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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)