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
Showing posts with label Day. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Day. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 3, 2020
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
.
Friday, July 26, 2019
Holbrook line: John Larkin 1640-1678
This man should be in my husband's line, but as far as I know John is my ancestor only. But husband should at least have a deep and heartfelt liking for the man, because he was a turner by trade. His father was a turner, also, and John passed his tools on to his sons so they could continue the trade also. A turner was someone who worked on a wood lathe, making whatever was needed (his father made wheels and it's possible that's what John did, too). It's interesting to find a family where the family business was passed from father to son like this.
To start at the beginning, John was the son of Edward and Joanna Butler Larkin (mother's name is not certain; some say her name was Cutler or Cutter, This genealogy stuff is never easy). Edward and Joanna were immigrants but John was born in Charlestown, Massachusetts Bay Colony, sometime on or before March 10, 1640, which is his baptismal date. He was the oldest son, one of at least seven children of the couple, which is why he received the tools and training from his father.
John married Joanna Hale, daughter of Robert and Joanna Cutter Hale on November 9, 1664 in Charlestown, and the couple set up their home there. Actually, John apparently already had his own home in 1658, when he was listed on a tax list in Charlestown along with the notation 0-4-0. That may or may not mean that he was taxed 4 shillings, which was more than some and less than other residents of the town on this list.
John and Joanna had at least six children together, but their time together was regrettably short. John reportedly died of smallpox on February 17, 1678. Although I haven't been able to document his cause of death, there is good reason to believe this is accurate because it's known that a great epidemic hit Boston and surrounding areas in 1678. The wonder is that, as far as I know, no one else in the family died of the disease. Other families were not so "lucky", to lose just one family member.
In between his marriage and his death, not much is known about John. I did locate a book, "From Deference to Defiance" that lists John as a constable in 1673, but he seems not to have been otherwise involved in public service. Roger Thompson, the author of the book mentioned, would likely have mentioned him had he been in serious trouble with the courts, so he probably complied with the laws and likely attended church regularly. That, and his trade of turning is all that I could find about him.
That is, until I located his will on Ancestry. That's where I learned that his son Edward was to have a double portion of the estate, plus John's turning tools, if he became a turner. If not, son John was to have them, if he became a turner.
Joanna was left her widow's third, plus partial control of the estate until the children were old enough to receive their bequests. Edward, the oldest, was just 12 when his father died, and Sarah, the youngest, was just a year old. Joanna had her hand's full with six children, but remained single for 7 years, when she married William Dodge of Beverly, Massachusetts.
John left his family enough money to live on, so Joanna probably felt less pressure to remarry quickly than some other widows. John's estate was appraised with a value of over three hundred poounds, as nearly as I can tell. When it was re-appraised in 1691, so Edward could receive at least part of his inheritance, it was noted that there was a dwelling house, wharf and warehouse. There was also an old boat, which perhaps wasn't so old when John had it. The picture I have in my mind is that he was a turner, yes, but also a merchant of sorts. Whether he sold his own goods to other towns and villages, or whether he did some trading, I'm not sure as there is much of the inventory that I can't make out. However, this is not the inventory of someone just getting by. I was pleased to see that there was mention of books in the inventory, so he or someone in his family must have been literate.
It looks like the final settlement of the estate didn't occur until 1698, when some of the children petitioned to receive their share. Among the names on the document are David and Sarah Larkin Fay. Sarah, the youngest child, was now 21 and there was no legal reason why the estate could not be divided as John had planned. Joanna, John's widow, had died in 1694, between the time Edward claimed some of his inheritance and the time the estate was finally divided.
It's been fun to find this story. I love the father to son to son trade, and I love knowing that John was relatively successful. But most of all, with my hsuband really enjoying learning to "turn" on his new lathe, I love hearing it hum and thinking back to the way it would have been done when foot pedals were the means of turning. The sawdust probably smells the same!
The line of descent is:
John Larkin-Joanna Hale
Sarah Larkin-David Fay
Edward Fay-Sarah Joslin
David Fay-Mary Perrin
Euzebia or Luceba Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
To start at the beginning, John was the son of Edward and Joanna Butler Larkin (mother's name is not certain; some say her name was Cutler or Cutter, This genealogy stuff is never easy). Edward and Joanna were immigrants but John was born in Charlestown, Massachusetts Bay Colony, sometime on or before March 10, 1640, which is his baptismal date. He was the oldest son, one of at least seven children of the couple, which is why he received the tools and training from his father.
John married Joanna Hale, daughter of Robert and Joanna Cutter Hale on November 9, 1664 in Charlestown, and the couple set up their home there. Actually, John apparently already had his own home in 1658, when he was listed on a tax list in Charlestown along with the notation 0-4-0. That may or may not mean that he was taxed 4 shillings, which was more than some and less than other residents of the town on this list.
John and Joanna had at least six children together, but their time together was regrettably short. John reportedly died of smallpox on February 17, 1678. Although I haven't been able to document his cause of death, there is good reason to believe this is accurate because it's known that a great epidemic hit Boston and surrounding areas in 1678. The wonder is that, as far as I know, no one else in the family died of the disease. Other families were not so "lucky", to lose just one family member.
In between his marriage and his death, not much is known about John. I did locate a book, "From Deference to Defiance" that lists John as a constable in 1673, but he seems not to have been otherwise involved in public service. Roger Thompson, the author of the book mentioned, would likely have mentioned him had he been in serious trouble with the courts, so he probably complied with the laws and likely attended church regularly. That, and his trade of turning is all that I could find about him.
That is, until I located his will on Ancestry. That's where I learned that his son Edward was to have a double portion of the estate, plus John's turning tools, if he became a turner. If not, son John was to have them, if he became a turner.
Joanna was left her widow's third, plus partial control of the estate until the children were old enough to receive their bequests. Edward, the oldest, was just 12 when his father died, and Sarah, the youngest, was just a year old. Joanna had her hand's full with six children, but remained single for 7 years, when she married William Dodge of Beverly, Massachusetts.
John left his family enough money to live on, so Joanna probably felt less pressure to remarry quickly than some other widows. John's estate was appraised with a value of over three hundred poounds, as nearly as I can tell. When it was re-appraised in 1691, so Edward could receive at least part of his inheritance, it was noted that there was a dwelling house, wharf and warehouse. There was also an old boat, which perhaps wasn't so old when John had it. The picture I have in my mind is that he was a turner, yes, but also a merchant of sorts. Whether he sold his own goods to other towns and villages, or whether he did some trading, I'm not sure as there is much of the inventory that I can't make out. However, this is not the inventory of someone just getting by. I was pleased to see that there was mention of books in the inventory, so he or someone in his family must have been literate.
It looks like the final settlement of the estate didn't occur until 1698, when some of the children petitioned to receive their share. Among the names on the document are David and Sarah Larkin Fay. Sarah, the youngest child, was now 21 and there was no legal reason why the estate could not be divided as John had planned. Joanna, John's widow, had died in 1694, between the time Edward claimed some of his inheritance and the time the estate was finally divided.
It's been fun to find this story. I love the father to son to son trade, and I love knowing that John was relatively successful. But most of all, with my hsuband really enjoying learning to "turn" on his new lathe, I love hearing it hum and thinking back to the way it would have been done when foot pedals were the means of turning. The sawdust probably smells the same!
The line of descent is:
John Larkin-Joanna Hale
Sarah Larkin-David Fay
Edward Fay-Sarah Joslin
David Fay-Mary Perrin
Euzebia or Luceba Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Tuesday, April 28, 2015
Allen line: Nathaniel Ely, Immigrant
We know a lot abut Nathaniel Ely in New England, but not anything at all about his life in (presumably) England. The best guess for his birth is probably 1605-1610, but that is based on his arrival in New England in 1634 as a presumably young man. His son Samuel was born "say 1634" and his daughter Ruth born "say 1641". There is always the possibility that he had children earlier, in England, and that he had others who were for whatever reason not recorded. We know he married Martha, and it is presumed that she is the mother of her children, which would make it likely that the marriage took place in England, also.
It's believed that Nathaniel and Martha came to Boston in 1634 on the ship "Elizabeth" from Ipswich. He first settled in Newtown (now Cambridge, Ma.) where he was made a freeman in 1635. This indicates he was over 21 years of age, possessed at least 20 pounds in property, and was properly Puritan in his religious beliefs and practice.
We don't know what prompted the move that the family made in 1636, but they left their home and considerable property in Newtown and went with Rev. Thomas Hooker and his group to found what would become Hartford, Ct. His name is listed on the Founder's Monument there. While in Hartford he again accumulated considerable land. By February 1639/1640, he had fourteen parcels of land, ten of which had been granted by the town and four which he had purchased. We don't know for sure what his occupation was during this time period, but his lands included meadows and swamp, so it is not likely that he did a lot of cultivation of land. He probably raised sheep or cattle and also enough food for his family. We know he was the constable of Hartford in 1639/40, meaning he was responsible for keeping the peace, both in the settlement and in church, so he was a man who would have commanded some respect or/and fear.
After 13 years in Hartford, Richard Ely and Roger Ludlow were the first settlers of what would become Norwalk, Ct, southwest of Hartford and on the coast line. There he again was apparently a respected man, because he was the constable in 1654 and he represented Norwalk in the General Court of the Colony of Connecticut in 1656. His name is listed on the Founders stone of the early settlers of Norwalk, which is located in the East Norwalk Historical Cemetery. Again, we don't know for sure his occupation but he owned at least thirteen parcels of land, as an original settler.
The Ely family made one final move, in 1659 and moved to Springfield, Massachusetts, which was north of Hartford. Did they stop to visit with old friends on their way to Springfield, I wonder? Was Martha getting a little tired of moving and "starting over" by now? At least this time they weren't "founding fathers," as the settlement had begun about 1636. Maybe they even had a chance to buy their home instead of needing to build one. by now, Nathaniel was respected enough to be a selectman for at least six years. By 1663 he was assigned a seat in the second row at the meeting house (church). Seats were assigned based on social importance and wealth, so this is another sign that he was of some importance to the town.
We don't know whether he keep his seat when he became the owner of an "ordinary" (inn-tavern) in 1665, but this ownership got him into a bit of trouble. At one time he was fined for selling cider to the Indians and another time he was fined for not having beer in the tavern. Both times, he admitted his guilt. In 1670 he reportedly had unkind words for or about his pastor and was again fined, although the fine was much less than for the alcohol-related offenses.
I haven't yet been able to locate information regarding the burning of Springfield by the Indians in 1675. Nathaniel was still alive then. Springfield was left a mess, with 45 of the 60 homes burned and also the grist mill and the saw mill. We are told that the town lived under siege and famine conditions. Nathaniel died December 25, 1675, and probably the difficult conditions contributed to his death. He must have been heart broken to leave his wife in such a situation, but there were two adult children to care for her so she was not left totally helpless. Martha died in 1683.
Now comes the hardest part of this post...One of the "items" included in Nathaniel's inventory was a "Negro man," valued at 15 pounds. I just read on a recent blog that early New England ancestors may well have been slave owners, and this seems to prove that statement. If I could talk to Nathaniel today, I'd want to know more about the Indian attack and what happened to the Ely family during that time, but I'd also want to know about this apparent slave ownership. Why did the family 'need' a slave, and how did this come about? What was the slave's name, and his story? Did he ever attain his freedom? And how did this fit in with Nathaniel's religious beliefs?
The line of descent is:
Nathaniel Ely-Martha
Samuel Ely-Mary Day
Joseph Ely-Mary Riley
Mary Ely-Thomas Stebbins
Ruth Stebbins-Samuel Hitchcock
Martha 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 descendents
It's believed that Nathaniel and Martha came to Boston in 1634 on the ship "Elizabeth" from Ipswich. He first settled in Newtown (now Cambridge, Ma.) where he was made a freeman in 1635. This indicates he was over 21 years of age, possessed at least 20 pounds in property, and was properly Puritan in his religious beliefs and practice.
We don't know what prompted the move that the family made in 1636, but they left their home and considerable property in Newtown and went with Rev. Thomas Hooker and his group to found what would become Hartford, Ct. His name is listed on the Founder's Monument there. While in Hartford he again accumulated considerable land. By February 1639/1640, he had fourteen parcels of land, ten of which had been granted by the town and four which he had purchased. We don't know for sure what his occupation was during this time period, but his lands included meadows and swamp, so it is not likely that he did a lot of cultivation of land. He probably raised sheep or cattle and also enough food for his family. We know he was the constable of Hartford in 1639/40, meaning he was responsible for keeping the peace, both in the settlement and in church, so he was a man who would have commanded some respect or/and fear.
After 13 years in Hartford, Richard Ely and Roger Ludlow were the first settlers of what would become Norwalk, Ct, southwest of Hartford and on the coast line. There he again was apparently a respected man, because he was the constable in 1654 and he represented Norwalk in the General Court of the Colony of Connecticut in 1656. His name is listed on the Founders stone of the early settlers of Norwalk, which is located in the East Norwalk Historical Cemetery. Again, we don't know for sure his occupation but he owned at least thirteen parcels of land, as an original settler.
The Ely family made one final move, in 1659 and moved to Springfield, Massachusetts, which was north of Hartford. Did they stop to visit with old friends on their way to Springfield, I wonder? Was Martha getting a little tired of moving and "starting over" by now? At least this time they weren't "founding fathers," as the settlement had begun about 1636. Maybe they even had a chance to buy their home instead of needing to build one. by now, Nathaniel was respected enough to be a selectman for at least six years. By 1663 he was assigned a seat in the second row at the meeting house (church). Seats were assigned based on social importance and wealth, so this is another sign that he was of some importance to the town.
We don't know whether he keep his seat when he became the owner of an "ordinary" (inn-tavern) in 1665, but this ownership got him into a bit of trouble. At one time he was fined for selling cider to the Indians and another time he was fined for not having beer in the tavern. Both times, he admitted his guilt. In 1670 he reportedly had unkind words for or about his pastor and was again fined, although the fine was much less than for the alcohol-related offenses.
I haven't yet been able to locate information regarding the burning of Springfield by the Indians in 1675. Nathaniel was still alive then. Springfield was left a mess, with 45 of the 60 homes burned and also the grist mill and the saw mill. We are told that the town lived under siege and famine conditions. Nathaniel died December 25, 1675, and probably the difficult conditions contributed to his death. He must have been heart broken to leave his wife in such a situation, but there were two adult children to care for her so she was not left totally helpless. Martha died in 1683.
Now comes the hardest part of this post...One of the "items" included in Nathaniel's inventory was a "Negro man," valued at 15 pounds. I just read on a recent blog that early New England ancestors may well have been slave owners, and this seems to prove that statement. If I could talk to Nathaniel today, I'd want to know more about the Indian attack and what happened to the Ely family during that time, but I'd also want to know about this apparent slave ownership. Why did the family 'need' a slave, and how did this come about? What was the slave's name, and his story? Did he ever attain his freedom? And how did this fit in with Nathaniel's religious beliefs?
The line of descent is:
Nathaniel Ely-Martha
Samuel Ely-Mary Day
Joseph Ely-Mary Riley
Mary Ely-Thomas Stebbins
Ruth Stebbins-Samuel Hitchcock
Martha 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 descendents
Tuesday, February 3, 2015
Allen line: Robert Day Immigrant 1604-1648
Robert Day, another immigrant ancestor in the Allen line, was born in Kilburn, Yorkshire, England on or shortly before July 31, 1604 according to some sources, and origin unknown according to The Great Migration: Immigrants to New England, 1634-1635, volume II, pages325-329. I'm going to use The Great Migration as a source for most of this post, but it will be expanded when the other information I've gathered seems likely.
If the Robert Day born in Kilburn, Yorkshire, England in 1604 is our Robert Day, then his parents were Richard Daye and probably Mary Kirby. The Days had been in Yorkshire for several generations, if you believe undocumented web sites, but were originally from Wales (15th century and before, where the name was spelled Dee).
Robert married Mary before April, 1634 in England, but nothing more is known of her or her origins. Robert and Mary came to the New World in 1634 on the ship "Elizabeth", and settled first in Newtown, which is now Cambridge, Massachusetts. Robert was made a freeman in 1635, which implies that he was a member of the church there, and also that he had some property. We don't know what degree of wealth he might have had, but apparently he was not dirt poor. One site states that he was a brickmaker and mason, and those trades would have been in demand.
He was given land in the part of Cambridge then known as Westfield in 1634, 1635, and possibly 1636. Sometime during this time period his wife, Mary, died. We don't know whether it was in childbirth, or of disease, but she was gone. Robert married Edith Stebbins probably by 1636, the daughter of WIlliam Stebbins and sister to Deacon Edward Stebbins. His children were born to Editha.
It is possible that the Days went to Hartford, Connecticut with the Thomas Hooker group. If they didn't go with them, they followed soon after, because Robert Day is listed on the Founder's Monument erected in Hartford. He had 10 different parcels of land listed in the Hartford land inventroy of February 1639/1640, which indictes he had been a settler long enough to have received these parcels at different times. Robert and Editha's children, probably all born in Hartford, were Thomas, John, Sarah and Mary.
I'm not locating information about the rest of Robert's life, which was, like many immigrants, a short life. He made his will May 20, 1648 and the inventory of his estate was taken October 14, 1648, so it was probably early fall when he died. His estate was valued at 142 pounds, 13 shillings, 6d., of which half was real estate. The estate included tools, not identified, and books valued at 1 pound. We know then that he was literate. I'd sure like to know what those books were, and why he chose the books that he chose for his library.
Once again, we have the bare bones outline of an ancestor. I'm thrilled to have this much information and disappointed not to have more. I'd like to clarify his occupation, I'd like to know more about his religious beliefs, and I'd like to know why he chose to go to Hartford. For that matter, once again I'd like to know why he chose to come to America.
The line of descent is:
Robert Day-Editha Stebbins
Mary Day-Samuel Ely
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
Their descendents
If the Robert Day born in Kilburn, Yorkshire, England in 1604 is our Robert Day, then his parents were Richard Daye and probably Mary Kirby. The Days had been in Yorkshire for several generations, if you believe undocumented web sites, but were originally from Wales (15th century and before, where the name was spelled Dee).
Robert married Mary before April, 1634 in England, but nothing more is known of her or her origins. Robert and Mary came to the New World in 1634 on the ship "Elizabeth", and settled first in Newtown, which is now Cambridge, Massachusetts. Robert was made a freeman in 1635, which implies that he was a member of the church there, and also that he had some property. We don't know what degree of wealth he might have had, but apparently he was not dirt poor. One site states that he was a brickmaker and mason, and those trades would have been in demand.
He was given land in the part of Cambridge then known as Westfield in 1634, 1635, and possibly 1636. Sometime during this time period his wife, Mary, died. We don't know whether it was in childbirth, or of disease, but she was gone. Robert married Edith Stebbins probably by 1636, the daughter of WIlliam Stebbins and sister to Deacon Edward Stebbins. His children were born to Editha.
It is possible that the Days went to Hartford, Connecticut with the Thomas Hooker group. If they didn't go with them, they followed soon after, because Robert Day is listed on the Founder's Monument erected in Hartford. He had 10 different parcels of land listed in the Hartford land inventroy of February 1639/1640, which indictes he had been a settler long enough to have received these parcels at different times. Robert and Editha's children, probably all born in Hartford, were Thomas, John, Sarah and Mary.
I'm not locating information about the rest of Robert's life, which was, like many immigrants, a short life. He made his will May 20, 1648 and the inventory of his estate was taken October 14, 1648, so it was probably early fall when he died. His estate was valued at 142 pounds, 13 shillings, 6d., of which half was real estate. The estate included tools, not identified, and books valued at 1 pound. We know then that he was literate. I'd sure like to know what those books were, and why he chose the books that he chose for his library.
Once again, we have the bare bones outline of an ancestor. I'm thrilled to have this much information and disappointed not to have more. I'd like to clarify his occupation, I'd like to know more about his religious beliefs, and I'd like to know why he chose to go to Hartford. For that matter, once again I'd like to know why he chose to come to America.
The line of descent is:
Robert Day-Editha Stebbins
Mary Day-Samuel Ely
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
Their descendents
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)