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

 

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

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

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

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

Holbrook line: Josiah Belcher 1631-1683

I recently wrote about an ancestor from early Boston, and now here is another one, even earlier.  And wonder of wonders, there is quite a bit of information about him.  It's always fun when that happens.  I want to acknowledge that a good bit of this seems to have originated with a wonderful source called The Thweng Collection, which is available on the site American Ancestors (this is a subscription site, but with as many New England families as we have, I can't do without it).

So...Josiah Belcher was the son of Gregory and (probably) Catherine Alcock Belcher and was born in 1631 (based on a gravestone inscription) in a small settlement, not yet an organized town, called Braintree, Massachusetts Bay Colony.  He was one of at least seven children, and would have grown up basically as a farmer.  Or perhaps not, because he had a trade as an adult, that of a wheelwright.  He is still described as a yeoman, so there was farming involved, also.

Josiah (also known as Josias) married Uranis (Ranis) Rainsford, daughter of Edward and Elizabeth Dilloe Rainsford, on March 3, 1655 in Boston, where her parents lived.  Braintree wasn't far from Boston, but it seems likely that Josiah had already settled in Boston, in order for them to have met.  Edward Rainsford is a gateway ancestor, connecting this family to European royalty (whether they knew it or not).  Rainsford was sometimes called "Mr." or "Gent" so this may be a case of Josiah being upwardly mobile.  One wonders what her parents thought of the match.

His property is described as being on the southwesterly corner of what is now Essex Street and Harrison Streets (this from a 1906 articles about the Belchers in the Register.  It fronted 126 feet on Essex Street and ran back 285 feet to the water.  I think this is very near what is identified as "Rainsford Lane" on the 1722 Boston map.  This was what was then the south part of Boston.  In fact, Josiah was one of about two dozen men given the task of founding the South church in Boston (this was the one that in later years would become a meeting place for Patriots, but that's part of someone else's story).

Josiah doesn't appear to have been much involved with politics or civic service, but he did serve as one of the "officers about swine" three times during the 1670s.  Typically this would involve making sure that the animals were ringed or yoked during certain times of the year, so they wouldn't destroy crops.  The Massachusetts towns I've read about during this time period all allowed swine to roam the town streets, and perhaps Boston did, too. 

Josiah and Uranis had thirteen children together.  Several died young, never married, or married but had no children.  The last years of Josiah and Uranis were probably sad, but they did have two sons who survived them and several daughters.  The land was not partitioned until after the death of Uranis, and then each surviving child received part of the land, which appears to have been then sold.  The inventory for Josiah includes land in Braintree but the land in Boston doesn't appear to be included.  As part of it may have been Uranis's land, perhaps it was not included in the inventory.  The inventory was valued at a little over 195 pounds.     Josiah is buried at the Granary Burying Ground in downtown Boston.  (I was on a trolley tour of Boston 21 years ago, and we stopped at this site, but I had no knowledge that I had ancestors there and did not get off the trolley to go exploring). 

Of course I'd like to know more about Josiah, including how it was that he became a wheelwright and how he met and courted his wife.  What made him (or his father) decide that Boston would be a better place for him than Braintree?  I'd also like to know if he was ever involved in military service. and was perhaps a member of the Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company of Massachusetts.  That discovery, however, will have to wait for another day.

The line of descent is:

Josiah Belcher-Uranis Rainsford
Elizabeth Belcher-John Paine
Stephen Paine-Sarah Vallet
Stephen Paine-Sarah Thornton
Stephen Paine-Lillis Winsor
Deborah Paine-Enos Eddy
Joseph Eddy-Susan Lamphire
Susan Eddy-Hiram Stanard
Louis E Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants

Holbrook line: Sergeant Samuel Judd 1653-1720

Well, OK, maybe he wasn't born in 1651.  Maybe it was 1653.  Records seem to be lacking.  However, his father was Deacon Thomas Judd and his mother was Elizabeth, maiden name unknown.  He was born in Farmington, Connecticut, which is just west of Hartford, and he was one of nine children.  Since his father was the church deacon, it is probably safe to assume that this was a Puritan family.  About 1670, the Puritan churches started having difficulties and we don't know how seriously Samuel took his religion, but presumably he would still have attended church even if he wasn't an official member of the congregation.  There are church records but one has to be on site in Connecticut to view them, it appears.

Samuel appears to have been in Northampton, Massachusetts at the time of his marriage in 1681 to Mariah Strong, daughter of Thomas and Mary Hewett Strong, who were also of Northampton. He may have gone there with his father and step mother, because they also were of Northampton by the time they died.  However it happened, Samuel became a resident of Northampton and stayed there for the rest of his life. I show that Samuel and Mariah had 10 children, He seems not to have been much involved in town service, other than as a juror on several cases.  He was made a freeman on 684, so at least he had voting rights and responsibilities.    

In his death record, Samuel is referred to as "Sergeant" Samuel Judd.  I have tried to locate (on line) records that would tell us how he acquired that rank (generally, elected by the men) and where he might have served, but the only reference I found showed a Samuel Judd serving in 1709,  This may or may not be our Samuel; he would have been 56 years old at the time.  If Samuel was in Northampton in 1675, then he would surely have been involved in King Philip's War, because the town was attacked and some homes destroyed during that time.  However, the town was heavily garrisoned and defended, so the whole town was not lost, and it doesn't seem that the townspeople fled.  The colony was also involved in Queen Anne's War and King William's War, so Samuel may have taken part in battles there.  He may also have responded to the native American attacks on Harfield and Deerfield later in the 1700s.  It's frustrating to have all these possibilities and no answers!  Maybe when the Allen County Public Library is able to re-open...

I did locate Samuel's will.  It's a little unusual because he gives half of everything to his wife, Mariah, but if she re-marries she is to get only one third and then only for as long as she lives.  Samuel did sign the will but it is printed rather than cursive writing.  I don't know if that means anything; perhaps it only means that he was ill and uncomfortable when he signed it.  I've not located an inventory but he also left each of his six daughters fifty pounds, besides what he left his wife and each of his three sons.  It appears that he was doing OK financially, perhaps greatly helped by that bequest from his step mother.  Mariah lived until 1751, so his sons waited a while for their bequests. 

I would love to know more about Samuel, especially about his military service.  I'd love to find his inventory, as well as church records that might tell us something of not only his religious character, but also where he was seated in the meeting house.  That would give us an indication of his status in the town.  This is a start, but only a start, to Samuel's story.

The line of descent is:

Samuel Judd-Mariah Strong
Elizabeth Judd-Ebenezer Southwell
Eunice Southwell-Medad Pomeroy
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








  

Holbrook line: John Stevens 1637-1691

As is often the case, there's much I don't know about John Stevens.  But we do have a few facts that will help us place him in a time and a location, with family around him and work to be done.  So although it's a very faint and not detailed picture of his life, at least it's something.

John was born September 10, 1637 in Boston, Massachusetts, when Boston was just a few years away from being total wilderness.  So by definition, at least in his early years, he would have seen native Americans on the streets of his town, and he was most likely a Puritan.  His parents were Henry and Alice (maiden name unknown) Stevens.  An account of his father in "The Great Migration" indicates that his father was a mason and was likely a servant from at least 1635 to 1640, when his master left permanently for England.  Henry was one of those who were able to live above the subsistence level that was the lot of many servants, and he had died with a decent estate. 

John, however, was another story.  We don't know for sure why or how he ended up in Chelmsford, Massachusetts, which was probably at the time about 40 miles north and west of Boston.  But it was in Chelmsford that he married Elizabeth Hildreth, daughter of Richard and Elizabeth (possibly Hinchman) Hildreth.  I can't make a guess as to what his occupation was, other than farmer, based on his inventory.  He and Elizabeth had at least five children in Chelmsford. 

He is referred to as "Ensign" but we don't know when or how he acquired that title.  He would have been the right age to have served in King Philip's War but I didn't find anyone I could positively identify with our John Stevens then.  There was one John Stevens in that war, who had either lost an arm, or had it badly damaged, in the conflict.  But it seems that he was likely of a different community than our John.  Like most towns, there is little reference to the war or its aftermath in the town records, but John did sign a petition in 1676 asking for lower taxes because the town had suffered so grievously in the war.  We know that Chelmsford did suffer at least one raid but it's not clear whether the town was then abandoned, or whether the people simply lived in garrisons. 

John was made a freeman, meaning he had property, could join the church if he hadn't already, and could now vote, on May 3, 1665, shortly after his December 15, 1664 marriage to Elizabeth.  So he had some status in the community.  His farm was located about two miles west of the meeting house, at the foot of "Francis" hill.  Five generations of the family lived there after John, so likely the family watched and perhaps participated in the Revolutionary War from this home. 

From a couple of tax lists I reviewed, it looks like John was neither well off nor dirt poor.  His "rates" or taxes, were maybe a tad below the average charge, but were not at the lowest amount, by any means.  He doesn't seem to have been elected to town office, which again indicates that he didn't have much status in the town.  Still, he was a freeman, and not everyone achieved that distinction

John died April 6, 1691 in Chelmsford.  If he left a will, I've not been able to locate it.  I did find his inventory, which looks like that of many farmers-animals and tools, some household goods, several properties, arms and ammunition.  Since he wasn't yet 60 years old, he was probably still a member of the training band, which explains the arms.  The estate was valued at a little over 195 pounds, significantly less than the amost 500 pounds his stone mason father had left when he died less than a year earlier.

That's what we know of John.  He seems to have stayed out of trouble and out of the public limelight, while taking care of his family and serving his colony.  He didn't get rich along the way, but he probably never let his family go hungry.  He deserves to have a few paragraphs written about him, all these years later.

The line of descent is

John Stevens-Elizabeth Hildreth
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 Whittemore 1685-1748

What fun!  Most of our ancestors were good folks, either farmers or pastors, and sometimes it's hard to find something new to say about their lives.  But every once in a while, someone steps out of the box and does something entirely different, and perhaps is entirely different, from our norm.  John Whittemore just may be one of those men.

John Whittemore was born February 23, 1685 in Charlestown, Massachusetts, the son of John and Elizabeth Annable Whittemore, and he's one in a succession of four men named John Whittemore, each of whom is our ancestor.  Confusion reigns, but I think I have this man figured out. 

At some point in his life, John left Charlestown and settled in Boston.  He married Elizabeth Lloyd, the daughter of Edward and Hannah Griffin Lloyd.  The Lloyds were a Charleston family who had moved to Boston also.  I'm wondering if John was maybe an apprentice or some sort of shipworker there, because the marriage took place in Boston.  John and Elizabeth had at least five children together, including our John born 1714. 

I'm still trying to pull together John's story as far as his adult life goes.  I know that he was a mariner and a retailer, perhaps not at the same time or perhaps at the same time.  His father in law had died with a good supply of "rhum" and spirits, and John may have inherited or purchased that, as he also sold strong spirits.  So, basically he ran a tavern or a liquor store.  He must have been somewhat successful because he built a new home in 1733,   We know that because he was granted liberty to dig a frain from his new house, which was apparently on Sheaf St.  It looks like this would have been just blocks from what we know as the Old North Church, in the north end of Boston.  It was also near Copp's Hill Burying Ground

, which is where he was buried. 

Elizabeth died August 13, 1746 and John died April 21, 1748,  In his will, he left 100 pounds to his oldest son, John and 150 pounds (old tenor, not the new fangled money the colony had printed) to son Edward.  He also left each of them 1/4 of his "moveable estate".  Three grandsons, including another of our Johns, were to share 100 pounds.  To Elizabeth, his daughter, he left his house and land, and all his liquors.  One can speculate that the two sons were set up in life already but that Elizabeth would need some source of income.  I wonder what the city fathers thought of that. 

The only reference I found to a possible religion for John was that his son John was baptized at "Second Church", which is now known as Old North Church.  Increase Mather was the pastor at the time.  There doesn't seem to be any record of the other children's baptism.  Perhaps John was away so much that he wasn't often there to see that the children were baptized, or perhaps Elizabeth had enough to do to take care of her family.

I would love to find his inventory, to learn whether he was well to do or not.  I'd also love to learn more about his story as a mariner, and I do have a few new sources to look at for that.  If I find anything interesting, I'll do an update.  And of course, I'm wondering how involved he was in the slave trade, and whether he had one or more slaves.  That would be more than possible if he was importing rum, also. But for now, we at least have a sense that John lived in one of the (to me) most interesting places in the world, and had a fascinating career.  That's pretty cool.

The line of descent is:

John Whittemore-Elizabeth Lloyd
John Whittemore-Lydia Clough
Josiah Whittemore-Lucy Snow
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: Benjamin Wheelock 1678-1746

 Earlier this week I wrote about Jonathan Thayer, of whom I could find little or nothing.  Now I'm writing about his son in law, Benjamin Wheelock, who lived in the same small town, and I've found a ton of information about him.  His father, also Benjamin Wheelock, was a founder of the town of Mendon, Massachusetts Bay Colony, and was respected in the town.  This Benjamin also was respected, sometimes being given the title of "Mr." in the town records, and his son Benjamin, who is not our direct ancestor, carried on the family tradition.

This Benjamin was the son of Benjamin and Elizabeth Bullen Wheelock and a grandson of Ralph Wheelock, the immigrant.  He was born December 12, 1768 and was one of at least five children.  He came to Mendon as a young boy and lived his whole life in this frontier village.

On December 9, 1700 he married his step sister, Huldah Thayer, who was the daughter of Jonathan and Elizabeth French Thayer (Elizabeth had married Benjamin's father, after they were both widowed).  Since it's reasonable to suppose that the two knew each other well, we can assume this marriage was a happy one.  They had at least eight children together, and the family, or at least Benjamin, seems to have prospered.

In The Annals of the Town of Mendon, it is often hard to differentiate between the three (at least) Benjamin Wheelocks.  But in 1707 ours is identified as Benjamin Wheelock Jr., as a selectman, so we are willing to consider the possibility that some of the remaining references to Benjamin between then and 1716, when his father died, could be our Benjamin.

 In 1705, Benjamin Wheelock and his successors were granted use of the "mill pond" for as long as they kept in in repair and serviceable for the town's use. The mill pond was used as a reservoir with water released as necessary to run the mill. I don't know if this signifies that the mill was run by the Wheelocks, or whether there is something else significant about this.  If someone knows, please let me know!

I didn't find anything specific about Benjamin in the military, but it seems likely he was in the training band, if nothing else.  I did find that he was appointed to a committee to oversee the building of the town meeting house in 1720.  It was to be 50 ft long, 45 ft wide, 20 ft high, and to be a "studded house", as differentiated from a log cabin, I suppose.  He also was appointed to a committee to sell the "pew rooms" in 1737.  I'm not clear on the meaning of this, either.

He was the recipient of several grants of land that the town made, and two of the three times I noted he drew a low number, so he chose some of the best of the land that was being divided.  In another grant, he drew lot 122, so this was probably mediocre at best.

Benjamin was a selectman several times, starting in 1707 and probably ending in 1739, when he was also chosen to be the representative to the general court in Boston.  He refused to serve, but it's not stated why he chose to stay home.  He was already 61 years of age, and may have not felt up to the task.  Just as likely, Huldah died July 7 of that year and he probably wanted to stay home, to care for her and watch after the family.

Benjamin remarried on August 21, 1740, to Rebecca Nurse Kinney.  (No, I haven't checked to see if she was connected to the Nurses of Salem).  He died 6 years later, on September 13, 1746.  His will is quite extensive.  He left twenty pounds each to the daughters of his deceased daughter, Mary Thayer, and some personal belongings beside.  His will specifies that all bequests are to be in the "old tenor", which is a reference to a fairly recent change in currency.  He wanted them to be given the money as he had known it all his life, and that carried more value than the more recent currency.

I was also fortunate enough to locate his inventory.  It is quite specific, including the value of items devised in the will.  His inventory was valued at over 1120 pounds, again in the "old tenor".  I think we would classify him as"well to do", if not wealthy.  Benjamin Wheelock was a family man, a civil servant, a member of the church, and a leader in the community.  We can be proud of him!

The line of descent is

Benjamin Wheelock-Huldah Thayer
Mary Wheelock-Ebenezer Thayer
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: Jonathan Thayer 1658-1690

A life cut short...Jonathan Thayer was one of the several children of Fernando or Ferdinando and Huldah Hayward Thayer.  He was born January 1, 1658 and he died sometime in 1690.  He lived just 32 years.  That is probably why I can find so little information about him. 

He married Elizabeth French, daughter of John and Freedom French, on June 22, 1679, and that is where he and Elizabeth raised their family. Four children, Huldah, Grace, Deborah and Jonathan, were born to the couple, and our Jonathan also had an illegitimate child with Sarah Darling, Hezekiah Thayer, who died young. (This last was born in 1687). It would be interesting to find the court records for that situation.  Jonathan probably had to pay some kind of support for the young child, and Sarah could very well have been jailed and whipped.   

That is as much as I can tell you, and honestly, I don't have a source for the Hezekiah story.  It's on Find a Grave, so take it for whatever it's worth.

Now, I'm going to speculate for a couple of sentences.  Huldah, Jonathan's mother, died in 1690.  1690 was a horrible year for smallpox in the Boston area (Mendon was near enough for this purpose to be counted as Boston.)  Did both of them die of smallpox?  Jonathan apparently died before September 14, 1690 (date of inventory)  and his mother died in September,   Had one of them been caring for the other?

We can't tell much about Jonathan from the inventory, which was taken September 14, 1690.  The inventory included 10 acres of land, a dwelling and out (housing, laying, not sure what it says), two cows, three yearlings, and one calf, ten swine, 2 horses, a cart, arms and ammunition, a debt from his father, and a few household goods such as beds and a chest.  It's a pretty meager inventory. 

Elizabeth went on to marry Benjamin Wheelock in 1692, and her daughter Huldah, our ancestor, married his son Benjamin, also our ancestor.  It's nice to think that something good happened out of these tragedies. 

The line of descent is:

Jonathan Thayer-Elizabeth French
Huldah Thayer-Benjamin Wheelock
Mary Wheelock-Ebenezer Thayer
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

Holbrook line: John Merryman 1678-1749

I don't have enough information to write a blog post about this ancestor, so this will be more like a placeholder, for now.  John Merryman is one of our early Maryland ancestors, he owned land, he married and had children, and that's about most of what I know about him.  There are other things we can speculate about.

John Merryman was the son of Charles and Mry Haile Merryman.  He was born in either Lancaster County, Virginia, where his parents married, or Baltimore County, Maryland, where they moved about the time of his birth.  We don't know why his parents moved but perhaps it was for religious freedom.  Also, this was about the time of Bacon's Rebellion in Virginia and perhaps they felt safer there.

John married Matha Bowen, daughter of Jonas and Martha Henchman Bowen, on December 30, 1702.  He already owned land on the north side of the Patapsco River, because he is taxed there starting in 1699.  He was left two parcels of land by his father, and acquired more as he matured.  The location of the land and the number of parcels he owned, plus the history of the other families I've reviewed for these posts, makes me speculate that he was a slave-owner.  He likely grew tobacco as at least one of his crops, and that depleted soils rapidly so that farms had to be kept in rotation.  This land was more or less directly east of what is now Fort McHenry in what is now Baltimore.

John and Martha had at least eight children.  Three sons are named in his will, and five daughters are mentioned but not named.  It is possible, even probable, that there were other children that didn't live to adulthood. We believe he was Anglican, as some of the family record's are at St Paul's Parish.  He wrote his will in 1746 and died July 17, 1749. 

That is what I know about John.  He is not a man who has been thoroughly researched, but surely there is more to be found about him.  I looked diligently for an inventory for John, but either it is misfiled or is lost.  I would love to know what his estate was worth, and more particularly, I'd like to settle the question of whether he owned slaves, and how many there were. This family was early and important in the area so there should be more information to be found.  If you know where and what it is, please contact me!

The line of descent is

John Merryman-Martha Bowen
Martha Merryman-Alexis Lemmon
Alexis Lemmon-Rachel Stansbury
Sarah Lemmon-Abraham Hetrick
Isaac Hetrick-Elizabeth Black
Mary Alice Hetrick-Louis Stanard
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants