Holbrook line: Another John Lamb, quite mysterious

I can tell you a lot of things John isn't.  He isn't the son of Thomas and Dorothy Harbottle Lamb.  He isn't the son of Thomas (see above) and Elizabeth Lamb.  He isn't the John who died in Springfield, Massachusetts in 16*90.  He isn't the John who died January 9, 1677 in a saw mill accident in New London or perhaps Stonington, Connecticut, although there are indications this may have been John's son, John.  We know several things about who he wasn't, but there's not much to show who he was. 

I was surprised when I started researching John Lamb to find him first in Kittery, Maine.  I had to pull up a map of Kittery, which is in York County (a new county for me to research in, perhaps making this number 238!!) to realize this was not at all far from the northern shores of Massachusetts.  At the time, of course, it was part of Massachusetts Bay Colony, so John can be forgiven for being in "new" parts.  However, we don't know when or where he was born, or how he arrived in Kittery, or even when he arrived in Kittery. 

Most guesses put his birthdate at about 1623, with two or three different locations being put forth for his home at birth, and several guesses as to his parents.  If we accept that the John killed near Stonington was his son, and assume that he was probably not more than 24 (since he would likely have been married by then) and assume that he was the first or second son of John's, then our John could have been born as late as 1630.  John himself tells us that he was 45 years old in 1670, when he testified in court, so even though these dates are not always accurate, it is as close as we are likely to get. 

We know he was in Kittery, Maine in 1651, because then and again in 1653 he was called a liar in court (a thief also, in 1651) although I don't know the disposition of those cases.  I also don't know whether he was single or married at this time, although it must have been around this time that he married.  His son Thomas sold part of his inheritance to brother Samuel in 1695.  The best guess is that John died sometime around 1681, and likely some of his seven children were minors at this time, which could explain why there is no discussion of an inheritance until 1695.  But that is supposition.

It's believed that his wife's name was Ann.  She may have been Ann Skelton, or she may have been Ann Plaistead.  The Plaistead guess seems to be based on that 1670 court case, when John testified on behalf of Roger Plaistead about lands in dispute between Connecticut and Rhode Island.  In 1674, John made inquiries on behalf of this same Roger Plaistead about building a fulling mill near Stonington.  There was some sort of connection here, but whether this is enough to establish a family relationship appears doubtful.  There seems to be even less support for the Skelton idea.  So for now and perhaps forever, the name of John's wife is not known. 

He was a charcoal burner in Kittery, which was a lonely, demanding job, since the charcoal had to be tended to almost constantly.  Charcoal was needed for the iron smelting process.  He received grants of land in Kittery in 1655 and 1666, but by 1663 was in New London, or possibly near Stonington, Connecticut.  We don't know why he changed locations.  At his new home, he seems to have been a farrier and a blacksmith as well as a farmer and a miller.  Again, the records are scanty.

He may be the John Lamb who became a freeman at New London in 1670, but that isn't clear.

The implication is that John died about 1681, when there was testimony about what John told John Packer about problems in a mill wash.  Since John himself didn't testify, he was likely either too sick to testify or had already died.

So he don't know his parents, his origins, when he arrived in New England (I'm thinking he was possibly an indentured servant), who he married or when, or much about his life near Stonington.  We don't know what he thought of King Philip's War, or whether he might have served in earlier militias.  We don't know why he was only about 55 when he (most likely) died.  We assume that he attended church but there don't seem to be records to confirm this.  He apparently prepared a will in 1673 but it's been lost.  "Johnny, we hardly knew ye."

Please, if someone knows more or has insights into this family, please contact me!

The line of descent is

John Lamb-Ann
Elizabeth Lamb-Daniel Longbottom
James Longbottom-Elizabeth Jackson
Elizabeth Longbottom-John Eames
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