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
Showing posts with label Ely. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ely. Show all posts
Friday, March 20, 2020
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, 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 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, 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)