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.




No comments:

Post a Comment

Don't want to comment publicly? Feel free to email me: happygenealogydancingATgmailDOTcom. You can figure out what to do with the "AT" and the "DOT".