There is so much erroneous information about our ancestor Nathaniel Joslin, on so many trees and websites, that I hesitate to write this post. I hope I have weeded out most of the false information and I think I can add a few details to his story. I would absolutely love to hear from anywone who knows more about this Nathaniel, the son of Nathaniel and Sarah King Joslin.
The first thing we don't know is when he was born. It was not Aril 21, 1658, as is often stated. That son Nathaniel died in 1667. We know our Nathaniel was the son of the above couple because he is mentioned several times in his father's will. But we don't know his birthdate, or location, or why it would have been omitted from town records that seem complete otherwise. Perhaps his name was on a scrap of paper that was stuck in the records, intending that it be recorded later, and the scrap of paper was mislaid. Another possibility is that Nathaniel was not Sarah's child, and so was not recorded, but there is no indication of that and surely it would have been noted somewhere.
Nathaniel married Hester Morse, daughter of Joseph and Susannah Shattuck Morse, on July 20,1682, and that is the first record we have of him. Presumably this would give him a birth date in the early 1660's. He was next named on a list of inhabitants in Marlboro in 1686, and would likely have been at least 21 years old to have made that list. So again, we point to the early 1660's. Nathaniel and Hester (also seen as Esther, same lady) were the parents of perhaps as many as eleven children, although that would mean Hester had children into her 40's, which is surely not impossible.
The list of inhabitants from 1686 that includes the names of both father and son, the two Nathaniels, is not one to be particularly proud of. The men of Marlboro wanted more land and not long after King Philip's War they began settling on land that was owned by the native Americans. The General Court told them their deed was invalid and declared null and void, but the men of the settlement connived, basically, to continue settling on those lands and tried to make it look legal. It wasn't. The land was in dispute for at least 23 years after the 1686 list, but I didn't find a final resolution, except the results were that the colonists kept the land.
Many of the settlers of Marlboro had ties to Lancaster, Massachusetts, which was burned by the natives in King Philip's War. Nathaniel Senior lost a brother, sister in law, and nephew during the massacre, and other townspeople lost family members, too. It was a raw wound. That doesn't excuse their later actions but it helps put it in a bit of perspective.
King Philip's War didn't end the difficulties with some of the native tribes, and in 1711 our Nathaniel was appointed to a committee to assigned families to garrisons. If the natives threatened the town, each family was to go to one of the stronger fortified homes in the area, where soldiers were also assigned. Nathaniel's family was assigned to Captain Kerley's garrison. We don't know if there was ever a time when the family was forced to go there or not.
Nathaniel must have had a good reputation, because he was chosen selectman in 1701, and also a good education, because he was town clerk from 1714 until 1725.
I've not found a mention of Nathaniel's occupation, nor have I found his will. (The will frequently attached to his name on websites is from Scituate, Plymouth, Massachusetts. That Nathaniel was a cousin of some sort to ours, and the similar death dates are a coincidence). If his will and inventory could be found, we could possibly answer the question of his occupation, find out if he had books, get a clue as to how he did financially, and perhaps get a clue as to his religion. It would be wonderful to find those estate records, just as it would be wonderful to find his birth record!
The line of descent is
Nathaniel Joslin-Hester or Esther Morse
Israel Joslin-Sarah Cleveland
Sarah Joslin-Edward Fay
David Fay-Mary Perrin
Luceba Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Showing posts with label Morse. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Morse. Show all posts
Friday, October 25, 2019
Tuesday, December 4, 2018
Holbrook line: Joseph Morse 1610-1690 Immigrant
Perhaps I should be writing this about the Joseph Morse who died in 1646 in Ipswich, Massachusetts Bay Colony and who had a son named Joseph, mentioned in his will, but Robert Charles Anderson is not willing to state that Joseph of Ipswich is the father of Joseph of Watertown, Massachusetts Bay Colony, so I will only present that as a possibility. The Joseph Morse I will write of was born about 1610, somewhere in England and sailed on the Elizabeth from Ipswich, England in 1634.
Joseph was listed as 24 years of age at the time. He apparently went straight to Watertown and stayed there is whole life. He was admitted to the Watertown Church and was granted the status of freeman on May 6, 1635. He was a weaver by trade but also received several grants of land, including meadow and "upland" as well as a farm of 73 acres, all as grants. He may have rented these lands out or he may have farmed them himself. He was married by about 1637 to Esther or Hester Piece, daughter of John and Elizabeth (possibly Stoker) Pierce, also of Watertown. Joseph and Esther had at least seven children, six of whom lived until adulthood. This was a pretty decent survival rate for the time and indicates that Joseph and Esther were probably not "dirt poor", although they may have struggled during the early years. Another indication that the family was surviving economically was that they accepted at least one child into their care, who was three years old at the time and who became an apprentice at the age of five, unless these are two different children with the same father.
Joseph apparently did not take an active part in the civic life of Watertown, although he was a fence viewer for a term. Raising several children, carrying on a trade as well as (likely) a farming operation may have left him little time for public service. When Joseph died in 1689/90, his estate was very small, just a little over six pounds. He had already disposed of his land holdings and probably was living with or under the care of one or more of his children. Esther lived until 1694.
This is not much information to fill in the "dash" for a man who lived about 80 years. I have a book on my "to read" shelf about Watertown, and although I didn't find his name in the index, perhaps the book will be able to fill in some of the gaps in my knowledge of Joseph and how he lived. We do know that he farmed, he worked, he attended church, he voted, and he served as "master" to at least one child beside his own.
One other thing: He is listed as the ancestor of Calvin Coolidge and of Richard Nixon.
The line of descent is:
Joseph Morse-Esther Pierce
Joseph Morse-Susanna Shattuck
Esther Morse-Nathaniel Joslin
Israel Joslin-Sarah Cleveland
Sarah Joslin-Edward Fay
David Fay-Mary Perrin
Luceba Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Joseph was listed as 24 years of age at the time. He apparently went straight to Watertown and stayed there is whole life. He was admitted to the Watertown Church and was granted the status of freeman on May 6, 1635. He was a weaver by trade but also received several grants of land, including meadow and "upland" as well as a farm of 73 acres, all as grants. He may have rented these lands out or he may have farmed them himself. He was married by about 1637 to Esther or Hester Piece, daughter of John and Elizabeth (possibly Stoker) Pierce, also of Watertown. Joseph and Esther had at least seven children, six of whom lived until adulthood. This was a pretty decent survival rate for the time and indicates that Joseph and Esther were probably not "dirt poor", although they may have struggled during the early years. Another indication that the family was surviving economically was that they accepted at least one child into their care, who was three years old at the time and who became an apprentice at the age of five, unless these are two different children with the same father.
Joseph apparently did not take an active part in the civic life of Watertown, although he was a fence viewer for a term. Raising several children, carrying on a trade as well as (likely) a farming operation may have left him little time for public service. When Joseph died in 1689/90, his estate was very small, just a little over six pounds. He had already disposed of his land holdings and probably was living with or under the care of one or more of his children. Esther lived until 1694.
This is not much information to fill in the "dash" for a man who lived about 80 years. I have a book on my "to read" shelf about Watertown, and although I didn't find his name in the index, perhaps the book will be able to fill in some of the gaps in my knowledge of Joseph and how he lived. We do know that he farmed, he worked, he attended church, he voted, and he served as "master" to at least one child beside his own.
One other thing: He is listed as the ancestor of Calvin Coolidge and of Richard Nixon.
The line of descent is:
Joseph Morse-Esther Pierce
Joseph Morse-Susanna Shattuck
Esther Morse-Nathaniel Joslin
Israel Joslin-Sarah Cleveland
Sarah Joslin-Edward Fay
David Fay-Mary Perrin
Luceba Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Friday, September 28, 2018
Holbrook line: Thomas King, Immigrant
This is another case of "Will the real Thomas King please stand up?" Many people are identifying him as the Thomas King who was born at Taunton, Dorset, England before April 20, 1676 and he was then believed to be about 71 years old. So wew have a nine to ten year discrepancy on his birthdate, or location, or both.
We also don't know the name of his wife, other than Ann or Anne. It is possible that he had two wives named Ann, since the first one died in 1642 and he didn't marry Bridget Loker until 1655. However, Ann #1 is believed to be the mother of all his children, since all known children were born before she died. Thomas and Ann are believed to have come to America about 1638, so some of the possibly as many as nine children were born here.
It is likely that Ann died of complications of childbirth because the last son, Thomas, was born December 4, 1642 and Ann #1 died December 24, 1642. Sadly, their infant son followed within a few days and died on January 3, 1643. So there Thomas was in Sudbury, Massachusetts, a widower with as many as nine children, and it's hard to imagine that he didn't marry again, quickly. Unless he had a sister or other close relative who could live in the home and help out, Thomas would have needed a wife, quickly. The other possibility is that all the children who were underage were bound out, or sent to live with relatives. As far as I know, there is no documentation for this; it's just speculation on my part.
Thomas and family seem to have spent their first two or three years in Watertown and then moved on to Sudbury. The Kings stayed there for several years, even after Ann had died. After he had married Bridget, he was found in Marlborough. This had been considered part of Sudbury until it was partitioned so I'm not sure whether he actually moved or not. In Marlborough, he was a selectman, a town constable, and responsible for laying out the highways in town. He received several grants of land in the divisions that were made to the settlers.
When King Philip's War came in 1675-76, Thomas was counted in the household of his son-in-law, William Kerley. He may have gone there, temporarily, for protection. Or, as a seventy year old man (or older, depending on birth date), he may have been ready to live with a younger member of his family.
He wrote his will on 3/21/1675 and added a codicil January 15, 1676. The inventory showed a valuation of 295 pounds, 10 shillings.
This is what we know. We don't know what his occupation was, or what religion he professed. We don't know whether he was literate. We don't know about his life during the thirteen years between the death of Ann #1 and Bridget. We don't know what the exact circumstances were that had him living with his son in law in 1675-76, and we don't know whether Bridget was with him then or not.
But we do know he was an immigrant here during the end of the Great Migration, and we know he contributed to the growth of America. He wasn't rich but he wasn't poor, either. He had probably improved his family's fortune by coming to America, so it was a win for him and a win for us.
The line of descent is:
Thomas King-Ann
Sarah King-Nathaniel Joslin
Nathaniel Joslin-Esther Morse
Israel Joslin-Sarah Cleveland
Sarah Joslin-Edward Fay
David Fay-Mary Perrin
Luceba (Euzebia) Fay-Libbeus Stannard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
We also don't know the name of his wife, other than Ann or Anne. It is possible that he had two wives named Ann, since the first one died in 1642 and he didn't marry Bridget Loker until 1655. However, Ann #1 is believed to be the mother of all his children, since all known children were born before she died. Thomas and Ann are believed to have come to America about 1638, so some of the possibly as many as nine children were born here.
It is likely that Ann died of complications of childbirth because the last son, Thomas, was born December 4, 1642 and Ann #1 died December 24, 1642. Sadly, their infant son followed within a few days and died on January 3, 1643. So there Thomas was in Sudbury, Massachusetts, a widower with as many as nine children, and it's hard to imagine that he didn't marry again, quickly. Unless he had a sister or other close relative who could live in the home and help out, Thomas would have needed a wife, quickly. The other possibility is that all the children who were underage were bound out, or sent to live with relatives. As far as I know, there is no documentation for this; it's just speculation on my part.
Thomas and family seem to have spent their first two or three years in Watertown and then moved on to Sudbury. The Kings stayed there for several years, even after Ann had died. After he had married Bridget, he was found in Marlborough. This had been considered part of Sudbury until it was partitioned so I'm not sure whether he actually moved or not. In Marlborough, he was a selectman, a town constable, and responsible for laying out the highways in town. He received several grants of land in the divisions that were made to the settlers.
When King Philip's War came in 1675-76, Thomas was counted in the household of his son-in-law, William Kerley. He may have gone there, temporarily, for protection. Or, as a seventy year old man (or older, depending on birth date), he may have been ready to live with a younger member of his family.
He wrote his will on 3/21/1675 and added a codicil January 15, 1676. The inventory showed a valuation of 295 pounds, 10 shillings.
This is what we know. We don't know what his occupation was, or what religion he professed. We don't know whether he was literate. We don't know about his life during the thirteen years between the death of Ann #1 and Bridget. We don't know what the exact circumstances were that had him living with his son in law in 1675-76, and we don't know whether Bridget was with him then or not.
But we do know he was an immigrant here during the end of the Great Migration, and we know he contributed to the growth of America. He wasn't rich but he wasn't poor, either. He had probably improved his family's fortune by coming to America, so it was a win for him and a win for us.
The line of descent is:
Thomas King-Ann
Sarah King-Nathaniel Joslin
Nathaniel Joslin-Esther Morse
Israel Joslin-Sarah Cleveland
Sarah Joslin-Edward Fay
David Fay-Mary Perrin
Luceba (Euzebia) Fay-Libbeus Stannard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Friday, September 14, 2018
Holbrook line: Samuel Morse 1576-1654 Immigrant
What would it take for a man of 50 to decide to take his family across the ocean to a land they had only heard of, with challenges both known and unknown? He was a "husbandman", meaning that he farmed either land owned by someone else, or a small farm. So he didn't have much money in England, and perhaps he thought life would be better here.
We do know a little more about Samuel than we do about some of our ancestors. His parents were Reverend Thomas and Margaret (probably King) Morse, and he was born on or shortly before June 12, 1576 in Boxted, Essex, England. Boxted is a small village on the northern border of Essex, not far from the North Sea. The current population is about 1350 people. Two groups of religious dissenters had gone from this area to New England in 1630, so in addition to economic reasons, perhaps the Morses were following family, or certainly, neighbors.
Samuel married Elizabeth Jasper, daughter of Lancelot and Rose Shephard Jasper, on June 29, 1602, at Redgrave, Suffolk, England. This was about 40 miles from Samuel's home at Boxted, but we don't know how they met. Perhaps Samuel's father had preached at Redgrave, or maybe Elizabeth visited someone in Boxted. At any rate, they met, married, and settled down in or near Redgrave, where several of their children were born. Their last three children were born at Burgate, Suffolk, England, which seems to be quite close to Redgrave.
Samuel, Elizabeth, their twenty year old son Joseph and a 2 year old granddaughter traveled together on the ship Increase in 1635. Samuel was listed as 50 and Elizabeth as 48. It is uncertain how the other children got to New England but there are only ship and other records for a small fraction of those who arrived in New England, so that is not a problem. Samuel and Elizabeth first went to Waterwon, and then to Dedham, which are both towns settled by those settlers who had come over from Boxted in 1630. The Morses were iamong the first settlers of Dedham in 1637, when Samuel was admitted to the church. He was made a freeman on October 8, 1640.
We don't know what education Samuel had but he must have had at least the basics because he served Dedham as a treasurer and a selectman, he was an assessor for the meetinghouse rate, and he was a fenceviewer and highway surveyor. One would think that the treasurer's position would require basic math skills, and the selectman's job may have required literacy.
In 1652, Samuel and Elizabeth moved on to Medfield, where they were early settlers. I find it hard to fathom moving across the ocean, living in one town, going to another, and then finally, at the age of 67, starting over in another village. Starting over may well have meant building one's own home, clearing one's own fields and helping with the common, and helping develop roads for the new village. It would have been a lot of work! Samuel still owned land in Dedham when he died in December of 1654, but it's unclear whether he also owned land at Medfield.
His estate was valued at 124 pounds, 7 shillings, of which 40 pounds was real estate. I don't know what his net worth would have been when he left England, but he seems to have improved his circumstances here.
He left descendants who would not only improve their circumstances, but improve the country. John Chapman, otherwise known as Johnny Appleseed, is a descendant, as are Wild Bill Hickock, Emily Dickinson, William Howard Taft, Calvin Coolidge, and the two Presidents Bush. There are also some famous entertainers in the list such as Raquel Welch and Elizabeth Shue. We are cousins, very distant, to all these people!
The line of descent is:
Samuel Morse-Elizabeth Jasper
Mary Morse-Samuel Bullen
Elizabeth Bullen-Benjamin Wheelock
Benjamin Wheelock-Hulda Thayer
Mary Wheelock-Ebenezer Thayer
Abigail Thayer-Jesse Holbrook
Amariah Holbrook-Molly oh where are you Wright
Nahum Holbrook-Susannah Rockwood
Joseph Holbrook-Mary Elizabeth Whittemore
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
If I have this figured right, Hulda Thayer was Ebenezer Thayer's niece, so Abigail Thayer's grandmother Hulda was also her aunt. Can that be right?
We do know a little more about Samuel than we do about some of our ancestors. His parents were Reverend Thomas and Margaret (probably King) Morse, and he was born on or shortly before June 12, 1576 in Boxted, Essex, England. Boxted is a small village on the northern border of Essex, not far from the North Sea. The current population is about 1350 people. Two groups of religious dissenters had gone from this area to New England in 1630, so in addition to economic reasons, perhaps the Morses were following family, or certainly, neighbors.
Samuel married Elizabeth Jasper, daughter of Lancelot and Rose Shephard Jasper, on June 29, 1602, at Redgrave, Suffolk, England. This was about 40 miles from Samuel's home at Boxted, but we don't know how they met. Perhaps Samuel's father had preached at Redgrave, or maybe Elizabeth visited someone in Boxted. At any rate, they met, married, and settled down in or near Redgrave, where several of their children were born. Their last three children were born at Burgate, Suffolk, England, which seems to be quite close to Redgrave.
Samuel, Elizabeth, their twenty year old son Joseph and a 2 year old granddaughter traveled together on the ship Increase in 1635. Samuel was listed as 50 and Elizabeth as 48. It is uncertain how the other children got to New England but there are only ship and other records for a small fraction of those who arrived in New England, so that is not a problem. Samuel and Elizabeth first went to Waterwon, and then to Dedham, which are both towns settled by those settlers who had come over from Boxted in 1630. The Morses were iamong the first settlers of Dedham in 1637, when Samuel was admitted to the church. He was made a freeman on October 8, 1640.
We don't know what education Samuel had but he must have had at least the basics because he served Dedham as a treasurer and a selectman, he was an assessor for the meetinghouse rate, and he was a fenceviewer and highway surveyor. One would think that the treasurer's position would require basic math skills, and the selectman's job may have required literacy.
In 1652, Samuel and Elizabeth moved on to Medfield, where they were early settlers. I find it hard to fathom moving across the ocean, living in one town, going to another, and then finally, at the age of 67, starting over in another village. Starting over may well have meant building one's own home, clearing one's own fields and helping with the common, and helping develop roads for the new village. It would have been a lot of work! Samuel still owned land in Dedham when he died in December of 1654, but it's unclear whether he also owned land at Medfield.
His estate was valued at 124 pounds, 7 shillings, of which 40 pounds was real estate. I don't know what his net worth would have been when he left England, but he seems to have improved his circumstances here.
He left descendants who would not only improve their circumstances, but improve the country. John Chapman, otherwise known as Johnny Appleseed, is a descendant, as are Wild Bill Hickock, Emily Dickinson, William Howard Taft, Calvin Coolidge, and the two Presidents Bush. There are also some famous entertainers in the list such as Raquel Welch and Elizabeth Shue. We are cousins, very distant, to all these people!
The line of descent is:
Samuel Morse-Elizabeth Jasper
Mary Morse-Samuel Bullen
Elizabeth Bullen-Benjamin Wheelock
Benjamin Wheelock-Hulda Thayer
Mary Wheelock-Ebenezer Thayer
Abigail Thayer-Jesse Holbrook
Amariah Holbrook-Molly oh where are you Wright
Nahum Holbrook-Susannah Rockwood
Joseph Holbrook-Mary Elizabeth Whittemore
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
If I have this figured right, Hulda Thayer was Ebenezer Thayer's niece, so Abigail Thayer's grandmother Hulda was also her aunt. Can that be right?
Friday, May 4, 2018
Holbrook Line: William Shattuck, Immigrant
William Shattuck was born in England, possibly Somerset, but perhaps Dorset, about 1622. That is as much as we can safely say about his origins. His parents are believed to be Samuel Shattuck and Damaris Sibley, but as far as I know, no documentation has been found for this. He did name a son Samuel, but there is no Damaris in the known family, so I think the jury is still out on his parentage.
The first we really know of Samuel is that he is in Watertown, a few miles west of Boston, by 1642. "The Pioneers of Massachusetts" states that he was a shoemaker. There was a loom in his inventory when he died, and there has been speculation that he was also a weaver. Many farmers, for that was also an occupation of his, did weaving in the winter time, but it's also possible that the output was for family needs only. So let's consider him a shoemaker and a farmer.
His wife's name and origins are also unknown. She was Susanna, and may have been either a Hayden or a Barnard, but again there is no proof that I can find. They were likely married about 1642 in England, and came almost immediately to Boston. I have also seen speculation that his father may have been with them, but died on the voyage. Again, I have not seen documentation.
His children present another mystery. I have names for 8 of them. One son has been described as "Samuel Church". I don't know whether this was a misreading of the will, or whether William had somehow adopted the boy, or whether there is another explanation. He mentioned the "ten younger children that are married" as well as several sons, so he may have had more children than we know of. The children that we have listed are Susanna, Mary, John, Philip, William, Rebecca, Abigail and Benjamin. Perhaps Susanna had brought children into the marriage whom William considered "his". We just don't know.
We do know a little of his life because of what was listed in the inventory at this death. His total appraised value was 434 pound, 2 shillings, which was not bad for a farmer, or a shoemaker. Among the interesting items are more linens and dinnerware than would be typical for the day, but perhaps made necessary by having a large family. He had 103 pounds and 17 shillings in money, cash on hand, which again is a larger amount than I typically see. Unless books were included among "some small things", I didn't see books on the list but I do see two pair of "cards". They are listed with some of the wooden and earthenware dishes, so I don't want to guess what the "cards" were. If these were playing cards, they would have caused a scandal so the likelihood is that they were something else. He had three guns, two "pistools", and a cutlash, so he may have been well armed, depending on how old these arms were. He also had crops in the ground, bushels of grain, and farm animals of every sort except goats, it seems.
The inventory is signed by John Coolege, John Livermore, and Thomas Hastings. William died August 14, 1672 and the will was entered into probate on August 23, when the inventory was completed. Susannah remained a single woman for about 15 months, and then married Richard Norcross They stayed in Watertown, where she died December 11, 1686.
We actually have two lines through William and Susanna, both through their daughter Susannah. One line is:
William Shattuck-Susanna
Susannah Shattuck-John Fay
David Fay-Sarah Larkin
Edward Fay-Sarah Joslin
David Fay-Mary or Mercy Perrin
Euzebia (Luceba) Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
The other line is
William Shattuck-Susanna
Susanna Shattuck-Joseph Morse
Esther Morse-Nathaniel Joslin
Israel Joslin-Sarah Cleveland
Sarah Joslin-Edward Fay
and as per above
The first we really know of Samuel is that he is in Watertown, a few miles west of Boston, by 1642. "The Pioneers of Massachusetts" states that he was a shoemaker. There was a loom in his inventory when he died, and there has been speculation that he was also a weaver. Many farmers, for that was also an occupation of his, did weaving in the winter time, but it's also possible that the output was for family needs only. So let's consider him a shoemaker and a farmer.
His wife's name and origins are also unknown. She was Susanna, and may have been either a Hayden or a Barnard, but again there is no proof that I can find. They were likely married about 1642 in England, and came almost immediately to Boston. I have also seen speculation that his father may have been with them, but died on the voyage. Again, I have not seen documentation.
His children present another mystery. I have names for 8 of them. One son has been described as "Samuel Church". I don't know whether this was a misreading of the will, or whether William had somehow adopted the boy, or whether there is another explanation. He mentioned the "ten younger children that are married" as well as several sons, so he may have had more children than we know of. The children that we have listed are Susanna, Mary, John, Philip, William, Rebecca, Abigail and Benjamin. Perhaps Susanna had brought children into the marriage whom William considered "his". We just don't know.
We do know a little of his life because of what was listed in the inventory at this death. His total appraised value was 434 pound, 2 shillings, which was not bad for a farmer, or a shoemaker. Among the interesting items are more linens and dinnerware than would be typical for the day, but perhaps made necessary by having a large family. He had 103 pounds and 17 shillings in money, cash on hand, which again is a larger amount than I typically see. Unless books were included among "some small things", I didn't see books on the list but I do see two pair of "cards". They are listed with some of the wooden and earthenware dishes, so I don't want to guess what the "cards" were. If these were playing cards, they would have caused a scandal so the likelihood is that they were something else. He had three guns, two "pistools", and a cutlash, so he may have been well armed, depending on how old these arms were. He also had crops in the ground, bushels of grain, and farm animals of every sort except goats, it seems.
The inventory is signed by John Coolege, John Livermore, and Thomas Hastings. William died August 14, 1672 and the will was entered into probate on August 23, when the inventory was completed. Susannah remained a single woman for about 15 months, and then married Richard Norcross They stayed in Watertown, where she died December 11, 1686.
We actually have two lines through William and Susanna, both through their daughter Susannah. One line is:
William Shattuck-Susanna
Susannah Shattuck-John Fay
David Fay-Sarah Larkin
Edward Fay-Sarah Joslin
David Fay-Mary or Mercy Perrin
Euzebia (Luceba) Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
The other line is
William Shattuck-Susanna
Susanna Shattuck-Joseph Morse
Esther Morse-Nathaniel Joslin
Israel Joslin-Sarah Cleveland
Sarah Joslin-Edward Fay
and as per above
Friday, April 13, 2018
Holbrook line: Samuel Bullen, Immigrant
We know enough about Samuel Bullen to make us want to know more. Of course, some of the early information is conflicting, but once we can point to him in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, his information is a little more definitive. So, he was born in either 1617 or 1622, in Redgrave, Suffolk, England, or Botesdale, Suffolk, England. The two villages are only about two and a half miles apart, so at least we have are pinned down very closely. Living at either location, Samuel would have been very familiar with St Mary's Church, which was constructed sometime in the late 13th or early 14th century. There are pictures on Wikipedia of the interior of this building, and they are stunning. But I digress.
I tend to think Samuel was likely born in 1617 although possibly not christened until 1622, for whatever reason. He was married in 1641 and the 1622 date would make him a pretty young bridegroom for the time period. His father was likely (don't quote me on this!) John Bullen and his mother Agnes Wiffin. I'd feel better if I could find the documentation for this myself, but it's been reported early and often.
There is also a bit of confusion the date he came to America. He was in Watertown, Massachusetts in 1636. I have also seen him listed as arriving in 1640. If this is so, then he must have returned to England for reasons unknown, and arrived back that year. We know he was accepted as a freeman in Boston in 1641, the same year he married Mary Morse, daughter of Samuel and Elizabeth Jasper Morse, in Dedham, Massachusetts. Samuel's name is on the Dedham Compact, written in 1636, but it's not clear whether he signed it in 1636 or whether he signed it when he moved to the town.
Samuel and Mary had at least nine children, some born in Dedham and some after the family had moved (or possibly the town had divided) to Medfield. I am not sure I completely understand the following but I will give it to you, anyway, in quotes. It is from an article from Volume 65 of the New England Historical and Genealogical Register, page 270, from an article about "The Origin and Development of Conveyancing."
"Samuel Bullein of Dedham for & in consideration of two cowes sould him granted vnto Thomas Dudley Esq deput Governor his dwellinghouse in Dedham and foure Acres of land within the fence neere adjoyneing to the said house vppon condition that the sd Bullein shall pay unto the sd Thomas Dudley twelve pounds starling at the house of the sd Thomas Dudley in Roxbury in manner following to wit thirty shillings in good cleane dry wheate the 18 (1) the next comeing and 20s in good butter and 10s in good cheese the 8 (7) 1647. & so the like sume vppon every eighteenth of march and the like sume of butter & cheese vppon every eight day of 7ber for the three yeares next following provideing at his owne cost a Tubb for the butter and the wheate buttr & cheese to be valued by indifferent men; & if the Cows be not with Calfe then ten shillings to be abated in the first paymt. This was by mortgage dat7 (7) 1646. Acknowledged before John Winthrop Gov: the same day."
I've tried to copy this word for word and punctuation for punctuation. I think it means that our Samuel purchased a dwellinghouse in Dedham and two cows from Thomas Dudley, the deputy Governor, and in return was to pay him wheat, butter and cheese for a period of four years. Cash was scarce at the time.
There are suggestions that Samuel may have been a housewright (carpenter) but I've not found that supported, yet. We can assume that he raised wheat and dairy cows, from the above conveyance.
We don't know just when Samuel became a deacon in the church. Almost everyone in town belonged to the church when it was first formed in 1638, but it seems unlikely that he would have been chosen as deacon right away, merely because of his age.
Samuel and Mary were in Medfield by 1651, but circumstances forced them out during King Philip's War in 1675-76. At least half of the town was burned by the native Americans, and about 20 colonists were killed. It is possible that the Bullens had already left for safer ground before the attack. It's also possible that Samuel, who would have been nearly 60 years old, stayed to try to protect the town. I've not found his name listed in "Soldiers in King Philip's War" but that list may not include every one who defended his own home town. Apparently Samuel's children had a hard time of it, too, because Samuel later asked for a reduction in "rates" (taxes) because not only had he lost everything, but he had needed to help some of his adult children, also.
Samuel and Mary did return to Medfield and rebuilt their home.Samuel died January 16,1692/92 and Mary died February 14 of the same year. This may explain why his inventory wasn't filed until 1695. It included books, clothing, feather beds and furniture, 'irons" and a loom, and several pieces of land as well as his dwelling house, totaling 178-02-08. Two years later, when a division was finally made, the real estate was valued at 131-10-00.
As with many of our immigrants, we can be proud of him, and just as with many others, we can wish we knew more about him. Imagine coming across the ocean, hoping to find a better life, and later having your home and those of some of your children burned! There were remarkable people.
Our line of descent is:
Samuel Bullen-Mary Morse
Elizabeth Bullen-Benjamin Wheelock
Benjamin Wheelock-Huldah Thayer
Mary Wheelock-Ebenezer Thayer
Abigail Thayer-Jesse Holbrook
Amariah Holbrook-Molly Wright
Nahum Holbrook-Susanna Rockwood
Joseph Holbrook-Mary Elizabeth Whittemore
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
I tend to think Samuel was likely born in 1617 although possibly not christened until 1622, for whatever reason. He was married in 1641 and the 1622 date would make him a pretty young bridegroom for the time period. His father was likely (don't quote me on this!) John Bullen and his mother Agnes Wiffin. I'd feel better if I could find the documentation for this myself, but it's been reported early and often.
There is also a bit of confusion the date he came to America. He was in Watertown, Massachusetts in 1636. I have also seen him listed as arriving in 1640. If this is so, then he must have returned to England for reasons unknown, and arrived back that year. We know he was accepted as a freeman in Boston in 1641, the same year he married Mary Morse, daughter of Samuel and Elizabeth Jasper Morse, in Dedham, Massachusetts. Samuel's name is on the Dedham Compact, written in 1636, but it's not clear whether he signed it in 1636 or whether he signed it when he moved to the town.
Samuel and Mary had at least nine children, some born in Dedham and some after the family had moved (or possibly the town had divided) to Medfield. I am not sure I completely understand the following but I will give it to you, anyway, in quotes. It is from an article from Volume 65 of the New England Historical and Genealogical Register, page 270, from an article about "The Origin and Development of Conveyancing."
"Samuel Bullein of Dedham for & in consideration of two cowes sould him granted vnto Thomas Dudley Esq deput Governor his dwellinghouse in Dedham and foure Acres of land within the fence neere adjoyneing to the said house vppon condition that the sd Bullein shall pay unto the sd Thomas Dudley twelve pounds starling at the house of the sd Thomas Dudley in Roxbury in manner following to wit thirty shillings in good cleane dry wheate the 18 (1) the next comeing and 20s in good butter and 10s in good cheese the 8 (7) 1647. & so the like sume vppon every eighteenth of march and the like sume of butter & cheese vppon every eight day of 7ber for the three yeares next following provideing at his owne cost a Tubb for the butter and the wheate buttr & cheese to be valued by indifferent men; & if the Cows be not with Calfe then ten shillings to be abated in the first paymt. This was by mortgage dat7 (7) 1646. Acknowledged before John Winthrop Gov: the same day."
I've tried to copy this word for word and punctuation for punctuation. I think it means that our Samuel purchased a dwellinghouse in Dedham and two cows from Thomas Dudley, the deputy Governor, and in return was to pay him wheat, butter and cheese for a period of four years. Cash was scarce at the time.
There are suggestions that Samuel may have been a housewright (carpenter) but I've not found that supported, yet. We can assume that he raised wheat and dairy cows, from the above conveyance.
We don't know just when Samuel became a deacon in the church. Almost everyone in town belonged to the church when it was first formed in 1638, but it seems unlikely that he would have been chosen as deacon right away, merely because of his age.
Samuel and Mary were in Medfield by 1651, but circumstances forced them out during King Philip's War in 1675-76. At least half of the town was burned by the native Americans, and about 20 colonists were killed. It is possible that the Bullens had already left for safer ground before the attack. It's also possible that Samuel, who would have been nearly 60 years old, stayed to try to protect the town. I've not found his name listed in "Soldiers in King Philip's War" but that list may not include every one who defended his own home town. Apparently Samuel's children had a hard time of it, too, because Samuel later asked for a reduction in "rates" (taxes) because not only had he lost everything, but he had needed to help some of his adult children, also.
Samuel and Mary did return to Medfield and rebuilt their home.Samuel died January 16,1692/92 and Mary died February 14 of the same year. This may explain why his inventory wasn't filed until 1695. It included books, clothing, feather beds and furniture, 'irons" and a loom, and several pieces of land as well as his dwelling house, totaling 178-02-08. Two years later, when a division was finally made, the real estate was valued at 131-10-00.
As with many of our immigrants, we can be proud of him, and just as with many others, we can wish we knew more about him. Imagine coming across the ocean, hoping to find a better life, and later having your home and those of some of your children burned! There were remarkable people.
Our line of descent is:
Samuel Bullen-Mary Morse
Elizabeth Bullen-Benjamin Wheelock
Benjamin Wheelock-Huldah Thayer
Mary Wheelock-Ebenezer Thayer
Abigail Thayer-Jesse Holbrook
Amariah Holbrook-Molly Wright
Nahum Holbrook-Susanna Rockwood
Joseph Holbrook-Mary Elizabeth Whittemore
Fremont Holbrook-Phoebe Brown
Loren Holbrook-Etta Stanard
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Friday, November 24, 2017
Holbrook line: Thomas King, Immigrant
I have a lot of summaries of the life of Thomas King. who lived from 1605 to 1676/1677. Thomas was born in England, possibly in Shaftsbury, Dorset. The problem is that there are quite a few Thomas King's,, and it's hard to figure out which one he is. In addition, the maiden name of his wife is not agreed upon. Her first name was Anne but she may or may not have been a Tice. I am disinclined, at this point, to think that she was Anne Collins. We don't even know whether the children he had were all from one wife.
His parents are generally given as Thomas and Sarah or Susan King, also of Shaftsbury. The senior Thomas is sometimes said to have died in 1642 in Sudbury, Middlesex, Massachusetts but I've not been able to find documentation for that. So we have uncertain parentage, uncertain wife, and are even uncertain when he arrived in the New World. We do know that a Thomas King arrived in 1635 but we don't know if that was our Thomas, Thomas's purported father, or another Thomas King entirely.
However, we do know that he went to Sudbury, which was founded in 1639. He was not one of the very earliest settlers, but apparently was one of those who came just a bit later. His wife died in childbirth in 1642, leaving Thomas with six children (the baby lived only a few days longer than his mother) . We don't know whether this wife was his first wife, or whether some of the first children had a different mother. Thomas was of a hardier sort than most men, as he stayed single for thirteen years, apparently raising his children himself, or with the help of his oldest children. He remarried in 1655, when his children were mostly grown or at least ready to earn their own living.
He acquired land in Sudbury and then in 1656 petitioned for land in what became Marlboro. Here he was a selectman and also assisted in laying out the roads for the new town. Again he acquired land and farmed.
He wrote his will on March 1, 1676/77 and it was proven on April 20, 1676/77. We don't know whether he died of illness, accident, or possibly in the Indian attacks of King Phillip's War, which took place at about this time. He certainly died at an unhappy time in the history of Marlboro.
His wife Bridge survived another nine years, dying in 1685.
I've not found reference to the Kings' religion but it was likely Puritan, based on family association (son Peter was a deacon, and assigned to rebuild the Sudbury church). I don't know if he was literate, or what he did in England before coming to America. But I do know he came, and survived what must have been a difficult life, and for that, I admire our Thomas King.
The line of descent is:
Thomas King-Ann
Sarah King-Nathaniel Joslin
Nathaniel Joslin-Esther Morse
Israel Joslin-Sarah Cleveland
Sarah Joslin-Edward Fay
Daniel Fay-Mary or Mercy 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
His parents are generally given as Thomas and Sarah or Susan King, also of Shaftsbury. The senior Thomas is sometimes said to have died in 1642 in Sudbury, Middlesex, Massachusetts but I've not been able to find documentation for that. So we have uncertain parentage, uncertain wife, and are even uncertain when he arrived in the New World. We do know that a Thomas King arrived in 1635 but we don't know if that was our Thomas, Thomas's purported father, or another Thomas King entirely.
However, we do know that he went to Sudbury, which was founded in 1639. He was not one of the very earliest settlers, but apparently was one of those who came just a bit later. His wife died in childbirth in 1642, leaving Thomas with six children (the baby lived only a few days longer than his mother) . We don't know whether this wife was his first wife, or whether some of the first children had a different mother. Thomas was of a hardier sort than most men, as he stayed single for thirteen years, apparently raising his children himself, or with the help of his oldest children. He remarried in 1655, when his children were mostly grown or at least ready to earn their own living.
He acquired land in Sudbury and then in 1656 petitioned for land in what became Marlboro. Here he was a selectman and also assisted in laying out the roads for the new town. Again he acquired land and farmed.
He wrote his will on March 1, 1676/77 and it was proven on April 20, 1676/77. We don't know whether he died of illness, accident, or possibly in the Indian attacks of King Phillip's War, which took place at about this time. He certainly died at an unhappy time in the history of Marlboro.
His wife Bridge survived another nine years, dying in 1685.
I've not found reference to the Kings' religion but it was likely Puritan, based on family association (son Peter was a deacon, and assigned to rebuild the Sudbury church). I don't know if he was literate, or what he did in England before coming to America. But I do know he came, and survived what must have been a difficult life, and for that, I admire our Thomas King.
The line of descent is:
Thomas King-Ann
Sarah King-Nathaniel Joslin
Nathaniel Joslin-Esther Morse
Israel Joslin-Sarah Cleveland
Sarah Joslin-Edward Fay
Daniel Fay-Mary or Mercy 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, December 8, 2015
Beeks and Holbrook lines: John Pers 1588-1661 Immigrant
John Pers is another in a long line of early immigrants to New England in the Beeks family, and also the Holbrook family. He follows something of the typical mold, if there is such a thing, of coming to New England before the English Civil War, with a family and in his middle age. John was born April 8, 1588 in Norwich, Norfolk, England, the son of Richard Pers or Pierce and Marguerite Coney. We don't know much about his early life, except that his occupation in New England was a weaver. It is probable that he learned this trade at home in Norwich, where the main industry was wool. Wool made Norwich a wealthy city, and the Wikipedia article is quite interesting as it explains how Norwich welcomed religious refugees in the decades just before John was born. What we don't know is John's religion, except that his children were baptized in the Anglican church.
John married Elizabeth Trulle or Stoker on April 22, 1610, in Norwich. (I have seen her name listed as Trulle Stoker and as Stoker Trulle, but as of now I haven't found documentation for either name. The couple had seven children from 1610 to 1622. Four of them are documented as having traveled with their parents to Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1637. There was also a servant, John Gednay, in their party. However, this may not have been John's first trip to the New World. The older children of John were already here, and John was given land in Watertown in 1634. It is likely that he was here as early as 1633 and then returned to New England for his wife and the rest of his family, to bring them over in 1637.
The family settled in Watertown where John taught the weaving trade to at least some of his children, and where they were given land as settlers of the town. John was made a freeman in March of 1638 and took the "oath of fidelity" in 1652. His name appears as a drummer in the train band (militia) of that year but it's not clear whether this was John the immigrant or John the son. John the immigrant would have been 64 years old and likely had been excused from the militia by this time, unless he was in exceptionally good health.
John made his will in 1658 and died September 2, 1661. His will was proven September 30,1661, and his inventory was valued at just over 217 pounds. Elizabeth made her will on March 15, 1667 and died within just a few days, as it was proved April 2, 1667. Her estate was valued at just over 124 pounds, so she must have used her assets wisely.
Of course I'd like to know more about this couple, but I'm grateful to have located this much information about them. Here are the lines of descent.
Beeks:
John Pers-Elizabeth Trulle or Stoker
Anthony Pers-Ann
Daniel Pierce-Elizabeth Shedd
Elizabeth Pierce-Samuel Smith
Shubael Smith-Prudence Fitzrandolph
Mary Smith-Jonathan Dunham
Samuel Dunham-Hannah Ruble
Jacob Dunham-Catherine Goodnight
Samuel G Dunham-Eliza Reese
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Holbrook:
John Pers-Elizabeth Trulle or Stoker
Hester Pierce-Joseph Morse
Joseph Morse-Susanna Shattuck
Esther Morse-Nathaniel Joslin
Israel Joslin-Sarah Cleveland
Sarah Joslin-Edward Fay
David Fay-Mary or Mercy Perrin
Euzebia (Luceba) Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
John married Elizabeth Trulle or Stoker on April 22, 1610, in Norwich. (I have seen her name listed as Trulle Stoker and as Stoker Trulle, but as of now I haven't found documentation for either name. The couple had seven children from 1610 to 1622. Four of them are documented as having traveled with their parents to Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1637. There was also a servant, John Gednay, in their party. However, this may not have been John's first trip to the New World. The older children of John were already here, and John was given land in Watertown in 1634. It is likely that he was here as early as 1633 and then returned to New England for his wife and the rest of his family, to bring them over in 1637.
The family settled in Watertown where John taught the weaving trade to at least some of his children, and where they were given land as settlers of the town. John was made a freeman in March of 1638 and took the "oath of fidelity" in 1652. His name appears as a drummer in the train band (militia) of that year but it's not clear whether this was John the immigrant or John the son. John the immigrant would have been 64 years old and likely had been excused from the militia by this time, unless he was in exceptionally good health.
John made his will in 1658 and died September 2, 1661. His will was proven September 30,1661, and his inventory was valued at just over 217 pounds. Elizabeth made her will on March 15, 1667 and died within just a few days, as it was proved April 2, 1667. Her estate was valued at just over 124 pounds, so she must have used her assets wisely.
Of course I'd like to know more about this couple, but I'm grateful to have located this much information about them. Here are the lines of descent.
Beeks:
John Pers-Elizabeth Trulle or Stoker
Anthony Pers-Ann
Daniel Pierce-Elizabeth Shedd
Elizabeth Pierce-Samuel Smith
Shubael Smith-Prudence Fitzrandolph
Mary Smith-Jonathan Dunham
Samuel Dunham-Hannah Ruble
Jacob Dunham-Catherine Goodnight
Samuel G Dunham-Eliza Reese
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Holbrook:
John Pers-Elizabeth Trulle or Stoker
Hester Pierce-Joseph Morse
Joseph Morse-Susanna Shattuck
Esther Morse-Nathaniel Joslin
Israel Joslin-Sarah Cleveland
Sarah Joslin-Edward Fay
David Fay-Mary or Mercy Perrin
Euzebia (Luceba) Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Friday, August 14, 2015
Holbrook line: Thomas Joslin, Immigrant 1591-1660/61
I love it when I find so much information about an ancestor that it's hard to fit it all into one blog post! This is definitely a case of "pick and choose" what I can reasonably expect my family to read.
Thomas Joslin was born at Roxwell, County Essex, in England late in 1591, the son of Ralph Josselyn and Mary Bright (or possibly Dorothy unknown). Roxwell is a small village and was likely never much larger than it was in 1872, when it had a population of 986. There is a church there that has been in existence since the 14th century, where Thomas would have been baptized. Ralph, the father, is called a yeoman, so he was a respectable farmer who owned at least some land. Thomas had at least 10 brothers and sisters, some of which were likely half siblings, so it was a large family in what was probably a small home.
Sometime about 1615, Thomas married Rebecca Jude, and they raised their family for about 20 years in Dedham and later in Barham, county Suffolk, England. In between, they may have lived in Ardleigh, Essex county, because two of their children were baptized there. The last child was baptized in Barham, but we are missing baptismal locations for some of their other children. The question is, did they move, or did they simply take some of their children to other (family) locations to be baptized in the "home church"?
We do know that in April of 1635, the family set sail on the ship Increase to come to Massachusetts. They brought with them Rebecca, age 18, Dorothy, age 11, Nathaniel, age 8, Elizabeth, age 6, and Mary, age 1. They also had a maidservant, Eliabeth Ward, who may or may not have been a relative.
The family first settled at Hingham, and by 1647 were well enough established that they were being given small parcels of land (one and one half acre of fresh meadow, and three acres of land in Hockly Field. Thomas also purchased land from Stephen Lincoln, and by the time he was ready to sell it, it was described as "our houses, barns, homestalls, outhouses and dwelling house and barns, orchards and gardens, with the homelot", about three acres in all. At the same time, he and son Nathaniel sold additional land to George Lane and Thomas Collier.
Thomas and Rebecca's children were Abraham, Rebecca, Mary, Dorothy, Nathaniel, Elizabeth, and Mary again (the first Mary died soon after her 1619 baptism, and Dorothy died as a young woman.)
According to "Account of the Joslin Family", he was admitted freeman at Hingham in 1636, and was largely interested in commerce, owning several vessels that sailed between England and the Colonies, and was also proprietor of land in the towns of Lancaster, Hingham, and Sudbury. He was described as a man of commendable habits, generous disposition, and great business ability, and was respected by the citizens for his excellent personal character. He was a selectman for the town for several years, apparently.
In 1654 the Joslins sold their land and moved to Lancaster. We aren't told why they moved, but it must have seemed a better opportunity. By this time, Thomas would have been 63 years old, and perhaps he went because Nathaniel was moving, and he wanted to be with his son and grandchildren. Lancaster of course was very much a frontier town, but during the time Thomas lived there relations with the native Americans seem to have been peaceful. Still, a 63 year old man may have had a hard time building a new home, unless he was able to have it built.
Thomas's will was written May 9,1660 and proved March 29,1661. He left his estate to his wife Rebecca, and land or money to each of his children. He left little to his son Abraham, so he may have already given him his share of the estate. His housing and lands were valued at 30 pounds.
Rebecca later remarried and disposed of the land according to (Thomas's) will.
I've used material from "Great Migration, Volume 4, page 117, "English Origins of New England Families Volume I," and New England Historical and Genealogical Register Volume 158" in writing this post, as well as bits and pieces from Wikipedia.
The line of descent is:
Thomas Joslin-Rebecca Jude
Nathaniel Joslin-Sarah King
Nathaniel Joslin-Esther Morse
Israel Joslin-Sarah Cleveland
Sarah Joslin-Edward Fay
David Fay-Mercy or Mary Perrin
Euzebia (Luceba) Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendents
Fun fact: There are genealogies that say that our Thomas can be traced back to Gilbert Josceline, who was a contemporary of William the Conqueror. Others say it isn't so, so take it with a grain of salt. The dates seem to work, and it's fun to think it might be so!
Thomas Joslin was born at Roxwell, County Essex, in England late in 1591, the son of Ralph Josselyn and Mary Bright (or possibly Dorothy unknown). Roxwell is a small village and was likely never much larger than it was in 1872, when it had a population of 986. There is a church there that has been in existence since the 14th century, where Thomas would have been baptized. Ralph, the father, is called a yeoman, so he was a respectable farmer who owned at least some land. Thomas had at least 10 brothers and sisters, some of which were likely half siblings, so it was a large family in what was probably a small home.
Sometime about 1615, Thomas married Rebecca Jude, and they raised their family for about 20 years in Dedham and later in Barham, county Suffolk, England. In between, they may have lived in Ardleigh, Essex county, because two of their children were baptized there. The last child was baptized in Barham, but we are missing baptismal locations for some of their other children. The question is, did they move, or did they simply take some of their children to other (family) locations to be baptized in the "home church"?
We do know that in April of 1635, the family set sail on the ship Increase to come to Massachusetts. They brought with them Rebecca, age 18, Dorothy, age 11, Nathaniel, age 8, Elizabeth, age 6, and Mary, age 1. They also had a maidservant, Eliabeth Ward, who may or may not have been a relative.
The family first settled at Hingham, and by 1647 were well enough established that they were being given small parcels of land (one and one half acre of fresh meadow, and three acres of land in Hockly Field. Thomas also purchased land from Stephen Lincoln, and by the time he was ready to sell it, it was described as "our houses, barns, homestalls, outhouses and dwelling house and barns, orchards and gardens, with the homelot", about three acres in all. At the same time, he and son Nathaniel sold additional land to George Lane and Thomas Collier.
Thomas and Rebecca's children were Abraham, Rebecca, Mary, Dorothy, Nathaniel, Elizabeth, and Mary again (the first Mary died soon after her 1619 baptism, and Dorothy died as a young woman.)
According to "Account of the Joslin Family", he was admitted freeman at Hingham in 1636, and was largely interested in commerce, owning several vessels that sailed between England and the Colonies, and was also proprietor of land in the towns of Lancaster, Hingham, and Sudbury. He was described as a man of commendable habits, generous disposition, and great business ability, and was respected by the citizens for his excellent personal character. He was a selectman for the town for several years, apparently.
In 1654 the Joslins sold their land and moved to Lancaster. We aren't told why they moved, but it must have seemed a better opportunity. By this time, Thomas would have been 63 years old, and perhaps he went because Nathaniel was moving, and he wanted to be with his son and grandchildren. Lancaster of course was very much a frontier town, but during the time Thomas lived there relations with the native Americans seem to have been peaceful. Still, a 63 year old man may have had a hard time building a new home, unless he was able to have it built.
Thomas's will was written May 9,1660 and proved March 29,1661. He left his estate to his wife Rebecca, and land or money to each of his children. He left little to his son Abraham, so he may have already given him his share of the estate. His housing and lands were valued at 30 pounds.
Rebecca later remarried and disposed of the land according to (Thomas's) will.
I've used material from "Great Migration, Volume 4, page 117, "English Origins of New England Families Volume I," and New England Historical and Genealogical Register Volume 158" in writing this post, as well as bits and pieces from Wikipedia.
The line of descent is:
Thomas Joslin-Rebecca Jude
Nathaniel Joslin-Sarah King
Nathaniel Joslin-Esther Morse
Israel Joslin-Sarah Cleveland
Sarah Joslin-Edward Fay
David Fay-Mercy or Mary Perrin
Euzebia (Luceba) Fay-Libbeus Stanard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendents
Fun fact: There are genealogies that say that our Thomas can be traced back to Gilbert Josceline, who was a contemporary of William the Conqueror. Others say it isn't so, so take it with a grain of salt. The dates seem to work, and it's fun to think it might be so!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)