjamin Clough in New Hampshire is not ours. His wife's name is wrong, as are the children, and the death date, and just about everything about that Benjamin. Also, that Benjamin's father, as listed on DAR records, was Cornelios Clough. Cornelios possibly had two wives, as there are two different names given as the New Hampshire Patriot's mother.
Because of the Thweng records, we know that Benjamin was a blacksmith, and that he acquired several parcels of land on Sheafe Street and also on Hull Street, starting in 1720. In the deeds he is almost always referred to as blacksmith, to avoid any confusion as to other Benjamin Clough's, apparently. He was constable of Boston in 1727 and 1728, so he was respected. In fact, on his tombstone he is noted as "Mr."
Benjamin and Faith had at least five children together, and Benjamin would have worked hard to support them, catechize them, and find them jobs and spouses. In 1738, the town took one of Benjamin's houses and "improved" it to be a hospital, during a smallpox epidemic. We're not told how Benjamin was repaid, or whether this was a permanent confiscation. At the time, the house was on the west edge of town.
Benjamin wrote his will June 18, 1744 and it was entered into probate on July 31, 1744. In it, he disposes of his real estate, leaving much of it to his wife during her widowhood. He also gives her "his" Negro woman Jenny and Jenny's child called Violet, as well as all his household goods. When his inventory is taken, there is very little mentioned in the way of household goods, just a couple of desks and some books, among other things. His total estate, which does not mention the slaves, was valued at a little over 309 pounds.
He is buried at Kings Chapel cemetery (not affiliated with the church of that name), and ironically, I may have been there without understanding its significance to our family. When I took a tour of the Freedom Trail in 1998, this was one of our stops. I was not actively interested in genealogy at that time and had no idea that ancestors had lived in Boston, but I appreciated the history and the fact that the cemetery was being cared for, all these years later. The stone gives Benjamin the honorific of "Mr." and says that he died July 6, 1744, aged 53 years and 11 months. So if that age is correct, Benjamin was actually born in 1690, and therefore likely not the son of Benoni and Hannah.
So we have a quandary. Who was Benjamin Clough, the blacksmith in Boston who was our ancestor? His first child's name was Joseph, but I don't know if that is a clue or not. I'd love to figure out who his parents are, and I'd also like to know whether he was involved in any military expeditions. Did he stay a faithful member of the church? I'd love to find out more about him, but at least we have this much.
The line of descent is:
Benjamin Clough-Faith Hart
Lydia Clough-John Whittemore
Josiah Whittemore-Lucy Snow
Josiah Whittemore- Betsy Foster
Mary Elizabeth Whittmore-Joseph Holbrook
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
I'm so grateful to American Ancestors and to Ancestry, who each had good information in their databases. These men who were colonial ancestors, but not necessarily immigrants, are difficult to trace!
Tuesday, December 3, 2019
Holbrook line: Kingsland Comstock, another elusive ancestor
I almost regret trying to write a blog post about Kingsland. I find wide variations on his birth date, no record of his death date, no location to be sure of, and nothing at all about him. I think I know who his parents are, I am reasonably sure who his wife was, and I do have information that may or may not be correct about his children. He may be hiding in plain sight but so far I haven't caught many glimpses of him.
Kingsland was the son of Kingsland and Mary Atwell Comstock. Supposedly his parents were married in 1711, which is a bit of a problem. First, I can't find documentation for that, and secondly, our Kingsland is presumed to be older than can be accounted for by this couple, if the marriage date is correct. We know that Kingsland married Rachel Crocker on September 18, 1717 in New London, so Kingsland would presumably have been in the neighborhood of 25 years old then. That gives a birthdate of about 1692. Kingsland Sr. and Mary were old enough to have been married when our Kingsland was born So either Mary Atwell was a second wife, or the marriage date, undocumented, is simply wrong.
At any rate, the younger Kingsland had at least three brothers and one sister. The family is believed to have stayed in New London, where our Kingsland married in 1717. But with absolutely no record to be found after a moderate amount of research, I'm wondering whether he may have taken his family elsewhere. Kingsland and Rachel are believed to have had at least seven children, all born between 1718 and 1727. After the 1727 birth, Kingsland disappears from New London records. Did they live off the grid, so to speak, or did Kingsland possibly desert his family? Did he die at sea?
I've not found a record of a will for Kingsland, nor an inventory. This further exclaims "Mystery" to me. His mother Mary died in 1755 and left a small estate, but the papers I've found didn't include a distribution. The supposition is that Kingsland was already deceased by then.
I wonder if he had actually left New London for some reason? I wonder what his occupation was and whether he attended church after his children were baptized. I wonder if he was literate. I wonder if he did leave his family an estate that has been lost. I wonder why he is so mysterious!
The line of descent is
Kingsland Comstock-Rachel Crocker
Rachel Comstock-John Eames
John Eames-Elizabeth Longbottom
Hannah Eames-James Lamphire
Susan Lamphire-Joseph Eddy
Susan Eddy-Hiram Stanard
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Kingsland was the son of Kingsland and Mary Atwell Comstock. Supposedly his parents were married in 1711, which is a bit of a problem. First, I can't find documentation for that, and secondly, our Kingsland is presumed to be older than can be accounted for by this couple, if the marriage date is correct. We know that Kingsland married Rachel Crocker on September 18, 1717 in New London, so Kingsland would presumably have been in the neighborhood of 25 years old then. That gives a birthdate of about 1692. Kingsland Sr. and Mary were old enough to have been married when our Kingsland was born So either Mary Atwell was a second wife, or the marriage date, undocumented, is simply wrong.
At any rate, the younger Kingsland had at least three brothers and one sister. The family is believed to have stayed in New London, where our Kingsland married in 1717. But with absolutely no record to be found after a moderate amount of research, I'm wondering whether he may have taken his family elsewhere. Kingsland and Rachel are believed to have had at least seven children, all born between 1718 and 1727. After the 1727 birth, Kingsland disappears from New London records. Did they live off the grid, so to speak, or did Kingsland possibly desert his family? Did he die at sea?
I've not found a record of a will for Kingsland, nor an inventory. This further exclaims "Mystery" to me. His mother Mary died in 1755 and left a small estate, but the papers I've found didn't include a distribution. The supposition is that Kingsland was already deceased by then.
I wonder if he had actually left New London for some reason? I wonder what his occupation was and whether he attended church after his children were baptized. I wonder if he was literate. I wonder if he did leave his family an estate that has been lost. I wonder why he is so mysterious!
The line of descent is
Kingsland Comstock-Rachel Crocker
Rachel Comstock-John Eames
John Eames-Elizabeth Longbottom
Hannah Eames-James Lamphire
Susan Lamphire-Joseph Eddy
Susan Eddy-Hiram Stanard
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Friday, November 29, 2019
Holbrook line: Israel Lazell 1671-1755
Eighty four years ought to have been enough to have left more of a footprint than our ancestor Israel seems to have left. I have birth and marriage records, his will, and an inventory. I don't have a death record, I don't have a burial location, I don't know what church he attended, if any, and I don't have a reference to his occupation, although I can guess it from the inventory. There is also one reference that he was a constable for a one year period. End of story.
So, even though this will be a short post, this is what I know so far. Israel Lazell was born September 24, 1671 in Hingham, Massachusetts to John and Elizabeth Gates Lazell. He was one of at least 11 children born to the couple, and he apparently lived his whole life out in Hingham. I say apparently because for some reason I am not locating a death record there, although his will states he was of Hingham, in Suffolk County. It is of course possible that he died elsewhere, perhaps on a visit to one of his children. Hingham was attacked by the natives so it's likely that his family evacuated the town, at least for a time.
The first we hear of Israel after his birth is his marriage, to Rachel Lincoln, daughter of Daniel and Susanna Cushing Lincoln, also of Hingham, on July 6, 1698. I don't know the religion of this couple but their first names indicate they were likely Puritan. The Old Ship Church in Hingham was built in 681, when Israel would have been just ten years old, and this is likely the church that he and his family attended both before and after his marriage. Israel and Rachel had at least four children who survived, and possibly others who died young. We don't know how literate Israel was, but he did sign his name to his will, and there were books in his inventory, so he must have had more than the minimal amount of education. (Typically, boys of this period learned to read and write, and girls learned to read well enough to read the Bible.)
The next information I've found about Israel is his will. Rachel had died in April of 1748 but it appears that Israel kept on doing what it was he was doing (farming, it appears) up until his final illness. The inventory is more extensive than would have been necessary for just one man living by himself. But wait, there's a discovery. Listed on his inventory is "one Negro woman". So he had a slave who cooked and cleaned for him, and probably took care of the smaller livestock and spun wool (a spinning wheel is in the inventory) and most of the things that a wife would have done. We have no way of knowing how long he had "owned" her or what her age, or her name, may have been.
Other information on the inventory is also revealing, though not as surprising. He had a sword, and several pieces of land (given away in the will), cattle and oxen and sheep, a fishing rod (Hingham is on the coast line), a "pare" of spectacles, 4 barrels of cider, several books, and furniture including a "great chare". In the will, it looks like our ancestor Isaac received a double share of the land that was granted. The total estate was valued at about 755 pounds, which was not large but would have been enough to have helped his sons a bit.
That's what I know about Israel. It sounds like he worked hard, farmed and fished, and was mostly occupied with supporting his family rather than public service. He deserves to have his place in our family tree noted.
The line of descent is:
Israel Lazell-Rachel Lincoln
Isaac Lazell-Deborah Marsh
Deborah Lazell-Levi Rockwood
Susanna Rockwood-Nahum Holbrook
Joseph Holbrook-Mary Elizabeth Whittemore
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
So, even though this will be a short post, this is what I know so far. Israel Lazell was born September 24, 1671 in Hingham, Massachusetts to John and Elizabeth Gates Lazell. He was one of at least 11 children born to the couple, and he apparently lived his whole life out in Hingham. I say apparently because for some reason I am not locating a death record there, although his will states he was of Hingham, in Suffolk County. It is of course possible that he died elsewhere, perhaps on a visit to one of his children. Hingham was attacked by the natives so it's likely that his family evacuated the town, at least for a time.
The first we hear of Israel after his birth is his marriage, to Rachel Lincoln, daughter of Daniel and Susanna Cushing Lincoln, also of Hingham, on July 6, 1698. I don't know the religion of this couple but their first names indicate they were likely Puritan. The Old Ship Church in Hingham was built in 681, when Israel would have been just ten years old, and this is likely the church that he and his family attended both before and after his marriage. Israel and Rachel had at least four children who survived, and possibly others who died young. We don't know how literate Israel was, but he did sign his name to his will, and there were books in his inventory, so he must have had more than the minimal amount of education. (Typically, boys of this period learned to read and write, and girls learned to read well enough to read the Bible.)
The next information I've found about Israel is his will. Rachel had died in April of 1748 but it appears that Israel kept on doing what it was he was doing (farming, it appears) up until his final illness. The inventory is more extensive than would have been necessary for just one man living by himself. But wait, there's a discovery. Listed on his inventory is "one Negro woman". So he had a slave who cooked and cleaned for him, and probably took care of the smaller livestock and spun wool (a spinning wheel is in the inventory) and most of the things that a wife would have done. We have no way of knowing how long he had "owned" her or what her age, or her name, may have been.
Other information on the inventory is also revealing, though not as surprising. He had a sword, and several pieces of land (given away in the will), cattle and oxen and sheep, a fishing rod (Hingham is on the coast line), a "pare" of spectacles, 4 barrels of cider, several books, and furniture including a "great chare". In the will, it looks like our ancestor Isaac received a double share of the land that was granted. The total estate was valued at about 755 pounds, which was not large but would have been enough to have helped his sons a bit.
That's what I know about Israel. It sounds like he worked hard, farmed and fished, and was mostly occupied with supporting his family rather than public service. He deserves to have his place in our family tree noted.
The line of descent is:
Israel Lazell-Rachel Lincoln
Isaac Lazell-Deborah Marsh
Deborah Lazell-Levi Rockwood
Susanna Rockwood-Nahum Holbrook
Joseph Holbrook-Mary Elizabeth Whittemore
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Tuesday, November 26, 2019
Holbrook line: John Rockwood 1641-1724
Our ancestor is notorious, not because he did anything wrong, but because he has confused and confounded genealogists and family historians. His death date is often given far too early, 1676, when it was his son John Rockwood who died during an attack by the Nipmucks during King Philip's War. He is sometimes assigned to the wrong parents. Nicholas Rockwood and Margaret Holbrook are not correct, as they didn't marry until our John was a teenager. Having said that, here's what we do know about John Rockwood, whose name is sometimes spelled Rocket or Rockett, just to make it more fun to research him.
He was born November 1, 1641 probably at Braintree, Massachusetts (even though the vital records don't seem to list his birth there). His parents were Richard Rockwood and Agnes Lovell, sometimes seen as Agnes Bicknell. Actually, Robert Charles Anderson doesn't accept that her maiden name was Lovell. She was married to Zachary Bicknell and married Richard Rockwood as a widow. John had an older step brother and at least two sisters who apparently grew up in the same household.
He married Joanna Ford, daughter of someone named Ford, apparently. There seems to be no firm resolution as to this; I've seen Nicholas, Thomas, and William Ford each listed on a different website as her father. However, I can say that they married July 15, 1662 in Braintree. John and Joanna had at least ten children together. Some were born in Braintree, some in Mendon, and some in Medfield. The family moved to Mendon by 1667, when John was awarded land in the meadows, probably indicating he already had a houselot, although it wasn't surveyed until 1669. That same year, he was appointed to a committee to agree on the boundaries between Mendon and Dedham.
John would likely have been content to stay his whole life in Mendon, but King Philip's War, particularly the burning of the towa n and the death of his twelve year old son, sent him and the family to Medfield for at least a few years. It would have been a fearsome time, and difficult to rebuilt after losing everything. I don't find him listed as a soldier in the war but he would have been only 34 or 35 years old so it's likely that he at least did garrison duty or was otherwise engaged with the militia.
His will tells us that he was a husbandman, or farmer. Joanna had died at some point because his will refers to his wife Rebecca, identified elsewhere as Rebecca Crafts. He wrote his will in Mendon but there isn't a death record there, so he may have moved, either to be with his wife's family or with one of his children. Unfortunately, I've not found an inventory for him, yet, which may indicate he had already disposed of his land and had few personal possessions.
John Rockwood was one of those quiet men, it seems, who took care of his family, saw sorrow and joy, and helped build New England. I'd like to learn more about him.
The line of descent is:
John Rockwood-Joanna Ford
Joanna Rockwood-Nicholas Cook
Mary Cook-Joseph Holbrook
Jesse Holbrook-Abigail Thayer
Amariah Holbrook-Molly Wright
Nahum Holbrook-Susanna Rockwood
Joseph Holbrook-Mary Elizabeth Whittemore
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Second line starts with John Rockwood and Joanna Ford
Joseph Rockwood-Mary Hayward
John Rockwood-Deborah Thayer
Joseph Rockwood-Alice Thompson
Levi Rockwood-Deborah Lazell
Susannah Rockwood-Nahum Holbrook
and on as above. So Susannah and Nahum were fourth cousins. I wonder if they knew that?
He was born November 1, 1641 probably at Braintree, Massachusetts (even though the vital records don't seem to list his birth there). His parents were Richard Rockwood and Agnes Lovell, sometimes seen as Agnes Bicknell. Actually, Robert Charles Anderson doesn't accept that her maiden name was Lovell. She was married to Zachary Bicknell and married Richard Rockwood as a widow. John had an older step brother and at least two sisters who apparently grew up in the same household.
He married Joanna Ford, daughter of someone named Ford, apparently. There seems to be no firm resolution as to this; I've seen Nicholas, Thomas, and William Ford each listed on a different website as her father. However, I can say that they married July 15, 1662 in Braintree. John and Joanna had at least ten children together. Some were born in Braintree, some in Mendon, and some in Medfield. The family moved to Mendon by 1667, when John was awarded land in the meadows, probably indicating he already had a houselot, although it wasn't surveyed until 1669. That same year, he was appointed to a committee to agree on the boundaries between Mendon and Dedham.
John would likely have been content to stay his whole life in Mendon, but King Philip's War, particularly the burning of the towa n and the death of his twelve year old son, sent him and the family to Medfield for at least a few years. It would have been a fearsome time, and difficult to rebuilt after losing everything. I don't find him listed as a soldier in the war but he would have been only 34 or 35 years old so it's likely that he at least did garrison duty or was otherwise engaged with the militia.
His will tells us that he was a husbandman, or farmer. Joanna had died at some point because his will refers to his wife Rebecca, identified elsewhere as Rebecca Crafts. He wrote his will in Mendon but there isn't a death record there, so he may have moved, either to be with his wife's family or with one of his children. Unfortunately, I've not found an inventory for him, yet, which may indicate he had already disposed of his land and had few personal possessions.
John Rockwood was one of those quiet men, it seems, who took care of his family, saw sorrow and joy, and helped build New England. I'd like to learn more about him.
The line of descent is:
John Rockwood-Joanna Ford
Joanna Rockwood-Nicholas Cook
Mary Cook-Joseph Holbrook
Jesse Holbrook-Abigail Thayer
Amariah Holbrook-Molly Wright
Nahum Holbrook-Susanna Rockwood
Joseph Holbrook-Mary Elizabeth Whittemore
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Second line starts with John Rockwood and Joanna Ford
Joseph Rockwood-Mary Hayward
John Rockwood-Deborah Thayer
Joseph Rockwood-Alice Thompson
Levi Rockwood-Deborah Lazell
Susannah Rockwood-Nahum Holbrook
and on as above. So Susannah and Nahum were fourth cousins. I wonder if they knew that?
Friday, November 22, 2019
Holbrook line: Thomas Stansbury 1714-1798
Thomas Stansbury is especially important to this family because of the woman he chose to marry. She is a descendant of a gateway ancestor, one of several who connect us in a long line back to royalty, history, and fun. (I love gateway ancestors, only because there are paper trails and it's relatively easy to learn about the connections. I love my plain Jane (or Joe) ancestors, too, but many of them I will never even have names for.)
Thomas is sometimes known as Thomas Stansbury Jr., because his parents were Thomas and Jane Dixon Hayes Stansbury. He was born in Saint Paul's Parish, Baltimore County, Maryland on April 24, 1714, which is now part of the Baltimore Historic District. At the time of the church's founding in 192, it was in a more rural setting, close to the Patapsco River. He was one of at least six children.
Thomas married Hannah Gorsuch, daughter of Charles and Sarah Cole Gorsuch and descendant of Anne Lovelace Gorsuch, the gateway ancestor, on March 2, 1734/35 in St. Paul's, Baltimore. The couple had at least twelve children together, ten of whom are mentioned in Thomas's will. He left nothing to daughter Jane, apparently because she was already wealthy, and one child had died early.
Although Thomas is listed as a patriot on the DAR website, he apparently had some difficulty in making an early decision about which side of the Revolutionary War to support. He was called before a "Committee" on May 19, 1776, because he had been reported as making comments favorable to the British. He was cleared of that suspicion and thanked for his zeal in supporting his country (which would become, but was not yet, the USA). The church the Stansbury family attended was Anglican and these families, as a whole, were more likely to support the British side than, say, our New England ancestors who descended from Puritans. By 1778, Thomas had definitely made up his mind when he took the oath of fidelity and support required by the state of Maryland of all voters and of all office holders.
Thomas was a plantation owner, and had a few slaves listed in his "personal property" inventory. It appears that at one time he had owned a great deal of land but I've not found a will to see whether he distributed the land in his will, or land records to see whether he had disposed of it earlier. Land that he may have owned at one time included "Dixon's Neck" of 450 acres, "Stansbury's Good Luck" of 90 acres, "Father's Care" of 100 acres, "Jerrico" of 700 acres, "Luke's Goodwill" of 111 acres, and 650 acres of "Franklin's Purchase". I haven't done the research to back this up and it's possible that some of these lands belonged to another Thomas Stansbury. Nor do I know whether he owned them all at once, or serially. It does indicate, however, that land perhaps needed to be replenished, perhaps because he was growing a crop like tobacco, which could generally be planted only three years in a row, and then the land needed to rest for ten years or so. It's also possible that he was a wealthy man.
Thomas died June 15, 1798 in Baltimore. I haven't yet found his will, but I did locate his inventory filed on August 6, 1798. Thomas was 84 years old when he died, but he still "owned" 6 Negroes, as they were called. He owned horses and swine, tools, a few crops (17 bushels of corn), and some, but not a lot, furniture and household goods. He also owned a gun, a rifle, and an old sword. Perhaps he was already downsizing and had given some of his property to children or grandchildren. Hannah lived until September of 1800 but I didn't locate her by name in the 1800 census. She was likely living with one of her children.
It's interesting to think about Thomas, about how his life was so very different from ours, and about how he came to change his political beliefs. I'd love to sit and chat with this couple, to absorb a little of their culture and to learn how he treated his slaves. I hope he was as close to being a good master as he could be, given that a master, by definition, would not fit the 21st century meaning of good.
The line of descent is:
Thomas Stansbury-Hannah Gorsuch
Rachel Stansbury-Alexis Lemmon
Sarah Lemmon-Abraham Hetrick
Isaac Hetrick-Elizabeth Black
Mary Alice Hetrick-Louis Stanard
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Thomas is sometimes known as Thomas Stansbury Jr., because his parents were Thomas and Jane Dixon Hayes Stansbury. He was born in Saint Paul's Parish, Baltimore County, Maryland on April 24, 1714, which is now part of the Baltimore Historic District. At the time of the church's founding in 192, it was in a more rural setting, close to the Patapsco River. He was one of at least six children.
Thomas married Hannah Gorsuch, daughter of Charles and Sarah Cole Gorsuch and descendant of Anne Lovelace Gorsuch, the gateway ancestor, on March 2, 1734/35 in St. Paul's, Baltimore. The couple had at least twelve children together, ten of whom are mentioned in Thomas's will. He left nothing to daughter Jane, apparently because she was already wealthy, and one child had died early.
Although Thomas is listed as a patriot on the DAR website, he apparently had some difficulty in making an early decision about which side of the Revolutionary War to support. He was called before a "Committee" on May 19, 1776, because he had been reported as making comments favorable to the British. He was cleared of that suspicion and thanked for his zeal in supporting his country (which would become, but was not yet, the USA). The church the Stansbury family attended was Anglican and these families, as a whole, were more likely to support the British side than, say, our New England ancestors who descended from Puritans. By 1778, Thomas had definitely made up his mind when he took the oath of fidelity and support required by the state of Maryland of all voters and of all office holders.
Thomas was a plantation owner, and had a few slaves listed in his "personal property" inventory. It appears that at one time he had owned a great deal of land but I've not found a will to see whether he distributed the land in his will, or land records to see whether he had disposed of it earlier. Land that he may have owned at one time included "Dixon's Neck" of 450 acres, "Stansbury's Good Luck" of 90 acres, "Father's Care" of 100 acres, "Jerrico" of 700 acres, "Luke's Goodwill" of 111 acres, and 650 acres of "Franklin's Purchase". I haven't done the research to back this up and it's possible that some of these lands belonged to another Thomas Stansbury. Nor do I know whether he owned them all at once, or serially. It does indicate, however, that land perhaps needed to be replenished, perhaps because he was growing a crop like tobacco, which could generally be planted only three years in a row, and then the land needed to rest for ten years or so. It's also possible that he was a wealthy man.
Thomas died June 15, 1798 in Baltimore. I haven't yet found his will, but I did locate his inventory filed on August 6, 1798. Thomas was 84 years old when he died, but he still "owned" 6 Negroes, as they were called. He owned horses and swine, tools, a few crops (17 bushels of corn), and some, but not a lot, furniture and household goods. He also owned a gun, a rifle, and an old sword. Perhaps he was already downsizing and had given some of his property to children or grandchildren. Hannah lived until September of 1800 but I didn't locate her by name in the 1800 census. She was likely living with one of her children.
It's interesting to think about Thomas, about how his life was so very different from ours, and about how he came to change his political beliefs. I'd love to sit and chat with this couple, to absorb a little of their culture and to learn how he treated his slaves. I hope he was as close to being a good master as he could be, given that a master, by definition, would not fit the 21st century meaning of good.
The line of descent is:
Thomas Stansbury-Hannah Gorsuch
Rachel Stansbury-Alexis Lemmon
Sarah Lemmon-Abraham Hetrick
Isaac Hetrick-Elizabeth Black
Mary Alice Hetrick-Louis Stanard
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Tuesday, November 19, 2019
Holbrook line: The remarkable Elizabeth Stannard 1884-1959
My mother thought she was a very interesting person. My research shows this to be true. I actually had the privilege of her acquaintance, although I was very young and she was very old (to me) when she passed away. I remember the phone call, and I remember thinking I should cry, but mostly I remember thinking that now she wouldn't be able to tell us more of her stories. Unfortunately, I don't remember her stories, but here is a little of her story.
Elizabeth was born to Louis Elwin and Mary Alice Hetrick Stanard on August 18, 1884, somewhere in Kansas-likely Harvey County but I've not found a record that gives a precise location. She was the oldest of the three children, and was early a bit of a rebel as she spelled her name with two "n's" and her parents and grandparents, and probably two generations beyond that, had used one "n". The story is that her ancestor changed the spelling of his name after a sign painter was able to only include 7 letters in a storefront sign he painted for one of the family back in New York. Some of the descendants kept the shortened spelling and some did not, and Elizabeth and her sister, Etta, reverted to the longer version.
We know Louis and Mary Alice were in Ottawa, Kansas in 1900 and in 1905. Shortly after that, about 1908, the family (Etta trailing by a few years) packed up and moved to Stevens County, Washington. Louis and Mary Alice had a home there, and Elizabeth also homesteaded, receiving her patent in 1915. She taught school to pay to have her land cleared, but she apparently built the "improvements" herself, including putting a roof on her barn. She taught school in Stevens County for several years and in 1916, before women could vote in national elections, was elected superintendent of schools for Stevens County. Although these were not large schools, there were many, and visiting schools, hiring teachers, overseeing curriculum, and other duties kept her so busy that she hired her father to be her assistant superintendent. During this time, she was also assisting her father in setting up Sunday school classes (Baptist) all over the area.
She must have been a good hearted, family loving woman because there are several comments in the local newspaper that she was tending to this or that family suffering from the flu, presumably, due to the dates, that flu known as the "Spanish influenza" that hit the area hard. Her sister-in-law, wife of Elwin Stanard, died of influenza in 1920., but I don't know that she was directly involved in her care.
By 1920 Elizabeth was living in Spokane, Washington as a boarder, and teaching Latin at Lewis and Clark High school there. Her father died in 1923 and soon Elizabeth bought a home and her mother came to live with her. She helped raise her brother's three sons and possibly two daughters, especially when they were attending high school. Interestingly, in 1930 she is the home owner and in 1940 the census shows her as the sister of the homeowner. It's the same address, and she always owned the house so the census taker didn't get the straight goods on this. She also helped raise the two sons of her sister, and it seems they all stayed with her when school was in session.
While she was helping raise her nephews and nieces, and watching after her sister who sometimes needed guidance, she continued her education. An article about her retirement in 1949 states (and I haven't proven this) that her graduate work included studies at Columbia, Reed, University of Washington, Gonzaga, the University of Chicago, Washington State College and Eastern Washington College of Education. She taught for 44 years, but she never stopped learning, and she did all this while caring for her extended family, and for her mother as she aged.
When she retired, she didn't sit around doing nothing, not our Bessie. She was always active at Liberty Park Baptist Church, and in various civic organizations. And she became a world traveler. The family story is that some of the Stannard boys helped her go to Europe at least twice. On the first trip, she sailed on the Queen Elizabeth and the trip included Egypt. The second trip seems to have been more in the northern part of Europe, including Switzerland and Germany. She brought back gifts for her nieces and nephews from Jerusalem, Denmark, England, Switzerland, and probably other places. (I still treasure a small volume of Hans Christian Andersen's Fairy Tales that she gave to me,)
Elizabeth Stannard died suddenly on July 8, 1959 in Spokane. I hope I've told you enough about her that you, too, will smile when you think of her. She was stern, funny, loving, giving, a strict disciplinarian and yes, remarkable. I wish I'd heard more of her stories!
Elizabeth was born to Louis Elwin and Mary Alice Hetrick Stanard on August 18, 1884, somewhere in Kansas-likely Harvey County but I've not found a record that gives a precise location. She was the oldest of the three children, and was early a bit of a rebel as she spelled her name with two "n's" and her parents and grandparents, and probably two generations beyond that, had used one "n". The story is that her ancestor changed the spelling of his name after a sign painter was able to only include 7 letters in a storefront sign he painted for one of the family back in New York. Some of the descendants kept the shortened spelling and some did not, and Elizabeth and her sister, Etta, reverted to the longer version.
We know Louis and Mary Alice were in Ottawa, Kansas in 1900 and in 1905. Shortly after that, about 1908, the family (Etta trailing by a few years) packed up and moved to Stevens County, Washington. Louis and Mary Alice had a home there, and Elizabeth also homesteaded, receiving her patent in 1915. She taught school to pay to have her land cleared, but she apparently built the "improvements" herself, including putting a roof on her barn. She taught school in Stevens County for several years and in 1916, before women could vote in national elections, was elected superintendent of schools for Stevens County. Although these were not large schools, there were many, and visiting schools, hiring teachers, overseeing curriculum, and other duties kept her so busy that she hired her father to be her assistant superintendent. During this time, she was also assisting her father in setting up Sunday school classes (Baptist) all over the area.
She must have been a good hearted, family loving woman because there are several comments in the local newspaper that she was tending to this or that family suffering from the flu, presumably, due to the dates, that flu known as the "Spanish influenza" that hit the area hard. Her sister-in-law, wife of Elwin Stanard, died of influenza in 1920., but I don't know that she was directly involved in her care.
By 1920 Elizabeth was living in Spokane, Washington as a boarder, and teaching Latin at Lewis and Clark High school there. Her father died in 1923 and soon Elizabeth bought a home and her mother came to live with her. She helped raise her brother's three sons and possibly two daughters, especially when they were attending high school. Interestingly, in 1930 she is the home owner and in 1940 the census shows her as the sister of the homeowner. It's the same address, and she always owned the house so the census taker didn't get the straight goods on this. She also helped raise the two sons of her sister, and it seems they all stayed with her when school was in session.
While she was helping raise her nephews and nieces, and watching after her sister who sometimes needed guidance, she continued her education. An article about her retirement in 1949 states (and I haven't proven this) that her graduate work included studies at Columbia, Reed, University of Washington, Gonzaga, the University of Chicago, Washington State College and Eastern Washington College of Education. She taught for 44 years, but she never stopped learning, and she did all this while caring for her extended family, and for her mother as she aged.
When she retired, she didn't sit around doing nothing, not our Bessie. She was always active at Liberty Park Baptist Church, and in various civic organizations. And she became a world traveler. The family story is that some of the Stannard boys helped her go to Europe at least twice. On the first trip, she sailed on the Queen Elizabeth and the trip included Egypt. The second trip seems to have been more in the northern part of Europe, including Switzerland and Germany. She brought back gifts for her nieces and nephews from Jerusalem, Denmark, England, Switzerland, and probably other places. (I still treasure a small volume of Hans Christian Andersen's Fairy Tales that she gave to me,)
Elizabeth Stannard died suddenly on July 8, 1959 in Spokane. I hope I've told you enough about her that you, too, will smile when you think of her. She was stern, funny, loving, giving, a strict disciplinarian and yes, remarkable. I wish I'd heard more of her stories!
Friday, November 15, 2019
Allen line: The second Daniel Scofield 1648-1714
Sometimes it's difficult to find anything new about the second generation of colonists. Sometimes it's hard to find anything at all about them. With Daniel Scofield, son of one Daniel Scofield and father of another, we are somewhat more fortunate. I've been able to pull some bits and pieces together that will help us get an idea of his life. I say, "idea" because there is still much I don't know.
Daniel was the second son of Daniel and first wife Sarah Scofield. The elder Daniel was one of the early founders of the townof Stamford, Connecticut, and was first named as a resident in 1641 (settlement had begun in 1640.) Our subject, Daniel II, was born about 1647 or 1648, but I've not found documentation for an actual date. He was one of at least five children, and he outlived his siblings.
One mystery about Daniel at this point is his occupation. He was financially stable, perhaps even well off, judging by tax records of 1700, but it's not clear how he made his living. He married Abigail Merwin, daughter of Miles and Elizabeth Powell Merwin, in Stamford in about 1671, when he was about 24 years old. He and Abigail had at least eight children together.
Daniel's house lot was number three in the town according to a map from 1685. I don't know whether he inherited this lot or whether he purchased it from someone, but it was certainly an early number and may indicate either that the lots were assigned by drawing, or that the original owner had his choice of lots.
Daniel wasn't in the top tier of town government. Most of his duties had to do with the church, such as helping to settle disputes, tything man, and he also was made a townsman in 1700. (I'm not sure whether this was a "freeman" or whether this was what Massachusetts referred to as a selectman, a member of the council. That same year he was appointed a sheepmaster, to take care of the flock.
In the town tax records of 1700, his estate was valued at 115 pounds, 5 shillings. There were men in town with higher valuations, but not many. So he made money somehow, and was more than the term sheepmaster might indicate to us.
Daniel lived his life, and died October 10, 1714. I don't know whether he ever left the village he was born in, although Long Island Sound borders the town, and it wouldn't have been far to travel to New York, or to Hartford, for that matter.
His inventory is not detailed but it indicates that he had several parcels of land and homes, valued at about 300 pounds, and 149 pounds in personal property. An additional amount had been set aside for Abigail. There were debts to be paid. It's interesting that it appears that more was spent for rum and sugar, apparently for the funeral or visitation, than for the coffin. The boards for the coffin were two shillings, the coffin making (marking? not sure I read this correctly) was three shillings and four pence, and the rum and sugar was 10 shillings and 10 pence.
I've not found record of Abigail's death but several sites list it as 1714 also. She is mentioned extensively in the settlement papers so she was still alive as of November 29, 1714. I guess her death date is one of the questions still unanswered, as well as how Daniel made his living. This, however, is more information than we have for many ancestors, and it is enough to recognize that Daniel was a hard working, pious man.
The line of descent is:
Daniel Scofield-Abigail Merwin
Daniel Scofield-Hannah Hoyt
Hannah Scofield-Nathaniel Finch
Jesse Finch-Hannah
Hannah Finch-John Bell
Hannah Bell-Thomas Knott
John Wilson Knott-Harriet Starr
Edith Knott-Edward Allen
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
Their descendants
Daniel was the second son of Daniel and first wife Sarah Scofield. The elder Daniel was one of the early founders of the townof Stamford, Connecticut, and was first named as a resident in 1641 (settlement had begun in 1640.) Our subject, Daniel II, was born about 1647 or 1648, but I've not found documentation for an actual date. He was one of at least five children, and he outlived his siblings.
One mystery about Daniel at this point is his occupation. He was financially stable, perhaps even well off, judging by tax records of 1700, but it's not clear how he made his living. He married Abigail Merwin, daughter of Miles and Elizabeth Powell Merwin, in Stamford in about 1671, when he was about 24 years old. He and Abigail had at least eight children together.
Daniel's house lot was number three in the town according to a map from 1685. I don't know whether he inherited this lot or whether he purchased it from someone, but it was certainly an early number and may indicate either that the lots were assigned by drawing, or that the original owner had his choice of lots.
Daniel wasn't in the top tier of town government. Most of his duties had to do with the church, such as helping to settle disputes, tything man, and he also was made a townsman in 1700. (I'm not sure whether this was a "freeman" or whether this was what Massachusetts referred to as a selectman, a member of the council. That same year he was appointed a sheepmaster, to take care of the flock.
In the town tax records of 1700, his estate was valued at 115 pounds, 5 shillings. There were men in town with higher valuations, but not many. So he made money somehow, and was more than the term sheepmaster might indicate to us.
Daniel lived his life, and died October 10, 1714. I don't know whether he ever left the village he was born in, although Long Island Sound borders the town, and it wouldn't have been far to travel to New York, or to Hartford, for that matter.
His inventory is not detailed but it indicates that he had several parcels of land and homes, valued at about 300 pounds, and 149 pounds in personal property. An additional amount had been set aside for Abigail. There were debts to be paid. It's interesting that it appears that more was spent for rum and sugar, apparently for the funeral or visitation, than for the coffin. The boards for the coffin were two shillings, the coffin making (marking? not sure I read this correctly) was three shillings and four pence, and the rum and sugar was 10 shillings and 10 pence.
I've not found record of Abigail's death but several sites list it as 1714 also. She is mentioned extensively in the settlement papers so she was still alive as of November 29, 1714. I guess her death date is one of the questions still unanswered, as well as how Daniel made his living. This, however, is more information than we have for many ancestors, and it is enough to recognize that Daniel was a hard working, pious man.
The line of descent is:
Daniel Scofield-Abigail Merwin
Daniel Scofield-Hannah Hoyt
Hannah Scofield-Nathaniel Finch
Jesse Finch-Hannah
Hannah Finch-John Bell
Hannah Bell-Thomas Knott
John Wilson Knott-Harriet Starr
Edith Knott-Edward Allen
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
Their descendants
Tuesday, November 12, 2019
Holbrook line: Samuel Hayward 1641-1713
Samuel Hayward left us some traces in the records, and for that, in this month of November, I am profoundly grateful. He is one of those ancestors who seem to be little researched, perhaps because there were several Samuel Haywards in Massachusetts Bay Colony of about the same time period and year. Fortunately, if we limit our search to Braintree and then Mendon, Massachusetts, his story becomes if not clear, at least less murky.
Our Samuel was born in about 1641 to William and Margery Knight Hayward. I haven't found record of his birth but it was in the Boston or Braintree area, because that is where his parents settled early. (His parents were those I've written of before, who apparently went to Barbados for a short time before arriving in Massachusetts.)
Samuel was one of at least 8 children, so he had quite a full family life. As an adult, he was a "housewright", so he was likely apprenticed to or at least worked with a housewright as soon as he had finished whatever schooling he acquired. A housewright built wooden (as opposed to stone or brick) houses, but the job involved more than a carpenter's work. He cut the wood, sawed it into planks, and then built the house with the wood he had chosen and prepared. There was no middleman, and no one else to blame if something was not done correctly. I have much respect for housewrights after learning this!
Samuel married Mehitable Thompson, daughter of John and Sarah Trevore Thompson, on November 28, 1666 in Medfield, Massachusetts. They had at least twelve children together. Samuel is listed as a founding father of Mendon, which was officially formed from Braintree in 1667. He held several town positions. In 1668 he was a surveyor of highways, in 1692 and 1696 a selectman, and in 1696 also a tything man.
One of the most remembered events of his life was probably King Philip's War. Mendon was one of the towns that was attacked early in the war, with loss of life, and later the town was burned to the ground by the native Americans. Mendon had several villages of "praying Indians", converted by our grand uncle John Eliot, and it was not these groups who rebelled. They did, however, suffer consequences. Samuel and his family left Mendon, perhaps soon after the first attack, but Samuel was back in 1677 to rebuild his home, and doubtless those of others who returned also.
There were at least two Samuel Haywards who are listed as soldiers in King Philip's War, but I didn't find those reports also listing other Mendon men, so I think the ones who are listed in the records are not our Samuel. He may have gone to stay with friends or relatives in Braintree, expectantly waiting for the end of the war.
By 1680 Samuel's family was probably back in Mendon, and life was slowly returning to normal. Samuel was hired by the town to raise (build} the meeting house, which was to be 26 feet by 24 feet in size. He was to be paid 3 shillings a day, with part of that to be in kind, a cow and a calf. There was some unspecified dispute involved during or following construction, but it was resolved and the town and Samuel each went about their business.
Samuel's wife Mehitabel died in 1700 and the next year he married Elizabeth Sabin. Samuel died on July 29, 1713, without leaving a will. If there is an inventory, I haven't located it, either. However, I did locate papers, filed in Suffolk County, showing that the surviving children (or in the case of the several daughters who were married, their husbands) agreed to a settlement of the estate. Interestingly, there were few who could sign their name to this document; most used a mark. (Joseph Rockwood, our ancestor, did sign his name and it is quite legible.) A probate judge signed off on the "deal" and presumably everyone lived happily ever after. We do know that Samuel had a house and quite a bit of land. Housewright may not sound like a glamorous job, but in a time when everyone needed to have a house built, it paid the bills and then some.
I like Samuel. He took care of his family, he was a public servant, an honest and hard working man, and he served his church also. And I especially like that I was able to find a little bit of information about him!
The line of descent is:
Samuel Hayward-Mehitabel Thompson
Mary Hayward-Joseph Rockwood
John Rockwood-Deborah Thayer
Joseph Rockwood-Alice Thompson
Levi Rockwood-Deborah Lazell
Susanna Rockwood-Nahum Holbrook
Joseph Holbrook-Mary Elizabeth Whittemore
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Our Samuel was born in about 1641 to William and Margery Knight Hayward. I haven't found record of his birth but it was in the Boston or Braintree area, because that is where his parents settled early. (His parents were those I've written of before, who apparently went to Barbados for a short time before arriving in Massachusetts.)
Samuel was one of at least 8 children, so he had quite a full family life. As an adult, he was a "housewright", so he was likely apprenticed to or at least worked with a housewright as soon as he had finished whatever schooling he acquired. A housewright built wooden (as opposed to stone or brick) houses, but the job involved more than a carpenter's work. He cut the wood, sawed it into planks, and then built the house with the wood he had chosen and prepared. There was no middleman, and no one else to blame if something was not done correctly. I have much respect for housewrights after learning this!
Samuel married Mehitable Thompson, daughter of John and Sarah Trevore Thompson, on November 28, 1666 in Medfield, Massachusetts. They had at least twelve children together. Samuel is listed as a founding father of Mendon, which was officially formed from Braintree in 1667. He held several town positions. In 1668 he was a surveyor of highways, in 1692 and 1696 a selectman, and in 1696 also a tything man.
One of the most remembered events of his life was probably King Philip's War. Mendon was one of the towns that was attacked early in the war, with loss of life, and later the town was burned to the ground by the native Americans. Mendon had several villages of "praying Indians", converted by our grand uncle John Eliot, and it was not these groups who rebelled. They did, however, suffer consequences. Samuel and his family left Mendon, perhaps soon after the first attack, but Samuel was back in 1677 to rebuild his home, and doubtless those of others who returned also.
There were at least two Samuel Haywards who are listed as soldiers in King Philip's War, but I didn't find those reports also listing other Mendon men, so I think the ones who are listed in the records are not our Samuel. He may have gone to stay with friends or relatives in Braintree, expectantly waiting for the end of the war.
By 1680 Samuel's family was probably back in Mendon, and life was slowly returning to normal. Samuel was hired by the town to raise (build} the meeting house, which was to be 26 feet by 24 feet in size. He was to be paid 3 shillings a day, with part of that to be in kind, a cow and a calf. There was some unspecified dispute involved during or following construction, but it was resolved and the town and Samuel each went about their business.
Samuel's wife Mehitabel died in 1700 and the next year he married Elizabeth Sabin. Samuel died on July 29, 1713, without leaving a will. If there is an inventory, I haven't located it, either. However, I did locate papers, filed in Suffolk County, showing that the surviving children (or in the case of the several daughters who were married, their husbands) agreed to a settlement of the estate. Interestingly, there were few who could sign their name to this document; most used a mark. (Joseph Rockwood, our ancestor, did sign his name and it is quite legible.) A probate judge signed off on the "deal" and presumably everyone lived happily ever after. We do know that Samuel had a house and quite a bit of land. Housewright may not sound like a glamorous job, but in a time when everyone needed to have a house built, it paid the bills and then some.
I like Samuel. He took care of his family, he was a public servant, an honest and hard working man, and he served his church also. And I especially like that I was able to find a little bit of information about him!
The line of descent is:
Samuel Hayward-Mehitabel Thompson
Mary Hayward-Joseph Rockwood
John Rockwood-Deborah Thayer
Joseph Rockwood-Alice Thompson
Levi Rockwood-Deborah Lazell
Susanna Rockwood-Nahum Holbrook
Joseph Holbrook-Mary Elizabeth Whittemore
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Friday, November 8, 2019
Holbrook line: Benjamin Amos 1748-1814
I wrote a blog post recent about Robert Amos, brother to Benjamin. It was an interesting (to me) blog post because I was able to uncover some information about Robert that was new to me. With Benjamin, I have some new to me information but I am not sure what it all means.
Let's start at the beginning. Like Robert, Benjamin was the son of James and Hannah Clarke Amos. James and Hannah had at least nine children. Robert was at least seven years older than Benjamin, so I don't know how close they were as children. When Benjamin grew up, he married Sarah Bussey, daughter of Edward Bussey and Mary, who was the widow of Edward Pendergrass. (I have not yet solved the mystery of Mary's maiden name, and would surely love some help on that challenge.)
Benjamin and Sarah were married in about 1772, and had at least four children-Elizabeth, Mary, Ann, and James, all named in Benjamin's will. Now here's a mystery: Did Benjamin ever leave the land he lived on? The reason I ask is that I can't find another Amos in this immediate family who would have been alive to be the Benjamin Amos who was listed as a merchant in Baltimore, in 1800. The location is given as 48 Calvert Street. If this is the same Calvert Street as the one so named now, then he would have been just a few blocks from the harbor, an excellent location for a merchant. Also, if we assume this is our Benjamin, it gives us a reason that his granddaughter Martha might have been in Baltimore when she married Peter Black in 1812.
But then there is the census information. It shows Benjamin Amos in Harford County, Maryland (where he was born and died) in 1790, with 6 white males (presumably including himself), one of which is under 16, and 6 females. No slaves are reported, but since I can't identify all of these people it's possible that slaves were included in these numbers. The 1800 census, when he possibly was in Baltimore, shows him in Harford County District 4, with a male and a female over 45, one male aged 10-15, one female 16-25, and ten slaves. The 1810 census shows him at Havre de Grace, Harford, Maryland, with one female 16-25, a male over age 45, and 10 slaves. Two questions arise: Slaves, and where was Sarah?
The only thing I can say about the slavery issue is that grandfather William was a Quaker, and abhorred slavery. There was a split in the family between those who were willing to "own" slaves and those who were not. I don't know how serious the split was but I do know a family that had been harmonious in their beliefs was under considerable strain as the slavery issue played out.
I don't know where Sarah was in 1810. Possibly she was with a child, nursing someone through an illness or pregnancy. In 1820, after Benjamin had died, she was in Election District 4, Harford County, with one slave to care for her. No slaves are mentioned in Benjamin's will but he did divide his personal property up between his four children, after his wife had her thirds. So did he still have slaves? I don't know.
Also confusing are the dates. Benjamin's will is dated January 2, 1815 and his death date is generally given as January 15, 1815. However, there are wills dated 1814 just before his will and also the second will after his. And..there are inventories of a sort, handled by James Amos, the executor of Benjamin's will, that are dated November 14, 1814 and then January 19, 1818. These refer to debts and to cash on hand. Did James serve as executor for another Benjamin Amos? Did whoever copied these wills read the dates wrong? What is the explanation for this?
So we are left with mysteries: What happened to the slaves, and when and how did he initially acquire them? Did Benjamin have a business in Baltimore at one time? Did he perhaps lose them when a business failed, or sell them to keep a business afloat? When did he die, really-1814 or 1815? Clearly there is more to be learned about this ancestor of ours, but what we do know is intriguing.
The line of descent is:
Benjamin Amos-Sarah Bussey
Elizabeth Amos-Robert Amos
Martha Amos-Peter Black
Elizabeth Black-Isaac Hetrick
Mary Alice Hetrick-Louis Stanard
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Let's start at the beginning. Like Robert, Benjamin was the son of James and Hannah Clarke Amos. James and Hannah had at least nine children. Robert was at least seven years older than Benjamin, so I don't know how close they were as children. When Benjamin grew up, he married Sarah Bussey, daughter of Edward Bussey and Mary, who was the widow of Edward Pendergrass. (I have not yet solved the mystery of Mary's maiden name, and would surely love some help on that challenge.)
Benjamin and Sarah were married in about 1772, and had at least four children-Elizabeth, Mary, Ann, and James, all named in Benjamin's will. Now here's a mystery: Did Benjamin ever leave the land he lived on? The reason I ask is that I can't find another Amos in this immediate family who would have been alive to be the Benjamin Amos who was listed as a merchant in Baltimore, in 1800. The location is given as 48 Calvert Street. If this is the same Calvert Street as the one so named now, then he would have been just a few blocks from the harbor, an excellent location for a merchant. Also, if we assume this is our Benjamin, it gives us a reason that his granddaughter Martha might have been in Baltimore when she married Peter Black in 1812.
But then there is the census information. It shows Benjamin Amos in Harford County, Maryland (where he was born and died) in 1790, with 6 white males (presumably including himself), one of which is under 16, and 6 females. No slaves are reported, but since I can't identify all of these people it's possible that slaves were included in these numbers. The 1800 census, when he possibly was in Baltimore, shows him in Harford County District 4, with a male and a female over 45, one male aged 10-15, one female 16-25, and ten slaves. The 1810 census shows him at Havre de Grace, Harford, Maryland, with one female 16-25, a male over age 45, and 10 slaves. Two questions arise: Slaves, and where was Sarah?
The only thing I can say about the slavery issue is that grandfather William was a Quaker, and abhorred slavery. There was a split in the family between those who were willing to "own" slaves and those who were not. I don't know how serious the split was but I do know a family that had been harmonious in their beliefs was under considerable strain as the slavery issue played out.
I don't know where Sarah was in 1810. Possibly she was with a child, nursing someone through an illness or pregnancy. In 1820, after Benjamin had died, she was in Election District 4, Harford County, with one slave to care for her. No slaves are mentioned in Benjamin's will but he did divide his personal property up between his four children, after his wife had her thirds. So did he still have slaves? I don't know.
Also confusing are the dates. Benjamin's will is dated January 2, 1815 and his death date is generally given as January 15, 1815. However, there are wills dated 1814 just before his will and also the second will after his. And..there are inventories of a sort, handled by James Amos, the executor of Benjamin's will, that are dated November 14, 1814 and then January 19, 1818. These refer to debts and to cash on hand. Did James serve as executor for another Benjamin Amos? Did whoever copied these wills read the dates wrong? What is the explanation for this?
So we are left with mysteries: What happened to the slaves, and when and how did he initially acquire them? Did Benjamin have a business in Baltimore at one time? Did he perhaps lose them when a business failed, or sell them to keep a business afloat? When did he die, really-1814 or 1815? Clearly there is more to be learned about this ancestor of ours, but what we do know is intriguing.
The line of descent is:
Benjamin Amos-Sarah Bussey
Elizabeth Amos-Robert Amos
Martha Amos-Peter Black
Elizabeth Black-Isaac Hetrick
Mary Alice Hetrick-Louis Stanard
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Tuesday, November 5, 2019
Allen line: Samuel Davis 1637-1692
This is a poor excuse for a post. I admit it, and I write it because of a hope that someone who reads this will have at least one more little tidbit to add to what little I think I know about Samuel. I also write it because no one in our family should be ignored.
Samuel is traditionally given as the son of Foulk or Fulke Davis and Mary Haynes Dayton, although that may not be correct. Fulke was the sort of character who had a girl in every port (on Long Island) and I've not found a marriage record for this couple, but Samuel was born possibly about 1637 in Brookhaven, Suffolk County, New York.
He married Mary, possibly Mary Mather, about 1671, at Southampton, Suffolk Co, New York (Long Island). He died in 1692 at Jamaica, Queens County, NY.
That is what I know about Samuel. I can make a few other guesses. My guess is as good as yours, unless you've found more information than I have. Since his father was something of a ne'er do well, we can guess that Samuel had a hard life. He may have been employed at sea, or he may have worked menial jobs such as his father had. Perhaps he was lucky and was put out to learn a trade of some sort.
There is a deed from a Samuel Davis to his son Samuel Davis, dated January 14, 1729. It mentions that the older Samuel Davis was a blacksmith. If this is the son of our Samuel, then at least he was able to give his oldest son a trade, also. And if this Samuel is the son of our Samuel, then there were also sons Obadiah, Joseph, and Daniel; those names are mentioned in the deed and the first two were specified to be brothers. But that's a big, unproven if.
Samuel is believed to also have had at least one daughter, Hester, and that is where we connect.
I have no will, no inventory, no hint of anything further at this point. His death is generally given as 1692, which is the same year his father died. I don't know whether there is any record of Samuel's death, or whether this is an "after 1692" date. It would probably take a trip to the appropriate towns and courthouses to even have a chance of learning anything new, but new records are coming on line all the time and perhaps next week something new will show up. Then maybe we'll be able to write more of his story, and find out whether he was able to improve his situation in life or not.
The line of descent is:
Samuel Davis-Mary possibly Mather
Hester Davis- John Finch
John Finch-Sarah
Nathaniel Finch-Hannah Scofield
Jesse Finch-Hannah
Hannah Finch-John Bell
Harriet Bell-Thomas Knott
John Wilson Knott-Harriet Starr
Edith Knott-Edward Allen
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
Their descendants
Samuel is traditionally given as the son of Foulk or Fulke Davis and Mary Haynes Dayton, although that may not be correct. Fulke was the sort of character who had a girl in every port (on Long Island) and I've not found a marriage record for this couple, but Samuel was born possibly about 1637 in Brookhaven, Suffolk County, New York.
He married Mary, possibly Mary Mather, about 1671, at Southampton, Suffolk Co, New York (Long Island). He died in 1692 at Jamaica, Queens County, NY.
That is what I know about Samuel. I can make a few other guesses. My guess is as good as yours, unless you've found more information than I have. Since his father was something of a ne'er do well, we can guess that Samuel had a hard life. He may have been employed at sea, or he may have worked menial jobs such as his father had. Perhaps he was lucky and was put out to learn a trade of some sort.
There is a deed from a Samuel Davis to his son Samuel Davis, dated January 14, 1729. It mentions that the older Samuel Davis was a blacksmith. If this is the son of our Samuel, then at least he was able to give his oldest son a trade, also. And if this Samuel is the son of our Samuel, then there were also sons Obadiah, Joseph, and Daniel; those names are mentioned in the deed and the first two were specified to be brothers. But that's a big, unproven if.
Samuel is believed to also have had at least one daughter, Hester, and that is where we connect.
I have no will, no inventory, no hint of anything further at this point. His death is generally given as 1692, which is the same year his father died. I don't know whether there is any record of Samuel's death, or whether this is an "after 1692" date. It would probably take a trip to the appropriate towns and courthouses to even have a chance of learning anything new, but new records are coming on line all the time and perhaps next week something new will show up. Then maybe we'll be able to write more of his story, and find out whether he was able to improve his situation in life or not.
The line of descent is:
Samuel Davis-Mary possibly Mather
Hester Davis- John Finch
John Finch-Sarah
Nathaniel Finch-Hannah Scofield
Jesse Finch-Hannah
Hannah Finch-John Bell
Harriet Bell-Thomas Knott
John Wilson Knott-Harriet Starr
Edith Knott-Edward Allen
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
Their descendants
Friday, November 1, 2019
Holbrook line: Simon Thompson, Immigrant 1619-1658
Simon Thompson was about 11 years old when he came to Massachusetts with his father, James Thompson or Thomson, and his step-mother, Elizabeth. He was born to James and his mother, Ann, and was christened July 3, 1619 at Friesden, Lincolnshire, England. He was one of four children born to this couple before Ann died about December 13, 1625. Simon's father, James, married Elizabeth in 1625 and soon moved to the neighboring parish of Fishtoft. This couple had two children born in England. When James and Elizabeth came to Massachusetts they had four children with them, Simon, James, Jonathan and Olive.
James settled in Charlestown so that is where Simon spent his early teen age years, probably learning a trade as well as how to adjust to this whole new world he could explore. James soon moved on to Woburn, as did Simon, and that is where Simon met and married his wife, Mary Converse, the daughter of Edward and Sarah Parker Converse, They were married December 19, 1643 in Woburn, and had at least six children together.
After that, we don't know much about Simon. He is not listed in the list of freemen in Massachusetts, although his father, James was so listed. He was made a freeman of Woburn in 1648, according to information found on Wikitree, so I'm not sure why he didn't show up in the state record.
We know he had some land because it is mentioned briefly in a record of deeds for early Woburn. This particular reference, the only one I found, refers to land in a meadow, so from that, we can infer that he also had a house lot. Family tradition says that he was an early town clerk, but I cannot verify that-yet. We can be pretty sure, with the designation of meadow-land, that Simon farmed, but we don't know if that was his only occupation.
We can also be sure that he attended what became the First Congregational Church of Woburn, whether or not he was a member. During the early days of each "plantation" or settlement that I've read about, an appointed drummer walked through the village, beating the drum at each household, so the persons residing could fall in line and march to the meeting house for service. Every resident was expected to be at service whether or not they belonged to the church.
The Wikitree that I referenced earlier states that Simon had helped to organize the town of Chelmsford, but it's not clear that he ever moved there.
Simon died while still quite young. He was not yet 40 years old when he died in May of 1658. He likely died of an illness because he reportedly wrote his will a few weeks before he died. I have been unable to find a cause of death, nor have I found the will or inventory. He left the widow's third to Mary, a double portion to his surviving son James, and the rest was left to his four daughters. All of the children were minors, which is probably one reason that Mary remarried quickly. She married John Sheldon of Billerica in 1659, the year after Simon's death.
This certainly is not a satisfying blog post. There surely is more information about Simon than I've located. However, it at least helps us remember Simon and a little of the kind of life he lived. He's another of the quiet people who helped build America, and for that alone we should be thankful.
One of his famous descendants was Calvin Coolidge, "Silent Cal". Perhaps he took lessons from this ancestor!
The line of descent is
Simon Thompson-Mary Converse
Jonathan Thompson-Thankful Woodland
Martha Thompson-Ebenezer Thayer
Ebenezer Thayer-Mary Wheelock
Abigail Thayer-Jesse Holbrook
Amariah Holbrook-Molly Wright
Nahum Holbrook-Susanna Rockwood
Joseph Holbrook-May Elizabeth Whittemore
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
James settled in Charlestown so that is where Simon spent his early teen age years, probably learning a trade as well as how to adjust to this whole new world he could explore. James soon moved on to Woburn, as did Simon, and that is where Simon met and married his wife, Mary Converse, the daughter of Edward and Sarah Parker Converse, They were married December 19, 1643 in Woburn, and had at least six children together.
After that, we don't know much about Simon. He is not listed in the list of freemen in Massachusetts, although his father, James was so listed. He was made a freeman of Woburn in 1648, according to information found on Wikitree, so I'm not sure why he didn't show up in the state record.
We know he had some land because it is mentioned briefly in a record of deeds for early Woburn. This particular reference, the only one I found, refers to land in a meadow, so from that, we can infer that he also had a house lot. Family tradition says that he was an early town clerk, but I cannot verify that-yet. We can be pretty sure, with the designation of meadow-land, that Simon farmed, but we don't know if that was his only occupation.
We can also be sure that he attended what became the First Congregational Church of Woburn, whether or not he was a member. During the early days of each "plantation" or settlement that I've read about, an appointed drummer walked through the village, beating the drum at each household, so the persons residing could fall in line and march to the meeting house for service. Every resident was expected to be at service whether or not they belonged to the church.
The Wikitree that I referenced earlier states that Simon had helped to organize the town of Chelmsford, but it's not clear that he ever moved there.
Simon died while still quite young. He was not yet 40 years old when he died in May of 1658. He likely died of an illness because he reportedly wrote his will a few weeks before he died. I have been unable to find a cause of death, nor have I found the will or inventory. He left the widow's third to Mary, a double portion to his surviving son James, and the rest was left to his four daughters. All of the children were minors, which is probably one reason that Mary remarried quickly. She married John Sheldon of Billerica in 1659, the year after Simon's death.
This certainly is not a satisfying blog post. There surely is more information about Simon than I've located. However, it at least helps us remember Simon and a little of the kind of life he lived. He's another of the quiet people who helped build America, and for that alone we should be thankful.
One of his famous descendants was Calvin Coolidge, "Silent Cal". Perhaps he took lessons from this ancestor!
The line of descent is
Simon Thompson-Mary Converse
Jonathan Thompson-Thankful Woodland
Martha Thompson-Ebenezer Thayer
Ebenezer Thayer-Mary Wheelock
Abigail Thayer-Jesse Holbrook
Amariah Holbrook-Molly Wright
Nahum Holbrook-Susanna Rockwood
Joseph Holbrook-May Elizabeth Whittemore
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Tuesday, October 29, 2019
Holbrook line: Ephraim Wilson 1656-1733,
OK. So here's another ancestor who lived through tough times, but of whom we know very little. I've ordered a book about the history of Dedham, Massachusetts because we have so many ancestors there, but it's not here yet. Perhaps it will tell us more about Ephraim and perhaps we will still not know much.
First, the name Ephraim is unusual. It was not carried down in our line; at least none of our later ancestors have that first name. It comes from the Old Testament; Ephraim was a child of Joseph and Asenath, and the patriarch of one of the twelve tribes of Israel. Biblical names were frequently used by the Puritans of Massachusetts, and Ephraim's parent qualified in that regard.
Ephraim was a son of Henry and Mary Metcalf Wilson (sometimes spelled Willson), His parents, both immigrants, married in 1642 in Dedham, Massachusetts Bay Colony, and Ephraim was born in 1656, the last of their five children.
The first record I can find of Ephraim is during King Philip's War, when he was about 20 years old. He earned twelve shillings for serving under Captain Jacob in Medfield, where native Americans attacked and destroyed about half the town despite there being a relatively large garrison there. Because Ephraim's pay record is from June of 1676 and the attack occurred in February, it's possible that he was not there when the town was attacked, but was sent after the fact to guard against further attacks. Interestingly, the towns were responsible for paying the soldiers and then were reimbursed by the colony. So Ephraim's family, probably his father, received the pay and we don't know whether Ephraim received any of it or not. The family may have used it to help replace whatever income was lost to them when Ephraim left his job and went to war.
I don't know what kind of job Ephraim had. He didn't marry until 1681, when he married Rebecca Sumner, daughter of Samuel and Rebecca Staples Sumner. They had at least five children together-Samuel, Rebecca, Nathaniel, John and Ephraim. Ephraim was a little older than was typical for the time and place, which could indicate that he was still busy establishing himself in his trade or on a farm prior to his marriage.
He died February 20, 1733, a few months short of 77 years. His stone is still standing and can be seen on his Find A Grave memorial. Unfortunately, I've not found a will or inventory for Ephraim. That could tell us a lot about what his occupation may have been, possibly his religion, perhaps items that would indicate a financial status. The likelihood is that he was a Puritan, that he was a farmer, and that he worked hard for a living. I can't wait till the Dedham book arrives to see if there are any gems there that will tell us more.
The line of descent is:
Ephraim Wilson-Rebecca Sumner
Samuel Wilson-Elizabeth Hawes
Rebecca Wilson-Jonathan Wright
Molly Wright-Amariah Holbrook
Nahum Holbrook-Susanna Rockwood
Joseph Holbrook-Mary Elizabeth Whittemore
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
First, the name Ephraim is unusual. It was not carried down in our line; at least none of our later ancestors have that first name. It comes from the Old Testament; Ephraim was a child of Joseph and Asenath, and the patriarch of one of the twelve tribes of Israel. Biblical names were frequently used by the Puritans of Massachusetts, and Ephraim's parent qualified in that regard.
Ephraim was a son of Henry and Mary Metcalf Wilson (sometimes spelled Willson), His parents, both immigrants, married in 1642 in Dedham, Massachusetts Bay Colony, and Ephraim was born in 1656, the last of their five children.
The first record I can find of Ephraim is during King Philip's War, when he was about 20 years old. He earned twelve shillings for serving under Captain Jacob in Medfield, where native Americans attacked and destroyed about half the town despite there being a relatively large garrison there. Because Ephraim's pay record is from June of 1676 and the attack occurred in February, it's possible that he was not there when the town was attacked, but was sent after the fact to guard against further attacks. Interestingly, the towns were responsible for paying the soldiers and then were reimbursed by the colony. So Ephraim's family, probably his father, received the pay and we don't know whether Ephraim received any of it or not. The family may have used it to help replace whatever income was lost to them when Ephraim left his job and went to war.
I don't know what kind of job Ephraim had. He didn't marry until 1681, when he married Rebecca Sumner, daughter of Samuel and Rebecca Staples Sumner. They had at least five children together-Samuel, Rebecca, Nathaniel, John and Ephraim. Ephraim was a little older than was typical for the time and place, which could indicate that he was still busy establishing himself in his trade or on a farm prior to his marriage.
He died February 20, 1733, a few months short of 77 years. His stone is still standing and can be seen on his Find A Grave memorial. Unfortunately, I've not found a will or inventory for Ephraim. That could tell us a lot about what his occupation may have been, possibly his religion, perhaps items that would indicate a financial status. The likelihood is that he was a Puritan, that he was a farmer, and that he worked hard for a living. I can't wait till the Dedham book arrives to see if there are any gems there that will tell us more.
The line of descent is:
Ephraim Wilson-Rebecca Sumner
Samuel Wilson-Elizabeth Hawes
Rebecca Wilson-Jonathan Wright
Molly Wright-Amariah Holbrook
Nahum Holbrook-Susanna Rockwood
Joseph Holbrook-Mary Elizabeth Whittemore
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Friday, October 25, 2019
Holbrook line: Nathaniel Joslin, of Marlsboro
There is so much erroneous information about our ancestor Nathaniel Joslin, on so many trees and websites, that I hesitate to write this post. I hope I have weeded out most of the false information and I think I can add a few details to his story. I would absolutely love to hear from anywone who knows more about this Nathaniel, the son of Nathaniel and Sarah King Joslin.
The first thing we don't know is when he was born. It was not Aril 21, 1658, as is often stated. That son Nathaniel died in 1667. We know our Nathaniel was the son of the above couple because he is mentioned several times in his father's will. But we don't know his birthdate, or location, or why it would have been omitted from town records that seem complete otherwise. Perhaps his name was on a scrap of paper that was stuck in the records, intending that it be recorded later, and the scrap of paper was mislaid. Another possibility is that Nathaniel was not Sarah's child, and so was not recorded, but there is no indication of that and surely it would have been noted somewhere.
Nathaniel married Hester Morse, daughter of Joseph and Susannah Shattuck Morse, on July 20,1682, and that is the first record we have of him. Presumably this would give him a birth date in the early 1660's. He was next named on a list of inhabitants in Marlboro in 1686, and would likely have been at least 21 years old to have made that list. So again, we point to the early 1660's. Nathaniel and Hester (also seen as Esther, same lady) were the parents of perhaps as many as eleven children, although that would mean Hester had children into her 40's, which is surely not impossible.
The list of inhabitants from 1686 that includes the names of both father and son, the two Nathaniels, is not one to be particularly proud of. The men of Marlboro wanted more land and not long after King Philip's War they began settling on land that was owned by the native Americans. The General Court told them their deed was invalid and declared null and void, but the men of the settlement connived, basically, to continue settling on those lands and tried to make it look legal. It wasn't. The land was in dispute for at least 23 years after the 1686 list, but I didn't find a final resolution, except the results were that the colonists kept the land.
Many of the settlers of Marlboro had ties to Lancaster, Massachusetts, which was burned by the natives in King Philip's War. Nathaniel Senior lost a brother, sister in law, and nephew during the massacre, and other townspeople lost family members, too. It was a raw wound. That doesn't excuse their later actions but it helps put it in a bit of perspective.
King Philip's War didn't end the difficulties with some of the native tribes, and in 1711 our Nathaniel was appointed to a committee to assigned families to garrisons. If the natives threatened the town, each family was to go to one of the stronger fortified homes in the area, where soldiers were also assigned. Nathaniel's family was assigned to Captain Kerley's garrison. We don't know if there was ever a time when the family was forced to go there or not.
Nathaniel must have had a good reputation, because he was chosen selectman in 1701, and also a good education, because he was town clerk from 1714 until 1725.
I've not found a mention of Nathaniel's occupation, nor have I found his will. (The will frequently attached to his name on websites is from Scituate, Plymouth, Massachusetts. That Nathaniel was a cousin of some sort to ours, and the similar death dates are a coincidence). If his will and inventory could be found, we could possibly answer the question of his occupation, find out if he had books, get a clue as to how he did financially, and perhaps get a clue as to his religion. It would be wonderful to find those estate records, just as it would be wonderful to find his birth record!
The line of descent is
Nathaniel Joslin-Hester or Esther Morse
Israel Joslin-Sarah Cleveland
Sarah Joslin-Edward Fay
David Fay-Mary Perrin
Luceba Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
The first thing we don't know is when he was born. It was not Aril 21, 1658, as is often stated. That son Nathaniel died in 1667. We know our Nathaniel was the son of the above couple because he is mentioned several times in his father's will. But we don't know his birthdate, or location, or why it would have been omitted from town records that seem complete otherwise. Perhaps his name was on a scrap of paper that was stuck in the records, intending that it be recorded later, and the scrap of paper was mislaid. Another possibility is that Nathaniel was not Sarah's child, and so was not recorded, but there is no indication of that and surely it would have been noted somewhere.
Nathaniel married Hester Morse, daughter of Joseph and Susannah Shattuck Morse, on July 20,1682, and that is the first record we have of him. Presumably this would give him a birth date in the early 1660's. He was next named on a list of inhabitants in Marlboro in 1686, and would likely have been at least 21 years old to have made that list. So again, we point to the early 1660's. Nathaniel and Hester (also seen as Esther, same lady) were the parents of perhaps as many as eleven children, although that would mean Hester had children into her 40's, which is surely not impossible.
The list of inhabitants from 1686 that includes the names of both father and son, the two Nathaniels, is not one to be particularly proud of. The men of Marlboro wanted more land and not long after King Philip's War they began settling on land that was owned by the native Americans. The General Court told them their deed was invalid and declared null and void, but the men of the settlement connived, basically, to continue settling on those lands and tried to make it look legal. It wasn't. The land was in dispute for at least 23 years after the 1686 list, but I didn't find a final resolution, except the results were that the colonists kept the land.
Many of the settlers of Marlboro had ties to Lancaster, Massachusetts, which was burned by the natives in King Philip's War. Nathaniel Senior lost a brother, sister in law, and nephew during the massacre, and other townspeople lost family members, too. It was a raw wound. That doesn't excuse their later actions but it helps put it in a bit of perspective.
King Philip's War didn't end the difficulties with some of the native tribes, and in 1711 our Nathaniel was appointed to a committee to assigned families to garrisons. If the natives threatened the town, each family was to go to one of the stronger fortified homes in the area, where soldiers were also assigned. Nathaniel's family was assigned to Captain Kerley's garrison. We don't know if there was ever a time when the family was forced to go there or not.
Nathaniel must have had a good reputation, because he was chosen selectman in 1701, and also a good education, because he was town clerk from 1714 until 1725.
I've not found a mention of Nathaniel's occupation, nor have I found his will. (The will frequently attached to his name on websites is from Scituate, Plymouth, Massachusetts. That Nathaniel was a cousin of some sort to ours, and the similar death dates are a coincidence). If his will and inventory could be found, we could possibly answer the question of his occupation, find out if he had books, get a clue as to how he did financially, and perhaps get a clue as to his religion. It would be wonderful to find those estate records, just as it would be wonderful to find his birth record!
The line of descent is
Nathaniel Joslin-Hester or Esther Morse
Israel Joslin-Sarah Cleveland
Sarah Joslin-Edward Fay
David Fay-Mary Perrin
Luceba Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Tuesday, October 22, 2019
Holbrook line: Edward Smith of Rhode Island, Immigrant 1633-1693
Edward Smith was one of the younger children of Christopher and Alice Gibbs Smith. He was christened on March 17, 1633 at Holy Trinity Church, Stratford on Avon, Warwickshire, England. He was one of at least 9 children. Some of the siblings settled in Rhode Island and others settled in Hartford, Connecticut, for reasons that are not yet evident.
Christopher was in Providence, Rhode Island by 1649, and possibly sooner. He was a Quaker according to John Osborne Astin's Genealogical Record of Rhode Island, because during King Philips War he and the family went to Newport, which was not attacked. At that time Quakeer records call him "an ancient Friend of Providence". But I'm getting ahead of myself.
Edward came to Providence with his parents and some siblings, and on August 26, 1656 he was granted common equal to other townsmen, and was to have a vote with inhabitants. He was a hayward (kept stray animals out of fields) in 1656, a freeman on May 12, 1638, and a juryman in 1639. He must have handled his early responsibilities well, because he was a town sergeant (not sure about this-watchman, maybe?- in 1662 and was to be paid 20 shillings in "peage". "Peage" was also known as wampum, and was treated as legal tender in the colonies, as cash was in short supply.
His marriage intention, to Amphillis Angell, was recorded on May 9, 1663 but there doesn't seem to be a record of the marriage. Nevertheless, the marriage is accepted by genealogists. He participated in a division of lands in 1665, and ten years later, just before King Philip's War broke out, he asked for an accommodation of difficulties-basically an arbitration. It had to do with the division of lands with his neighbors.
He was 7 times a deputy and 9 times a town council member. In 1688. about 25 years after he was married, he was taxed on 5 cows, 4 three year olds, 2 two year olds, 4 yearlings, 2 oxen, 2 horses, 1 1/2 shares of meadow, 5 acres tilage, 4 acres pasture, 5 acres wild pasture, and 140 acres of woods. The number of cattle is a bit surprising, as it is a larger herd than many in that location had.
Edward and Amphillis had at least seven children together, and some stayed in Providence. I would like to know whether his children stayed in the Quaker meeting, or whether they changed religion at some point.
It isn't know what kind of relationship Edward had with his Connecticut siblings. I wonder whether perhaps there was a religious difference, and the Connecticut siblings were Puritans whereas Edward and his father remained Quaker. That is just my speculation.
Edward died shortly before January 2, 1694, when administration of the estate was granted to Amphillis and his son Edward. I have as yet not found the estate papers, inventory, or will, but I do have a case number which may help me track it down.
Edward's record shows him to be a well respected man of principle, a good provider and a good citizen. We can be proud of him and honor his memory with respect.
The line of descent is:
Edward Smith-Amphillis Angell
Amphillis Smith=Zechariah Eddy
Elisha Eddy-Sarah Phetteplace
Enos Eddy-Sarah Brown
Enos Eddy-Deborah Paine
Joseph Eddy-Susan Lamphire
Susan Eddy-Hiram Stanard
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Christopher was in Providence, Rhode Island by 1649, and possibly sooner. He was a Quaker according to John Osborne Astin's Genealogical Record of Rhode Island, because during King Philips War he and the family went to Newport, which was not attacked. At that time Quakeer records call him "an ancient Friend of Providence". But I'm getting ahead of myself.
Edward came to Providence with his parents and some siblings, and on August 26, 1656 he was granted common equal to other townsmen, and was to have a vote with inhabitants. He was a hayward (kept stray animals out of fields) in 1656, a freeman on May 12, 1638, and a juryman in 1639. He must have handled his early responsibilities well, because he was a town sergeant (not sure about this-watchman, maybe?- in 1662 and was to be paid 20 shillings in "peage". "Peage" was also known as wampum, and was treated as legal tender in the colonies, as cash was in short supply.
His marriage intention, to Amphillis Angell, was recorded on May 9, 1663 but there doesn't seem to be a record of the marriage. Nevertheless, the marriage is accepted by genealogists. He participated in a division of lands in 1665, and ten years later, just before King Philip's War broke out, he asked for an accommodation of difficulties-basically an arbitration. It had to do with the division of lands with his neighbors.
He was 7 times a deputy and 9 times a town council member. In 1688. about 25 years after he was married, he was taxed on 5 cows, 4 three year olds, 2 two year olds, 4 yearlings, 2 oxen, 2 horses, 1 1/2 shares of meadow, 5 acres tilage, 4 acres pasture, 5 acres wild pasture, and 140 acres of woods. The number of cattle is a bit surprising, as it is a larger herd than many in that location had.
Edward and Amphillis had at least seven children together, and some stayed in Providence. I would like to know whether his children stayed in the Quaker meeting, or whether they changed religion at some point.
It isn't know what kind of relationship Edward had with his Connecticut siblings. I wonder whether perhaps there was a religious difference, and the Connecticut siblings were Puritans whereas Edward and his father remained Quaker. That is just my speculation.
Edward died shortly before January 2, 1694, when administration of the estate was granted to Amphillis and his son Edward. I have as yet not found the estate papers, inventory, or will, but I do have a case number which may help me track it down.
Edward's record shows him to be a well respected man of principle, a good provider and a good citizen. We can be proud of him and honor his memory with respect.
The line of descent is:
Edward Smith-Amphillis Angell
Amphillis Smith=Zechariah Eddy
Elisha Eddy-Sarah Phetteplace
Enos Eddy-Sarah Brown
Enos Eddy-Deborah Paine
Joseph Eddy-Susan Lamphire
Susan Eddy-Hiram Stanard
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Friday, October 18, 2019
Holbrook line: Joseph Robbins 1668-1709
Sometimes I forget that we had some ancestors who lived in New Jersey for a generation or two. This is one of those ancestors, He was actually born in Woodbridge, Middlesex County and died in Freehold, Monmouth County, so he spent his whole, although relatively brief, life there.
Joseph Robbins was the son of Daniel and Hope Potter Robins. (The second "b" was a fixture in Joseph's name but not in Daniel's.) Daniel was from somewhere in Scotland, apparently. He may have come to the colonies as a Covenanter, or he came have come as an indentured servant, for the same reasons ohters came to the Colonies.
Joseph was one of at least 11 children of Daniel and Hope Potter Robins. The first we find of him is his marriage to Anna Pack on June 8, 1692 in Woodbridge. Anna is the daughter of George and Anna possibly Cranmer Pack. Joseph and Anna had at least 9 children, before Joseph's premature death ion May 10, 1709.
We don't know any more about Joesph than that, except that he sold l100 acres of land in Woodbridge to his son Joseph when he moved to Monmouth, That is a clue that he was a farmer of some sort, and in his will he calls himself "yeoman".
Several of Joseph's children were minors when he died. He left everything to his widow during her life, then gave each son (except Richard, who was born after Joseph's death) land that was to be his after the widow's death. Each son was to provide for one or two of his sisters, ten pounds each two years after taking possession of the land. Each son was also to give 25 pounds to the unborn baby if it was a boy, and nothing if a girl.
I haven't yet located land records for Joseph but records surely must exist. There may be an inventory somewhere, also, but I've not yet located it. I've also not yet located a deaath record for Anna, nor guardianship records regarding her children. There is much work yet to do!
The line of descent is:
Joseph Robbins-Anna Pack
Bethia Robbins-John Nation
Christopher Nation-Elizabeth Swaim
Joseph Nation-Jerretta Vickery
Elizabeth Nation-Christopher Myers
Phoebe Myers-John Adam Brown
Phoebe Brown-Fremont Holbrook
Loren Holbook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Joseph Robbins was the son of Daniel and Hope Potter Robins. (The second "b" was a fixture in Joseph's name but not in Daniel's.) Daniel was from somewhere in Scotland, apparently. He may have come to the colonies as a Covenanter, or he came have come as an indentured servant, for the same reasons ohters came to the Colonies.
Joseph was one of at least 11 children of Daniel and Hope Potter Robins. The first we find of him is his marriage to Anna Pack on June 8, 1692 in Woodbridge. Anna is the daughter of George and Anna possibly Cranmer Pack. Joseph and Anna had at least 9 children, before Joseph's premature death ion May 10, 1709.
We don't know any more about Joesph than that, except that he sold l100 acres of land in Woodbridge to his son Joseph when he moved to Monmouth, That is a clue that he was a farmer of some sort, and in his will he calls himself "yeoman".
Several of Joseph's children were minors when he died. He left everything to his widow during her life, then gave each son (except Richard, who was born after Joseph's death) land that was to be his after the widow's death. Each son was to provide for one or two of his sisters, ten pounds each two years after taking possession of the land. Each son was also to give 25 pounds to the unborn baby if it was a boy, and nothing if a girl.
I haven't yet located land records for Joseph but records surely must exist. There may be an inventory somewhere, also, but I've not yet located it. I've also not yet located a deaath record for Anna, nor guardianship records regarding her children. There is much work yet to do!
The line of descent is:
Joseph Robbins-Anna Pack
Bethia Robbins-John Nation
Christopher Nation-Elizabeth Swaim
Joseph Nation-Jerretta Vickery
Elizabeth Nation-Christopher Myers
Phoebe Myers-John Adam Brown
Phoebe Brown-Fremont Holbrook
Loren Holbook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Tuesday, October 15, 2019
Holbrook line: John Jordan of Guilford, Connecticut, Immigrant
The only mysteries we have about John Jordan are these: Who were his parents? When and where was he born? What did he do for a living? Was he literate? What happened to his will? In other words, we don't know much.
The first time we see John Jordan is on a ship heading from England to Guilford, Connecticut. This was the first town in New England to be settled directly and entirely by immigrants, rather than being an overflow of colonists who for one reason or another wished to leave their original home in New England. Henry Whitfield was the leader and pastor of this group. Whitfield was a pastor who was not willing to comply with government requirements in support of the Church of England. He and about 70 other people, including 25 men, signed an agreement while still on board ship regarding how the group would govern themselves. Among the names on that list is John Jordan. It is thought that his (probable) brother Thomas was also on board, but not yet of age to sign the compact.
Many of the men on the ship were young farmers, and until I find something to the contrary, I will postulate that John fell into this class. He and others like him were expected to grow crops to support the others, including Pastor Whitfield. Apparently life in Guilford went well, because when Charles I was executed in 1649, there were requests for Puritans to come back "home"/ Henry Whitfield answered that request, as did Thomas Jordan and a few others who were early settlers.
John, however, stayed in Guilford. He had married Ann Bishop, daughter of John BIshop (who was also on the original ship and signed the original compact) in October of 1639, probably soon after arriving in Connecticut. John and Ann had at least five children together. John was early a trustee of the lands of Guilford, and also a justice of the peace, so perhaps he had at least some education.
That is pretty much the end of his story, for John died in January of 1650. Indications are that he was likely a young man, perhaps around the age of 40. It's unknown whether it was an accident or an illness that killed him. He left a will, but it's been lost. His wife, Ann, married Thomas Clarke.
Please don't write a thesis stating that John's wife was Ann Bishop, daughter of John. Some think that she was his widowed daughter in law, which is possible, although I've seen no evidence for that. If that's so, we don't know who Ann's parents were, either.
I'm ending this blog post with one more mystery than I started with. However, we do know that John came to Guilford and stayed in Guilford. He helped get the new village started and so was important to the history of Connecticut, and to our family!
The line of descent is:
John Jordan-Ann Bishop
John Jordan-Katherine Chalker
Hannah Jordan-John Stannard
John Stannard-Hannah Hanchett
Libbeus Stannard-Eunice Pomeroy
Libbeus Stanard-Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
The first time we see John Jordan is on a ship heading from England to Guilford, Connecticut. This was the first town in New England to be settled directly and entirely by immigrants, rather than being an overflow of colonists who for one reason or another wished to leave their original home in New England. Henry Whitfield was the leader and pastor of this group. Whitfield was a pastor who was not willing to comply with government requirements in support of the Church of England. He and about 70 other people, including 25 men, signed an agreement while still on board ship regarding how the group would govern themselves. Among the names on that list is John Jordan. It is thought that his (probable) brother Thomas was also on board, but not yet of age to sign the compact.
Many of the men on the ship were young farmers, and until I find something to the contrary, I will postulate that John fell into this class. He and others like him were expected to grow crops to support the others, including Pastor Whitfield. Apparently life in Guilford went well, because when Charles I was executed in 1649, there were requests for Puritans to come back "home"/ Henry Whitfield answered that request, as did Thomas Jordan and a few others who were early settlers.
John, however, stayed in Guilford. He had married Ann Bishop, daughter of John BIshop (who was also on the original ship and signed the original compact) in October of 1639, probably soon after arriving in Connecticut. John and Ann had at least five children together. John was early a trustee of the lands of Guilford, and also a justice of the peace, so perhaps he had at least some education.
That is pretty much the end of his story, for John died in January of 1650. Indications are that he was likely a young man, perhaps around the age of 40. It's unknown whether it was an accident or an illness that killed him. He left a will, but it's been lost. His wife, Ann, married Thomas Clarke.
Please don't write a thesis stating that John's wife was Ann Bishop, daughter of John. Some think that she was his widowed daughter in law, which is possible, although I've seen no evidence for that. If that's so, we don't know who Ann's parents were, either.
I'm ending this blog post with one more mystery than I started with. However, we do know that John came to Guilford and stayed in Guilford. He helped get the new village started and so was important to the history of Connecticut, and to our family!
The line of descent is:
John Jordan-Ann Bishop
John Jordan-Katherine Chalker
Hannah Jordan-John Stannard
John Stannard-Hannah Hanchett
Libbeus Stannard-Eunice Pomeroy
Libbeus Stanard-Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Friday, October 11, 2019
Holbrook line: John Graves of Roxbury, Immigrant
Just when I thought I'd written about all the immigrants who could be traced at all, here is John Graves. While much information about him is lacking, there is also much information that we know. We are really fortunate when an ancestor is included in Robert Charles Anderson's Great Migration project, because that typically gives us much information. We are also fortunate to have John's will. I haven't found his inventory yet, but I would love to do that. And I learned a fascinating term and a new occupation for an ancestor. Have I convinced you yet to read on?
John Graves was born probably about 1600 but it could be a few years either way because his birth records have not yet been identified. "John Graves" is a fairly common name. It is thought that he came from the area around Nazing, Essex, England. This is where John Eliot came from, and he was a close friend of the Apostle to the Indians. We know John had a sister named Lydia, and we know his mother came to New England also, but we don't know when she arrived or with whom.
John's occupation was "cowleech". I'd never heard of such a thing, but Google quickly informed me that he treated diseases in cows. Presumably leeching was one of the treatments. So he was an early form of veterinarian, although we don't know whether he treated horses, swine, or sheep also. Almost every household in early New England would have had a cow or two, so he was probably in demand, although I don't know whether that also meant he made money, or had any kind of status because of his job. I don't know if that indicates that he had any kind of formal education in the field, or whether he had learned as an apprentice, or how he got started in his career. Still, "cowleech". That's interesting.
Also interesting is John's marital status. Anderson thinks he may have had three wives. The first wife was Sarah Finch, with whom he had two children, John and Sarah. The second wife is unidentified. She was the mother of Samuel, Jonathan and Mary, and she died shortly after the family arrived in Roxbury. His third wife was Judith Alward, who was or had been a "servant girl". They were married in Roxbury in December of 1635 and their daughter Hannah was born September 8, 1636. The sad thing is that after son John's death a year after his father's, Hannah is the only child who can be traced.
John became a member of the church in Roxbury in 1635 and was made a freeman in 1637. He acquired several plots of land in the 10 years or so he was in Roxbury, apparently all as part of land divisions made by the town. He died November 4, 1644, as reported by John Eliot "John Grave, a godly brother of the church, he took a deep cold, which swelled his head with rheum and overcame his heart. (He and Thomas Ruggles) broke the knot first of the Nazing Christians. I mean they first died of all those Christians that came from that town in England."
In his will, John provided for his wife and for all the children except Sarah. It is possible that he omitted her because she had received a bequest from her maternal grandfather, or perhaps he had otherwise given her what he could. Judith went on to marry William Potter on June 2, 1646, and then Samuel Finch on December 13, 1654, and lived until October of 1683.
The line of descent is:
John Graves-Judith Alward
Hannah Graves-John Mayo
Mehitable Mayo-Samuel Morris
Abigail Morris-John Perrin
Benjamin Perrin-Mary
Mary Perrin-David Fay
Luceba Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Update May 24, 2020: John Graves and Judith Alward are now "former ancestors". Abigail Morris was not the daughter of Mehitable Mayo, so the lines above that are incorrect. See the post about Samuel Morris for further explanation.
John Graves was born probably about 1600 but it could be a few years either way because his birth records have not yet been identified. "John Graves" is a fairly common name. It is thought that he came from the area around Nazing, Essex, England. This is where John Eliot came from, and he was a close friend of the Apostle to the Indians. We know John had a sister named Lydia, and we know his mother came to New England also, but we don't know when she arrived or with whom.
John's occupation was "cowleech". I'd never heard of such a thing, but Google quickly informed me that he treated diseases in cows. Presumably leeching was one of the treatments. So he was an early form of veterinarian, although we don't know whether he treated horses, swine, or sheep also. Almost every household in early New England would have had a cow or two, so he was probably in demand, although I don't know whether that also meant he made money, or had any kind of status because of his job. I don't know if that indicates that he had any kind of formal education in the field, or whether he had learned as an apprentice, or how he got started in his career. Still, "cowleech". That's interesting.
Also interesting is John's marital status. Anderson thinks he may have had three wives. The first wife was Sarah Finch, with whom he had two children, John and Sarah. The second wife is unidentified. She was the mother of Samuel, Jonathan and Mary, and she died shortly after the family arrived in Roxbury. His third wife was Judith Alward, who was or had been a "servant girl". They were married in Roxbury in December of 1635 and their daughter Hannah was born September 8, 1636. The sad thing is that after son John's death a year after his father's, Hannah is the only child who can be traced.
John became a member of the church in Roxbury in 1635 and was made a freeman in 1637. He acquired several plots of land in the 10 years or so he was in Roxbury, apparently all as part of land divisions made by the town. He died November 4, 1644, as reported by John Eliot "John Grave, a godly brother of the church, he took a deep cold, which swelled his head with rheum and overcame his heart. (He and Thomas Ruggles) broke the knot first of the Nazing Christians. I mean they first died of all those Christians that came from that town in England."
In his will, John provided for his wife and for all the children except Sarah. It is possible that he omitted her because she had received a bequest from her maternal grandfather, or perhaps he had otherwise given her what he could. Judith went on to marry William Potter on June 2, 1646, and then Samuel Finch on December 13, 1654, and lived until October of 1683.
The line of descent is:
John Graves-Judith Alward
Hannah Graves-John Mayo
Mehitable Mayo-Samuel Morris
Abigail Morris-John Perrin
Benjamin Perrin-Mary
Mary Perrin-David Fay
Luceba Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Update May 24, 2020: John Graves and Judith Alward are now "former ancestors". Abigail Morris was not the daughter of Mehitable Mayo, so the lines above that are incorrect. See the post about Samuel Morris for further explanation.
Tuesday, October 8, 2019
Allen line: Richard Falley, more of a hero than I knew
One of the first blog posts that I wrote, over 6 years ago, told about our ancestor, Richard Falley Jr., who was captured by native Americans in the French and Indian War, held a prisoner in Canada, and then eventually released and returned home. He was also a lieutenant at the battle of Bunker Hill in the American Revolution, and then, I thought, sent home to make rifles. Well, he was much more than that.
This is the body of a letter written by Russel Falley, his grandson on September 7, 1831, and printed in "Westfield, Massachusetts 1669-1969". It gives us a lot mere detail about what actually happened to young Richard during the French and Indian War. Enjoy this letter from our distant cousin.
This is the body of a letter written by Russel Falley, his grandson on September 7, 1831, and printed in "Westfield, Massachusetts 1669-1969". It gives us a lot mere detail about what actually happened to young Richard during the French and Indian War. Enjoy this letter from our distant cousin.
"My grandfather (Richard Falley) was a
native of the Isle Guernsey. When a young child he was going to
school with some other children. They were delayed by some sailors
on board a boat by the promise of presents and were put on board
their vessel and brought to Boston where they were sold and my
grandfather was brought up in the vicinity of Boston and Salem and at
the business of husbandry.
He married Anna Lamb, she was a native
of Dublin, Ireland and it has been said of her that she was very
cheery in her temper and that she was a pious Christian. Some years
after their marriage they removed to Westfield, Massachusetts. They
had three sons and three daughters.My father, Richard Falley, 1; Samuel
Falley, 2, Frederick the latter died young. The daughter, Elizabeth,
4, married Mr. William Ford. They had a numerous family and resided
many years in Pittsfield, Mas, then removed to Vermont. Rachel, 5,
married Mr. Hubbard. They resided in Pittsfield and had two sons and
two daughters. Their eldest daughter married Mr. John Francis,
Baptist preacher. The other daughter married Mr. Goodrich. The
oldest son died of dysentery.
My father returned from the taking of
Burgoyne and after visiting Daniel Hubbard of Pittsfield went to
Lennox to visit his brother, Samuel Falley. His nephew, Daniel
Falley accompanied him and slept with him one night and took from him
the distemper which was fatal to him. Richard Falley had taken this
disease in camp and observed in relating the account that the
dysentery which he had was attended with a dreadful fever. The child
returned and died soon after and Richard returned to Westfield and
was soon restored. The youngest, who was born after the disease, was
named after him. He lived to marry and died at about thirty, leaving
a widow and some children. Sarah, 6, the youngest of Richard Sr, was
diseased by reason of fits and died in 1804 aged fifty.
Richard Falley learned the blacksmith's
trade, partly in Westfield and partly of Mr. Chapin in Springfield.
In the interim of his business he went as a soldier against the
French at Canada at Fort William Henry (in 1757). After a
troublesome siege of a few days the garrison surrendered to the
enemy. He was taken prisoner. He went a few miles to Lake George
where the Indians with their prisoners slept. His repose, although a
prisoner among savages, was refreshing and delightful on account of
his being deprived of sleep for several nights by the confusion of
the camp.
They crossed Lake George in bark
canoes. From there to Lake Champlain they traveled loaded with both
Indians and prisoners. Encamped there, the Indians gave themselves
up to drunkenness. One under penalty of death must keep sober to
watch the prisoners. He, too, indulged himself with the precious
liquors. He would take a spoonful at at time at a short interval and
would always give as much to the prisoners. By the extreme
drunkenness of the Indians the lives of prisoners were endangered.
When would commence the work of destruction, whether on man or
beast, the whole drunken gang would unite and the victim was not left
until he was hewn to pieces.
At this time a lady came daily in her
coach with an attendant to visit the prisoners. Richard, at first
cautiously lest the Indians should know his desire to leave them,
begged the gentlewoman to buy him and the purchase was made. He with a
number walked toward town. A little girl, unbought, was huddled with
the company toward the gate. They hoped to have got her without the
gate as she would have been safe from the Indians but her keeper
missing her came running with the swiftness of the wind caught her
and bore her back crying hideously to the great grief of her friends.
He was taken from Montreal to Quebec
and put in prison and by eating dry food was sick. Through a hole in
the well (wall?) of the prison he was enabled to get into an
adjoining garden at night, by procuring fruit in this way he was
cured, after being there a while he went on board a vessel with other
passengers and went to Boston. On the voyage he had the small pox
but lightly and soon got well. On arriving at Boston, he went to
Westfield. His mother was so afftected at seeing him, although she
had been informed of his safe arrival, that she swooned in his arms.
He became a Christian early in life and constantly prayed with his
family morning and evening and was a constant attendant in Divine
Worship. He died at the age of sixty eight. He was a man nearly six
feet in height of fine proportion and great strength.”
Richard's grandson's recollections of Richard's story are priceless. They match closely with what we know of Fort William Henry and the subsequent taking and treatment of prisoners. We can surely be proud of this man. In another post, I will write about Richard Falley in the American Revolution. That story, too, is richer than the few details I've known.
The line of descent, again, is:
Richard Falley Jr.-Margaret Hitchcock
Samuel Falley-Ruth Root
Clarissa Falley-John Havens Starr
Harriet Starr-John Wilson Knott
Edith Knott-Edward Allen
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
Their descendants
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)