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
Showing posts with label Stebbins. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Stebbins. Show all posts
Friday, June 19, 2020
Friday, May 29, 2020
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
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
Friday, March 20, 2020
Allen line: Captain Thomas Stebbins 1687-1758
What's an ancestor without a mystery? I haven't found many of those, and Thomas Stebbins is no exception. My question is simple, but the answer is elusive. I'd like to know why he was called "Captain"? In the book of wills, his will is labeled "Captain Thomas Stebbings". Now, the will book was made at some point after the death of our subject, so it's possible that he wasn't really a "Captain" at all, and that the recorder of the book of wills used a title that applied to a different Thomas Stebbins, because there were certainly several of them running around Massachusetts at the time.
Or, he did earn the title and we need to do more research. Based on his age, I would guess that he probably served in Queen Anne's war, possibly on the aborted invasion of Canada (to take it from the French) or in King William's war, with the same aim. There is also the strong possibility that he responded to one or another of the native American attacks on Deerfield.
However, that is the middle of the story, or the lack of a story, for Captain Thomas Stebbins. The beginning of the story is his birth on March 7, 1687 in Springfield, Massachusetts (Massachusetts Bay Colony, actually), His parents were Edward and Sarah Graves Stebbins, and he was in the fourth generation of men named Stebbins to live in New England. He was raised in Springfield, lived and died there, and except for whatever he did to be designated as "Captain", he probably never left the town.
He belonged to one of the more well known families in Springfield, and grew to fill his father's shoes at least partly. He married Mary Ely, daughter of Joseph and Mary Riley Ely, on May 1, 1711. He and Mary had at least five children together, and life was pretty good for the Stebbins family. He held several minor offices in town but was also constable at one point, and served on committees to audit the town accounts. As was expected of Puritan boys, he could read, write, and do at least some arithmetic.
Thomas died December 4, 1758, about a month after writing his will. Mary died less than two years later, on October 14, 1760. I haven't located an inventory, but Thomas left his oldest son, Caleb, his "gun, sword and belt" so we know he treasured those items. He doesn't specifically mention any land or dwellings, just his "estate". He left about 5 pounds to each of his daughters (Ruth got a little more than Mary did) and the rest of his estate, after his wife's death, was to be divided between the sons. It's hard to imagine someone in Springfield not owning land, so I'm going to guess that Thomas did, too. He likely inherited at least some of it from his father, although I'm not finding even a will for him.
That is what we know, and don't know, about Thomas. I would certainly like to learn more about him, because he probably met and conquered more challenges than we can imagine.
The line of descent is:
Thomas Stebbins-Mary Ely
Ruth Stebbins-Samuel Hitchcock
Margaret Hitchcock-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
Or, he did earn the title and we need to do more research. Based on his age, I would guess that he probably served in Queen Anne's war, possibly on the aborted invasion of Canada (to take it from the French) or in King William's war, with the same aim. There is also the strong possibility that he responded to one or another of the native American attacks on Deerfield.
However, that is the middle of the story, or the lack of a story, for Captain Thomas Stebbins. The beginning of the story is his birth on March 7, 1687 in Springfield, Massachusetts (Massachusetts Bay Colony, actually), His parents were Edward and Sarah Graves Stebbins, and he was in the fourth generation of men named Stebbins to live in New England. He was raised in Springfield, lived and died there, and except for whatever he did to be designated as "Captain", he probably never left the town.
He belonged to one of the more well known families in Springfield, and grew to fill his father's shoes at least partly. He married Mary Ely, daughter of Joseph and Mary Riley Ely, on May 1, 1711. He and Mary had at least five children together, and life was pretty good for the Stebbins family. He held several minor offices in town but was also constable at one point, and served on committees to audit the town accounts. As was expected of Puritan boys, he could read, write, and do at least some arithmetic.
Thomas died December 4, 1758, about a month after writing his will. Mary died less than two years later, on October 14, 1760. I haven't located an inventory, but Thomas left his oldest son, Caleb, his "gun, sword and belt" so we know he treasured those items. He doesn't specifically mention any land or dwellings, just his "estate". He left about 5 pounds to each of his daughters (Ruth got a little more than Mary did) and the rest of his estate, after his wife's death, was to be divided between the sons. It's hard to imagine someone in Springfield not owning land, so I'm going to guess that Thomas did, too. He likely inherited at least some of it from his father, although I'm not finding even a will for him.
That is what we know, and don't know, about Thomas. I would certainly like to learn more about him, because he probably met and conquered more challenges than we can imagine.
The line of descent is:
Thomas Stebbins-Mary Ely
Ruth Stebbins-Samuel Hitchcock
Margaret Hitchcock-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
Tuesday, March 3, 2020
Allen line: Editha Stebbins Day Maynard Holyoke 17th century heroine
I had just realized that I wanted to write a blog post about Editha when I saw on one of my genealogy groups a post asking what I was doing to honor my female ancestors in March, which is National Women's History Month. I wanted to not only honor a female ancestor, but also to allow her to teach us a little about how life could be, and was, in 17th century Massachusetts (and other parts of the colonies, too).
First, the bare facts about her life. Editha Stebbins was born in 1613 in probably Woodham, Essex, England although I have also seen other locations in Essex mentioned. My genealogy skills for English research are negligible, so let's just say Essex, England in order to avoid dispute. Her parents are frequently given as William and Mary Scott Stebbins. Her father died in 1625 and it's thought that she came to New England with her brother, Edward Stebbins, in 1633. They stayed at Newtown/Cambridge, Massachusetts before moving to Hartford, Connecticut with Reverend Thomas Hooker's group.
Editha married Robert Day about this time, either in Newtown or Hartford. Robert Day is among those listed as a founder of Hartford, and by rights, Editha should be there, too, as should the wives of the other listed founders. Robert was a widower when they married but apparently had no surviving children by this first marriage. Robert and Editha had four children, and started to build a life together in the wilderness. Robert was a deacon in the church and life looked good, even if it wasn't easy.
However, Robert died in 1648 and Editha was left with four young children. She married Deacon John Maynard in October of 1648, and he helped raise her four children, leaving them gifts in his will and probably helping the boys get started in life. John and Editha had no children together before he died in 1658. By now, Editha had lived 22 years in Hartford, probably the longest she had lived in any one place in her life.
She must have been wealthy, or at least well to do, and also physically attractive, even though she was now about 45 years old and probably past child bearing age. But that same year, she married Captain Elizur Holyoke, who lived in Springfield, Massachusetts. So Editha packed up her things and moved to her new home, possibly leaving a son behind in Hartford. Within that first year of this marriage, her other three children married and left home. Did Mary have time to become an empty nester?
Not exactly, because her new husband had been widowed in 1657, and she was now the step mother to six children ranging in age from two to twelve years of age. It was a whole new family to nurture, feed, clothe, and raise, but our ancestor gladly rose to the challenge. Perhaps she had sadly missed not having children with her second husband. It looks like life went well for this family, until King Philip's War. Elizur died in 1676, although there is some dispute about whether or not it was a direct result of war injuries. He was in charge of the defense of Springfield at the time of his death.
The loss of her husband was not the only loss Editha suffered during that war. Her daughter, Sarah, and grandson, Joseph were killed at Hatfield, and Editha also grieved as a step son, Samuel Holyoke, died during the war. In addition, she may have lost her home. The Indians attacked Springfield, burning 32 of the 45 homes in the settlement. If her home was still standing, she would have taken in as many of the homeless villagers as possible, even though the town's crops and animals had also been destroyed.
Editha lived as a widow for another 12 years, dying in 1688. I admire her so much, for all she went through, for keeping her Puritan faith when it might have seemed that God had abandoned her, and for her quiet goodness. But those are not the only reasons I wanted to write about Editha.
The other reason I wanted to tell her story was to mention how the marriages that these pioneer women made really entwined them in much of New England's history. We don't know who Robert's first wife was, but either through her or through some other family connection there may have been a connection to the Talcott family. John Maynard's first wife was a sister to John Pynchon, the richest man in Springfield and a government official. Elizur Holyoke had connections to the Putnam family of Salem witch trial fame. Editha's children married into the Cooper, Ely, and Gunn families. One of her step sons married a Talcott and another married an Eliot. This family was well connected to some of the major families in Massachusetts, and thus part of much of New England's early history.
Editha's family and connections may be stronger and cast longer shadows than some others, but we should always remember to look for the whole story by thinking about who was sitting around the dinner table when, and what happened to them. This helps fill in the dash in the story of our ancestors, both male and female.
The line of descent is
Robert Day-Editha Stebbins
Nary Day-Samuel Ely
Joseph Ely-Mary Riley
Mary Ely-Thomas Stebbins
Ruth Stebbins-Samuel Hitchcock
Margaret Hitchcock-Samuel 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
First, the bare facts about her life. Editha Stebbins was born in 1613 in probably Woodham, Essex, England although I have also seen other locations in Essex mentioned. My genealogy skills for English research are negligible, so let's just say Essex, England in order to avoid dispute. Her parents are frequently given as William and Mary Scott Stebbins. Her father died in 1625 and it's thought that she came to New England with her brother, Edward Stebbins, in 1633. They stayed at Newtown/Cambridge, Massachusetts before moving to Hartford, Connecticut with Reverend Thomas Hooker's group.
Editha married Robert Day about this time, either in Newtown or Hartford. Robert Day is among those listed as a founder of Hartford, and by rights, Editha should be there, too, as should the wives of the other listed founders. Robert was a widower when they married but apparently had no surviving children by this first marriage. Robert and Editha had four children, and started to build a life together in the wilderness. Robert was a deacon in the church and life looked good, even if it wasn't easy.
However, Robert died in 1648 and Editha was left with four young children. She married Deacon John Maynard in October of 1648, and he helped raise her four children, leaving them gifts in his will and probably helping the boys get started in life. John and Editha had no children together before he died in 1658. By now, Editha had lived 22 years in Hartford, probably the longest she had lived in any one place in her life.
She must have been wealthy, or at least well to do, and also physically attractive, even though she was now about 45 years old and probably past child bearing age. But that same year, she married Captain Elizur Holyoke, who lived in Springfield, Massachusetts. So Editha packed up her things and moved to her new home, possibly leaving a son behind in Hartford. Within that first year of this marriage, her other three children married and left home. Did Mary have time to become an empty nester?
Not exactly, because her new husband had been widowed in 1657, and she was now the step mother to six children ranging in age from two to twelve years of age. It was a whole new family to nurture, feed, clothe, and raise, but our ancestor gladly rose to the challenge. Perhaps she had sadly missed not having children with her second husband. It looks like life went well for this family, until King Philip's War. Elizur died in 1676, although there is some dispute about whether or not it was a direct result of war injuries. He was in charge of the defense of Springfield at the time of his death.
The loss of her husband was not the only loss Editha suffered during that war. Her daughter, Sarah, and grandson, Joseph were killed at Hatfield, and Editha also grieved as a step son, Samuel Holyoke, died during the war. In addition, she may have lost her home. The Indians attacked Springfield, burning 32 of the 45 homes in the settlement. If her home was still standing, she would have taken in as many of the homeless villagers as possible, even though the town's crops and animals had also been destroyed.
Editha lived as a widow for another 12 years, dying in 1688. I admire her so much, for all she went through, for keeping her Puritan faith when it might have seemed that God had abandoned her, and for her quiet goodness. But those are not the only reasons I wanted to write about Editha.
The other reason I wanted to tell her story was to mention how the marriages that these pioneer women made really entwined them in much of New England's history. We don't know who Robert's first wife was, but either through her or through some other family connection there may have been a connection to the Talcott family. John Maynard's first wife was a sister to John Pynchon, the richest man in Springfield and a government official. Elizur Holyoke had connections to the Putnam family of Salem witch trial fame. Editha's children married into the Cooper, Ely, and Gunn families. One of her step sons married a Talcott and another married an Eliot. This family was well connected to some of the major families in Massachusetts, and thus part of much of New England's early history.
Editha's family and connections may be stronger and cast longer shadows than some others, but we should always remember to look for the whole story by thinking about who was sitting around the dinner table when, and what happened to them. This helps fill in the dash in the story of our ancestors, both male and female.
The line of descent is
Robert Day-Editha Stebbins
Nary Day-Samuel Ely
Joseph Ely-Mary Riley
Mary Ely-Thomas Stebbins
Ruth Stebbins-Samuel Hitchcock
Margaret Hitchcock-Samuel 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
Tuesday, February 25, 2020
Allen line: Deacon, Joseph Ely 1663-1755
Joseph was the son of Samuel Ely (who in turn was the son of the immigrant Nathaniel Ely) and Martha unknown (may or may not have been Bliss, as far as I can tell). He was born August 20, 1663 in Springfield, Hampden, Massachusetts and 91 years later, died just across the river in West Springfield. Unlike his immigrant grandfather, Joseph was content to stay in one place his entire life, which means there are a few records to be found, because the town records of Springfield have been published. We also have some vital records and a will. So far, however, I've been unable to locate military or church records.
Joseph was not quite 22 when he married Mary Riley, daughter of John and Margaret McCraney Riley, on July 9, 1685. Exactly nine months later, their first son, Joseph, was born, to be followed by 6 more children over the next 21 years. He was made a freeman in 1691.
I have little idea of how Joseph supported his family, although he did acquire several pieces of land over the years. Presumably this means he farmed. Lending credence to this idea is the fact that during the 1730s, when he was already in his 70's, he was paid 40 shillings for the "use" of his bull. Only a few farmers kept bulls, and they were used by all the area farmers when their cows were ready for shenanigans. After 1735 there is no further mention, so Joseph may have sold his livestock then, or given them to his sons.
He was not very active in civic life, although he was appointed fence-viewer in the area where he lived several times. This job involved making sure that new landowners put up proper fences, including permanent markers at the corners of their lands. He would also have been responsible to make sure all fences were kept in good repair, and to notify landowners when their fences needed attention. It required some diplomacy and perhaps some rudimentary surveying skills, but it wasn't the most complicated of civic jobs. His diplomatic skills would also have come into play when he was appointed to a committee to try to smooth out difficulties over the courthouse in 1712.
He was referred to as deacon many times, including in his death records. Deacons might give the message in the absence of the pastor, but their main role may have been as treasurer. They were responsible for the finances of the church, and were also responsible for distribution of aide to the community's poor people. Sometimes this involved finding families who would take people into their household, especially the elderly who had no families. For the most part, caring for the poor was a church function and not a town function when Joseph was deacon. So again, he was given the role of diplomat; perhaps that came naturally to him.
Mary died May 19, 1736. Joseph didn't re-marry, but survived her for 19 years, dying on April 29, 1755. He left land to his sons and a grandson, and 25 pounds each to his daughters. The value of his estate was a little over 356 pounds, most of it in land and house lots. He had clothes and some basic household utensils, two beds, and spectacles. There isn't a mention of military arms or of books that I can see. But he signed his own name to his will, written in 1738, so he was at least somewhat literate. It's quite possible that he was living with a child or grandchild at the time of his death, which would explain why there were no farm animals, crops, or other evidence of income producing goods.
The other big mystery I would like to know is-did Joseph participate in any of the military actions of the time? King William's War and Queen Anne's War both took place during the time he would have been in the militia. I haven't yet found a source listing the men who fought in these wars. He may have been involved in defending or guarding against native American attacks in one or another of the attacks on Deerfield, Massachusetts, which was more or less just up the river, 35 miles from Springfield. So far, I've not found evidence of this, but it is worth considering. Even if he didn't participate, he likely pulled some sort of guard duty at home during those uncertain times. I'd like to know more!
Joseph Ely was a man of honor and integrity, as we can tell by his being deacon, and being elected and re-elected fence viewer. We can be proud to be his descendant.
The line of descent is:
Joseph Ely-Mary Riley
Mary Ely-Thomas Stebbins
Ruth Stebbins-Samuel Hitchcok
Margaret Hitchcok-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
Tuesday, September 10, 2019
Allen line: Samuel Ely 1639-1692
The jury is out as to where Samuel Ely was born, but fortunately we do know bits and pieces about his life and we have his will and inventory. We also know that he was a man of many sorrows-certainly more than most of us can even imagine.
Samuel was the son of Nathaniel and Martha Ely. Martha's maiden name is unknown, and also unknown is the birth record for Samuel.There seems to be no birth record for Samuel but since his father had been in Hartford since 1635 (Nathaniel is recognized as a founding father of the city) it is most likely that Hartford was the place of his birth. Somewhat unusually among our ancestors, he seems to have had only one sibling, a sister named Ruth. The possibiity exists that the two were born to a different mother, who died in or shortly after childbirth. Martha may have been a stepmother.
Samuel moved with his family to Norwalk, Connecticut in 1651 and then on to Springfield, Massachusetts by 1659. Nathaniel was welcomed but Samuel had to have a security bond in order to live there, perhaps because he was young and single and perhaps because a reputation may have preceded him. He wasn't the first young man of whom security was required. Samuel married Mary Day, the daughter of Robert and Editha Stebbins Day, in either Hartford or Sprinfgield. The Days and the Elys had been close friends in Hartford so it's possible the wedding took place there, we just don't know.
What we do know is sad. Samuel and Mary had sixteen children together. They had to make the walk to the graveyard 10 times for their young children. Of those who died young, one lived to his early teens but the others died much earlier, mostly as infants or toddlers. I cannot fathom the sadness of losing ten children, nor can I imagine what happened. I wonder if there was a genetic defect that affected some of the children but not others. Regardless, the family must have been much pitied.
Nathaniel Ely had run an ordinary (tavern) and Samuel carried on the tradition of hospitality. Whether or not he ran an ordinary, too, he did entertain selectmen and other town personages and was reimbursed by the town for expenses. Samuel doesn't seem to have taken as many town jobs as his father did. Perhaps he was kept busy caring for Mary as she went through so many pregnancies and losses. Or perhaps he was busy making money, and supporting his family. He did act as an appraiser of cattle, and sat on a committee to audit the town books, and his yard was used as a town pound from time to time, so he was very much a part of the town.
I've been unable to locate anything placing Samuel Ely in military service at the time of King Philip's War, but "Ely's Tavern" was one of three garrisoned houses (built more strongly, and had at least a few troops to protect it) in 1675. The town was attacked by Agawam and other Indians on October 5, 1675, with all but thirteen homes being destroyed. There were further skirmishes during the war, or rather, ambushes, with Indians attacking settlers on their way to church, for example. From this, we can tell that not all of the town left, or at least they didn't leave for long. We don't know about Samuel and his family but it is likely they stayed in their garrisoned house, offering food and shelter to neighbors in need.
Samuel died March 19, 1692. He was only about 53 years old, and death must have come suddenly for he left no will. His widow, Mary, and two oldest sons, Joseph and Samuel, proposed a settlement to the court that appears to have been accepted. Mary was to get 1/3 of the estate, plus money to raise her youngest children. The two oldest sons were to receive 60 pounds, the two younger sons 50 pounds, and the two daughters 30 pounds, when they were of age. Thomas Day, Luke Hitchock and John Hitchcock appraised his estate at 400 pounds. He had the typical farm type animals and implements, four pounds worth of books (quite a lot for the time and place) and enough tables, chairs, and eating utensils to either furnish a house very well, or to equip a tavern. He had a cider press and a still, which again supports the tavern idea. In fact, a further agreement notes that Mary Ely and Samuel Ely (junior) were granted a license to continue operating the "ordinary" after Samuel's death.
Mary married Thomas Stebbins and then John Coleman, and died October 25, 1725 at the age of 84. She had seen more sorrows that most women ever fear, and we can be proud to be the descendants of Samuel and Mary Ely.
The line of descent is
Samuel Ely-Mary Day
Joseph Ely-Mary Riley
Mary Ely-Thomas Stebbins
Ruth Stebbins-Samuel Hitchcock
Margaret Hitchcock-Richard Falley
Samuel Falley-Ruth Root
Clarissa Falley-John Havens Starr
Harriet Starr-John Wilson Knott
Edith Knott-Edward Allen
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
.
Samuel was the son of Nathaniel and Martha Ely. Martha's maiden name is unknown, and also unknown is the birth record for Samuel.There seems to be no birth record for Samuel but since his father had been in Hartford since 1635 (Nathaniel is recognized as a founding father of the city) it is most likely that Hartford was the place of his birth. Somewhat unusually among our ancestors, he seems to have had only one sibling, a sister named Ruth. The possibiity exists that the two were born to a different mother, who died in or shortly after childbirth. Martha may have been a stepmother.
Samuel moved with his family to Norwalk, Connecticut in 1651 and then on to Springfield, Massachusetts by 1659. Nathaniel was welcomed but Samuel had to have a security bond in order to live there, perhaps because he was young and single and perhaps because a reputation may have preceded him. He wasn't the first young man of whom security was required. Samuel married Mary Day, the daughter of Robert and Editha Stebbins Day, in either Hartford or Sprinfgield. The Days and the Elys had been close friends in Hartford so it's possible the wedding took place there, we just don't know.
What we do know is sad. Samuel and Mary had sixteen children together. They had to make the walk to the graveyard 10 times for their young children. Of those who died young, one lived to his early teens but the others died much earlier, mostly as infants or toddlers. I cannot fathom the sadness of losing ten children, nor can I imagine what happened. I wonder if there was a genetic defect that affected some of the children but not others. Regardless, the family must have been much pitied.
Nathaniel Ely had run an ordinary (tavern) and Samuel carried on the tradition of hospitality. Whether or not he ran an ordinary, too, he did entertain selectmen and other town personages and was reimbursed by the town for expenses. Samuel doesn't seem to have taken as many town jobs as his father did. Perhaps he was kept busy caring for Mary as she went through so many pregnancies and losses. Or perhaps he was busy making money, and supporting his family. He did act as an appraiser of cattle, and sat on a committee to audit the town books, and his yard was used as a town pound from time to time, so he was very much a part of the town.
I've been unable to locate anything placing Samuel Ely in military service at the time of King Philip's War, but "Ely's Tavern" was one of three garrisoned houses (built more strongly, and had at least a few troops to protect it) in 1675. The town was attacked by Agawam and other Indians on October 5, 1675, with all but thirteen homes being destroyed. There were further skirmishes during the war, or rather, ambushes, with Indians attacking settlers on their way to church, for example. From this, we can tell that not all of the town left, or at least they didn't leave for long. We don't know about Samuel and his family but it is likely they stayed in their garrisoned house, offering food and shelter to neighbors in need.
Samuel died March 19, 1692. He was only about 53 years old, and death must have come suddenly for he left no will. His widow, Mary, and two oldest sons, Joseph and Samuel, proposed a settlement to the court that appears to have been accepted. Mary was to get 1/3 of the estate, plus money to raise her youngest children. The two oldest sons were to receive 60 pounds, the two younger sons 50 pounds, and the two daughters 30 pounds, when they were of age. Thomas Day, Luke Hitchock and John Hitchcock appraised his estate at 400 pounds. He had the typical farm type animals and implements, four pounds worth of books (quite a lot for the time and place) and enough tables, chairs, and eating utensils to either furnish a house very well, or to equip a tavern. He had a cider press and a still, which again supports the tavern idea. In fact, a further agreement notes that Mary Ely and Samuel Ely (junior) were granted a license to continue operating the "ordinary" after Samuel's death.
Mary married Thomas Stebbins and then John Coleman, and died October 25, 1725 at the age of 84. She had seen more sorrows that most women ever fear, and we can be proud to be the descendants of Samuel and Mary Ely.
The line of descent is
Samuel Ely-Mary Day
Joseph Ely-Mary Riley
Mary Ely-Thomas Stebbins
Ruth Stebbins-Samuel Hitchcock
Margaret Hitchcock-Richard Falley
Samuel Falley-Ruth Root
Clarissa Falley-John Havens Starr
Harriet Starr-John Wilson Knott
Edith Knott-Edward Allen
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
.
Tuesday, August 27, 2019
Allen line: John Root "Junior" 1642-1687
One neat thing about writing genealogy blog posts is that as I research, I find new pieces of information that seem to have not shown up in other people's research. As I look at the dates that they posted, I can see that my new "finds" became available on line only after their posts were written. So it's a good reminder to us all to not take for granted that everything available has already been found. I'm sure earlier blog post writers would have loved to have had access to John Root's will and inventory, for instance. And they would have loved to have known about his military service. Both of these items weren't freely available just a few short years ago. Finding information about the son or daughter of an early immigrant is never easy, so I'm glad I've got a story here to tell.
John Root was born about 1642 at Farmington, Hartford County, Connecticut. His parents were John and Mary Kilbourne Roote, and he was one of at least eight children. His parents stayed in Farmington His parents did well financially and John Sr. was active in civic life, so John probably had a good start in life. We know nothing of his childhood but can imagine that he started doing chores at a young age and probably went to school for about three months out of the year, as that was typical for the time. Or perhaps his mother schooled him.
John married Mary Ashley, daughter of Robert and Mary Ashley on October 18, 1664 in Springfield, Massachusetts. John was noted as being of Farmington at the time and I've not yet found reference to where the young couple first settled. Their first known child, Mary, was born September 22, 1667 in Westfield, Massachusetts and that is where the couple lived their married life. (Westfield didn't legally exist until 1669, when it was split from Springfield, but it seems likely that the couple didn't actually move.) They lived on Union Street in Westfield, and John was a farmer.
We don't know much about their lives, actually, except that they had at least eight children. So Mary would have been kept quite busy as she raised the children. She had four girls to help her with the many household chores, and John had four boys to educate in some sort of occupation. And of course, there were future spouses to think of, to approve or disapprove.
John may have been ill or somehow injured, because when it came to King Philip's War in 1675, he was appointed commissary of the fort at Westfield. It doesn't appear that Westfield was actually attacked, but it may have been because the area was relatively well protected. John's job as commisary was to make sure that their were ample supplies and food for the soldiers, as well as for those families staying at the fort.
John became a freeman in 1669. He was appointed to a survey committee in 1668 and then about two years later the committee was dismissed and a new one was chosen. In 1684, he was a juror in the case of Elezer Weller. The verdict was that the man had died by suicide on August 17, 1684.
John apparently died rather suddenly on September 24, 1687. He did not have a will, and the appraisal wasn't done for another three years. By this time, the youngest child was about 8 years old and that may have something to do with it. Or, the oldest child was about 23 and may have been requesting his portion of the estate. The estate was valued at about 505 pounds, with 35 pounds owing so the net value was about 470 pounds. The widow was to have her choice of housing, and the children were each assigned a portion, with mathematical precision. The oldest son's share was more than the other children's but not double as was commonly the case.
The amazing part of John's story to me is actually that of his wife. Mary didn't remarry, despite having small children to raise. And, bless her heart, when she died in 1703, she left a will! Of course, being a woman, her will was overturned, but at least she tried. One thing that she had requested, but that apparently wasn't honored, was that her youngest daughter, fittingly named Mercy, be given a separate amount as payment for the three years that she had cared for her mother in her old age. The document signed by Samuel Partridge merely says there were "imperfections" in the will, and he re-distributed her estate. Her estate was valued at 170 pounds, and the inventory shows that she was still running an active household and farm, including farm animals, feed, and other things necessary for a household. She had Bibles and old books, and "specticles", which touched me. She also had a musket. I wonder if she ever used it, or knew how to use it?
While learning about John, I also learned about Mary, and oh, how I love her. I hope you do, too.
The line of descent is
John Root-Mary Ashley
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
John Root was born about 1642 at Farmington, Hartford County, Connecticut. His parents were John and Mary Kilbourne Roote, and he was one of at least eight children. His parents stayed in Farmington His parents did well financially and John Sr. was active in civic life, so John probably had a good start in life. We know nothing of his childhood but can imagine that he started doing chores at a young age and probably went to school for about three months out of the year, as that was typical for the time. Or perhaps his mother schooled him.
John married Mary Ashley, daughter of Robert and Mary Ashley on October 18, 1664 in Springfield, Massachusetts. John was noted as being of Farmington at the time and I've not yet found reference to where the young couple first settled. Their first known child, Mary, was born September 22, 1667 in Westfield, Massachusetts and that is where the couple lived their married life. (Westfield didn't legally exist until 1669, when it was split from Springfield, but it seems likely that the couple didn't actually move.) They lived on Union Street in Westfield, and John was a farmer.
We don't know much about their lives, actually, except that they had at least eight children. So Mary would have been kept quite busy as she raised the children. She had four girls to help her with the many household chores, and John had four boys to educate in some sort of occupation. And of course, there were future spouses to think of, to approve or disapprove.
John may have been ill or somehow injured, because when it came to King Philip's War in 1675, he was appointed commissary of the fort at Westfield. It doesn't appear that Westfield was actually attacked, but it may have been because the area was relatively well protected. John's job as commisary was to make sure that their were ample supplies and food for the soldiers, as well as for those families staying at the fort.
John became a freeman in 1669. He was appointed to a survey committee in 1668 and then about two years later the committee was dismissed and a new one was chosen. In 1684, he was a juror in the case of Elezer Weller. The verdict was that the man had died by suicide on August 17, 1684.
John apparently died rather suddenly on September 24, 1687. He did not have a will, and the appraisal wasn't done for another three years. By this time, the youngest child was about 8 years old and that may have something to do with it. Or, the oldest child was about 23 and may have been requesting his portion of the estate. The estate was valued at about 505 pounds, with 35 pounds owing so the net value was about 470 pounds. The widow was to have her choice of housing, and the children were each assigned a portion, with mathematical precision. The oldest son's share was more than the other children's but not double as was commonly the case.
The amazing part of John's story to me is actually that of his wife. Mary didn't remarry, despite having small children to raise. And, bless her heart, when she died in 1703, she left a will! Of course, being a woman, her will was overturned, but at least she tried. One thing that she had requested, but that apparently wasn't honored, was that her youngest daughter, fittingly named Mercy, be given a separate amount as payment for the three years that she had cared for her mother in her old age. The document signed by Samuel Partridge merely says there were "imperfections" in the will, and he re-distributed her estate. Her estate was valued at 170 pounds, and the inventory shows that she was still running an active household and farm, including farm animals, feed, and other things necessary for a household. She had Bibles and old books, and "specticles", which touched me. She also had a musket. I wonder if she ever used it, or knew how to use it?
While learning about John, I also learned about Mary, and oh, how I love her. I hope you do, too.
The line of descent is
John Root-Mary Ashley
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
Tuesday, May 28, 2019
Allen line: Edward Stebbins in King Philip's War
It's approaching Memorial Day as I write this. In general, Memorial Day honors veterans who gave their lives for our country. I completely support that, as we have a family member who died during World War II. Most of our ancestors made it through whatever war they were involved in, but some had adventures during that time.
For this post, I'm writing about a man who had what some would consider the "ultimate" adventure; others would consider it heroism, and still others might shudder at the result. This was before our country was even dreamed of. Massachusetts was a colony of England, and it was still almost all frontier land. Springfield, Massachusetts was no exception; it was a small settlement on the Connecticut River, struggling to survive even before King Phillip's War broke out.
Edward Stebbins was born in Springfield April 14, 1656, the son of Thomas and Hannah Wright had Stebbins. He was the first of this Stebbins line to be born in New England as Thomas had come to America with his father at about the age of 14. Thomas had memories of England, but Edward was 100% New Englander. At the age of 16, Edward would have been eligible and probably required to join the training band, although I've not found specific note of it. Surely a town settled in the wilderness, with different tribes of native Americans all around them, would have had a training band.
We don't know whether Edward was doing guard duty or whether he may have been working in the fields, but in the spring of 1676, he and at least one other young man were surrounded and then abducted by a group of natives. They were held captive for about a month until Edward and his friend managed to escape during the nighttime hours. They reported the location of the natives to the nearest authorities and immediately a large force of men were on their trail, and the entire village of natives was ambushed and destroyed-old men, women and children-by the colonists. The warriors were mostly in camp at a nearby location, and it's not clear to what extent they became involved in the battle. .
This was not the finest moment in American history but it was what it was. To the colonists affected by King Philip's War, it was kill or be killed. Springfield had been almost totally burned to the ground during an attack in the fall of 1675 and it was time to make the area safe for the colonists and their families. They may not have known, or may not have cared, that the village that was massacred was not a warrior camp at all.
Edward seems to have suffered no after effects of his ordeal. He married Sarah Graves, daughter of John and Mary Smith Graves on April 12, 1679 and they had six children together. He was made a freeman on December 19, 1690, along with over forty other men. Perhaps they had been so busy rebuilding the town that there had been no time to stop and gain one's "freedom", or right to vote. Or perhaps the list is not actually when they were admitted, but simply a list of who was a freeman as of that date.
Edward inherited land from his father, who had died in 1683, and was also granted various tracts during his lifetime. At various times, he was a constable, surveyor of county highways, selectman several years, and fence viewer, so he was a respected man in the community. I've not found anything that indicates his occupation but with the various tracts of land he owned, he probably was a "yeoman" farmer. I also don't know how religious he might have been, and whether he supported the local church.
Sarah died June 12, 1700 when her youngest child was just 4 years old. Edward remarried, to Mary Cooper Colton. Edward died October 31, 1712 in Springfield and Mary lived until 1743. I wonder how long the story of the Indian captivity was part of family story time. Or was it something he chose to downplay?
I've ordered a copy of a history of Springfield, Massachusetts because so many family names are listed in the 1690 list of freedmen. This is one of our "hometowns", Allen family!
The line of descent is
Edward Stebbins-Sarah Graves
Sarah Stebbins-John Roote
Sarah Root-Thomas Noble
Stephen Noble-Ruth Church
Ruth Noble-Martin Root Jr.
Ruth Root-Samuel Falley
Clarissa Falley-John Havens Starr
Harriet Starr-John Wilson Knott
Edith Knott-Edward Allen
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
Their descendants
For this post, I'm writing about a man who had what some would consider the "ultimate" adventure; others would consider it heroism, and still others might shudder at the result. This was before our country was even dreamed of. Massachusetts was a colony of England, and it was still almost all frontier land. Springfield, Massachusetts was no exception; it was a small settlement on the Connecticut River, struggling to survive even before King Phillip's War broke out.
Edward Stebbins was born in Springfield April 14, 1656, the son of Thomas and Hannah Wright had Stebbins. He was the first of this Stebbins line to be born in New England as Thomas had come to America with his father at about the age of 14. Thomas had memories of England, but Edward was 100% New Englander. At the age of 16, Edward would have been eligible and probably required to join the training band, although I've not found specific note of it. Surely a town settled in the wilderness, with different tribes of native Americans all around them, would have had a training band.
We don't know whether Edward was doing guard duty or whether he may have been working in the fields, but in the spring of 1676, he and at least one other young man were surrounded and then abducted by a group of natives. They were held captive for about a month until Edward and his friend managed to escape during the nighttime hours. They reported the location of the natives to the nearest authorities and immediately a large force of men were on their trail, and the entire village of natives was ambushed and destroyed-old men, women and children-by the colonists. The warriors were mostly in camp at a nearby location, and it's not clear to what extent they became involved in the battle. .
This was not the finest moment in American history but it was what it was. To the colonists affected by King Philip's War, it was kill or be killed. Springfield had been almost totally burned to the ground during an attack in the fall of 1675 and it was time to make the area safe for the colonists and their families. They may not have known, or may not have cared, that the village that was massacred was not a warrior camp at all.
Edward seems to have suffered no after effects of his ordeal. He married Sarah Graves, daughter of John and Mary Smith Graves on April 12, 1679 and they had six children together. He was made a freeman on December 19, 1690, along with over forty other men. Perhaps they had been so busy rebuilding the town that there had been no time to stop and gain one's "freedom", or right to vote. Or perhaps the list is not actually when they were admitted, but simply a list of who was a freeman as of that date.
Edward inherited land from his father, who had died in 1683, and was also granted various tracts during his lifetime. At various times, he was a constable, surveyor of county highways, selectman several years, and fence viewer, so he was a respected man in the community. I've not found anything that indicates his occupation but with the various tracts of land he owned, he probably was a "yeoman" farmer. I also don't know how religious he might have been, and whether he supported the local church.
Sarah died June 12, 1700 when her youngest child was just 4 years old. Edward remarried, to Mary Cooper Colton. Edward died October 31, 1712 in Springfield and Mary lived until 1743. I wonder how long the story of the Indian captivity was part of family story time. Or was it something he chose to downplay?
I've ordered a copy of a history of Springfield, Massachusetts because so many family names are listed in the 1690 list of freedmen. This is one of our "hometowns", Allen family!
The line of descent is
Edward Stebbins-Sarah Graves
Sarah Stebbins-John Roote
Sarah Root-Thomas Noble
Stephen Noble-Ruth Church
Ruth Noble-Martin Root Jr.
Ruth Root-Samuel Falley
Clarissa Falley-John Havens Starr
Harriet Starr-John Wilson Knott
Edith Knott-Edward Allen
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
Their descendants
Friday, May 17, 2019
Allen line: Samuel Hitchcock 1717-1777
I was getting frustrated. Why could I find so little information about Samuel? He lived in the same town, Springfield, Massachusetts, his whole life. He is a direct ancestor of Grover Cleveland, President of the United States. Why was the amount of information about him so limited? And then-jackpot! I found his estate papers on the American Ancestors website, and it was happy dance time.
But let's start at the beginning. Samuel Hitchcock was born June 9, 1717 in Springfield, Massachusetts, the son of Ensign John and Mary Ball Hitchcock. He was the youngest of their eleven children and may have been just the tiniest bit spoiled, although of course good New Englanders would not have "spoiled" their children. Since his name is in the records of the First Church (Congregational) of Springfield, we know that he had only two pastors for his entire life. Daniel Brewer was the pastor when he was born, and Robert Breck not only married Samuel and his wife, Ruth Stebbins, but also buried him. That's a pretty long record for pastoral longevity and it may be that the church was truly unified during all that time.
Samuel married just a few days past his 21st birthday, to Ruth Stebbins, daughter of Thomas and Mary Ely Stebbins. Ruth was either 16 or 17 when she married-records differ as to the year of the wedding, but it was either 1738 or 1739. The couple quickly settled into married life, and would eventually have twelve children together, all of whom lived to adulthood. Samuel's father died in 1751, when he received a "French gun" from his father, and Mary died in 1760.
That's pretty much what we know about Samuel from records I'd found. I'd begun to think that our Samuel was a "nobody", or rather, one of the ordinary people who live under the radar, without drawing notice either good or bad. I don't know whether he served in the French and Indian war, although because Springfield is located on the Connecticut river in Western Massachusetts, and because Samuel would have been less than 40 years old when the war started, it would be quite likely that he did serve then. It's one of my burning questions about Samuel.
I interrupt this blog post for a history geek moment. When I started looking at the estate papers, one cool thing is that in May of 1777, appraisers were appointed for the estate, a usual procedure and nothing unusual. By this time, the colonies were using printed forms, where only the name of the deceased and the names of the appraisers had to be added by hand. What's neat about this one is that the heading on the paper was printed "Province of Massachusetts". The justice of the peace had crossed out "Province of" and written "State of" on the form. This was less than a year after the Declaration of Independence, things were not going well for the colonists, and yet, Massachusetts, considered itself a state. It gave me a thrill chill to see that written out.
Samuel died April 22, 1777, after Ruth died in 1775. He died without a will, so perhaps it was a sudden illness or accident that took hiw life. The administrators of the estate didn't have an easy time of it. They had to divide the land that Samuel owned into 13 more or less equal tracts. Samuel, the oldest son got a double portion, and each of the other children got about 100 acres, although I don't think it was necessarily in nice neat squares. An added bonus: My Revolutionary War hero, Richard Falley, and his wife, Margaret Falley, along with several other Hitchcock children signed that they had received their portions. So I know those two ancestors, at least, were literate. Each child also received about 77 pounds, with son Samuel receiving a double portion of 154 pounds plus.
Interesting items in the inventory: One new beaver hatt, one grey wig, at least two pairs of silver knee buckles, about 15 books, including a Bible and hymnal, at least 20 different tracts of land, more farm animals than the typical "yeoman", although that is how Samuel is referred to in one document, quite a few household furnishings including "2 great chairs and 13 old chairs", 14 pewter plates and other pewterware, one fifth of a cider mill, a weaver's shop, and a lot of tools and farm implements. Clearly, although a yeoman who apparently didn't make many waves in town, Samuel did make money and was relatively well off in the town. His estate, before expenses, was valued at about 1300 pounds, and it took four appraisers a total of 17 man days to value everything they found.
It would be interesting to know what his neighbors thought of Samuel Hitchcock. Was he well regarded? Was he a nice man? Did he do his duty during the French and Indian war? Did the town perceive him as being rich, or greedy, or generous, or something in between? Was he a patriot during the earliest years of the Revolution? (I'll wager he was!) I've enjoyed getting to know a little bit about Samuel Hitchcock, and would love to know more!
The line of descent is"
Sanuel Hitchcok-Ruth Stebbins
Margaret Hitchcock-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
But let's start at the beginning. Samuel Hitchcock was born June 9, 1717 in Springfield, Massachusetts, the son of Ensign John and Mary Ball Hitchcock. He was the youngest of their eleven children and may have been just the tiniest bit spoiled, although of course good New Englanders would not have "spoiled" their children. Since his name is in the records of the First Church (Congregational) of Springfield, we know that he had only two pastors for his entire life. Daniel Brewer was the pastor when he was born, and Robert Breck not only married Samuel and his wife, Ruth Stebbins, but also buried him. That's a pretty long record for pastoral longevity and it may be that the church was truly unified during all that time.
Samuel married just a few days past his 21st birthday, to Ruth Stebbins, daughter of Thomas and Mary Ely Stebbins. Ruth was either 16 or 17 when she married-records differ as to the year of the wedding, but it was either 1738 or 1739. The couple quickly settled into married life, and would eventually have twelve children together, all of whom lived to adulthood. Samuel's father died in 1751, when he received a "French gun" from his father, and Mary died in 1760.
That's pretty much what we know about Samuel from records I'd found. I'd begun to think that our Samuel was a "nobody", or rather, one of the ordinary people who live under the radar, without drawing notice either good or bad. I don't know whether he served in the French and Indian war, although because Springfield is located on the Connecticut river in Western Massachusetts, and because Samuel would have been less than 40 years old when the war started, it would be quite likely that he did serve then. It's one of my burning questions about Samuel.
I interrupt this blog post for a history geek moment. When I started looking at the estate papers, one cool thing is that in May of 1777, appraisers were appointed for the estate, a usual procedure and nothing unusual. By this time, the colonies were using printed forms, where only the name of the deceased and the names of the appraisers had to be added by hand. What's neat about this one is that the heading on the paper was printed "Province of Massachusetts". The justice of the peace had crossed out "Province of" and written "State of" on the form. This was less than a year after the Declaration of Independence, things were not going well for the colonists, and yet, Massachusetts, considered itself a state. It gave me a thrill chill to see that written out.
Samuel died April 22, 1777, after Ruth died in 1775. He died without a will, so perhaps it was a sudden illness or accident that took hiw life. The administrators of the estate didn't have an easy time of it. They had to divide the land that Samuel owned into 13 more or less equal tracts. Samuel, the oldest son got a double portion, and each of the other children got about 100 acres, although I don't think it was necessarily in nice neat squares. An added bonus: My Revolutionary War hero, Richard Falley, and his wife, Margaret Falley, along with several other Hitchcock children signed that they had received their portions. So I know those two ancestors, at least, were literate. Each child also received about 77 pounds, with son Samuel receiving a double portion of 154 pounds plus.
Interesting items in the inventory: One new beaver hatt, one grey wig, at least two pairs of silver knee buckles, about 15 books, including a Bible and hymnal, at least 20 different tracts of land, more farm animals than the typical "yeoman", although that is how Samuel is referred to in one document, quite a few household furnishings including "2 great chairs and 13 old chairs", 14 pewter plates and other pewterware, one fifth of a cider mill, a weaver's shop, and a lot of tools and farm implements. Clearly, although a yeoman who apparently didn't make many waves in town, Samuel did make money and was relatively well off in the town. His estate, before expenses, was valued at about 1300 pounds, and it took four appraisers a total of 17 man days to value everything they found.
It would be interesting to know what his neighbors thought of Samuel Hitchcock. Was he well regarded? Was he a nice man? Did he do his duty during the French and Indian war? Did the town perceive him as being rich, or greedy, or generous, or something in between? Was he a patriot during the earliest years of the Revolution? (I'll wager he was!) I've enjoyed getting to know a little bit about Samuel Hitchcock, and would love to know more!
The line of descent is"
Sanuel Hitchcok-Ruth Stebbins
Margaret Hitchcock-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
Friday, March 8, 2019
Allen line: John Lamb 1628-1690
Is it breaking the rules to call John Lamb an immigrant? He was only two years old when he came to New England, so he had no say at all in whether to come. Yet, not understanding the purpose of being uprooted and joining his parents on a small and dark ship, he shared the voyage and shared the wonder of arriving in a world totally unlike anything he knew in England. From the eyes of a two year old, this would have been a big deal, and yes, I think we can call him an immigrant. Besides, he's in the Allen line and I don't have many opportunities any more to write about this side of the family.
It would be interesting to know how closely his parents, Thomas and Elizabeth Lamb, could follow the typical Puritan methods in raising children under the circumstances of sailing across the ocean. Were they stern, were they relaxed? Certainly they, especially Elizabeth, would have been watchful as there were many ways for little ones to get hurt, or worse, on a ship. The other women on board would have helped, surely, but it wouldn't have been an easy job. Actually, our ancestor John had sibling Thomas with him, so at least there was someone to play with.
John was born to Thomas and Elizabeth on or before August 1, 1628 at Barnardiston, Suffolk, England. He would have been baptized in the local church, which had parts dating back to the twelfth century, so this was a very old village indeed. Likely there was quite a bit of family in the area, as that is common for small villages, so again one wonders what the pioneer immigrants were thinking.
John came with his parents to Roxbury, Massachusetts, where Thomas died in 1646. Five years later, in 1651, John settled in Springfield, Massachusetts where he was made a freeman in 1654. He was a wheelwright and perhaps an "East Indian trader". That may mean he owned part of a ship that traveled to the East Indies, or it could have other meanings. It gets a little dicey here because he is supposed to be living in Springfield and in Kittery, Maine at the same time. I suspect there were two John Lambs, and they have been a bit intermingled in this part of the story. Perhaps the man in Kittery was the one who was engaged in trading. More research needs to be done on this.
In Springfield, he became an important part of the town. He was a fence viewer, a surveyor of highways, a sealer of weights and measures, a sergeant of the Westfield Garrison during King Philip's War, and he had the fifth seat in the church (seats were assigned according to wealth and piety as well as status in the town).
John was married to Joanna Chapin, daughter of Samuel Chapin and Cicely Penny) about 1650, and they had eleven children, with the last being born in 1674. Joanna died in 1683 and John died September 28,1690, just two or three years after he had married Lydia Wright Bliss Norton. His estate was valued at a little over 421 pounds, which was respectable indeed. He had more animals than many of his neighbors would have had, several good sized parcels of land, more tools and implements, and more household goods than would have been common. John Lamb had done all right for himself.
The line of descent is:
John Lamb-Joanna Chapin
Samuel Lamb-Rebecca Bird
Samuel Lamb-Martha Stebbins
Eunice Lamb-Martin Root
Martin Root-Ruth Noble
Ruth Root-Samuel Falley
Clarissa Falley-John Havens Starr
Harriet Starr-John Wilson Knott
Edith Knott-Edward Allen
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
Their descendants
It would be interesting to know how closely his parents, Thomas and Elizabeth Lamb, could follow the typical Puritan methods in raising children under the circumstances of sailing across the ocean. Were they stern, were they relaxed? Certainly they, especially Elizabeth, would have been watchful as there were many ways for little ones to get hurt, or worse, on a ship. The other women on board would have helped, surely, but it wouldn't have been an easy job. Actually, our ancestor John had sibling Thomas with him, so at least there was someone to play with.
John was born to Thomas and Elizabeth on or before August 1, 1628 at Barnardiston, Suffolk, England. He would have been baptized in the local church, which had parts dating back to the twelfth century, so this was a very old village indeed. Likely there was quite a bit of family in the area, as that is common for small villages, so again one wonders what the pioneer immigrants were thinking.
John came with his parents to Roxbury, Massachusetts, where Thomas died in 1646. Five years later, in 1651, John settled in Springfield, Massachusetts where he was made a freeman in 1654. He was a wheelwright and perhaps an "East Indian trader". That may mean he owned part of a ship that traveled to the East Indies, or it could have other meanings. It gets a little dicey here because he is supposed to be living in Springfield and in Kittery, Maine at the same time. I suspect there were two John Lambs, and they have been a bit intermingled in this part of the story. Perhaps the man in Kittery was the one who was engaged in trading. More research needs to be done on this.
In Springfield, he became an important part of the town. He was a fence viewer, a surveyor of highways, a sealer of weights and measures, a sergeant of the Westfield Garrison during King Philip's War, and he had the fifth seat in the church (seats were assigned according to wealth and piety as well as status in the town).
John was married to Joanna Chapin, daughter of Samuel Chapin and Cicely Penny) about 1650, and they had eleven children, with the last being born in 1674. Joanna died in 1683 and John died September 28,1690, just two or three years after he had married Lydia Wright Bliss Norton. His estate was valued at a little over 421 pounds, which was respectable indeed. He had more animals than many of his neighbors would have had, several good sized parcels of land, more tools and implements, and more household goods than would have been common. John Lamb had done all right for himself.
The line of descent is:
John Lamb-Joanna Chapin
Samuel Lamb-Rebecca Bird
Samuel Lamb-Martha Stebbins
Eunice Lamb-Martin Root
Martin Root-Ruth Noble
Ruth Root-Samuel Falley
Clarissa Falley-John Havens Starr
Harriet Starr-John Wilson Knott
Edith Knott-Edward Allen
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
Their descendants
Tuesday, January 22, 2019
Holbrook line: John Stebbins 1626-1678
I wrote in December 2015 about Rowland Stebbins, and then in June of 2017 about his son Thomas, who is our Stebbins ancestor in our Allen line. Now I'd like to write about John Stebbins, who is also a son of Rowland Stebbins, but is in our Holbrook line. This is one example I've found that shows both Allen and Holbrook ancestors descending from the same couple. I believe there are more examples but they don't come to mind right now.
John Stebbins came on the ship Francis in 1634, aged eight years old. His brother Thomas, 14, and his sisters Sarah, 11, and Elizabeth, 8, were with him. Also along for the ride were their parents, Rowland and Sarah Whiting Stebbins, and a servant, Mary Winch. The ship left from Ipswich, Suffolk, England, but it's believed the family was from Bocking, Essex, England.
Rowland seems to have stayed at Roxbury, Massachusetts Bay Colony, for some time before moving on to Springfield, Massachusetts, in the Connecticut River valley. The family may have been there as early as 1639.
John married Ann Munden in Springfield on May 14, 1646 in Springfield, the same year he purchased land there. He purchased a house in 1651 but it's not clear whether the young family had lived elsewhere for five years, perhaps with her family (or his), or whether they were moving to better quarters. Ann died in 1656 in Springfield. John then married Abigail Bartlett on December 17, 1657. She was just 21 years old but was old enough to care for John's two children born by Ann, as well as the eleven children they eventually had together. 1656 was also the year that he moved to Northampton, Massachusetts, or at least the year he bought land there. He may have traveled back and forth between the two towns until he was married, and then brought his bride to that town.
He was a man of some wealth, or at least he was comfortably well off. He owned a sawmill, and was active in town affairs. I've seen him referred to as "Deacon John" which means he was active in church. He is also described as a carpenter, surveyor, bailiff, and as town selectman in 1675 and 1676. One source says that he was a soldier, and I've found his name on a list of soldiers in King Philip's War, but he would have been 50 years old or so, right at the division point for active service, then, so it may be that it was his son John Munden or Munson Stebbins who was the soldier then. That of course doesn't mean our John was not a soldier. There were constant skirmishes prior to the outbreak of King Philip's War, and John would have been expected to do his part in the training band or militia.
The manner of John's death was officially undetermined. It likely was a sawmill accident, or possibly a case of some sort of rapid fever, but at least two groups of women were allowed to examine the body before it was buried, to examine it for signs of witchcraft. A report detailing their suspicions was sent to the Court at Boston but there was no follow up done. Since John died in March of 1678, it's possible that the Court was still busy with the fall out from King Philip's War and had little time to devote to a full investigation. Still, even to know that someone thought his death was suspicious and that the local jury felt obliged to pass the information upwards, means that Northampton was not always a nice and friendly place in which to live. It was also a suspicious place.
John Stebbins was accused of what was basically abuse of his aged father, but was not found guilty. Another time, he accused a neighbor of harassing his wife. He served on at least two juries. As a reader of "Colonial Justice in Western Massachusetts 1639-1702" can easily determine, this community did not believe in "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone." The entire community seemed to feel that it was a good idea to file court cases for the least little problem (such as animals getting out of their enclosures and "running amok").
I regret that my eyesight prevents me from giving an account of the settling of John's estate. It can be found on www.americancenturies.mass.edu/collection, in the Digital Collections. The settlement is dated September 30, 1679. It appears, if I'm seeing correctly, that he owned land in several locations and that his estate was valued at over 500 pounds. His widow, Abigail, lived until 1710 and presumably benefited from her widow's thirds, if not more.
So that's the short version of John's life. I'd love to know more about him and how he acquired the business sense he must have had. I'd like to know if he was literate. And I'd like to know how he kept his sanity, raising that many children!
The line of descent is:
John Stebbins-Abigail Bartlett
Sarah Stebbins-William Southwell
Ebenezer Southwell-Elizabeth Judd
Eunice Southwell-Medad Pomeroy Jr.
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stanard
Libbeus Stanard-Euzebia (Luceba) Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
John Stebbins came on the ship Francis in 1634, aged eight years old. His brother Thomas, 14, and his sisters Sarah, 11, and Elizabeth, 8, were with him. Also along for the ride were their parents, Rowland and Sarah Whiting Stebbins, and a servant, Mary Winch. The ship left from Ipswich, Suffolk, England, but it's believed the family was from Bocking, Essex, England.
Rowland seems to have stayed at Roxbury, Massachusetts Bay Colony, for some time before moving on to Springfield, Massachusetts, in the Connecticut River valley. The family may have been there as early as 1639.
John married Ann Munden in Springfield on May 14, 1646 in Springfield, the same year he purchased land there. He purchased a house in 1651 but it's not clear whether the young family had lived elsewhere for five years, perhaps with her family (or his), or whether they were moving to better quarters. Ann died in 1656 in Springfield. John then married Abigail Bartlett on December 17, 1657. She was just 21 years old but was old enough to care for John's two children born by Ann, as well as the eleven children they eventually had together. 1656 was also the year that he moved to Northampton, Massachusetts, or at least the year he bought land there. He may have traveled back and forth between the two towns until he was married, and then brought his bride to that town.
He was a man of some wealth, or at least he was comfortably well off. He owned a sawmill, and was active in town affairs. I've seen him referred to as "Deacon John" which means he was active in church. He is also described as a carpenter, surveyor, bailiff, and as town selectman in 1675 and 1676. One source says that he was a soldier, and I've found his name on a list of soldiers in King Philip's War, but he would have been 50 years old or so, right at the division point for active service, then, so it may be that it was his son John Munden or Munson Stebbins who was the soldier then. That of course doesn't mean our John was not a soldier. There were constant skirmishes prior to the outbreak of King Philip's War, and John would have been expected to do his part in the training band or militia.
The manner of John's death was officially undetermined. It likely was a sawmill accident, or possibly a case of some sort of rapid fever, but at least two groups of women were allowed to examine the body before it was buried, to examine it for signs of witchcraft. A report detailing their suspicions was sent to the Court at Boston but there was no follow up done. Since John died in March of 1678, it's possible that the Court was still busy with the fall out from King Philip's War and had little time to devote to a full investigation. Still, even to know that someone thought his death was suspicious and that the local jury felt obliged to pass the information upwards, means that Northampton was not always a nice and friendly place in which to live. It was also a suspicious place.
John Stebbins was accused of what was basically abuse of his aged father, but was not found guilty. Another time, he accused a neighbor of harassing his wife. He served on at least two juries. As a reader of "Colonial Justice in Western Massachusetts 1639-1702" can easily determine, this community did not believe in "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone." The entire community seemed to feel that it was a good idea to file court cases for the least little problem (such as animals getting out of their enclosures and "running amok").
I regret that my eyesight prevents me from giving an account of the settling of John's estate. It can be found on www.americancenturies.mass.edu/collection, in the Digital Collections. The settlement is dated September 30, 1679. It appears, if I'm seeing correctly, that he owned land in several locations and that his estate was valued at over 500 pounds. His widow, Abigail, lived until 1710 and presumably benefited from her widow's thirds, if not more.
So that's the short version of John's life. I'd love to know more about him and how he acquired the business sense he must have had. I'd like to know if he was literate. And I'd like to know how he kept his sanity, raising that many children!
The line of descent is:
John Stebbins-Abigail Bartlett
Sarah Stebbins-William Southwell
Ebenezer Southwell-Elizabeth Judd
Eunice Southwell-Medad Pomeroy Jr.
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stanard
Libbeus Stanard-Euzebia (Luceba) Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Tuesday, November 7, 2017
Allen line: Joseph Riley, possible Irishman, Immigrant
This post will be more a collection of ideas than a post of fact. Please take anything you read here with a grain of salt. I am trying to do more research to support this post but so far I'm coming up empty, and here is my deadline for writing this post.
I've written an earlier blog post about John Riley, and I think I had that one pretty much straight, but I could be wrong. Joseph seems, at the present time, to be more in the way of a myth, since I can't find records right now to support what I have finding on line. I'll post what I have found online here in the hopes that this will give us some clues as to where to look, or perhaps someone will recognize this man and be able to say, "No, he's not your guy, and here's why".
The first surprising thing is that Joseph seems to have been born on December 12, 1598 in Dublin, Leinster, Ireland. That is a bit unusual for our family, but stranger things have happened. His parents may have been Jonathan Riley and Sarah, whose name is given in some places as Deming. Deming is a good New England name but I'm not sure it's a good Irish name, so there is one of my hesitations with this tree.
The next "fact" I find about Joseph is that he married Mary Wright on January 23,1624 in Eland, Yorkshire, England. I am unable to figure out a really good reason that Joseph would have gone from Dublin to Yorkshire to marry, except, possibly, that his Riley grandparents, Daniel and Elizabeth Bist Riley, went from Yorkshire to Dublin. So there is a slight possibility that he had family in the area. it's also possible that Daniel and Elizabeth are also not factual.
It seems that Joseph and Mary arrived in New England in the late 1620s, because supposedly their son Thomas was born in Wethersfield, Hartford Connecticut in 1630. There's a problem here, however, as Wethersfield wasn't founded until 1822, quite a bit after our ancestor lived. Also, the trees are showing that Joseph died in Massachusetts, possibly Westfield, Hampden County. The problem with that is I have looked at those records (Westfield) and there are no Rileys at all listed there prior to, at least, 1700.
Joseph and Mary have been credited with at least five children: John, Sarah, William, Daniel, and Elizabeth, with John presumably being the oldest and being born in Dublin. However, I'm not finding records of the births of the children.
I would certainly like to find some documentation for this family. If they are from Dublin, then that makes them quite interesting people in our family. If they are not from Dublin, where are they from? And if John's parents aren't even Joseph and Mary, where do we go from here?
Do you see why sometimes it feels like banging one's head against a wall, in trying to verify "information"? I don't want to mislead anyone into believing that much of anything here has been proven, at least not be me. Yet, on the chance that this is correct, here we go:
The line of descent may be:
Joseph Riley-Mary Wright
John Riley-Grace Buck
John Riley-Margaret McCraney
Mary Riley-Joseph Ely
Mary Ely-Thomas Stebbins
Ruth Stebbins-Samuel Hitchcock
Margaret Hitchcock-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
I've written an earlier blog post about John Riley, and I think I had that one pretty much straight, but I could be wrong. Joseph seems, at the present time, to be more in the way of a myth, since I can't find records right now to support what I have finding on line. I'll post what I have found online here in the hopes that this will give us some clues as to where to look, or perhaps someone will recognize this man and be able to say, "No, he's not your guy, and here's why".
The first surprising thing is that Joseph seems to have been born on December 12, 1598 in Dublin, Leinster, Ireland. That is a bit unusual for our family, but stranger things have happened. His parents may have been Jonathan Riley and Sarah, whose name is given in some places as Deming. Deming is a good New England name but I'm not sure it's a good Irish name, so there is one of my hesitations with this tree.
The next "fact" I find about Joseph is that he married Mary Wright on January 23,1624 in Eland, Yorkshire, England. I am unable to figure out a really good reason that Joseph would have gone from Dublin to Yorkshire to marry, except, possibly, that his Riley grandparents, Daniel and Elizabeth Bist Riley, went from Yorkshire to Dublin. So there is a slight possibility that he had family in the area. it's also possible that Daniel and Elizabeth are also not factual.
It seems that Joseph and Mary arrived in New England in the late 1620s, because supposedly their son Thomas was born in Wethersfield, Hartford Connecticut in 1630. There's a problem here, however, as Wethersfield wasn't founded until 1822, quite a bit after our ancestor lived. Also, the trees are showing that Joseph died in Massachusetts, possibly Westfield, Hampden County. The problem with that is I have looked at those records (Westfield) and there are no Rileys at all listed there prior to, at least, 1700.
Joseph and Mary have been credited with at least five children: John, Sarah, William, Daniel, and Elizabeth, with John presumably being the oldest and being born in Dublin. However, I'm not finding records of the births of the children.
I would certainly like to find some documentation for this family. If they are from Dublin, then that makes them quite interesting people in our family. If they are not from Dublin, where are they from? And if John's parents aren't even Joseph and Mary, where do we go from here?
Do you see why sometimes it feels like banging one's head against a wall, in trying to verify "information"? I don't want to mislead anyone into believing that much of anything here has been proven, at least not be me. Yet, on the chance that this is correct, here we go:
The line of descent may be:
Joseph Riley-Mary Wright
John Riley-Grace Buck
John Riley-Margaret McCraney
Mary Riley-Joseph Ely
Mary Ely-Thomas Stebbins
Ruth Stebbins-Samuel Hitchcock
Margaret Hitchcock-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
Tuesday, September 26, 2017
Allen line: William Buck, Immigrant 1585-1657
I've rarely written about a person with so much conflicting information. On the one hand, we have Robert Charles Anderson, world famous Great Migration researcher, saying no one knows his parents, or his wife, and that William had only one known son. On the other hand, we have other researchers who give William's parents, two wifes, and up to 17 children. I've also found discrepancies, large ones, in his birthdate.
In a nutshell, this is what is absolutely certain about William: He came to New England from England with his son Roger, on the ship Increase, with his son Roger. He was a plowright (a maker and probably repairman of plows) and he died January 24, 1657/58.
That would be the end of this blogpost, except I also want to share what else may be true about William. From a book published in 1799 called History of Worcestershire, England by Nash, he is referred to as esquire, and is said to have been the son and heir of Nathaniel, son of John, and is also said to have marred about 1606 Margaret Good, daughter and heir of Michael Good of Sussex, Lord of the castle of Frome, Somersetshire. My analysis of this is that it is doubtful, because of the way William made his living in Massachusetts Bay Colony and because he never joined a church or became a freeman. Even the land he was given was on the outskirts of town, indicating that perhaps he lived on the edge of society.
I've also seen his parents listed as James Buck and Elizabeth Sherman, This connection goes with a birth location of Padbury, Cambridgeshire, England, and makes a little more sense historically, except that I can find no documentation for this information. So as far as I can determine, the jury is still out.
William Buck is also said to have married Margaret Neave, September 7, 1618 in Andersby, Lincolnshire, England. This would be late for a first marriage, but it is entirely possible that he had a first wife. Under this theory, Roger, the known descendant, was born in 1617 and his mother, William's wife, died shortly after. William is credited with as many as eight children with Margaret, including our ancestor, Grace. But again, I can find no record of her birth, nor of any of her siblings.
It is fun to think of William living as a plowright, next to a Winthrop farm . Perhaps he knew some of the Winthrop family, in a business sense, anyway. Living in Cambridge, he would have known some of our other Allen and Holbrook ancestors, and helped them make a living on their farms.
I am very open, even anxious, to learn more about William Buck. Was he in fact the father of our Grace, and was he married to Margaret Neave? I'd love to find his family!
The line of descent would be:
William Buck-possibly Margaret Neave
Grace Buck-John Riley
John Riley-Margaret McCraney
Mary Riley-Joseph Ely
Mary Ely Thomas Stebbins
Ruth Stebbins-Samuel Hitchcock
Margaret Hitchcock-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
In a nutshell, this is what is absolutely certain about William: He came to New England from England with his son Roger, on the ship Increase, with his son Roger. He was a plowright (a maker and probably repairman of plows) and he died January 24, 1657/58.
That would be the end of this blogpost, except I also want to share what else may be true about William. From a book published in 1799 called History of Worcestershire, England by Nash, he is referred to as esquire, and is said to have been the son and heir of Nathaniel, son of John, and is also said to have marred about 1606 Margaret Good, daughter and heir of Michael Good of Sussex, Lord of the castle of Frome, Somersetshire. My analysis of this is that it is doubtful, because of the way William made his living in Massachusetts Bay Colony and because he never joined a church or became a freeman. Even the land he was given was on the outskirts of town, indicating that perhaps he lived on the edge of society.
I've also seen his parents listed as James Buck and Elizabeth Sherman, This connection goes with a birth location of Padbury, Cambridgeshire, England, and makes a little more sense historically, except that I can find no documentation for this information. So as far as I can determine, the jury is still out.
William Buck is also said to have married Margaret Neave, September 7, 1618 in Andersby, Lincolnshire, England. This would be late for a first marriage, but it is entirely possible that he had a first wife. Under this theory, Roger, the known descendant, was born in 1617 and his mother, William's wife, died shortly after. William is credited with as many as eight children with Margaret, including our ancestor, Grace. But again, I can find no record of her birth, nor of any of her siblings.
It is fun to think of William living as a plowright, next to a Winthrop farm . Perhaps he knew some of the Winthrop family, in a business sense, anyway. Living in Cambridge, he would have known some of our other Allen and Holbrook ancestors, and helped them make a living on their farms.
I am very open, even anxious, to learn more about William Buck. Was he in fact the father of our Grace, and was he married to Margaret Neave? I'd love to find his family!
The line of descent would be:
William Buck-possibly Margaret Neave
Grace Buck-John Riley
John Riley-Margaret McCraney
Mary Riley-Joseph Ely
Mary Ely Thomas Stebbins
Ruth Stebbins-Samuel Hitchcock
Margaret Hitchcock-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
Tuesday, August 29, 2017
Allen line: Thomas Graves, Immigrant 1585-1662
I've written earlier about John Graves, who was the son of Thomas. I didn't write about Thomas at the time because the information about his father appeared to me to be mixed up with that of at least one and possibly two other Thomas Graves, and I didn't want to get them confused. Some of what I write here may possibly still be wrong, but it seems that our Thomas has been more clearly identified and he is certainly an interesting person.
Thomas Graves was born (or christened) October 19, 1585 at Gravesend, Kent, England. I have seen his parents listed as Thomas Graves and Sarah Malter, but have not located documentation for that so an this point I'm considering that his parents are unknown. Gravesend was an interesting town as Thomas was growing up. It was on an estuary of the Thames River, so was closely connected with the sea. Gravesend had a long history, including a chantry built in 1384 that is still standing, and a Tudor fort built in 1543. It was a bustling town.
Thomas was an educated man, although his name is not found at either Cambridge or Oxford. It's possible that he was an apprentice to someone who shared his own knowledge with Thomas, or perhaps he attended some other school, perhaps even on the Continent. At any rate, he acquired the knowledge to become an engineer, and in 1629 he signed a contract with the Massachusetts Bay Company in which he represented himself as skilled in the discovery of mines, in fortifications of all sorts, in surveying, and in various other similar occupations. He and his wife, five children, and two unnamed servants sailed to Salem, Massachusetts in 1629, on the ship "George Bonaventure." He had married Sarah Whiting in England, and their five children were all 16 or older when they came to America as a family.
He apparently held some offices of note in Massachusetts Bay Colony, and became a freeman in 1631. It's not known when he and the family went to Hartford, Connecticut but they were there in 1645, and stayed for about 16 years. He was granted at least three pieces of property there, and of course had a dwelling. Perhaps for religious reasons, and perhaps because his skills were needed there, the family except for son Nathaniel emigrated to Hatfield, Massachusetts in 1661, By this time, Thomas and Sarah may have been living with son Isaac, or perhaps they were just there until a home could be built for them.
Thomas died in Hadley on or just before November 1, 1662 (burial date) and Sarah died about four years later. Apparently there are estate papers but I've not been able to locate them-yet. He was approximately 76 years old, and had been in America since his middle age. I honor especially those ancestors who were willing to start over in a strange land, and then again in a new settlement, when they could have stayed in England and lived their lives. It took courage and vision, and those are reasons enough to give Thomas honor.
The line of descent is:
Thomas Graves-Sarah Whiting
John Graves-Mary Smith
Mary Graves-Edward Stebbins
Sarah Stebbins-John Root
Sarah Roote-Thomas Noble
Stephen Notble-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
Thomas Graves was born (or christened) October 19, 1585 at Gravesend, Kent, England. I have seen his parents listed as Thomas Graves and Sarah Malter, but have not located documentation for that so an this point I'm considering that his parents are unknown. Gravesend was an interesting town as Thomas was growing up. It was on an estuary of the Thames River, so was closely connected with the sea. Gravesend had a long history, including a chantry built in 1384 that is still standing, and a Tudor fort built in 1543. It was a bustling town.
Thomas was an educated man, although his name is not found at either Cambridge or Oxford. It's possible that he was an apprentice to someone who shared his own knowledge with Thomas, or perhaps he attended some other school, perhaps even on the Continent. At any rate, he acquired the knowledge to become an engineer, and in 1629 he signed a contract with the Massachusetts Bay Company in which he represented himself as skilled in the discovery of mines, in fortifications of all sorts, in surveying, and in various other similar occupations. He and his wife, five children, and two unnamed servants sailed to Salem, Massachusetts in 1629, on the ship "George Bonaventure." He had married Sarah Whiting in England, and their five children were all 16 or older when they came to America as a family.
He apparently held some offices of note in Massachusetts Bay Colony, and became a freeman in 1631. It's not known when he and the family went to Hartford, Connecticut but they were there in 1645, and stayed for about 16 years. He was granted at least three pieces of property there, and of course had a dwelling. Perhaps for religious reasons, and perhaps because his skills were needed there, the family except for son Nathaniel emigrated to Hatfield, Massachusetts in 1661, By this time, Thomas and Sarah may have been living with son Isaac, or perhaps they were just there until a home could be built for them.
Thomas died in Hadley on or just before November 1, 1662 (burial date) and Sarah died about four years later. Apparently there are estate papers but I've not been able to locate them-yet. He was approximately 76 years old, and had been in America since his middle age. I honor especially those ancestors who were willing to start over in a strange land, and then again in a new settlement, when they could have stayed in England and lived their lives. It took courage and vision, and those are reasons enough to give Thomas honor.
The line of descent is:
Thomas Graves-Sarah Whiting
John Graves-Mary Smith
Mary Graves-Edward Stebbins
Sarah Stebbins-John Root
Sarah Roote-Thomas Noble
Stephen Notble-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
Tuesday, June 20, 2017
Allen line: Thomas Stebbins about 1619-1683, Immigrant
I've written earlier about Rowland Stebbins, father of Thomas, but Thomas was an immigrant, too, and his story should be told. He is actually an Allen ancestor twice, which makes him doubly important.
Thomas was born about 1619 or 1620, presumably in Bocking, Essex, England, which is the town of record of his parents. He came to New England in 1634 with his parents, Rowland and Sarah Whiting Stebbins, and three siblings, on the ship Francis. Thomas was listed as 14 at the time. The family possibly stayed in Roxbury, Massachusetts Bay Colony for a short time, with Rowland's younger brother Martin.
The Stebbins family soon moved on to Springfield, however, and that is where Thomas married Hannah Wright, daughter of Deacon Samuel and Margaret Stratton Wright, in November of 1645. My notes say their first son, Samuel, was born in September of 1646 and then Thomas, two Josephs (one died at about 18 months of age), Sarah, Edward, Benjamin and finally twins Hannah and Rowland, born October 1 and 2nd 1660. Hannah, the mother, died, probably from childbirth complications, two weeks later. 9 children in 15 years, plus the privations of frontier life, was just too much for Hannah to overcome. Surprisingly, it seems that Thomas stayed single until 1676, when he married Abigail Burt Ball Munn. Thomas died September 28, 1683 and Abigail lived until 1707.
We know a few other facts about Thomas. He was a tailor by trade, and of course had small tracts of farm land. When his father died, his brother John was given much more of the estate than Thomas was given, for whatever reason. Thomas was older than John and perhaps John had greater need, or maybe John had done more to care for his father in his father's old age. He was apparently a man of some standing in the town, as he was a selectman several time. He was referred to as "sergeant" in 1656 and an overseer of highways in 1667.
He would have been 56 years old at the time of King Philip's War, but was referred to as a lieutenant then, and was listed in Capt William Turner's company in the Turner Falls massacre. We don't know for sure that he was on that mission but it seems possible. (His sons Thomas and Samuel were there, so there is some confusion about whether Thomas Senior was there also). If he wasn't in the fight, then he was at home or nearby, pulling guard duty and defending his and other families The massacre or battle, whatever you want to call it, was a two parter. The colonists massacred natives as they were sleeping, including women and children, and other natives then came to harass and kill the colonists as they made their way back home. (We have many ancestors, and their siblings) on the lists of the men who were there).
There is apparently a will but I have not yet located it. It is said to mention his daughters and his widow only. I would like to find the will and would particularly like to find the inventory. That would tell us more about the life of Lieutenant Thomas Stebbins.
One line of descent is:
Thomas Stebbins-Hannah Wright
Edward Stebbins-Sarah Graves
Sarah Stebbins-John Root
Sarah Root-Thomas Noble
Stephen Noble-Ruth Church
Ruth Noble-Martin Root
Ruth Root-Samuel Falley
Claraissa Falley-John Havens Starr
Harriet Starr-John Wilson Knott
Edith Knott-Edward Allen
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
Their descendants
The second line is
Thomas Stebbins-Hannah Wright
Joseph Stebbins-Sarah Dorchester
Martha Stebbins-Samuel Lamb
Eunice Lamb-Martin Root
Martin Root-Ruth Noble
etc.
This is just one way we are our own cousins!
Thomas was born about 1619 or 1620, presumably in Bocking, Essex, England, which is the town of record of his parents. He came to New England in 1634 with his parents, Rowland and Sarah Whiting Stebbins, and three siblings, on the ship Francis. Thomas was listed as 14 at the time. The family possibly stayed in Roxbury, Massachusetts Bay Colony for a short time, with Rowland's younger brother Martin.
The Stebbins family soon moved on to Springfield, however, and that is where Thomas married Hannah Wright, daughter of Deacon Samuel and Margaret Stratton Wright, in November of 1645. My notes say their first son, Samuel, was born in September of 1646 and then Thomas, two Josephs (one died at about 18 months of age), Sarah, Edward, Benjamin and finally twins Hannah and Rowland, born October 1 and 2nd 1660. Hannah, the mother, died, probably from childbirth complications, two weeks later. 9 children in 15 years, plus the privations of frontier life, was just too much for Hannah to overcome. Surprisingly, it seems that Thomas stayed single until 1676, when he married Abigail Burt Ball Munn. Thomas died September 28, 1683 and Abigail lived until 1707.
We know a few other facts about Thomas. He was a tailor by trade, and of course had small tracts of farm land. When his father died, his brother John was given much more of the estate than Thomas was given, for whatever reason. Thomas was older than John and perhaps John had greater need, or maybe John had done more to care for his father in his father's old age. He was apparently a man of some standing in the town, as he was a selectman several time. He was referred to as "sergeant" in 1656 and an overseer of highways in 1667.
He would have been 56 years old at the time of King Philip's War, but was referred to as a lieutenant then, and was listed in Capt William Turner's company in the Turner Falls massacre. We don't know for sure that he was on that mission but it seems possible. (His sons Thomas and Samuel were there, so there is some confusion about whether Thomas Senior was there also). If he wasn't in the fight, then he was at home or nearby, pulling guard duty and defending his and other families The massacre or battle, whatever you want to call it, was a two parter. The colonists massacred natives as they were sleeping, including women and children, and other natives then came to harass and kill the colonists as they made their way back home. (We have many ancestors, and their siblings) on the lists of the men who were there).
There is apparently a will but I have not yet located it. It is said to mention his daughters and his widow only. I would like to find the will and would particularly like to find the inventory. That would tell us more about the life of Lieutenant Thomas Stebbins.
One line of descent is:
Thomas Stebbins-Hannah Wright
Edward Stebbins-Sarah Graves
Sarah Stebbins-John Root
Sarah Root-Thomas Noble
Stephen Noble-Ruth Church
Ruth Noble-Martin Root
Ruth Root-Samuel Falley
Claraissa Falley-John Havens Starr
Harriet Starr-John Wilson Knott
Edith Knott-Edward Allen
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
Their descendants
The second line is
Thomas Stebbins-Hannah Wright
Joseph Stebbins-Sarah Dorchester
Martha Stebbins-Samuel Lamb
Eunice Lamb-Martin Root
Martin Root-Ruth Noble
etc.
This is just one way we are our own cousins!
Tuesday, April 11, 2017
Allen line: Thomas Bird 1593-1662, Immigrant
The dates I've used in the title of this are not ones I necessarily put much credence in. Most sources say Thomas was born about 1600 in England, and that he died in 1662 in Hartford, Connecticut. I've been able to find a few bits and pieces of information about Thomas but not nearly as much as I'd like, and some of those bits and pieces don't necessarily belong to this man. I've tried to weed out the obviously wrong ones.
So, Thomas was born in England and died in Hartford, Connecticut. There is a Thomas Bird who was baptized November 5, 1593 in St Andrew Parish, Enfield Borough, London, England. He was the child of Robert and (from a different, undocumented source) possibly Amy. This may be our Thomas although 1593 is several years away from "about 1600". The jury is still out, as far as I'm concerned, as other researchers feel strongly that he came from the area of Braintree, Essex. We don't have birth dates for the children (Hannah, James, Joseph, Mary) but based on their marriage dates, they were probably born in the 1620's, so Thomas's first marriage would have taken place there, too. I've seen various names for this first wife put forth but they are all just speculation at this point. We do know he married Mary Belden as a subsequent wife, about 1660, in Hartford, Ct..
Thomas and his family were in Hartford by 1639, when he was granted land there. He also purchased land from Thomas Judd in 1644. There is apparently no mention of him in church records, but it is likely he was a Puritan, one who possibly stayed out of trouble with both the church and the courts. His name is notable more for the lack of records than for the records currently available.
We don't know when his wife died, but Thomas remarried just about two years before his own death, which was probably in July of 1662. His inventory was presented on August 10, 1662 and showed a total estate of 149 -05-10. This was not a large estate but it wasn't poverty level. I'm still looking to find more about the inventory. Son Joseph was left the dwelling place and land, but I don't know if that was all of the land or just the land the dwelling was on. I also don't know if there was more than one piece of land at the time of Thomas's death.
As is often the case, there is much not known about this immigrant ancestor, who by most standards was not an "illustrious" man. But he was here, he supported the culture of the area, he probably paid his taxes and tithes, and probably served in the military, and he supported his family. Those were the things that the many "ordinary" men did, and we can be proud of each of his actions. I'd certainly like to learn more about him!
The line of descent is:
Thomas Bird-unknown first wife
James Bird-Lydia Steele
Rebecca Bird-Samuel Lamb
Samuel Lamb-Martha Stebbins
Eunice Lamb-Martin Root
Martin Root Jr-Ruth Noble
Ruth Root-Samuel Falley
Clarissa Falley-John Havens Starr
Harriet Starr-John Wilson Knott
Edith Knott-Edward Allen
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
Their descendants
So, Thomas was born in England and died in Hartford, Connecticut. There is a Thomas Bird who was baptized November 5, 1593 in St Andrew Parish, Enfield Borough, London, England. He was the child of Robert and (from a different, undocumented source) possibly Amy. This may be our Thomas although 1593 is several years away from "about 1600". The jury is still out, as far as I'm concerned, as other researchers feel strongly that he came from the area of Braintree, Essex. We don't have birth dates for the children (Hannah, James, Joseph, Mary) but based on their marriage dates, they were probably born in the 1620's, so Thomas's first marriage would have taken place there, too. I've seen various names for this first wife put forth but they are all just speculation at this point. We do know he married Mary Belden as a subsequent wife, about 1660, in Hartford, Ct..
Thomas and his family were in Hartford by 1639, when he was granted land there. He also purchased land from Thomas Judd in 1644. There is apparently no mention of him in church records, but it is likely he was a Puritan, one who possibly stayed out of trouble with both the church and the courts. His name is notable more for the lack of records than for the records currently available.
We don't know when his wife died, but Thomas remarried just about two years before his own death, which was probably in July of 1662. His inventory was presented on August 10, 1662 and showed a total estate of 149 -05-10. This was not a large estate but it wasn't poverty level. I'm still looking to find more about the inventory. Son Joseph was left the dwelling place and land, but I don't know if that was all of the land or just the land the dwelling was on. I also don't know if there was more than one piece of land at the time of Thomas's death.
As is often the case, there is much not known about this immigrant ancestor, who by most standards was not an "illustrious" man. But he was here, he supported the culture of the area, he probably paid his taxes and tithes, and probably served in the military, and he supported his family. Those were the things that the many "ordinary" men did, and we can be proud of each of his actions. I'd certainly like to learn more about him!
The line of descent is:
Thomas Bird-unknown first wife
James Bird-Lydia Steele
Rebecca Bird-Samuel Lamb
Samuel Lamb-Martha Stebbins
Eunice Lamb-Martin Root
Martin Root Jr-Ruth Noble
Ruth Root-Samuel Falley
Clarissa Falley-John Havens Starr
Harriet Starr-John Wilson Knott
Edith Knott-Edward Allen
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
Their descendants
Tuesday, March 28, 2017
Allen line: John Root 1608-1684, Immigrant
Although we know quite a bit about John Root, there are two big questions I have after going through all the material I can find about him. The first is his origin. His gravestone, which I think is old but probably not dating back to 1684, states that he was a "Descendant of the Huguenots Routtes who fled from France to England." I've seen statements that this headstone was actually put up as late as 1880, and that the statement should be discounted because it was an American who had it installed. Being an American doesn't necessarily make it wrong, of course, and there is a Thomas Routte/Roote/Root who is accepted by the National Huguenot Society as being an ancestor. I don't know how much credibility to apply to this statement except that it does seem likely that at some point the Routte family came to England.
The second mystery about John is his parents. They are given everywhere as John Roote and Mary Ann Russell or Rushall. However, we are also told that John was raised by a wealthy uncle, and looking at the family tree, it appears that this couple might fit that description. I can't find documentation as to his birth or to the death of these "parents" so I'm not clear on exactly who John is. However, he was born February 26,1608 in Badby, Northamptonshire, England. Supposedly the uncle who raised him was pressing John to go into the Parliamentary Army under Cromwell, and our John was not willing to do that, so he came to America as a Puritan and settled in Farmington, Connecticut in 1640.
He married Mary Kilbourne, most likely after arriving in Farmington but possibly in England. Their first known child was born in 1642 in Farmington, so if they met soon after John's arrival, possibly in church, then a marriage perhaps in 1641 and a child born a year later would make sense.
John was a weaver as well as a farmer. We know that he and his wife were members of the church in Farmington, that John served on several juries at Hartford, and that he was apparently a respected man of his town. We are fortunate that copies of his estate are still available. At his death, it was valued at 819 pounds. Interestingly, it includes a list of the 32 books in his library, most of which were religious. There was one "law book" and it's not clear what a couple of the other books were, but most had titles like "Israel's Safety" or "door of Salvation." His inventory also included a long gun, a musket, a carbine, a backsword and belt, and various equipment needed to support these weapons. It is likely that he was part of the "military train" for much of his life, but since he lived until 1684, when he would have been 76 years old, he had probably been excused from military service some years earlier. He was have been 67 or 68 when King Philip's War broke out, so likely stayed home to help guard the women and children when the men of the town were called out.
John died in August of 1684 and his wife Mary died in 1697. Among his descendants, so our cousins, are President Rutherford B. Hayes, Louisa May Alcott (yes! I knew I liked her!), Nancy Davis Reagan, Bess Wallace Truman, and Clint Eastwood. He contributed much to American's history, besides settling in Connecticut and helping make a town out of the wilderness.
Our line of descent is:
John Root-Mary Kilbourne
John Root Mary Ashley
Samuel Root-Mary Gunn
Martin Root-Eunice Lamb
Martin Root-Ruth Noble
Ruth Root-Samuel Falley
Clarissa Falley-John Havens Starr
Harriet Starr-John Wilson Knott
Edith Knott-Edward Allen
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
Their descendants
A second line is the same for the first two generations, and then is:
John Root-Sarah Stebbins
Sarah Root-Thomas Noble
Stephen Noble-Ruth Church
Ruth Noble-Martin Root
and so on. Ruth Noble and Martin Root were second cousins, if I have this figured right. So we're doubly related to all those famous people I mentioned!
The second mystery about John is his parents. They are given everywhere as John Roote and Mary Ann Russell or Rushall. However, we are also told that John was raised by a wealthy uncle, and looking at the family tree, it appears that this couple might fit that description. I can't find documentation as to his birth or to the death of these "parents" so I'm not clear on exactly who John is. However, he was born February 26,1608 in Badby, Northamptonshire, England. Supposedly the uncle who raised him was pressing John to go into the Parliamentary Army under Cromwell, and our John was not willing to do that, so he came to America as a Puritan and settled in Farmington, Connecticut in 1640.
He married Mary Kilbourne, most likely after arriving in Farmington but possibly in England. Their first known child was born in 1642 in Farmington, so if they met soon after John's arrival, possibly in church, then a marriage perhaps in 1641 and a child born a year later would make sense.
John was a weaver as well as a farmer. We know that he and his wife were members of the church in Farmington, that John served on several juries at Hartford, and that he was apparently a respected man of his town. We are fortunate that copies of his estate are still available. At his death, it was valued at 819 pounds. Interestingly, it includes a list of the 32 books in his library, most of which were religious. There was one "law book" and it's not clear what a couple of the other books were, but most had titles like "Israel's Safety" or "door of Salvation." His inventory also included a long gun, a musket, a carbine, a backsword and belt, and various equipment needed to support these weapons. It is likely that he was part of the "military train" for much of his life, but since he lived until 1684, when he would have been 76 years old, he had probably been excused from military service some years earlier. He was have been 67 or 68 when King Philip's War broke out, so likely stayed home to help guard the women and children when the men of the town were called out.
John died in August of 1684 and his wife Mary died in 1697. Among his descendants, so our cousins, are President Rutherford B. Hayes, Louisa May Alcott (yes! I knew I liked her!), Nancy Davis Reagan, Bess Wallace Truman, and Clint Eastwood. He contributed much to American's history, besides settling in Connecticut and helping make a town out of the wilderness.
Our line of descent is:
John Root-Mary Kilbourne
John Root Mary Ashley
Samuel Root-Mary Gunn
Martin Root-Eunice Lamb
Martin Root-Ruth Noble
Ruth Root-Samuel Falley
Clarissa Falley-John Havens Starr
Harriet Starr-John Wilson Knott
Edith Knott-Edward Allen
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
Their descendants
A second line is the same for the first two generations, and then is:
John Root-Sarah Stebbins
Sarah Root-Thomas Noble
Stephen Noble-Ruth Church
Ruth Noble-Martin Root
and so on. Ruth Noble and Martin Root were second cousins, if I have this figured right. So we're doubly related to all those famous people I mentioned!
Tuesday, November 1, 2016
Allen line: Anthony Dorchester 1619-1683 Immigrant
Although quite a bit is known of Anthony's life in America, little is known of his life in England. He is believed to have been born about 1619, and some sources list, without documentation that I have found, his parents as being Anthony and Sarah Dorchester. Since Anthony himself had a wife named Sarah, I hope the two men are not being confused. I tend to believe his parents are not yet identified.
We don't know when Anthony came to America, either. Some believe it was as early as 1633, but Robert Charles Anderson hasn't covered him in any of the Great Migration publications that I've reviewed, so until there is some verification we will have to leave that as unknown. His second wife, Martha Chapman, may have been from Digswell, Hertfordshire, England but that may not be a clue since the marriage took place in Springfield, Massachusetts.
Savage, in his genealogical Dictionary of First Settlers of New England, says that Anthony went to Springfield about 1649 (probably soon after the death of his first wife, Sarah) but had been at Windsor, Ct. for some years prior (he is listed as a founding father of Windsor) and may have been at Hingham before that. Children by his first wife were John, Mary, and James, and were likely born in Windsor between 1644 and 1647. (Therefore, it is possible that a father or grandfather of Anthonhy's would have been John.) It is possible that Sarah died in or from complications of childbirth, since 1649 would have been about the time she would likely have had another pregnancy. With three small children to raise, Anthony needed a wife quickly, and less than three months after Sarah died, he was married to Martha Chapman Kitcherel, who was either from Digswell as indicated above or from Rolvenden, Kent, England. Apparently the jury is still out on her origins. Martha had children from her marriage, so it must have been a lively household as three more Dorchesters, Benjamin, Sarah and Hester, were added to the family. Martha died December 17, 1662 and Anthony next married Elizabeth possibly Cummins, his wife for the last 21 years of his life. She must have been an amazing woman to raise so many children who weren't "hers" by birth!
Anthony lived in very interesting times and the book "Colonial Justice in Western Massachusetts" tells at least one interesting story to indicate this. We don't generally think of slaves at that time period in Massachusetts, but it definitely was a fact of life. Jack ran away from his owner after one too many beatings, and 10 days later was at the Dorchester home. He asked for some tobacco, which the Dorchesters gave him, and then there was some sort of a struggle. It took Dorchester, his wife, and a daughter to subdue the man, possibly with the aid of a cutlass or possibly the cutlass "came out stiff" and therefore wasn't effective. When Jack was searched, he had in his pocket a knife belonging to Anthony. Jack was sent to jail until he was released into the custody of Lieut. William Clark. That night, the Clark house burned down, and Jack was soon found guilty of arson. He was sentenced to be hanged and his body to be burnt to ashes. It's not clear whether he ever stood trial for the events at the Dorchester home.
In addition to this story, Anthony and his wife were witnesses in a witchcraft case. It seems that an one time Anthony was working for Hugh Parsons, perhaps as a laborer, and he and Parsons each owned 1/4 interest in a certain cow. When the cow was killed, both men wanted the tongue. Dorchester got it, and it was put in the pot to be cooked but "mysteriously" disappeared. This was one of several incidents that got Hugh and his wife accused of witchcraft. Mrs. Parsons was tried in Boston for the death of her child, apparently believed to be witchcraft. She was found guilty but before she could be hanged she died in jail, apparently deranged. Mr. Parsons was also convicted of witchcraft but the General Court didn't confirm the conviction and he was allowed to leave Massachusetts. There's more to the Parsons story but our interest is in the Dorchesters, and it is interesting to see that both slavery and witchcraft touched their lives.
Anthony was a miller and a ferrier (ferryman? or farrier?) but he would have done at least some farming. We know he signed a petition in 1668 (along with a lot of other Allen ancestors and relatives) asking that the imposts, or tariffs, be lifted. We know that in 1663 he took an oath of fidelity, apparently routine, as part of the training band. He was on some local juries and was a selectman for Springfield. He was made a freeman of Springfield in 1661. He helped build the meeting house in Springfield, or at least was on a committee to supervise the building.
Anthony appears to have been relatively poor. He died without a will but his son John helped formulate an agreement with the heirs, including Martha, the daughter of Martha Chapman, who claimed that her mother had brought some property to the marriage. I'd love to find that inventory to see what was there when Anthony died August 28, 1683. Did he have a Bible and other books? Did he still have that cutlass? I'll keep looking!
The line of descent is:
Anthony Dorchester-Martha Chapman
Sarah Dorchester-Joseph Stebbins
Martha Stebbins-Samuel Lamb
Eunice Lamb-Martin Root
Martin Root Jr-Ruth Noble
Ruth Root-Samuel Falley
Clarissa Falley-John Havens Starr
Harriet Starr-John Wilson Knott
Edith Knott-Edward Allen
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
Their descendants
We don't know when Anthony came to America, either. Some believe it was as early as 1633, but Robert Charles Anderson hasn't covered him in any of the Great Migration publications that I've reviewed, so until there is some verification we will have to leave that as unknown. His second wife, Martha Chapman, may have been from Digswell, Hertfordshire, England but that may not be a clue since the marriage took place in Springfield, Massachusetts.
Savage, in his genealogical Dictionary of First Settlers of New England, says that Anthony went to Springfield about 1649 (probably soon after the death of his first wife, Sarah) but had been at Windsor, Ct. for some years prior (he is listed as a founding father of Windsor) and may have been at Hingham before that. Children by his first wife were John, Mary, and James, and were likely born in Windsor between 1644 and 1647. (Therefore, it is possible that a father or grandfather of Anthonhy's would have been John.) It is possible that Sarah died in or from complications of childbirth, since 1649 would have been about the time she would likely have had another pregnancy. With three small children to raise, Anthony needed a wife quickly, and less than three months after Sarah died, he was married to Martha Chapman Kitcherel, who was either from Digswell as indicated above or from Rolvenden, Kent, England. Apparently the jury is still out on her origins. Martha had children from her marriage, so it must have been a lively household as three more Dorchesters, Benjamin, Sarah and Hester, were added to the family. Martha died December 17, 1662 and Anthony next married Elizabeth possibly Cummins, his wife for the last 21 years of his life. She must have been an amazing woman to raise so many children who weren't "hers" by birth!
Anthony lived in very interesting times and the book "Colonial Justice in Western Massachusetts" tells at least one interesting story to indicate this. We don't generally think of slaves at that time period in Massachusetts, but it definitely was a fact of life. Jack ran away from his owner after one too many beatings, and 10 days later was at the Dorchester home. He asked for some tobacco, which the Dorchesters gave him, and then there was some sort of a struggle. It took Dorchester, his wife, and a daughter to subdue the man, possibly with the aid of a cutlass or possibly the cutlass "came out stiff" and therefore wasn't effective. When Jack was searched, he had in his pocket a knife belonging to Anthony. Jack was sent to jail until he was released into the custody of Lieut. William Clark. That night, the Clark house burned down, and Jack was soon found guilty of arson. He was sentenced to be hanged and his body to be burnt to ashes. It's not clear whether he ever stood trial for the events at the Dorchester home.
In addition to this story, Anthony and his wife were witnesses in a witchcraft case. It seems that an one time Anthony was working for Hugh Parsons, perhaps as a laborer, and he and Parsons each owned 1/4 interest in a certain cow. When the cow was killed, both men wanted the tongue. Dorchester got it, and it was put in the pot to be cooked but "mysteriously" disappeared. This was one of several incidents that got Hugh and his wife accused of witchcraft. Mrs. Parsons was tried in Boston for the death of her child, apparently believed to be witchcraft. She was found guilty but before she could be hanged she died in jail, apparently deranged. Mr. Parsons was also convicted of witchcraft but the General Court didn't confirm the conviction and he was allowed to leave Massachusetts. There's more to the Parsons story but our interest is in the Dorchesters, and it is interesting to see that both slavery and witchcraft touched their lives.
Anthony was a miller and a ferrier (ferryman? or farrier?) but he would have done at least some farming. We know he signed a petition in 1668 (along with a lot of other Allen ancestors and relatives) asking that the imposts, or tariffs, be lifted. We know that in 1663 he took an oath of fidelity, apparently routine, as part of the training band. He was on some local juries and was a selectman for Springfield. He was made a freeman of Springfield in 1661. He helped build the meeting house in Springfield, or at least was on a committee to supervise the building.
Anthony appears to have been relatively poor. He died without a will but his son John helped formulate an agreement with the heirs, including Martha, the daughter of Martha Chapman, who claimed that her mother had brought some property to the marriage. I'd love to find that inventory to see what was there when Anthony died August 28, 1683. Did he have a Bible and other books? Did he still have that cutlass? I'll keep looking!
The line of descent is:
Anthony Dorchester-Martha Chapman
Sarah Dorchester-Joseph Stebbins
Martha Stebbins-Samuel Lamb
Eunice Lamb-Martin Root
Martin Root Jr-Ruth Noble
Ruth Root-Samuel Falley
Clarissa Falley-John Havens Starr
Harriet Starr-John Wilson Knott
Edith Knott-Edward Allen
Richard Allen-Gladys Holbrook
Their descendants
Tuesday, August 9, 2016
Allen line: John Riley 1625-1674 Immigrant
Oh, my goodness. The "Life of Riley" is giving me an old-fashioned headache. I've been trying to figure out which Riley's have proof or at least some semblance of plausibility and which are wrong, or at least, not so plausible.
The only "facts" that I've located have to do with John's marriage, the birth of three of his sons, and his date of death.. All else is conjecture, or the result of the mixing of several John Riley's. It's an interesting family to look at because several people claim that the family originally came from Dublin, Ireland, and then place them in England for at least one generation and maybe two, before John emigrated to New England.
So John was born in 1624 or 1625, at Longford, Ireland or possibly Elland, Yorkshire, England.or maybe somewhere else. His parents are given as Joseph Riley and Mary Wright, who were married June 23, 1624 in Elland. It's hard to reconcile this with a birthdate for John of May 12, 1624 in Longford, Ireland, so all I am willing to say is that there is a possibility that John had Irish ancestry. Joseph and Mary may have come to the New World, perhaps sometime between 1628 and 1630, but I haven't found documents that confirm this idea yet. Supposedly they had three children in Ireland and two in Wethersfield, but that doesn't seem likely because the dates of birth as given are before the settlement of Wethersfield began.
We do know that John married Grace Buck, probably the daughter of William and Margaret Good Buck, before 1646, according to Torrey's Marriages. Three children are listed in the Wethersfield vital records for them: Joseph, John, and Jonathan. Also listed in his will were Mary, Grace, Jacob and Isaac. John the father is listed several times in Hartford Court records as being a juror.
From John's will (written as "John Ryly") and inventory, we can see that he died sometime before September 8, 1674. He was not a poor Irishman, if Irish he ever was. His inventory includes furniture in the parlor, beds, carpet, "guns, swords, and other ammunition", farm implements, carpenter tools, horses, oxen, cows, swine, sheep, and bees (indicating an orchard) as well as several parcels of land. His estate totaled 688 pounds, 4 shillings, but of that he owed 66 pounds in debts to three men. So it was not a huge estate, but definitely up the ladder from "poor." His wife, not mentioned by name, was the sole executor, which indicates he put a great deal of trust in her.
I would certainly like to find out more about John Riley. What connection, if any, did he have to Ireland? Was he a member of the (Puritan) church? Who were his parents? Was he well respected in Wethersfield? As of now, the clearest picture I have of him comes through his will and inventory, and I'd like to know so much more!
The line of descent is:
John Riley-Grace Buck
John Riley-Margaret
Mary Riley-Joseph Ely
Mary Ely-Thomas Stebbins
Ruth Stebbins-Samuel Hitchcock
Margaret Hitchcock-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
The only "facts" that I've located have to do with John's marriage, the birth of three of his sons, and his date of death.. All else is conjecture, or the result of the mixing of several John Riley's. It's an interesting family to look at because several people claim that the family originally came from Dublin, Ireland, and then place them in England for at least one generation and maybe two, before John emigrated to New England.
So John was born in 1624 or 1625, at Longford, Ireland or possibly Elland, Yorkshire, England.or maybe somewhere else. His parents are given as Joseph Riley and Mary Wright, who were married June 23, 1624 in Elland. It's hard to reconcile this with a birthdate for John of May 12, 1624 in Longford, Ireland, so all I am willing to say is that there is a possibility that John had Irish ancestry. Joseph and Mary may have come to the New World, perhaps sometime between 1628 and 1630, but I haven't found documents that confirm this idea yet. Supposedly they had three children in Ireland and two in Wethersfield, but that doesn't seem likely because the dates of birth as given are before the settlement of Wethersfield began.
We do know that John married Grace Buck, probably the daughter of William and Margaret Good Buck, before 1646, according to Torrey's Marriages. Three children are listed in the Wethersfield vital records for them: Joseph, John, and Jonathan. Also listed in his will were Mary, Grace, Jacob and Isaac. John the father is listed several times in Hartford Court records as being a juror.
From John's will (written as "John Ryly") and inventory, we can see that he died sometime before September 8, 1674. He was not a poor Irishman, if Irish he ever was. His inventory includes furniture in the parlor, beds, carpet, "guns, swords, and other ammunition", farm implements, carpenter tools, horses, oxen, cows, swine, sheep, and bees (indicating an orchard) as well as several parcels of land. His estate totaled 688 pounds, 4 shillings, but of that he owed 66 pounds in debts to three men. So it was not a huge estate, but definitely up the ladder from "poor." His wife, not mentioned by name, was the sole executor, which indicates he put a great deal of trust in her.
I would certainly like to find out more about John Riley. What connection, if any, did he have to Ireland? Was he a member of the (Puritan) church? Who were his parents? Was he well respected in Wethersfield? As of now, the clearest picture I have of him comes through his will and inventory, and I'd like to know so much more!
The line of descent is:
John Riley-Grace Buck
John Riley-Margaret
Mary Riley-Joseph Ely
Mary Ely-Thomas Stebbins
Ruth Stebbins-Samuel Hitchcock
Margaret Hitchcock-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
Tuesday, May 10, 2016
Allen line: John Eddy, Immigrant and Octogenarian 1597-1684
First, a disclaimer: There may or may not be a weak link in this lineage. John Eddy had a daughter Mary, and she is claimed in many sources to have married Robert Ashley. She is also claimed in many sources to have married Thomas Orton or Horton. I have not completely reconciled this. There is a court record where Widow Horton, on October 9, 1640, was called to explain why she had loaned or sold her late husband's gun to an Indian. So apparently she was widowed by that time and thus was free to marry Robert Ashley on December 24, 1641 in Springfield, Massachusetts.
But wait! There's more! In John Eddy's will, he refers to her as "Marie Orton", which could be the confusion of an old man. Or, since Robert Ashley had died the previous year, perhaps she had been using her first husband's name. Except that, Plymouth Plantations website says that Thomas Orton died in 1687. So someone is certainly confused, and that's me! If someone can help straighten this out, I'd be most grateful.
So, John Eddy's sketch is written with the advisory comment that not everyone agrees with the lineage. I tend to go with the Robert Ashley marriage, and that is why I'm writing this sketch about John Eddy.
John Eddy was born in March of 1596/1597, the son of Rev. William Eddy and Mary Fosten. (We have descents through the William Eddy line that go down into the Holbrook line, so somewhere along the line, distant cousins married distant cousins.) He grew up in the home of his parents until Mary died in 1611, and then his father married a widow, Sarah Taylor in 1613/14, so he may have had step siblings as well as his own brothers and sisters. The home seems to have been relatively prosperous, judging Rev. Eddy's inventory.
Whether it was for economic reasons or for religious reasons, John Eddy left home and came to Plymouth Colony in 1630, on the Handmaid, with his brother Samuel. The ship left London August 10 and arrived at Plymouth on October 29, 1630. It was not an easy voyage, but the brothers survived it. They are termed "gentlemen" by Governor Winthrop, whom they went to visit in company with Miles Standish and Captain Grant. Many "gentlemen" did not survive the early years in the colony but these two me did.
Within one or two years, John was a settler of Watertown, where he lived his life. John had married Amy Doggett, daughter of John Doggett and Dorothy Fay, in 1619, but we don't know when Amy and the children arrived in Plymouth. It's unclear whether the family traveled together, or whether some children may have come with John and the rest later, with their mother. It appears that the first four children were born in England and the last six were born in Watertown. In going from Plymouth to Watertown, John and Amy had left Plymouth Colony to become part of Massachusetts Bay Colony, where the people were Puritans but not Separatists.)
John Eddy is reported as being a juryman and a selectman, but little else is known of him. He apparently had some sort of episode in 1633, possibly a mental health issue, and Governor Winthrop later reported that "He recovered his understanding again in good measure, and lived very orderly, but would, now and then, be a little distempered." He was made a freeman shortly before this incident.
I've not found much about John during the next 40 years or so of his life. His wife Amy died sometime after 1647 and he married Johanna, widow of gabriel Meade, after May 12,1666. She died in August of 1683, although Eddy's will refers to his "well beloved wife," who was apparently left a separate bequest or gift. In 1673 and 1674, when he was 76 and 77 years of age, he requested to be excused from military training, so apparently he had been part of the train band up until that time. It's possible that in 1673 he was excused for a year, hoping that he would be able to recover from his ailments by the next year, and then in 1674 it was made a permanent exemption.
John wrote his will January 11, 1677 and it was proved December 16, 1684. He left bequests to his two sons and four daughters, one of whom is the Mary or Marie Horton which confuses me. His inventory included four parcels of land, valued at 216 pounds, and another 30 pounds, 7 shillings in personal property, including a "parcel of books." We an assume that he learned to read and write in his childhood, since he was the son of a vicar.
So ends the story of John Eddy, who may or may not be our ancestor. I'm posting this in hopes that someone can shed some light on the question of Mary Eddy Horton or Orton Ashley, or tell me whether these are two separate women and what the proof is, either way. If I get a response, or figure this out myself, I will do an update to this post.
The supposed line of descent is:
John Eddy-Amy Doggett
Mary Eddy-Robert Ashley
Mary Ashley-John Root
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
Update: I now believe that Robert Ashley's wife was likely not Mary Eddy, and I'm embarrassed that I didn't place closer attention to dates and places when I wrote this. Mary who married Robert Ashley, the widow of William Horton, was a widow who had two small children in 1640, so the chances that she was the Mary Eddy born in 625 to John Eddy are slim indeed. Also, John Eddy's will refers to Marie Orton, not Horton. Similarities in name must have led to the confusion. However, now we get the fun of trying to figure out who William Horton was, where he was from, and who he married. Does anyone have any ideas?
But wait! There's more! In John Eddy's will, he refers to her as "Marie Orton", which could be the confusion of an old man. Or, since Robert Ashley had died the previous year, perhaps she had been using her first husband's name. Except that, Plymouth Plantations website says that Thomas Orton died in 1687. So someone is certainly confused, and that's me! If someone can help straighten this out, I'd be most grateful.
So, John Eddy's sketch is written with the advisory comment that not everyone agrees with the lineage. I tend to go with the Robert Ashley marriage, and that is why I'm writing this sketch about John Eddy.
John Eddy was born in March of 1596/1597, the son of Rev. William Eddy and Mary Fosten. (We have descents through the William Eddy line that go down into the Holbrook line, so somewhere along the line, distant cousins married distant cousins.) He grew up in the home of his parents until Mary died in 1611, and then his father married a widow, Sarah Taylor in 1613/14, so he may have had step siblings as well as his own brothers and sisters. The home seems to have been relatively prosperous, judging Rev. Eddy's inventory.
Whether it was for economic reasons or for religious reasons, John Eddy left home and came to Plymouth Colony in 1630, on the Handmaid, with his brother Samuel. The ship left London August 10 and arrived at Plymouth on October 29, 1630. It was not an easy voyage, but the brothers survived it. They are termed "gentlemen" by Governor Winthrop, whom they went to visit in company with Miles Standish and Captain Grant. Many "gentlemen" did not survive the early years in the colony but these two me did.
Within one or two years, John was a settler of Watertown, where he lived his life. John had married Amy Doggett, daughter of John Doggett and Dorothy Fay, in 1619, but we don't know when Amy and the children arrived in Plymouth. It's unclear whether the family traveled together, or whether some children may have come with John and the rest later, with their mother. It appears that the first four children were born in England and the last six were born in Watertown. In going from Plymouth to Watertown, John and Amy had left Plymouth Colony to become part of Massachusetts Bay Colony, where the people were Puritans but not Separatists.)
John Eddy is reported as being a juryman and a selectman, but little else is known of him. He apparently had some sort of episode in 1633, possibly a mental health issue, and Governor Winthrop later reported that "He recovered his understanding again in good measure, and lived very orderly, but would, now and then, be a little distempered." He was made a freeman shortly before this incident.
I've not found much about John during the next 40 years or so of his life. His wife Amy died sometime after 1647 and he married Johanna, widow of gabriel Meade, after May 12,1666. She died in August of 1683, although Eddy's will refers to his "well beloved wife," who was apparently left a separate bequest or gift. In 1673 and 1674, when he was 76 and 77 years of age, he requested to be excused from military training, so apparently he had been part of the train band up until that time. It's possible that in 1673 he was excused for a year, hoping that he would be able to recover from his ailments by the next year, and then in 1674 it was made a permanent exemption.
John wrote his will January 11, 1677 and it was proved December 16, 1684. He left bequests to his two sons and four daughters, one of whom is the Mary or Marie Horton which confuses me. His inventory included four parcels of land, valued at 216 pounds, and another 30 pounds, 7 shillings in personal property, including a "parcel of books." We an assume that he learned to read and write in his childhood, since he was the son of a vicar.
So ends the story of John Eddy, who may or may not be our ancestor. I'm posting this in hopes that someone can shed some light on the question of Mary Eddy Horton or Orton Ashley, or tell me whether these are two separate women and what the proof is, either way. If I get a response, or figure this out myself, I will do an update to this post.
The supposed line of descent is:
John Eddy-Amy Doggett
Mary Eddy-Robert Ashley
Mary Ashley-John Root
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
Update: I now believe that Robert Ashley's wife was likely not Mary Eddy, and I'm embarrassed that I didn't place closer attention to dates and places when I wrote this. Mary who married Robert Ashley, the widow of William Horton, was a widow who had two small children in 1640, so the chances that she was the Mary Eddy born in 625 to John Eddy are slim indeed. Also, John Eddy's will refers to Marie Orton, not Horton. Similarities in name must have led to the confusion. However, now we get the fun of trying to figure out who William Horton was, where he was from, and who he married. Does anyone have any ideas?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)