Holbrook line: Thomas Strong 1637 ish to 1689

I hate to use "ish" with a date.  It shows my ignorance, or ability to find documentation to support a date.  However, that's the way it is.  The most specific date I found, which I can't support with a document, is October 24, 1637, likely in Hingham, Plymouth Colony, Massachusetts.  There are even those who state that his parentage isn't known, or at least that his mother isn't known.  However, most sources report him to be a son of Elder John Strong, whom I wrote about earlier, and his (possibly second) wife, Abigail Ford.  Thomas, as still a young boy, moved in 1647 to Windsor, Connecticut, where his parents lived until 1659.

Thomas lost no time in marrying Mary Hewitt at Northampton on October 3, 1659.  She was the daughter of Rev. Ephraim and Isabel Overton Hewitt (also spelled Huit, particularly in earlier records).  Thomas's father was the elder of the church, or soon would be, and Rev. Ephraim was a strong Puritan pastor, so Thomas and Mary would seem to have been well-matched.  However, Thomas's name is not on the list of those who first owned the Covenant, nor is Mary's. One wonders where they were spiritually, that they would not have joined the church immediately.  I've not been able to learn the dates that they joined, but it must have happened, because Thomas was a tithing man in 1669 and possibly for years thereafter.  (A tithing man was a sort of "law enforcer" for the church).

Thomas would have belonged to the militia of the town and would have been deeply involved in defending the town during King Philip's War.  I have not found his name on any lists indicating he fought outside of town but every able-bodied man would have been needed.  There were native American attacks on the palisades the men had built, and it was the spirit of the men (and women) inside that kept the rest of the townspeople safe (several died in the fields as some of the attacks began).  Thomas is listed as a "trooper" for Windsor, Connecticut in 1658 under Captain John Mason, but I haven't been able to determine what that service would have entailed, or why it was needed.

Thomas and Mary had five children together before she died February 20, 1671.  He then married Rachel Holton and they had at least eleven children together.  The youngest was born after her father's death, which occurred on October 3, 1689.  The estate papers are really hard to figure out, although they are mostly legible.  Apparently nothing was filed until 1695.  The estate seems to have been valued at over 400 pounds, more or less.  Rachel or a committee, or both, attempted to divide the estate so that each of the children would have their portion, and so the younger children could be raised until put to work.  I didn't locate an actual will, but she seems to be following some sort of directions from someone.  (Rachel later remarried, so some of the adult children actually had a step mother and a step father)

From the inventory, it appears that Thomas was a farmer, as he had several plots of land, oxen, cattle, horses, sheep, and lambs.  He may have been a shoemaker at one time, as there is the "remains of a last" in the list.  The inventory was taken 6 years after his death, so it is not a perfect look at his holdings.  Some goods, such as food and seeds, were used up in the meantime, as were cloths that were cut up for clothes for the children.  There were two guns listed, but no Bible that I could see.  Surely Thomas would have been able to read, though, as all Puritan boys were expected to meet this standard.

I wish we knew more about John Strong.  His father overshadowed him and out-lived him, too.  So was our John a meek and mild-mannered man, or was he strong and silent?  Was he a source of help to the community during and after King Philip's war, when some had lost their husbands and fathers and many had lost their homes and crops?  There is so much more I'd like to know!

The line of descent is

Thomas Strong-Mary Hewitt
Maria Strong-Samuel Judd
Elizabeth Judd-Ebenezer Southwell
Eunice Southwell-Medad Pomeroy
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stanard
Libbeus Stanard-Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants

Fun fact:  Thomas Strong is the 8th great grandfather of Lady Diana.  He is my 8th great grandfather, too.  So that makes us ninth cousins, which is kind of fun. 

Holbrook line: John Burr 1659-1716

John Burr is among those of our ancestors who I am beginning to call the "Silent Generation".  Actually, there are several "silent" ancestors in many generations.  To explain my terminology, it means I have been unable to find more than bare bones information about the person and sometimes not even that. 

At least for John Burr, we know who his parents are, and we know the vitals about birth, marriage, and death.  If it wasn't for his will, that information is all that we we would have.  Also, we do know a little about the town he lived and died in, and we know a little of the history of his time.  So we can pull this silent man just a little bit out of the shadows, and start to see a little of his life.

John Burr was born January 6, 1659 in Hingham, Massachusetts.  His parents, Simon and Hester Burr, were the immigrants here.  I should stop a moment to explain that John's mother is variously seen as Hester Rose, Rose Hester, and Hester Sparhawk. Whatever her name, her parentage has not yet been established, to the best of my current knowledge.

Hingham was a small village on the Massachusetts coast line, what is known as the South Shore.  It is about 20 miles from Boston.  At the time John lived, it probably supported both fisherman and coastal mariners as well as farmers and tradesmen.  Our John was a farmer.  He is described using that word, rather than husbandman or yeoman, which is a bit unusual.  The only record of town service that we have was that he was a constable in 1698.

His father, Simon, served in King Philip's War and it is probable that John at least served at home.  He would have been just 16 when the war broke out, and would have trained for only a few days with the local training band.  He likely could shoot, but probably couldn't yet perform military maneuvers well.  Hingham wasn't directly affected by the war, and probably the village didn't evacuate as so many towns did.  It is also possible that John served in some of the campaigns that Massachusetts men were involved in during King William's War, particularly the battles in what became Maine and Nova Scotia.  If he wasn't there, he at least would have known all about it from stories from other citizens of the town. 

John married Mary Warren, daughter of John and Deborah Wilson Warren, on December 24, 1685 in Hingham.  He and Mary had 10 children together.  John's financial position would have been improved when Simon died in 1691.  His older brother Simon got about 60% of the estate and he got about 40%, but it was still enough to help, with eventually 10 children to raise.  Presumably the two men supported their mother until her death by suicide in 1693. 

The only other information we have about John is his will.  His estate totaled almost 922 pounds, which was a pretty good sum for a farmer.  He owned 9 different plots of land, which made up the bulk of the estate, plus various farm animals and household furnishings.  His "arms and ammunition" were valued at 1 pound, and his books at two pounds.  His house had at least four rooms, or chambers, with furniture in each. John has several dates of death attributed to him, but they are all between September 17 and  December 7, 1716.  His youngest son was just 13 when John died.  Mary lived as a widow until July 26, 1742. 

This is the little we know of John Burr, and I'd like to know more.  Wouldn't you?

The line of descent is

John Burr-Mary Warren
Mary Burr-Thomas Marsh
Deborah Marsh-Isaac Lazell
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

 

Allen line: Yet another Thomas Noble 1696-1775

I try to make it a habit to write a blog post of at least five paragraphs, when writing about an ancestor.  I don't think I'll make it on this one.  Thomas Noble, who is at least the sixth of that name in a line dating back to the early 1500's, is also our last direct ancestor of that name, at least as far as I know now.  However, he seems to have not done much to make himself known, so this will be a short post. 

Thomas was born November 10, 1696 in Westfield, Massachusetts Bay Colony, to Thomas and Elizabeth Dewey Noble.  He was one of at least 11 children, and, like his father, he was born and died in the same small town. 

Thomas married Sarah Root, daughter of John and Sarah Stebbins Root, on September 1, 1722 in Westfield.  He and Sarah had at least 10 children together before her death on July 19, 1760, also in Westfield.  He then married Sarah Field Belding in 1761 in Hatfield, Massachusetts Bay Colony, and they returned to Westfield to live. 

We have these additional facts about Thomas:  He was a farmer, and in fact lived on the farm that had belonged to his grandfather.  He was chosen as a fence viewer in 1739 and in 1744, and was on a committee responsible for building pews in the meeting house.  He was often the moderator for town meetings, calling the meeting to order, making sure everyone's voice (male, of course) was heard, ancounting votes.  This took a level-headed man, one who could control both his own emotions and those of others.  That's as close as I can come to defining the character of the man. 

He was, of course, the son of a deacon and his vital records are in the First Church record books.  We can probably guess that he attended church on a regular basis, but I've not been able to determine whether he was actually a member of the church.  I have also been unable to determine whether, or to what extent, he served in the militia or on military expeditions.  It is within the range of possibility that he would have participated in King George's War, since he was only about 50-53 during that time period.  This would have pitted the colonists and Great Britain and their native American allies against the French and their native American allies.  His name is not listed in the source I consulted about Colonial Officers and Soldiers but those lists are always incomplete.  So we just don't know. 

  There is, on the "Early American Ancestors" website, a drawing labeled "The home of Thomas Noble, Westfield, 1725".  This is likely to be the home of Thomas's parents, Thomas and Elizabeth Dewey Noble, but it may well be the home that this Thomas also lived in.  At any rate, he would have been very familiar with this home. 

Sarah Root Noble died July 19, 1760 and Thomas married Sarah Field Belding the following year.  She died in 1763.  Thomas died February 18, 1775, just two months before the battles of Concord and Lexington.  We don't know what he would have thought about the Revolutionary War, except that at least two of his sons, who were middle aged men at the time, served as patriot soldiers.  That says something about their upbringing.  

I haven't been able to locate a will for Thomas, or a definitive land transfer.  The land probably stayed in the family, perhaps for generations.  We know there were Nobles in Westfield up through the 1940 census and probably longer.  Of course, I'd love to find a will or deed.  I'd love to find military records.  I'd love to know more about this man who seems to have stayed in the background.  I would be willing to bet there is more to his story.

The line of descent is:

Thomas Noble-Sarah Root
Stephen Noble-Ruth Church
Ruth Noble-Martin Root
Ruth Root-Samuel Falley
Clarissa Falley-John Havens Starr
Harriet Starr-John Wilson Knott
Edith Knott-Edward Allen
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
Their descendants

Allen line: John Root 1672-1731

I'm not sure why I could not find much on-line information about this John.  Yes, the earlier John Roots have more information, and there are a confusing number of John Roots to "root" through, to find our ancestor.  Yes, he had only one child with our ancestor, and those are all good reasons.  But yet...he was a person of some standing in his town.  Though he didn't leave as many foot prints as his father and grandfather did, there is enough to fill my minimum requirement of five paragraphs, I think. 

John Root was born December 28, 1672 in Westfield, Massachusetts Bay Colony, one of eight children of John and Mary Ashley Root.  He spent his childhood in Westfield, grew to be a man in Westfield, married twice and raised his family in Westfield, and died in Westfield.  The only hint we have that he may have ever left Westfield is that in his will and inventory papers, he is often referred to as "Lieutenant" John Root.  (This was important, as it differentiated him from his father and from other John Roots who lived in the same town). 

He is also referred to as a husbandman, which is roughly translated as farmer, and surely he farmed.  Everyone in Westfield did.  He also attended church regularly.  Everyone did.  Not everyone, however, had the title of "Deacon", which is another name I have seen assigned to his name.  I haven't yet found the documentation for that.  His pastor's name, for most of John's life, was Edward Taylor.  He was a brilliant man, an Englishman, and seems to have been loved by the whole town.  If John was indeed a deacon, he had a good man leading him. 

John married Sarah Stebbins, daughter of Edward and Sarah Graves Stebbins, on January 8, 1701 in Westfield.  She was from Springfield, but Westfield was actually part of Springfield at one time, so the two would have known each other, probably well, before their marriage.  They had just one child together, a daughter named Sarah.  who was born in March of 1702.  Perhaps there were difficulties with her birth, but for whatever reason, Sarah Root had no more known children before she died.  We don't have a death date for her, except that it was prior to September of 1713, when John married the widow Elizabeth Sackett.  I would certainly like to find a death date for our Sarah!  John and Elizabeth had at least four children, two of whom died very young.  There was much sadness for this couple to overcome, each having lost spouses, and then to lose the babies, too, must have been overwhelming. 

I would also like to know about John's military service.  Why was he referred to as lieutenant?  He was too young for King Philip's War, except that he would have gone to the garrison house with his family when attack was feared, and probably lived there for several months.  There were various military expeditions and wars he could have participated in, but one that seems most likely would be after the native American attacks on Deerfield, Massachusetts in 1704.  Deerfield was just 37 miles north of Westfield, and family members lived there.  Other possibilities include Queen Anne's war or King William's war.  Regardless, John was recognized as a leader of men and was prepared to go into battle with them. 
 a
John died May 1, 1731.  He left 300 pounds to his daughter Sarah and a small mount of land plus  team with its tackle to his son Moses.  There is no mention of wife Elizabeth, or of son Stephen.  Elizabeth was alive, because the paperwork for her to be the guardian of Moses is included in the estate papers.  However, John died owing money to almost everyone in town, it seems.  There is nothing in the papers that indicates how the estate was settled, and whether daughter Sarah got her bequest or son Moses got his land and his team.  It appears unlikely.  

So there's another mystery.  Why did John, who appears to have been a well respected member of his society, die with so much debt and such a small estate?  Were there crop failures? Did he spend too much time in military service to accumulate any wealth?  Was Elizabeth a spendthrift?  We simply can't tell from the little we can learn about him, but we can wonder.

Certainly I want to learn more about his story, and about what kind of man he was.  But at least here are a few paragraphs to honor our ancestor.

The line of descent is:

John Root-Sarah Stebbins
Sarah Root-Thomas Noble
Stephen Noble-Ruth Church
Ruth Noble-Martin Root
Ruth Root-Samuel Falley
Clarissa Falley-John Havens Starr
Harriet Starr-John Wilson Knott
Edith Knott-Edward Allen
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
Their descendants

Holbrook line: Zachariah Eddy 1638-1718

I've written earlier of Samuel Eddy, Zachariah's father, and of John Eddy, his uncle (although I now think that John Eddy was not an ancestor on the Allen side, pending further study).  But Zachariah has been neglected until now, probably because he wasn't in the first generation of immigrants.  But hey, we was born in Plymouth Colony and probably knew, or at least knew of, our Mayflower ancestors.  So his history, to me, is interesting. 

Zachariah (also seen as Zechariah and Zachary) was born March 7, 1639 to Samuel and (probably) Elizabeth Savory Eddy, in Plymouth Colony, Massachusetts.  He was the second of seven children his parents are known to have had.  Samuel was a tailor, but he apparently was not hugely successful because he asked the court to find an apprenticeship or other training opportunities for his children.  Zachariah was just 7 years old when the court approved his placement with John Browne, to train to be a husbandman or whatever else Mr. Browne desired.  John Browne was a man of considerable wealth and talent, so it was a good opportunity for Zachariah to learn much from him.  We are not sure whether that happened.  At any rate, 7 year old Zachariah said good-by to his parents and presumably moved to Rehoboth, where the Brownes lived.  His term of service was for 14 years, until Zachariah was 21 years old. 

Peter Browne was involved in the founding of Swansea, Massachusetts, and Zachariah and his brother, Caleb, are also considered among the first founders of the town.  He married Alice Paddock, daughter of Robert and Mary Holmes Paddock, on May 7, 1663, in either Plymouth or Middleboro, Massachusetts.  They may have settled immediately in the land that became Swansea, although the town itself wasn't founded until 1667.  The town selected him to be one of three waywardens in 1671, roughly these men were superintendents of highways. 

I didn't find any record that he was ever made a freeman, perhaps because he became a member of the Baptist Church in Swansea, which is one of the oldest Baptist churches in America.  I wonder whether Peter Browne influenced his decision one way or the other, to join this church.  Or his wife could have had some influence.  Nevertheless, it may have been hard to leave the Puritan church that had been a part of his early life.

I didn't find an occupation for Zachariah, although it is likely to have been as a husbandman, as he was trained to do.  He did own some marsh land, and probably other land, too, so it's easy to think he did at least some farming.  He and Alice had at least eight children, apparently all born at Swansea.

Life in Swansea was probably good, but also probably not easy.  It got even harder when King Philip's War broke out.  Swansea was one of the first villages attacked, although apparently everyone made it to the local garrison safely.  Some of the homes were burned, and there was fighting in the area for quite a while.  The little village escaped back to Plymouth for the most part, and it is believed that our family was part of this group.  I found no record that Zachariah was part of the militia but it's hard to believe that he would not have responded to protect his home and home town. He was of the right age and unless he had a physical infirmity, which I haven't seen mentioned, he would have had some role to play in either the defense or the offense.

The Eddy family was back in Swansea about 1678, rebuilding whatever had been lost to the native Americans.  Alice Paddock Eddy died October 24, 1692 and Zachariah then married Abigail, the widow of Dermit or Jeremiah Smith.  She brought children to the marriage, too, although they may have been close to grown, as Zachariah's own children were.  (I'm not finding a date for the second marriage, so perhaps Zachariah married when some of his own children were preteens or teenagers.

When Zachariah died, his estate was very small, valued at close to 65 pounds.  He mentions the lands that he had previously given to each of his sons, and adds that any money owed him by his sons should be forgiven.  His wife Abigail is to live in the homestead granted son Caleb for the rest of her natural life, and he left her money, also.  He left his great Bible to a grandson.  His will specifically grants a carbine to one son, a musket to another, and a fowling piece to yet another.  Zachariah died September 4, 1718 and is buried at the Eddy family burial grounds at Swansea, where his parents and many other family members are also buried. 

Although we know quite a bit about Zachariah, there is also much we don't know, especially about his life in Swansea.  But it is interesting to find another early Baptist in the family, and it's intriguing that our Pilgrim fathers would have known him.  This was a time when much of what was to become America was being constructed, day by day and town by town.  We are privileged to feel a little of this through reading about the lives of Zachariah Eddy and other of our ancestors.

The line of descent is

Zachariah Eddy-Alice Paddock
Zachariah Eddy-Amphillis Smith
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

  

Holbrook line: Medad Pomeroy 1638-1716

My last blog post was about Thomas Noble, an ancestor on our Allen side.  In it, I mentioned that his widow, Hannah Warriner, had married Medad Pomeroy.  I recognized that name so looked for the blog post I must have written about him, but there was nothing to be found.  So, here it is.  Medad Pomeroy is an ancestor on our Holbrook side.  He was first married to Experience Woodward, from whom we descend.  He was later married to Abigail Strong, who would be a sibling of our ancestor Thomas Strong, also on the Holbrook side.  And finally, he was married to Hannah Warriner Noble, the Allen connection.  We have quite a connection to this man, and it's time that I wrote about him. 

Medad Pomeroy was born August 19, 1638 in Windsor, Hartford Connecticut, to Eltweed and Mary Rockett/Rockwood Pomeroy.  The elder Pomeroys were with the very first settlers in 1633, when the settlement was first called Dorchester.  Eltweed had some prominence in the town, and is noted to be the founding father of the Pomeroy family in America.  Medad was one of at least eight children born to the couple.  Eltweed was a fuller, but perhaps he provided his children with an apprenticeship, for Medad was a blacksmith and a gunsmith. It's unclear why Medad left Windsor to go to Northampton, Massachusetts (north of Springfield), but once there, he may have been taught by John Webb, who was the first blacksmith in Northampton but not necessarily a businessman. (One source says he arrived in Northampton in 1659 and was welcomed because of his blacksmithing skills.  I've used a history of Northampton for most of the information in this post.)  Medad eventually took over Webb's shop location, perhaps with Webb's approval.  Medad also must have been given a decent education for the time.  Although he didn't attend college, the positions he held in the town would have required reading, writing, and arithmetic skills. 

As mentioned, Medad married three times.  He married Experience Woodward, daughter of Henry and Elizabeth Mather Woodward, on March 21, 1661 in Northampton, not long after his arrival in Northampton.  (Henry was one of the first settlers of the town.)  Medad and Experience had 11 children together, before she died, possibly in childbirth, at the age of 43.  Medad next married Abigail Strong, and they had one son together.  When Abigail died in 1704, he waited just a few months before marrying Hannah Warriner Noble.  By this time, he was about 67 years old and Hannah was also in her 60's, so there were no children from this marriage. 

Medad had one of the longest periods of public service to his town of any ancestor I've yet found.  He was chosen selectman of the town 28 times, deputy to the general court seven times, treasurer from 1698 onward, and some years held as many as six elected offices at the same time.  It was a small town, but he was still one of the prominent men in town.  He was also clerk, responsible for keeping town records, for most of the period from 1665 until shortly before his death. 

As if that was not enough honor, and work, he was also a deacon in the church, and a member of the militia who was involved in the Falls Fight, serving under Captain Turner.  This fight involved the massacre of a native American village so is not necessarily something to be proud of, but it was part of his life and he would have lived with that knowledge for another 40 plus years.  I wonder if he ever had nightmares, or whether he felt it was his duty to participate?  His son Ebenezer was granted land in 1736 in reward for his father's service during this battle. 

Medad wrote his will in 1708 but lived until December 30, 1716.  There must have been some kind of prenuptial agreement because he left Hannah her choice of a cow, everything she had brought with her, and instructions that she was to draw from the estate anything that she needed.  He left his sons and daughters anywhere from 20 to 80 pounds apiece, except that by the time he died, the estate was not worth nearly as much as he had expected.  Perhaps in the interim, he had sold assets and given the proceeds to the children, but it's hard to know.  His estate was valued at just 41 pounds, unless there were more pages to the inventory that didn't get filmed. 

There is more to be told about Medad than I've included in this brief sketch.  He was involved in at least one town controversy, and there were a couple of business ventures that don't seem to have gotten off the ground.  But Medad seems to have been well-respected, an extremely hard worker, and an important part of the town he served so well.  While recognizing that he had shortcomings, we can still respect this man, part of our past and part of our family.

The line of descent is:

Medad Pomeroy-Hannah Warriner
Joseph Pomeroy-Hannah Seymour
Medad Pomeroy-Hannah Trumbull
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stannard
Libbeus Stanard-Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants

Allen line: Thomas Noble 1632ish-1703/04

Earlier, I wrote about Thomas's supposed parents.  I wasn't sure at the time that I had the right people and I am still not sure.  So I will just say Thomas's parents may or may not have been Thomas and Rachel Gardiner Noble.  His father also may or may not have been John Noble.  The Thomas and Rachel may or may not have come to New England, and they may or may not have both died during the year of Thomas's birth.  End of speculation for now.

The first that i really known of Thomas Noble is that he was "admitted" to Boston on January 5, 1653.  "Admission" generally means that he had no family there but that he had a trade or other means to provide for himself.  Boston did not wish to have people in its community who could not be trusted to contribute to its growth, and who might, for whatever reason, become a burden to the town.  (This was common for single men in most early Massachusetts towns and villages).  Thomas, then, had permission to stay, but he didn't stay for long.

Later in the year he is found in Springfield, Massachusetts, a town which was founded in 1653. He was still a single man so would have been required to have stayed in someone else's home.  (The First Century of the History of Springfield gives his arrival date as 1656.  I think that is in error, because in 1657 Thomas had already gained enough approval from Mr. Pynchon to be advanced money for a trip to and from England. We can only speculate whether the trip was trade-related, or family related, or on some kind of errand for Mr. Pynchon.) 

Thomas Noble did have a trade, or at least a part time trade.  He was a tailor when he wasn't farming.  Again, it is hard to trace who he lived with and how he could practice a trade when he had no place to call his own.  He married Hannah Warriner, daughter of William and Joanna Scant (probably) Warriner of Springfield on  January 11, 1660, in Springfield.  It's possible that he had stayed in the home of his in-laws until and even after the marriage, but as far as I know there is no documentation of that.  We can see that after his marriage he acquired a bit more status than he had as a bachelor.  In 1659, he was assigned to the 9th row of men in the meeting house, and in 1662 he was already moved to the sixth row.  Marriage made a man more respectable, in and of itself. 

Thomas and Hannah stayed in Springfield for several years, eventually moving to the new town of Westfield, a little further to the west of the Springfield village.  In 1664 he was one of four men who were given permission to set up a saw mill, and were also given 70 acres of land to use.  The sawmill was to be in operation by April 1, 1666.  The sawmill was on the west side of the Agawam river, which appears to be just where Westfield was created.  Thomas Noble is noted as having been there in 1667, so probably the family moved during or after the construction of the sawmill. 

Yes, Thomas and Hannah had a family, and there are probably tens of thousands of descendants from this family now.  There were at least ten children born to the couple.  The family didn't realize it at the time, but later learned that a native American called "Gray Locks" had often had some of the children in his sight, saying he could have killed several at one time, but that he wanted to capture them so they could be held for ransom. Thankfully, this goal was not accomplished. During King Philip's war, the same Gray Lock would open the door to the cabin, and let it swing shut before playing his game again.  This encouraged the family to move from their farm to the relative safety of Westfield, at least for the duration of hostilities.  

Thomas farmed, of course, and probably helped in the saw mill operation, and also did tailoring work until close to the end of his days.  He was involved in another saw mill operation in 1684, but it's not clear whether he had already relinquished his partnership in the earlier saw mill, or whether this was a separate enterprise entirely.  At various times he was a constable, an appraiser, and on committees to help set the boundaries between Springfield and Westfield. 

Thomas joined the Westfield church on February 26, 1681 and was made a freeman in the fall of the year.  He was on juries, including one conducting an inquest into the manner of death of one of their neighbors, concluding that Eliezer Weller had hanged himself.  But Thomas also had his minor run-ins with the law, specifically, church law.  He was fined 5 shillings in 1683 because he traveled on a day of court-ordered fasting and humiliation.  Thomas stated that he was just trying to get home, but that didn't fold water with the court. 

Thomas seems to have been often, if not always, in debt, especially to William or John Pynchon, despite acquiring more and more land during his lifetime.  When he died on January 20, 1703/04, he left a will naming his ten children, although it appears that son James died at the same time that Thomas did.  Hannah survived him and later married Medad Pomeroy, another of our ancestors.  She lived until 1721.

Thomas's inventory was valued at 448 pounds, which was mostly land, farm animals, and farm implements.  He had arms and ammunition, but I didn't see any mention of books in the inventory, nor did I see tailoring tools, although they could have been included with  "other small things".  There is much more information available about Thomas, but the big mystery is still the identification of his parents, and of how and when he arrived in Massachusetts. 

Fun fact:  I was fascinated to learn that Agatha Christie, the mystery writer, is his sixth great grand daughter.  He is my 8th great granddaughter, so that makes us very distant cousins.  Other famous grandchildren are Samuel Colt, Humphrey Bogart, Nancy Davis Reagan, and Ken Burns. 

The line of descent is

Thomas Noble-Hannah Warriner
Thomas Noble-Elizabeth Dewey
Thomas Noble-Sarah Root
Stephen Noble=Ruth Church
Ruth Noble-Martin Root
Ruth Root-Samuel Falley
Clarissa Falley-John Havens Starr
Harriet Starr-John Wilson Knott
Edith Knott-Edward Allen
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
Their descendants

Holbrook line: John Cole of Maryland 1669-1746

I've put off writing about John Cole.  It's not because I don't like him, but because he is so confusing.  Is he one man, or two men, or three?  Which set of parents are really his?  And there are other questions.  So I'm going to proceed here with caution.  Please understand that this may not be entirely correct, and it could be entirely wrong.  I am following primarily (when I have a question) the work of Robert Barnes, who is a noted genealogist and who is relatively error free.  He is also an expert in Baltimore County, Maryland, genealogy.  I'm not.

John Cole was born in or about 1669, based on various court testimonies he gave.  All the records I have seen list his birth place as Anne Arundel County, Maryland, which was formed from St. Mary's County prior to the time of John's birth.  (So his parents may have been found in St Mary's County prior to the division).  I've seen several listings for John's parents, some with a bit of reason to them and some not.  But Robert Barnes lists his parents as John Cole and Mary Beedle, so we'll go with that while acknowledging that further analysis or new records could result in a different understanding.

We are reasonably sure that John Cole married Johanna Garrett, daughter of Dennis and Barbara (last name not found) Garrett about 1690.  He was a witness to and therefore testified in the trial of John Oldton (who is our distant relation as he was married to a Gorsuch), who was charged with the murder of Dennis Garrett.

Sometime within the next 10 years, John moved his family to Baltimore County, in the area of the Gunpowder Meeting, where he owned at least two pieces of land and probably more.  There are indications that John was or became a Quaker, or at least that other members of his family were members of the Society of Friends.  I haven't been able to verity that.  However, it does show that they were in the area and he would have possibly been influenced by their beliefs, even if he did stay a member of the Church of England.

John and Johanna had at least seven and possibly as many as ten children.  Barnes lists seven.  Johanna died probably about 1715 and John next married Dinah Hawkins, in 1716.  He had at least three children with her, so Dinah must have been at least a few years younger than John.

John was a planter.  His crops would have included tobacco, so that likely means that he owned slaves, or at the least, had indentured servants.  I haven't located records yet that indicate the status of his farm laborers, but he would have needed help and most if not all families had either slaves or indentured servants, or both.  Yes, in this time period some Quakers had slaves, too.

John wrote his will in 1745 and it was presented on November 3, 1746.  It named his wife, Dinah, and their three, or three surviving, children.  His children with Johanna were all adults and presumably he had given them land or other assets earlier, since the will was not contested.  The value of his inventory was just short of 100 pounds.

It's a pretty scanty sketch of a man in our ancestry and in our genes, but it is what we have, at the moment.  I think it's important to at least mention these men and women who built America, especially since so many of our ancestors were from New England.  We have Southern and almost Southern roots, too.

The line of descent is

John Cole-Johanna Garrett
Sarah Cole-Charles Gorsuch
Hannah Gorsuch-Thomas Stansbury
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

Holbrook line: Samuel Doty 1643-1715

Update 8/11/2022  This man is not our ancestor.  I am leaving the post up for anyone who is interested in a short version of his life, however.  The error in this post is that Sarah Doty did not marry Josiah Standish, according to current research.  

There's more to Samuel Doty than meets the eye.  Yes, he was the son of a Mayflower Pilgrim and yes, he married a daughter of a member of the Great Migration.  Yes, he was maybe a bit of a rebel in his younger days.  But his story has several interesting twists, some of which I haven't seen in other ancestors. 

First, the basics:  Samuel Doty was the son of Edward Doty of the Mayflower and Faith Clarke, who arrived in Plymouth Colony in 1634 with her father Thurstan Clarke.  He was one of 9 children of the couple.  The Doty family would have attended church services on a regular basis, because it was required.  But it is believed that Edward Doty didn't join the church as a member, and Samuel appears to have taken the independent thinking route.  (Plymouth Colony was both Puritan and Separatist, meaning that they wanted nothing to do with the Church of England, whereas the Puritans, at least initially, wanted only to "purify" the church of England of its rituals, hierarchy, church decor, and some of their beliefs). 

Samuel moved from Plymouth to Eastham on Cape Cod sometime before July 16, 1668.  He was there for only a brief time,but it may have been enough to convince him or encourage him that he needed to leave the colony.  Several families from that area left for either Long Island, New York, or New Jersey during that time period.  Some were Quakers and some were what we would call seekers, maybe.  At any rate, Samuel was helping found Piscataway, New Jersey by October of 1669.  He was still a young man.  It's possible that Samuel had married by now but if so, there is no record of a first wife. 

He was thirty five years old when he married Jane or Jeane Harmon in Piscataway on November 13, 1678, which is rather old for a first marriage.  Jane Harmon ws born in Saco, Maine and it's not entirely clear how she arrived in Piscataway.  She was bound as an indentured servant to Lt. James Gibbins for an eight year period on April 4, 1671, having been removed from her father's home for "oppression{.  Apparently the Gibbins family acted somewhat as a foster family, but they would have used Jane as a servant, too.  She would have been taught housekeeping skills and perhaps how to read.  Some of the families from that area emigrated to Piscataway at the outbreak of King Philip's War, and she may have arrived then.  It appears that the Gibbins family must have returned to Maine, if indeed they have moved at all.  The marriage date of Samuel and Jane is just a few months prior to the time her indenture likely expired.  Samuel may have been able to purchase those last few months of servitude that Jane owed the Gibbins, or perhaps they agreed to it.  At anhy rate, they were married.

Samuel and Jane had somewhere about 12 children (some say 13) together, so, like many of our ancestors, they would have been quite busy providing for their family.  Samuel owned land but was not accorded the title of "Mr."  In his will, he calls himself a yeoman, meaning a farmer who owned land.  He was respected in Piscataway and by 1675 was a lieutenant in the militia company.  He is sometimes referred to as "Captain" so he may have been promoted or elected to the higher office at some point. 

We don't know what religion Samuel practiced when he arrived in Piscataway, but he helped found the Seventh Day Baptist church there.  This appears to be similar to other Baptist churches, for instance those in Rhode Island, except that this group met on Saturday instead of Sunday. 

Samuel inherited some of his father's land and sold it, which may be how he was able to purchase so much land in New Jersey.  He owned hundreds of acres, purchasing land at least up until 1690.  We don't know how much of it he developed as farm land, nor do we know what crops he grew.  The abstract of his will shows a "personal estate".  It seems that he had probably given land or otherwise gifted his children prior to his death, as only his wife and one son are mentioned in the will.  (I have not seen the original, this information is from an abstract). 

Samuel died November 8, 1715 and Jane died just two years later, on October 8, 1717.  Samuel would have been 72 years old but Jane just 56.  Child-bearing may have worn her out.  The youngest child was about 12 years old by that time, but there were plenty of older siblings to provide care, a home, or whatever was needed. 

I would love to talk to Samuel.  I'd like to know the stories his parents might have told him.  I'd like to know how his religious beliefs developed.  I'd like to know how he and Jane met.  I'd like to know whether he was involved in any military expeditions.  And most of all, I'd like to know how he and Jane were able to overcome rather difficult backgrounds and raise so many children, who all apparently were strong, contributing citizens. 

The line of descent is:

Samuel Doty-Jane Harmon
Sarah Doty-Josiah Standish
Hannah Standish-Nathan Foster
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

Allen line: Samuel Ball 1648-1689

Here we are, back in Springfield, Massachusetts Bay Colony, where so many of our Allen ancestors started out.  This time we're looking at the rather short life of Samuel Ball, who was born in Springfield on March 16, Samuel's life started out on a harsh note, when his father drowned on October 3, 1648.  Samuel wasn't yet a year old.  Samuel had an older brother, Jonathan, and his mother soon remarried to Benjamin Munn.  Before long he had at least eight half siblings to care for and play with.  We don't know much more of his youth than that, but we know from following the early history of Springfield that the town was settled with houses close together, everyone went to church when the drummer came by, and Puritan boys were expected to learn to read and write.  Benjamin Munn was the only father Samuel would ever know, so we can expect that he raised the two Ball boys as he raised his own family. Samuel's inheritance from his father was prtected in 1649, stating that he would receive either 14 pounds when he became twenty years old, or would be provided with an apprenticeship.  

It looks like he was probably apprenticed to a brickmaker or mason, because there are several references to his employment in that trade in the town records.  He also had an interest in a pine saw mill at a later date.  Samuel married Mary Graves, daughter of John and Mary Smith Graves, in Hatfield, Massachusetts on January 15, 1671.  Let's hope Mary settled him down a bit, because as a youth Samuel was one of the young men who did not behave well (there was quite a group of them).  He was sentenced to the whipping post for speaking rudely to his step-father when Samuel was eighteen years old, saying to him "A father indeed; you are no better than an old Indian."  Samuel was offered the option of paying a fine, which he did.  It wouldn't surprise me at all if the money for the fine came from his step-father, but we don't know that. 

Samuel and Mary had five children together.  Probably the most difficult part of their life would have been King Philip's War.  Samuel is credited with fighting in the Turner Fall battle near Deerfield, Massachusetts,on May 19, 1676, along with several other of our family members and his own family, too.  This is a very complicated family as there were several Ball-Stebbins marriages, but we had other family names, too.  John Hitchcock, Samuel's son in law, received land in Falltown, at roughly the site of the battle, in 1736 as the heir of Samuel Ball.  It is quite likely that this was not the only time Samuel fought, or went on patrol, or stood guard duty, but this is the one instance we are sure of. 

Samuel was just 41 years old when he became sick and died on September 13, 1689, in Springfield.  There is no indication of the illness, or the length of the illness.  It could have been a contagious disease or it may have been heart trouble.  Medical care at the time was not particularly effective.

Samuel died without a will and the only record we have is John Hitchcock's presentation of an inventory to the court, on behalf of his mother in law, Mary Graves Ball.  The inventory didn't survive, although there are notes to support the widow and also his mother, and then divide up the inheritance among the surviving children.

In a way, it's fun when we can see a bit of the personality of our ancestors.  Samuel was a little bit of a rebel, as many teen agers are today, and that gives us a sense of connection with him.  He was also willing to work hard, to support his family and to fight for his hometown.  In some ways, he was just like us.

The line of descent is

Samuel Ball-Mary Graves
Mary Ball-John Hitchcock
Samuel Hitchcock-Ruth Stebbins
Margaret Hitchock-Richard Falley
Samuel Falley-Ruth Root
Clarissa Falley-John Havens Starr
Harriet Starr-John Wilson Knott
Edith Knott-Edward Allen
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
Their descendants

Holbrook line: Samuel Morris 1670-1745

Oh dear.  I have been guilty of perpetuating an error in my blog posts, I fear.  That of course is one reason I write these blog posts, to prove to my own satisfaction that I have the correct ancestry for each of the people I write about.  Now I find that I must strike names from my tree, and go back to update a few of my earlier posts.  At least through this line, we are not connected to the Mayo or the John Graves lines.  So those posts are now "alternate facts", but I will leave the posts up, just adding an update, so that if someone else is researching those lines, they might be helped.

Now, let's turn to Samuel Morris.  He was born in March, 1670, in Roxbury, Massachusetts to Edward and Grace Bett Morris.  He lived there with his parents and seven siblings, until his father moved to Woodstock, Connecticut in 1685.  His father was a man of considerable wealth and standing in both towns, so when his father died in 1689, Samuel inherited some lands, even though he was "only" a fourth son.  The narrative gets a little confusing here, as Woodstock was originally known as "New Roxbury" and some of the records are not clear as to which Roxbury is being discussed.   

It does appear that Samuel returned to Roxbury, or possibly had stayed there, and married Mehitable Mayo, daughter of John and Hannah Graves Mayo in 1694. Samuel inherited some of his father's land there and so it makes sense that he would have returned to the scene of his youth and lived there.  He was made a freeman there in 1691.  Samuel and Mehitable had at least seven children together, and she died February 8, 1703.  That makes it impossible for her to be the mother of Abigail Morris, who was born April 2, 1707.  Samuel had married Dorotha or Dorothy Martin, the widow Howe, in Marlboro of Middlesex County, Massachusetts on May 15, 1706.  Dorothy had six children, Samuel had seven, and then had two children together, Abigail and Elizabeth, before disappearing from Marlboro records.  All I know about Dorothy Martin Howe Morris right now is that her father was Thomas Martin, and he died in 1701. (Another ancestor to explore!)

We know that Samuel purchased lands in Marlboro before his second marriage, and we know that he purchased 1500 acres of land in 1714 from Governor Joseph Dudley, for 500 pounds English money.  This was on the east line of the Town of Woodstock.  On the same day, Samuel and Dorothy gave a deed of the old homestead in Roxbury to Colonel William Dudley for 500 pounds current money.  This is when the Morris's finally removed to Connecticut.  Samuel built a house with "fortifications".  We're not told exactly what this meant, but generally it would mean one that had thick walls, and thin slits from which guns could be fired without exposing oneself to the "enemy".  Situations with some of the native Americans were still tense, although the Nipmuck tribe which lived nearby seems to have been friendly.  As far as we know, the fortifications were never needed.

Samuel was a highly respected man in Woodstock, but I must say he seems to have also been a grumpy old man in his later years.  He felt that he was being double taxed as far as church rates go, being forced to pay for the meeting house, minister's salary, etc. in more than one town at a time, because he was assigned to a parish that was not of his liking.  He claimed great difficulty in traveling the five miles to Thompson, citing swamps, mountains, and a river he had to cross to reach the meeting house he was forced to support financially.  This complaint stayed in the court and on town records for several years, until eventually he was given half rates for the church he did not wish to attend.  His grumbling may not have stopped, but the annual discussions did.  It's believed he attended church at a location much closer to his home, in his later years, one that he could reach without difficulty. 

Samuel built and maintained at least three bridges in the area, over a river and two streams on his 1500 acres.  He also kept up a road on his property, and other than the church dispute, seems to have been a good neighbor.

Dorothy died July 28, 1742, and Samuel died January 9, 1745.  Sadly, we are missing all probate records for Samuel, so we don't know whether he acquired additional land other than the 1500 acres, or what value his inventory showed.  The records are thought to have been destroyed in a fire, but it's always possible that they will show up somewhere.  We are left with records of a man who had enough wealth to build a fortified house, to build and maintain bridges, and to raise at least nine children.  He was also a man who was willing to start over, in Roxbury and then Marlboro and then near Woodstock.  His official death location is Thompson, Connecticut, because town limits expanded.  As far as is known, he didn't leave those 1500 acres.

The line of descent is:

Samuel Morris-Dorothy Martin
Abigail Morris-John Perrin
Benjamin Perrin=Mary
Mary Perrin-David Fay
Euzebia or Luceba Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants

And now, if you'll excuse me, I have some corrections to make!

Holbrook line: Israel Joslin 1692-1740 Yes, this one!

These Joslin men!  Honestly, if they had tried, they couldn't be any more confusing than they are.  Did they live to play :hide and seek" and "Can you see me now? and "Will the real Israel Joslin please stand up"?  Israel's father, Nathaniel, was hard to unravel because of several men in the same time and location with the same name.  Israel follows that pattern, and many of the trees on line seem to have it wrong.  We have to pay attention to time, location, and opportunity in order to sort the documentation and make sure we have this right.  Of course, I could still be wrong and if someone can refute this, please contact me. 

Our Israel Joslin was born April 2, 1692 in Marlboro, Worcester County, Massachusetts.  He was the son of Nathaniel and Hester or Esther Morse Joslin.  He may well have spent his entire life in the same location, although I haven't verified that yet.  He died in Southboro rather than Marlboro, but Southboro split off from Marlboro so it's quite possible that Israel's land was originally in Marlboro.

As a boy, Israel was one of eleven children, and he must have enjoyed large families because it appears that he was the father of at least nine children.  The lucky wife/mother was Sarah Cleveland (or Cleaveland), the daughter of Enoch and Elizabeth Counts Cleveland.  They were married on April 29, 1719 in Marlboro. 

Other than the birth of his children, Israel seems to have made little impact on the town he lived in, whether it was Marlboro or Southboro (the two towns are less than five miles apart, so Israel likely knew everyone in each of the two towns).  I haven't yet checked the town records (they are in Salt Lake City but aren't available on line yet) but I would assume that he paid taxes, went to church, and served in some sort of militia or training band.  That's what we know so far. 

However, his will and inventory tell us a little bit more.  He described himself as a yeoman in the will written August 29, 1740, less than two months before he died on October 23 of that same year.  He was only 48 years old.  What illness would have caused him to write a will at that age?  Or maybe it wasn't an illness.  He could have been hurt in an accident, or while serving in a military raid, or any number of other ways.  But we can think that maybe it wasn't a sudden accident, like getting hit by lightning or drowning.  Israel must have known or suspected it was coming. 

By his description of "yeoman", we know he owned land, which is confirmed in his inventory, and we know he was not a servant.  I haven't been able to verify yet that he was a "free man" and had the right to vote, because those records are also at Salt Lake City.  But it's likely that he was in that category.  His will is a little bit surprising, because he leaves everything to his wife Sarah.  Typically husbands would leave the widow one third of the estate, as required by law, and then give instructions for how the rest was to be divided.  This will, however, only says that after Sarah is deceased, this assets are to be divided among his children. Sarah was only about 38 and could reasonably be expected to re-marry, but that didn't matter to Israel.  He must have trusted and loved her very much! 

It is only when we look at Israel's inventory that we are able to start drawing a picture of him, and it seems that whatever else he was, he was a good steward of his land.  He had considerably more clothes than did many of his fellow yeomen, and he had two Bibles and books that were by themselves valued at three pounds.  He also had a pair of spectacles, bt we don't know whether he was near or far sighted.  There were at least four beds with bedding, which is more than many households had, and

His inventory included just three pieces of land, and they are not very description.  However, the appraisers assigned a value of 1200 pounds to his homestead, including all the lands attached to it, so this is where much of his wealth lay.  The inventory was taken just a few days after his death.  It totaled a little over 1678 pounds, which even after we take the new currency into account, wasn't a small estate.  Sarah was set for life and could run the farm and raise their children. 

Except, it's possible that our Sarah Joslin is the one who married David Bellows in 1745.  He lived only until 1754, but was born in 1702 so was about her age, and was a husbandman when he died.  Sarah declined to be the executor of his estate and I can find no further reference to her.  I suppose it's possible that she married again and we just haven't traced her yet.  It's also possible this is a different Sarah Joslin, but our Sarah seems to be the only one in the area and of the right age to marry David.  I'd love to find the rest of her records, too! 

The line of descent is

Israel Joslin-Sarah Cleveland
Sarah Joslin-Edward Fay

David Fay-Mary Perrin

Euzebia/Luceba Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants

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

Beeks line: Joseph Holley 1605-1647

It's been awhile since I had a Beeks ancestor to write about.  Sometimes I just somehow miss these people, and sometimes the first time I looked for information, I couldn't find enough to write about.  It's also possible that I've relaxed my definition of "enough".  When I started doing these brief sketches, I made it a goal to write 8-10 paragraphs about each ancestor.  Now, I'm willing to write even just a little bit, figuring that something is better than nothing.  With Joseph, I've found enough to give at least some outline of his life, although there are still big question marks, too.

Joseph was born about 1605 possibly in Crewkerne, Somerset, England, although his parents have not yet been identified. We know he was born about 1605 because in a court case in 1640, Joseph stated that he was 35 or thereabouts.  Crewkerne is a very old town, dating back to the time of Alfred the Great.  There is a 15th century church there, which Joseph would probably have attended.  There was also a school at the time that Joseph lived there, but we don't know whether he attended or not.

Joseph married Rose Allen, daughter of George and Katherine (maiden name not certain) Allen, in England.  We know that it was in England becae his son was "of age" when Joseph died in 1647, which means the son must have been at least 18.  That puts his birth date at 1629, so this Joseph likely married in or about 1628.  The couple had at least five children together, a son and then four daughters. 

We don't know for sure when Joseph came to New England but he was in Dorchester as early as 1633 and in Lynn in 1636.  By 1637 he was in Sandwich, in Plymouth Colony, where he is considered one of the 61 original signers and one of just 16 long term settlers.  The church of Sandwich seems to have not been as Puritan as was liked, and they went for ten years without a pastor.  There is some thought that the people of the town, or at least some of them, were early Quaker adherents.

We know Joseph was part of a military band, probably guarding against Indians but we don't know whether he actually fought in any battles.  We know he owned property as early as 1639.   By occupation, he was a millwright, which may explain why he went from place to place for a few years before settling in Sandwich.  He was a freeman in 1643/44constable in 1644, and either he or his son was a surveyor of highways in 1647. 

Sadly. that is the last we hear of Joseph, for he died in 1647 in Sandwich.  We have no information about his cause of death but he was only about 42 years old, so it was likely an illness of some sort.  Fevers and dysentery were relatively common at the time. 

His inventory was valued at about 205 pounds, but the estate wasn't settled for another 18 years, as the youngest of the children finally reached maturity.  Rose remarried after a few months as a widow, to William Newland, and she died in 1694. 

The line of descent is

Joseph Holley-Rose Allen
Mary Holley-Nathaniel FitzRandolph__
Samuel FitzRandolph-Mary Jones
Prudence Fitzrandolph-Shubael Smith
Mary Smith-Jonathan Dunham
Samuel Dunham-Hannah Ruble
Jacob Dunham-Catherine Goodnight
Samuel Dunham-Eliza Matilda Reese
Margaret Catherine Dunham=Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants

Holbrook line: Joseph Thomson 1698-1755

There are certain towns in Massachusetts that should be "destinations" for family travelers.  One such area is Springfield-Westfield, in the Connecticut River valley, where many of our Allen names lived for generations.  Another is the Mendon-Wrentham-Franklin-Bellingham area, which was home to many of our Holbrook families for generations.  Sometimes our ancestors were big people in these little places, and sometimes they didn't leave much of a trace. 

Joseph Thomson (or Tomson, or Thompson) is one of our Mendon-Bellingham ancestors, who didn't make much of an impact on the town, as far as we can tell.  He lived, married, had children, and died.  Even though there is a lot we don't know about him, we do know that he lived in interesting times, and we know that his estate papers will tell us a little about his life. 

First, what we do know.  Joseph was born in Medfield, Massachusetts Bay Colony, on October 19, 1698, to John and Hannah Wight Thomson.  Medfield at the time would have felt like a new town.  It was originally founded in 1649 but was burned during King Philips War, so none of the hoes were more than 20 or so years old.  And memories were long.  Joseph had at least seven brothers and sisters, so his parents had plenty to do.  One thing they likely did was send the boys to school.  Another Holbrook ancestor, Ralph Wheelock, had founded the school there and it was important that boys learn to read and write.

Joseph married Mary Holbrook, daughter of Peter and Alice Godfrey Holbrook, on March 28, 1725, in Bellingham, Massachusetts Bay Colony.  The town had been officially formed in 1719, but people had been living in the area for some time.  Joseph's parents died in Bellingham, so it seems likely that his parents had initiated the move prior to Joseph's reaching the age of 21, but we don't know for sure when the move was made.  Joseph and Mary had 11 children together, so again, this was a busy family, with busy parents. 

Some of the Thomsons and most of the Holbrooks were Baptists, but the church didn't form until mid-century so Joseph, even if a member, would not have had a lot of influence there.  He doesn't show up on the earliest membership rolls, so perhaps he stayed in the Puritan church.  He does show up as one of only 50 qualified voters in the town, in 1739. 

I don't know if he ever served in the military.  We was of the right age to be in Queen Anne's war and might have been in King George's War, but I've not yet found his name on any such listing.  His inventory does include "Armour, gun, sword and accoutrements" so he was or had been ready to serve, at one time. 

Joseph died January 2, 1755, without having a will.  His appraisers were Ebenezer Thayer, (ancestor), Samuel Hayward, and John Metcalf.  Besides the military items listed above, he had several parcels of land, bedding for four beds, feathers, household goods, husbandry and carpenter tools, farm animals, and a lot of flax, It's hard to tell whether there was a loom or spinning wheel because several lines list an object and then say "and sundry items" so similar words.  He did have a few books.
There is a careful documentation in the file of who was to get which part of which parcel of land and other belongings.  Mary was entitled to her one third of the estate and the rest was divided up among the children.  Mary died March 4, 1781.  I haven't located a burial location for them but it was probably what is known as the North Cemetery, where many of the town's founders are buied.

So that's the little we know about Joseph Thomson.  He was a decent man, or there would be stories of any shenanigans in court records.  He may or may not have been a religious man, whether Puritan or Baptist.  He may or may not have served in one of more of the conflicts that were an ongoing part of colonial life.   But he was our ancestor, anchored in time and location, and for that, I am grateful.

The line of descent is:

Joseph Thomson-Mary Holbrook
Alice Thomson-Joseph Rockwood
Levi Rockwood-Deborah Lazell
Susannah Rockwood-Nahum Holbrook
Joseph Holbrook=Mary Elizabeth Whittemore
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants

Holbrook line: Another Ebenezer Thayer 1699-1771

I had something of a genealogy scare when I started researching for this post.  I saw that there are several trees that give different parents for our Ebenezer than I had thought correct.  So I spent some time going through what records I could find on line and ended up confident that the parents I'm showing are more likely to be correct than the ones others are showing.  Whew!  I let my breath out when I came to my conclusion, because I've made enough errors already and don't want to perpetuate any more. 

So, Ebenezer Thayer was born April 12, 1699 in Mendon, Massachusetts, the son of Ebenezer and Martha Thomson Thayer.  (I wrote about Ebenezer Senior recently, with never a thought that he might be the wrong guy.)  Ebenezer, the subject of this post, had at least two brothers and four sisters, named in his father's will in 1722 (father was of Bellingham then).  Bellingham was formed out of Mendon and it appears that at least some of the family land was on the border between the two towns, but the main dwelling house was part of Bellingham. 

Our Ebenezer married Mary Wheelock on August 9, 1721.  She was the daughter of Benjamin and Huldah Thayer Wheelock, and yes, there was a family connection between Ebenezer and Huldah.  The two were first cousins once removed.  When Ebenezer Senior died in 1722, he left a lot of land and other assets, to the value of about 795 pounds.  Ebenezer, as the oldest son, received a double share and it looks like he would have been set for life. 

Then it gets confusing, and I've not been able to find a will to give answers.  Mary, the wife of Ebenezer, is said to have died in 1731 and Ebenezer is said to have married Hannah Greene in 1734 and fathered more children with her.  I can't find a record of Mary's death or of the marriage of Ebenezer and Hannah, so I'm confused.  I don't know whether the Ebenezer who married Hannah was ours or not.  Some of the printed genealogies say that it was an Ebenezer who was born in 1720 who married Hannah, and that makes no sense either.  There was an Ebenezer who was born to Isaac Thayer in 1697; could it have been this Ebenezer who married Hannah?

And yet, there are just three records of births to Ebenezer and Mary in the town records...so what really happened? 

Another point of confusion is the use of the term "Captain" in 1754.  Which Ebenezer was this?  And how did he obtain the title of "Captain"/  What military service might this person have been part of?  The most likely explanation, given the birth date of 1699 for our Ebenezer is that he was somehow involved in King George's War,but I've found no evidence for that yet. 

There was only one Ebenezer who was taxed in 1726 in Bellingham, one who was qualified in 1739 to be a voter (implying land ownership and church membership, I believe).  His name is on a petition asking to be assigned to Mendon II district for ecclesiastical affairs, in 1747.  I know that Mendon had a serious church problem as did Bellingham, as the church in Bellingham was Baptist.  Perhaps Ebenezer was not of that persuasion and wanted to go to a more traditional church. 

Since I can't find a will or estate papers for Ebenezer, I don't know whether he held on to some of his father's wealth or not.  Farming in that area of Massachusetts was difficult as the soil was not suited for farming, or at least not easily farmed.  Was his will taken by someone who wanted it for personal reasons, or did he never have a will?  But shouldn't he at least had a probate record?

I'd like to know about Ebenezer, of course.  Did Mary die and did her remarry?  Where are Mary's death records?  What were his religious beliefs, and how did he acquire the title of "Captain", if this man is ours?  I sure hope someone who has studied this family will have some answers and be willing to help us learn more of our ancestor's story.

The line of descent is:
Ebenezer Thayer-Mary Wheelock
Abigail Thayer-Jesse Holbrook
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

Holbrook line: Joseph Stevens 1679-1757

I hesitate to write this blog post, because I'm finding information that is different than mine.  It looks like two of even three men by the name of Joseph Stevens have been combined in some of the information that is out on the web.  I hope I have untangled our Joseph Stevens from the others, and if I haven't, I hope someone who has the documentation will correct me. 

Our Joseph Stevens was the son of John and Elizabeth Hildreth Stevens. His grandfather, Henry, was the Stevens immigrant, and father John was born in Boston in 1637.  Joseph, however, was born in Chelmsford, Essex County, Massachusetts Bay Colony on March 24, 1679,  This was just after King Philip's War, and Chelmsford had apparently not been seriously attacked during that conflict, although the town did suffer raids from native Americans.  Joseph may have been the youngest of the eight Stevens children, so some of his older siblings likely told him stories as he grew up.  I can imagine the youngster's eyes growing round as they told stories that may have become slightly embellished with time.

This might be a good time to comment on a reference I saw that Joseph is believed to have been one.eighth native American.  I would say that this is possible only because I don't know all of Joseph's great grandparents.  They would have been born around the turn of the seventeenth century, or earlier, and would have had to have lived in the colony.  So far I've no evidence that there was anyone here that early.  I would love to know the truth of that rumor.

I don't know whether Joseph ever lived in Woburn, but it's possible because he married Elizabeth Tidd, daughter of John and Elizabeth Fifield Tidd there in 1701.  We next find Joseph in Billerica, where he married his second wife, Elizabeth Sherman in 1713 in BIllerica.  Elizabeth Tidd had died shortly before that, of unknown causes. 

Joseph had four children with Elizabeth Tidd and then perhaps as many as eight children with Elizabeth Sherman.  It would have been quite a household.  Joseph was well-regarded in Billerica and took responsibility to help form the town of Chelmsford.  It was formally incorporated in 1732, but settlers were probably there earlier.  He had the right to call the first town meeting, as the proprietor of the town, but he didn't do that.  He was, however, moderator of the first town meetings and was chosen as selectman several times.  He also seems to have been active in getting the first church started, after signing the covenant in 1734. 

Then it is hard to tell what happened to Joseph.  He died October 1, 1756 in Townsend, still in Essex County.  I haven't yet been able to trace when he moved there, or why, but his probate papers clearly state that he is of Townsend.  (Note: I found a will attached to him on Ancestry trees but it doesn't appear to be correct.  The children named don't belong to our Joseph, for one thing. I found what I believe is the correct probate file at American Ancestry.)  Joseph died without a will and with a very small estate, burdened with debts.  Perhaps in his old age taking "loans" from friends was a way to sustain himself.  But he was rich in treasure laid up in heaven, because this is what his headstone says:

"Halt stranger as you go past
Remember time doth runeth fast
My dust in narou bounds do lye
Remember man that thou must dye
This dust revive it shalt again
And in a grave no more remain
When trumpet sounds I shall arise
And celebrat my God his praise"

(Transcribed by Kevin Avery on Find a Grave.)  I've not seen this verse before and it speaks to me.  Joseph was a man of his times, a not so stern Puritan as he looked forward to his resurrection.

So we know a little about Joseph, but not enough to really satisfy me.  Why did he move so many times?  Did he have a trade that was valued at each of his homes?  Why did he fall on hard times?  Did he participate in any of the military missions of his times?  There is always more to learn!

The line of descent is

Joseph Stevens-Elizabeth Tidd
Elizabeth Stevens-William Snow
Lucy Snow-Josiah Whittemore
Josiah Whittemore-Betsy Foster
Mary Elizabeth Whittemore-Joseph Holbrook
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants 

Holbrook line: John Turner, our own iron man

Usually when I write a blog post, I have a birth date and a death date, even if those dates are approximate, and my job is to fill in the dash between those dates, telling a story about who the person was and what they did.  For today's post, I have only the vaguest of ideas about dates, and I'm not sure whether I'm telling the story of one man, or of two.  I am going to treat this as two men, with the understanding that I am fully open to corrections and additional information. 

The first John Turner seems to have been born perhaps about 1600.  He came to America by 1643, when his name was on an early petition for Lynn, Massachusetts.  He was there in 1654, as an iron worker.  In 1648, he was charged with stabbing his daughter in law, Sarah Turner, and was sentenced to be severely whipped.  It is thought that this was the wife of his son Lawrence.  He is also thought to have had a son John.  There don't seem to be any further known records about John in Lynn.  Speculation is that he had been an iron worker in England, perhaps at Hammersmith, and had come to Massachusetts specifically to work at the first iron works set up in the colony. 

The next time we find John Turner, he is in Taunton, Massachusetts, in 1654.  This John Turner worked as a foreman at the forge in Taunton.  He is believed to be the son of the John Turner at Lynn, but it's possible that this was the same man.  If he was the son, then he followed in his father's trade, and likely moved up in the world, because by 1690 he was listed as the "clerke" at the iron works at Taunton, which was perhaps close to the role of manager, or maybe chief financial officer.  It was a position of respect, anyway.

John at Taunton was a married man, with at least three daughters, Jane, Mary, and Margaret.  It's thought that his wife's name was Jane, but records are lacking.  (Taunton's early records were destroyed by fire). 

The other things we know about John are that he was a surveyor in 1675 (the only town office he is known to have filled, although there were likely others), that he purchased a share or part of a share in the company, that he acquired some of the land purchased from the native Americans in 1672, and that he took an oath of fidelity, probably related to when William and Mary took the thrones in 1688.  He's not found on the list of freemen, which means he likely was not a member of the church.  He may have had a few animals but he wasn't a farmer in the traditional sense of the word.  It would be a great help to review his will, but it seems to have gone missing, whether in the destruction of other town records or for some other reason, I don't know. 

Taunton was only lightly affected by King Philip's war, with minor attacks on only two occasions.  A couple of houses were burned and one man was killed.  The town in general did not evacuate, so it seems likely that John would have served in one of the garrison houses, either as a ember of the militia or as a civilian pressed into duty. 

John was working in 1690 but I've not located any further records of him.  He was outside of the box for our family, not a pastor or a school teacher or a farmer.  The work of the iron works was truly essential to the success of the colony, as the only other source of iron was from England itself, a long and costly way to procure it.  So his work was important to the colony, and his life is important to us. 

The line of descent is

John TUrner-Jane
Jane Turner-Richard Godfrey
Alice Godfrey-Peter Holbrook
Joseph Holbrook-Mary Cook
Jesse Holbrook-Abigail Thayer
Amariah Holbrook-Molly Wright
Nahum Holbrook-Susanna Rockwood
Joseph Holbrook-Mary Eliabeth Whittemore
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants

Allen line: John Church 1636-1691

Well, John's birth date is not known for certain, but I'm going with "about May 9, 1636."  The date is sort of important, as is the place, because it's possible that he was the first babe born in Hartford, Connecticut.  His father, Richard Church, is listed as one of the founders of Hartford, and by implication, his mother, Ann probably Marsh, would have been a founding mother.  We find Richard's name attached to lot 35 on the Hartford map of 1640, meaning that he was there early.  So probably John was born either in Hartford or on the trip there.  John was one of at least four children, and he was the youngest of them.

We don't know much about John's childhood but we know he must have attended the First Church there in Hartford, and he would have learned to read and probably write, whether that was at home or in a school setting.  The first record I've found for him was of his marriage on October 27, 1657, when he was just 21, to Sarah Beckley, the daughter of Richard and Ann Daniel Beckley.  Then there is a bit of a mystery.  The couple had ten children, but there doesn't seem to be a record of their births.  There has been a suggestion that perhaps the young couple went to Hadley, Massachusetts Bay Colony for a few years, but records are not found there, either.

We know they were in Hartford by 1670, if indeed they had ever left.  There is a long and complicated church history, but what eventually happened was that a second church was started in Hartford.  Apparently this second church had less stringent rules for membership, because John was able to state that he "owned the covenant", which was usually a precursor to church membership, and also to having your children baptized.  Sometimes this was called the "Halfway Covenant".  So John attended church (every resident in Hartford was expected to attend regular church services) and agreed with church beliefs, but apparently didn't follow all the steps necessary for full church membership.  Sarah was admitted to full membership on June 23, 1678.

John was willed his father's house in Hartford, and also his lands within the bounds of Hartford, which may be one reason they either came back or stayed in Hartford.  This is essentially what I know of John, up until his death.  I don't know his occupation, or to what extent he may have served in the militia, particularly in King Philip's war.  I don't know what town offices he may have held.  And I don't know how he died.  The reason this is of interest to me is that he died October 16, 1691 in Wethersfield, and Sarah is reported to have died just 11 days later.  They were 55 and 51 years old, respectfully, and John died without a will.  This leads me to suspect it was some kind of an illness, perhaps a flu or respiratory disease, that killed them.  That is purely speculation on my part, but clearly something was going on.

His children soon approached the court and asked for guidance as to how to dispose of the estate.  An inventory was taken, establishing the value at about 510 pounds, and it was then divided up between the 10 children, with each child receiving 20 pounds (could possibly be 28, I'm not sure), or goods worth that amount, except for son Richard, who received 40 pounds.  I don't know whether or not John was considered to be financially well off, but his inventory is larger than that of many of our ancestors who died about the same time.  There were two spinning wheels and quite a bit of cloth in the inventory, plus a lot of furniture for the time, especially chests.  There was also 'gunn, sworde, and ammunition", several pieces of real estate, and some farm tools.  I didn't follow what became of the real estate, but it seems that it may have been dealt with separately.

So we know some things about John, and some we don't know.  Yet, there is he in our family lineage, and without him, there would not have been us.

The line of descent is

John Church-Sarah Beckley
Richard Church-Elizabeth Noble
Jonathan Church-Ruth Hitchcock
Ruth Church-Stephen Noble
Ruth Noble-Martin Root
Ruth Root-Samuel Falley
Clarissa Falley-John Havens Starr
Harriet Starr-John Wilson Knott
Edith Knott-Edward Allen
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
Their descendants

Allen line: Stephen Noble 1727-1791

How could I have missed him?  I've known about "Lieutenant Stephen Noble" ever since my father received some family history from his sister, probably about 1960.  It was basically about the Starr family, but at the back, there were documents.  I was told at the time that these would make it easier for me to join the Daughters of the American Revolution, should I ever decide to do so.  But what child is really interested in doing that?

And yes, and yet, here it is, blog post number 702 and I'm just now writing a little about Stephen's story.  I think one reason I've put it off is that I have been hoping to find more information about him.  While I do have some facts, dates, names, and so on, I assumed there would be more.  There may well be more, but I don't know where to find it, I guess.

So, here's what I do know.  Stephen Noble was born April 15, 1791 in Westfield, Massachusetts, which is the home of a whole cluster of our Allen families.  His parents were Thomas and Sarah Root Noble, and his parents had also been born in Westfield.  Those of his grandparents who hadn't been born in Westfield were born in Springfield, which was just a few miles east of Westfield, and was Westfield's "mother town".  Stephen was one of at least ten children, and he likely led the kind of childhood we only dream about today-family nearby, freedom to play in the creeks, hunt or fish, and perhaps to learn a trade.

Stephen married in Westfield, to Ruth Church, daughter of Jonathan and Ruth Hitchcock Church, on March 7, 1753, when he was 25 and Ruth was 19. Stephenwas probably away from home at least some of the time during the mid 1750's. as I've seen a report of a source, but not the source itself, that says he was a private in 1757, so there may well be records that would document this.  I just haven't seen them yet. He very possibly could have been involved in one or more of the campaigns in New York during that time period. 

If Stephen had been in the French and Indian war, that would help explain why he served for nine months in the Revolutionary War, in 1777.  He was likely encouraged to do so, because of his experience under fire, and also because he apparently had leadership skills.  He was part of the Committee of Correspondence and Safety for Westfield, which means he was not afraid to stick his neck out and act for what he believed in, which was independence.  It is likely that his Revolutionary War experience was largely guarding provisions, but again, the New York campaigns and battles can't be ruled out, since he served for nine months.   He was a lieutenant, either elected by his men or appointed as such by townsmen, and we know he was entrusted with money for his men in 1780.  By the time the war was over, he would have been in his middle 50's, and probably not serving in any kind of active duty, but may have been the town's recruitment officer. It would be nice to see what else the DAR might have in their library about him.

Stephen and Ruth had at least nine children together.  I don't know whether their life together was happy or not.  It appears to have had an unhappy end, at least.  Stephen died April 2, 1791, deeply in debt to a large assortment of friends, relatives, neighbors, and apparently just about everyone in town.  He was so broke that the estate could pay only ten pence to the pound to each of his creditors, which is probably even less than "pennies on the dollar".  So now we have a mystery.  Was he just a poor money manager?  Had something happened, such as a house or business fire, that left him in an embarrassed position at the end of his life? Had he suffered from a long illness?  Or possibly one or more of his children had taken all that he had.  I don't know if there's a way to determine this.  Ruth lived about three years after Stephen had died, dying in Hadley, Massachusetts.  She may have been living with one of her children, or at least visiting there at the time of her death.

Obviously I would love to learn more about Stephen's military service, his occupation, and his religious life, and of course what happened that he died in such penury.  Inquiring minds want to know these things.  But he deserves our honor and respect for the service and love he gave to his country and to his family.

The line of descent is:

Stephen Noble-Ruth Church
Ruth Noble=Martin Root
Ruth Root-Samuel Falley
Clarissa Falley-John Havens Starr
Harriet Starr-John Wilson Knott
Edith Knott-Edward Allen
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
Their descendants