It doesn't help matters at all that we have at least two ancestors named John Johnson on our tree. For a long time, I've been reluctant to write about this one because I thought it was possible that I had the two men confused on my tree. However, I've been thrilled to find, and finally read, a book called "The Biography and Genealogy of Captain John Johnson from Roxbury, Massachusetts: An Uncommon Man in the Commonwealth of the Massachusetts Bay Colony 1630-1659" by Gerald Garth Johnson, whom I assume would be a distant cousin of ours. The book was published by Heritage Books in 2008, so the scholarship is recent. As my son and my sister would say "Cool beans!"
To give the bare facts, we don't know for sure where John Johnson was born nor whom his parents were, but it appears likely that he was from the area of Great Amwell or Ware, Hertfordshire, England. He married his first wife, Mary Heath, at Ware in 1613, so he was likely born sometime around 1590, give or take a few years. He seems to have learned to read, write, and "cipher" as a child but there is no evidence for that except that he possessed these skills in his adult life. He was a Puritan, probably deeply religious, and he had ten children before he came to America, unfortunately without Mary. She died in 1629 and John Johnson came to Massachusetts on the Arabella, with the Winthrop Fleet in 1630. He was the quartermaster for the ship, meaning he was responsible for providing and rationing food for the trip across the ocean, and perhaps for a time when the ship landed. Only six or perhaps seven of the children were still living, and we don't know whether all of the children came with him or whether some were on other ships of the same fleet, Mary, the oldest, would have been just sixteen, which perhaps was considered old enough to watch over the other children while on the trip.
Not much is known of Johnson's life in England but somewhere he must have acquired the skills and abilities that allowed him to become prominent in the life of Roxbury. He apparently went to the new village as soon as he landed, and was part of the town's development for the rest of his life. He was referred to as a yeoman, so he had little status coming to town but soon was respected by all Among his accomplishments, he was a selectman for most of his life there. He served as constable for many, many years. He was "Surveyor-General of the Arms" for the entire Massachusetts Bay Colony , as well as Captain of the Roxbury Military Company and clerk of the Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company of Massachusetts. (He had likely been a member of the Honourable Artillery Company of London, but the identification is not certain).
Johnson was frequently called on to witness wills or to inventory estates, as well as to represent townspeople as attorney or power of attorney. As a Puritan in a Puritan town, he helped found the first church and may have helped to construct the first meeting house. He donated toward the establishment of the first school in Roxbury. As Surveyor-General, he helped build bridges and decide boundaries, including settling disputes, or what could have become disputes, between neighboring towns.
Are you impressed yet? He did all this while raising his family, running a farm, and owning a tavern in Roxbury. He was a land owner and a land dealer, providing for farms for two sons as well as selling land for profit. John did have some help. He married for the second time, to a woman named Margery, probably about 1633. but possibly before coming to America to 1630. Margery died and Johnson then married Grace Negus Fawer before October 14, 1656. (She was either childless or had no surviving children when she died in 1671, since she left her estate to her two brothers). So on top of all that he did for the community, the church, and the colony, Johnson was also a family man. He may have had step children, although none were mentioned in his will.
John Johnson died September 30, 1659. The book I referred to earlier gives his complete will and an inventory several pages in length. His estate was valued at about 668 pounds, and the inventory shows many more items than were typical in a New England household in 1659. This is even more remarkable because Johnson's house, including town and military records and the town's ammunition, burned to the ground in 1645. Johnson had quickly replaced everything of the household that was destroyed, and possibly more besides.
The author is certainly proud of John Johnson and I think we should be, too. He was respected in his time both for the work he did and for the results, as he was regarded as successful. I'd love to learn more about him but this is so much more than I expected to find, that I am truly grateful for this book. If you want to learn more about John Johnson, or about Puritans in general, you couldn't do better than to read this book!
The line of descent is:
John Johnson-Mary Heath
Mary Johnson-Roger Mowry
Nathaniel Mowry-Joanna Inman
Joanna Mowry-Walter Phetteplace
Sarah Phetteplace-Elisha Eddy
Enos Eddy-Sarah Brown
Enos Eddy-Deborah Paine
Joseph B Eddy-Susan Lamphire
Susan Eddy-Hiram Stanard
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Tuesday, October 23, 2018
Friday, October 19, 2018
Holbrook line: Thomas Cole, Immigrant
Thomas Cole is believed to be the son of Humphrey Cole and May Mott. Humphrey must have been a person of some means because a son and a son in law were each rectors, and that would probably indicate a certain degree of schooling. Humphrey himself had a BA from Pembroke College (part of Cambridge University) in 1593 and an MA in 1598. The family was oriented toward education.
Thomas Cole was born about 1603 in Essex, England and had arrived in Virginia on July 4, 1635. It's possible that he came in 1632, had returned to England for some reason and then come back to Virginia. Either date would put him in Virginia early. He married a woman named Priscilla, who may or may not be Priscilla Godfrey, the daughter of John Godfrey.
Thomas and Priscilla were in Maryland by 1649, and were acknowledged Quakers a few years later. Perhaps they left Virginia because they felt persecuted there, but that is speculation. In 1666, he was voted 1000 pounds of tobacco in recompense for the loss of his stock, killed or stolen in raids by the native Americans. John owned 550 acres of land, called Cole's Harbor in 1668. This was in what is now the Inner Harbor of Baltimore, and even then may have been considered valuable. It may also have been marshy, because we don't know that Thomas and Priscilla actually lived there. He also patented 450 acres called Mayden's Choice in 1674, and a 200 acre tract called Saint Mary Borne in 1675.
They seem to have settled in what is now Anne Arundel County, then called Providence County. Thomas and Priscilla had just one known child, or at least one child who lived to adulthood. There may have been a son, John, but nothing more is known of him. Sarah and her husband, Charles Gorsuch, sold the three Baltimore County tracts on December 8, 1679, Sarah being described as the sole heiress of Thomas Cole. Priscilla therefore must have been gone by then, and Thomas also, although we don't have dates for either of them. They may well have been buried in the early Quaker fashion, which was in unmarked graves, with only a flagstone to indicate the place of burial.
I wish we knew more about Thomas. For instance, during the Indian attack when his stock was stolen, where was he and where was his family? Did the family suffer other losses, or was this a one time thing? As a Quaker, he probably wasn't part of the militia but I'd like to confirm that. Was he a slave owner? Was he educated, or at least literate? (I think yes, because his father and brother were educated, and because his daughter married into an influential family, but I'd like to know for sure). What words of wisdom could he share with us, if we could talk face to face?
The line of descent is :
Thomas Cole-Priscilla
Sarah Cole-Charles Gorsuch
Charles Gorsuch Jr-Sarah Cole (it appears that these two were cousins)
Hannah Gorsuch-Thomas Stansbury
Rachel Stansbury-Alexis Lemmon
Sarah Lemmon-Abraham Hetrick
Isaac Hetrick-Elizabeth Black
Mary Alice Hetrick-Louis Stanard
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Thomas Cole was born about 1603 in Essex, England and had arrived in Virginia on July 4, 1635. It's possible that he came in 1632, had returned to England for some reason and then come back to Virginia. Either date would put him in Virginia early. He married a woman named Priscilla, who may or may not be Priscilla Godfrey, the daughter of John Godfrey.
Thomas and Priscilla were in Maryland by 1649, and were acknowledged Quakers a few years later. Perhaps they left Virginia because they felt persecuted there, but that is speculation. In 1666, he was voted 1000 pounds of tobacco in recompense for the loss of his stock, killed or stolen in raids by the native Americans. John owned 550 acres of land, called Cole's Harbor in 1668. This was in what is now the Inner Harbor of Baltimore, and even then may have been considered valuable. It may also have been marshy, because we don't know that Thomas and Priscilla actually lived there. He also patented 450 acres called Mayden's Choice in 1674, and a 200 acre tract called Saint Mary Borne in 1675.
They seem to have settled in what is now Anne Arundel County, then called Providence County. Thomas and Priscilla had just one known child, or at least one child who lived to adulthood. There may have been a son, John, but nothing more is known of him. Sarah and her husband, Charles Gorsuch, sold the three Baltimore County tracts on December 8, 1679, Sarah being described as the sole heiress of Thomas Cole. Priscilla therefore must have been gone by then, and Thomas also, although we don't have dates for either of them. They may well have been buried in the early Quaker fashion, which was in unmarked graves, with only a flagstone to indicate the place of burial.
I wish we knew more about Thomas. For instance, during the Indian attack when his stock was stolen, where was he and where was his family? Did the family suffer other losses, or was this a one time thing? As a Quaker, he probably wasn't part of the militia but I'd like to confirm that. Was he a slave owner? Was he educated, or at least literate? (I think yes, because his father and brother were educated, and because his daughter married into an influential family, but I'd like to know for sure). What words of wisdom could he share with us, if we could talk face to face?
The line of descent is :
Thomas Cole-Priscilla
Sarah Cole-Charles Gorsuch
Charles Gorsuch Jr-Sarah Cole (it appears that these two were cousins)
Hannah Gorsuch-Thomas Stansbury
Rachel Stansbury-Alexis Lemmon
Sarah Lemmon-Abraham Hetrick
Isaac Hetrick-Elizabeth Black
Mary Alice Hetrick-Louis Stanard
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Tuesday, October 16, 2018
John Fay, Immigrant
What in the world would an eight year old boy be doing, traveling by himself, on a trip across the Atlantic ocean in 1656? The Speedwell carried several other passengers who are our ancestors, but we can't prove that any of them knew the Fay family in England. After thinking about it for a while, perhaps inheritance had something to do with it. His presumed father is Henry Fay, with a death date, in Ipswich, Middlesex, Massachusetts of 1655. Maybe John was sent across the ocean to stake a claim to whatever his father had left him. A woman by the name of Dorothy Fay died in Ipswich on the same day as Henry. He name is listed next to Henry's in the register, but we don't know for sure that this was his wife. We don't even know for sure that Henry was John's father, but it appears likely. Many websites give the parents as David Fay and Elizabeth Coale, but it doesn't appear likely to me that a woman of almost 50 would give birth. These are more likely John's grandparents.
We don't know what happened to John when he arrived in America, alone as far as we can tell. He was eight years old, so unless a relative stepped forward to care for him, he would have been bound out. He may have been bound out anyway, as this was the frequent way to deal with children. They needed to learn a trade or skill.
John did grow up and married first Mary Brigham, by whom he had four children, and then Susannah Shattuck Morse, by whom he had four more children. He married Susannah on July 5, 1678 in Watertown, although it's not believed he ever lived there. Early in his life, but probably when he was an adult, John went to Marlboro, where he was made a freeman in 1669. He acquired land in Worcester, and was considered a proprietor there, but he apparently didn't live there. He stayed in Marlboro until the fury of King Philip's War forced the family to go to Watertown,
We wouldn't know much more about John except that he left his inventory. Actually, there are two inventories for him, one taken in 1691 (John died December 5, 1690) and one in 1695. The youngest child was born in 1686 so perhaps it was time to settle the estate. The older children, from his first marriage, may have been getting anxious to get "their share". The estate was valued at about 209 pounds in 1691. The 1695 inventory is not totaled but it appears to be very similar. From the items listed, it appears that John was a farmer; he had the usual animals including two oxen, and "husbandry tools", He also had a Bible and books, total value given as 1 pound and one shilling.
The other interesting thing about John I can't prove. It is said that he was of Huguenot parentage. Whether his parents were Huguenots or whether the connection is further back, I don't know. I don't even know if there is a connection. It's a possibility.
The line of descent is:
John Fay-Susannah Shattuck
David Fay-Sarah Larkin
Edward Fay-Sarah Joslin
David Fay-Mary Perrin
Luceba Fay-Libbeus Stannard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
We don't know what happened to John when he arrived in America, alone as far as we can tell. He was eight years old, so unless a relative stepped forward to care for him, he would have been bound out. He may have been bound out anyway, as this was the frequent way to deal with children. They needed to learn a trade or skill.
John did grow up and married first Mary Brigham, by whom he had four children, and then Susannah Shattuck Morse, by whom he had four more children. He married Susannah on July 5, 1678 in Watertown, although it's not believed he ever lived there. Early in his life, but probably when he was an adult, John went to Marlboro, where he was made a freeman in 1669. He acquired land in Worcester, and was considered a proprietor there, but he apparently didn't live there. He stayed in Marlboro until the fury of King Philip's War forced the family to go to Watertown,
We wouldn't know much more about John except that he left his inventory. Actually, there are two inventories for him, one taken in 1691 (John died December 5, 1690) and one in 1695. The youngest child was born in 1686 so perhaps it was time to settle the estate. The older children, from his first marriage, may have been getting anxious to get "their share". The estate was valued at about 209 pounds in 1691. The 1695 inventory is not totaled but it appears to be very similar. From the items listed, it appears that John was a farmer; he had the usual animals including two oxen, and "husbandry tools", He also had a Bible and books, total value given as 1 pound and one shilling.
The other interesting thing about John I can't prove. It is said that he was of Huguenot parentage. Whether his parents were Huguenots or whether the connection is further back, I don't know. I don't even know if there is a connection. It's a possibility.
The line of descent is:
John Fay-Susannah Shattuck
David Fay-Sarah Larkin
Edward Fay-Sarah Joslin
David Fay-Mary Perrin
Luceba Fay-Libbeus Stannard
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Thursday, October 11, 2018
Matthew Woodruff, Immigrant
Matthew Woodruff's beginnings are a mystery. There are at least three candidates for his parents. I am almost positive his parents are NOT Sir David Woodruffe and Lettice Dunscombe, which means I have a lot of deleting to do on my tree. There are, however, two additional candidates. One is David Woodruffe and Anne Rogerson, but I've not found anything to back that up. The other is Matthew Woodruff and Margaret Sanders.
Another problem is that we don't know his birth date. He died in 1682 and is termed then "a very old man". If that is true, the dates we have for his birth of 1612-1616 may not be correct. He may be older than that. The other possibility with the description of "a very old man" is that his health was poor and he appeared to be aged beyond his years. However, he didn't write his will until shortly before his death, which seems to indicate that he was reasonably healthy up to his final illness. So definitely, more research needs to be done about Matthew's origins.
The first we really know about Matthew is that he was generally in the area of Hartford, Connecticut in 1643, when he was a defendant in a law suit, the plaintiff being John Robinson. He was made a freeman at Hartford in 1657, but neither of these items prove that he actually lived in Hartford. He purchased land in Farmington in 1653, but he could have been there practically the whole time he was in America. Although I didn't find an official list of first founders of Farmington, it does appear that Matthew would have been considered one of the earliest settlers, if not a first founder.
Another puzzle about Matthew is the name of his wife. Her first name was Hannah, but her surname is variously given as Flagg, Baldwin, and Lambert. Baldwin seems to have the longest tradition about it, but I've not found evidence of that. Matthew and Hannah were married about 1642, and had six children together. I have conflicting information about Hannah. One source says she died in 1664, but Matthew's will, written in 1682, mentions his loving wife. If he remarried, perhaps that is one possible reason why there are varying names for his wife. Hannah joined the church in November of 1654 but Matthew didn't join until 1672. Presumably he had attended all along, but was not technically a part of the communion of believers until 1672.
Matthew wrote his will in September of 1682 and it was proven December 14, 1682, so he died sometime between those two dates. From his inventory, we can tell that Matthew was a farmer. His tools are described as tools for husbandry, so perhaps his status was that of husbandman. From coming to America as an unknown, perhaps as an indentured servant, he left an estate of about 250 pounds. He had not a lot of land, but his livestock carried a relatively high value, so he may have done more intensive livestock farming than some did. (Incidentally, the spelling used in the inventory is some of the most creative I have seen.) There were no books mentioned in his inventory. Son Samuel got the lion's share of the moveable goods, as well as some land, on the condition that he care for his mother.
Naturally I am not happy with this post. I'm writing it because half a loaf is better than none, but I would really like to determine Matthew's parentage, his age, and his hometown in England. He deserves that much.
The line of descent is:
Matthew Woodruff-Hannah possibly Baldwin
Hannah Woodruff-Richard Seymour
Hannah Seymour-Josepoh Pomeroy
Medad Pomeroy-Hannah Trumbull
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stannard
Libbeus Stannard-Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Another problem is that we don't know his birth date. He died in 1682 and is termed then "a very old man". If that is true, the dates we have for his birth of 1612-1616 may not be correct. He may be older than that. The other possibility with the description of "a very old man" is that his health was poor and he appeared to be aged beyond his years. However, he didn't write his will until shortly before his death, which seems to indicate that he was reasonably healthy up to his final illness. So definitely, more research needs to be done about Matthew's origins.
The first we really know about Matthew is that he was generally in the area of Hartford, Connecticut in 1643, when he was a defendant in a law suit, the plaintiff being John Robinson. He was made a freeman at Hartford in 1657, but neither of these items prove that he actually lived in Hartford. He purchased land in Farmington in 1653, but he could have been there practically the whole time he was in America. Although I didn't find an official list of first founders of Farmington, it does appear that Matthew would have been considered one of the earliest settlers, if not a first founder.
Another puzzle about Matthew is the name of his wife. Her first name was Hannah, but her surname is variously given as Flagg, Baldwin, and Lambert. Baldwin seems to have the longest tradition about it, but I've not found evidence of that. Matthew and Hannah were married about 1642, and had six children together. I have conflicting information about Hannah. One source says she died in 1664, but Matthew's will, written in 1682, mentions his loving wife. If he remarried, perhaps that is one possible reason why there are varying names for his wife. Hannah joined the church in November of 1654 but Matthew didn't join until 1672. Presumably he had attended all along, but was not technically a part of the communion of believers until 1672.
Matthew wrote his will in September of 1682 and it was proven December 14, 1682, so he died sometime between those two dates. From his inventory, we can tell that Matthew was a farmer. His tools are described as tools for husbandry, so perhaps his status was that of husbandman. From coming to America as an unknown, perhaps as an indentured servant, he left an estate of about 250 pounds. He had not a lot of land, but his livestock carried a relatively high value, so he may have done more intensive livestock farming than some did. (Incidentally, the spelling used in the inventory is some of the most creative I have seen.) There were no books mentioned in his inventory. Son Samuel got the lion's share of the moveable goods, as well as some land, on the condition that he care for his mother.
Naturally I am not happy with this post. I'm writing it because half a loaf is better than none, but I would really like to determine Matthew's parentage, his age, and his hometown in England. He deserves that much.
The line of descent is:
Matthew Woodruff-Hannah possibly Baldwin
Hannah Woodruff-Richard Seymour
Hannah Seymour-Josepoh Pomeroy
Medad Pomeroy-Hannah Trumbull
Medad Pomeroy-Eunice Southwell
Eunice Pomeroy-Libbeus Stannard
Libbeus Stannard-Luceba Fay
Hiram Stanard-Susan Eddy
Louis Stanard-Mary Alice Hetrick
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Tuesday, October 9, 2018
Beeks line: Mary Smith Dunham, one feisty lady
It's been awhile since I've had anything to say about any of the Beeks ancestors. But I came across one sentence about one lady that I think is noteworthy. Actually, finding anything about a woman in the 18th century is noteworthy, as for the most part women are hidden in their husband's identity. Ah, but what is husband dies at a young age? Remarriage was the norm, but sometimes a widow chose a different road.
Mary Smith was the daughter of Shubael and Prudence Fitzrandolph Smith. (The Fitzrandolph family traces back to English and Scottish royalty but that is a story for sometime in the future, if I decide to expand the scope of this blog.) She was born December 27, 1717, probably in Woodbridge, Middlesex County, New Jersey. She was one of eleven children, and that's about what I know of her childhood. I would love to know her religion, but I don't know that at this time.
Mary married Jonathan Dunham (sometimes spelled Donham), the son of Benjamin Dunham and Mary Rolph, probably in 1737 although I haven't pinned that date down yet. Their first son was born at the end of 1738, and they had five additional children. Unfortunately, Jonathan died in 1748, although I've not yet found records that mention a cause of death. This left Mary with 6 children under the age of 15. What's a widow to do?
Well, what she did not do was marry again. We are given a clue as to what she may have done because her name is found (along with some other people by the name of Fitzrandolph and Dunham) on a petition to the New Jersey House stating that the rate for housing soldiers had been 5 shillings, 4 pence but had been reduced to 4 shillings, and the petitioners asked that it be increased to the original level.
This was during the French and Indian War. Woodbridge may have been close enough to the frontier that the citizens felt threatened, and apparently at least a few soldiers were stationed there or near there to protect civilians. My strong suspicion is that Mary ran a boarding house or inn to support her family. That would explain why some of her late husband's relatives would have signed the same petition. They wanted her to be able to support herself, so they would not be obliged to do so.
I've not learned whether the petition was successful or not. I don't know what Mary looked like, whether she was short or tall, plain or attractive, but I can imagine the determination in her mind and body that showed her a way to support her family without re-marrying. Signing a petition to the state was not a common thing for a woman to do. I think she was a feisty lady.
Mary died in 1791. Her will, written in 1784, disposed of mostly personal property, but she made cash bequests to two sons. Samuel, the Beeks ancestor (and also Barack Obama's ancestor) was absent from home and if he did not return within ten years, his son Jacob was to receive 10 pounds with the remainder of Samuel's share to be divided among her three children. It's possible that Samuel was already in what became West Virginia at that time, making a life for himself and his several children.
One other detail. One of her sons, Asher, was a Tory and fought on the British side in the Revolutionary war. Daniel Dunham followed the same path. He may or may not be Mary's son. Her birth date is given as 1717 and Daniel's as 1730. I suspect Daniel belongs to another Dunham, or might just possibly be Jonathan's from an earlier relationship. He would have been family of some kind, however. Asher seems to have returned to New Jersey by the time Mary wrote her will. Samuel may have stayed away because his were not Tory views.
That's what is known about Mary, plus I've thrown in some speculation that may or may not be accurate (that she ran an inn or boarding house of some sort). I like Mary. I admire her spunk and her grit that allowed her to raise five children without the benefit of a husband. I like that she was willing to sign a petition. I like that she wanted Samuel to return home, as most parents would. I just like Mary, and I hope you do, too.
The line of descent is:
Jonathan Dunham-Mary Smith
Samuel Dunham-Hannah probably Ruble
Jacob Dunham-Catherine Goodnight
Samuel G. Dunham-Eliza Matilda Reese
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Gretta Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Mary Smith was the daughter of Shubael and Prudence Fitzrandolph Smith. (The Fitzrandolph family traces back to English and Scottish royalty but that is a story for sometime in the future, if I decide to expand the scope of this blog.) She was born December 27, 1717, probably in Woodbridge, Middlesex County, New Jersey. She was one of eleven children, and that's about what I know of her childhood. I would love to know her religion, but I don't know that at this time.
Mary married Jonathan Dunham (sometimes spelled Donham), the son of Benjamin Dunham and Mary Rolph, probably in 1737 although I haven't pinned that date down yet. Their first son was born at the end of 1738, and they had five additional children. Unfortunately, Jonathan died in 1748, although I've not yet found records that mention a cause of death. This left Mary with 6 children under the age of 15. What's a widow to do?
Well, what she did not do was marry again. We are given a clue as to what she may have done because her name is found (along with some other people by the name of Fitzrandolph and Dunham) on a petition to the New Jersey House stating that the rate for housing soldiers had been 5 shillings, 4 pence but had been reduced to 4 shillings, and the petitioners asked that it be increased to the original level.
This was during the French and Indian War. Woodbridge may have been close enough to the frontier that the citizens felt threatened, and apparently at least a few soldiers were stationed there or near there to protect civilians. My strong suspicion is that Mary ran a boarding house or inn to support her family. That would explain why some of her late husband's relatives would have signed the same petition. They wanted her to be able to support herself, so they would not be obliged to do so.
I've not learned whether the petition was successful or not. I don't know what Mary looked like, whether she was short or tall, plain or attractive, but I can imagine the determination in her mind and body that showed her a way to support her family without re-marrying. Signing a petition to the state was not a common thing for a woman to do. I think she was a feisty lady.
Mary died in 1791. Her will, written in 1784, disposed of mostly personal property, but she made cash bequests to two sons. Samuel, the Beeks ancestor (and also Barack Obama's ancestor) was absent from home and if he did not return within ten years, his son Jacob was to receive 10 pounds with the remainder of Samuel's share to be divided among her three children. It's possible that Samuel was already in what became West Virginia at that time, making a life for himself and his several children.
One other detail. One of her sons, Asher, was a Tory and fought on the British side in the Revolutionary war. Daniel Dunham followed the same path. He may or may not be Mary's son. Her birth date is given as 1717 and Daniel's as 1730. I suspect Daniel belongs to another Dunham, or might just possibly be Jonathan's from an earlier relationship. He would have been family of some kind, however. Asher seems to have returned to New Jersey by the time Mary wrote her will. Samuel may have stayed away because his were not Tory views.
That's what is known about Mary, plus I've thrown in some speculation that may or may not be accurate (that she ran an inn or boarding house of some sort). I like Mary. I admire her spunk and her grit that allowed her to raise five children without the benefit of a husband. I like that she was willing to sign a petition. I like that she wanted Samuel to return home, as most parents would. I just like Mary, and I hope you do, too.
The line of descent is:
Jonathan Dunham-Mary Smith
Samuel Dunham-Hannah probably Ruble
Jacob Dunham-Catherine Goodnight
Samuel G. Dunham-Eliza Matilda Reese
Margaret Catherine Dunham-Harvey Aldridge
Gretta Cleo Aldridge-Wilbur Beeks
Mary Margaret Beeks-Cleveland Harshbarger
Their descendants
Friday, October 5, 2018
Holbrook line: John/Johan/Hans Michael Reyer, Immigrant
No one seems to be sure of his first name, which doesn't really matter much because he would have gone by the name of Michael, anyway. Hans Michael Reyer (also various spelling for the last name, such as Reiher) was born in 1686 or 1689 in Schwabbach, Wurtemburg, in what is now Germany. His parents were Johannes Michel Reiher, from Paris, France (or possibly Metz) and Anna Caatharina last name as yet unknown. They married in Wurtemburg.
This man, whom I will refer to as Michael, led a fascinating life. He was a part of the Huguenot movement, the French Protestants who were persecuted by the Catholics in France, if we are to believe what we read. He lived to be about 83 years old, some say 86. He was married three different times, and had 24 children, as reported in "The Perkiomen Region volume 1, printed in 1895). I have found names and approximate birth dates for "only" eleven of them.
I've not found anything yet about his early life, or even his early married life, but he emigrated in 1732 when he gave his age as 45, and arrived at Philadelphia on a ship called the Loyal Judith. Two sons arrived with him but we don't know how many of the rest of his family may have come, or when, except that his wife and at least one daughter arrived here also. They may have traveled on the same ship and simply not been listed, because they were women. At least two and more likely more of the children were born in America. There was a huge age different in the children, with birth years from about 1711 to at least 1752. His first wife, our ancestor, Anna Maria Seeland, died in 1742 in Upper Salford Township, in what is now Montgomery County, Philadelphia.
As of yet, I don't know much about Michael's life here except that he was a member of the Old Goshenhoppen church, which was Lutheran. He was one of the church wardens and as such, along with representatives from the Reformed church, bought jointly thirty eight and a quarter acres for the use of the two congregations in 1737. The first mention I've found of a church building was 1744, so it may have taken a while to raise the funds to erect the building. Micheal is believed to be buried at the cemetery there but I didn't locate records on Find A Grave.
He wrote his will on November 1, 1771 and died January 3, 1772. A son, John, filed a petition that the estate not be probated until another son, Charles, was present. There may be a family dynamic indicated that we don't understand. In the petition, he refers to his father as "yeoman", meaning he owned land. The inventory of personal property was valued at 79 pounds, 18 shillings, and one pence, including a large Bible, several books, and an almanac. He could read, but we don't know whether these were written in English or in German. He must have owned a good deal of land because it sold for 790 pounds, 14 shillings. Michael had done well for his family. This was not a huge estate but it was more than many of his neighbors.
I wonder how many of his children were still living, and were still in the same general area. I wonder how he managed to support such a large family. Did his older children postpone their own marriages and families in order to help raise the younger ones? What sort of problems did this area have with the native Americans during the French and Indian war? Michael was already relatively old when the conflict started. Did he serve? Did he take his family to a safer area, or a fort? What else could Michael tell us about if we could sit down and ask him about his life?
I'd like to do more research about Michael, and if I find more information, I will post updates or a new blog. In the meantime, it's good to know more about this French or German ancestor, who took a big risk in coming to America.
Our line of descent is
Hans Michael Reyer-Anna Maria Seeland
Anna Maria Reyer-Johan Jacob Nuss
Anna Elizabeth Nuss-Johan Jacob Hetrick
Abraham Hetrick-Sarah Lemmon
Isaac Hetrick-Elizabeth Black
Mary Alice Hetrick-Louis Stanard
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
This man, whom I will refer to as Michael, led a fascinating life. He was a part of the Huguenot movement, the French Protestants who were persecuted by the Catholics in France, if we are to believe what we read. He lived to be about 83 years old, some say 86. He was married three different times, and had 24 children, as reported in "The Perkiomen Region volume 1, printed in 1895). I have found names and approximate birth dates for "only" eleven of them.
I've not found anything yet about his early life, or even his early married life, but he emigrated in 1732 when he gave his age as 45, and arrived at Philadelphia on a ship called the Loyal Judith. Two sons arrived with him but we don't know how many of the rest of his family may have come, or when, except that his wife and at least one daughter arrived here also. They may have traveled on the same ship and simply not been listed, because they were women. At least two and more likely more of the children were born in America. There was a huge age different in the children, with birth years from about 1711 to at least 1752. His first wife, our ancestor, Anna Maria Seeland, died in 1742 in Upper Salford Township, in what is now Montgomery County, Philadelphia.
As of yet, I don't know much about Michael's life here except that he was a member of the Old Goshenhoppen church, which was Lutheran. He was one of the church wardens and as such, along with representatives from the Reformed church, bought jointly thirty eight and a quarter acres for the use of the two congregations in 1737. The first mention I've found of a church building was 1744, so it may have taken a while to raise the funds to erect the building. Micheal is believed to be buried at the cemetery there but I didn't locate records on Find A Grave.
He wrote his will on November 1, 1771 and died January 3, 1772. A son, John, filed a petition that the estate not be probated until another son, Charles, was present. There may be a family dynamic indicated that we don't understand. In the petition, he refers to his father as "yeoman", meaning he owned land. The inventory of personal property was valued at 79 pounds, 18 shillings, and one pence, including a large Bible, several books, and an almanac. He could read, but we don't know whether these were written in English or in German. He must have owned a good deal of land because it sold for 790 pounds, 14 shillings. Michael had done well for his family. This was not a huge estate but it was more than many of his neighbors.
I wonder how many of his children were still living, and were still in the same general area. I wonder how he managed to support such a large family. Did his older children postpone their own marriages and families in order to help raise the younger ones? What sort of problems did this area have with the native Americans during the French and Indian war? Michael was already relatively old when the conflict started. Did he serve? Did he take his family to a safer area, or a fort? What else could Michael tell us about if we could sit down and ask him about his life?
I'd like to do more research about Michael, and if I find more information, I will post updates or a new blog. In the meantime, it's good to know more about this French or German ancestor, who took a big risk in coming to America.
Our line of descent is
Hans Michael Reyer-Anna Maria Seeland
Anna Maria Reyer-Johan Jacob Nuss
Anna Elizabeth Nuss-Johan Jacob Hetrick
Abraham Hetrick-Sarah Lemmon
Isaac Hetrick-Elizabeth Black
Mary Alice Hetrick-Louis Stanard
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Tuesday, October 2, 2018
Holbrook line: Dethmarus Sternberg, Immigrant
I've been waiting for several years for the facts about this ancestor to come out. I think I've waited in vain, and it will be some time, if ever, before the origins of this man are determined. We know where he was baptized, and we know his parents' names and when and where they were baptized. But after that, it gets confusing. Was Detmar's father a German count, or a Dutch count, or an Englishman named Stansbury who decided to stay in the area of the Low countries after spending time there during one or another of the many wars those countries had? Was his mother some relation to William of Orange? All these theories are mentioned on various internet sites but no one seems to really have documents that show anything for sure. The one exception is a crude drawing of heraldry, with a 1609 date, and the name Sternberg written on it. It's written in a foreign language so I have no idea what the sketch actually says.
Detmar was the son of Dethmarus and Catherine Morske Sternberge, and was baptized in the Protestant church honoring St. Rainaldi in Dortmund, Prussia in 1628. He was probably born shortly before that. He married Catherine (Renske was her nickname but we don't know her given name) probably about 1650. Their first and perhaps only son was named Tobias. The three of them came to Maryland in 1658 according to Detmar's claim for headrights, and he had also transported a man by the name of John Dowlin. So he had 200 acres, or at least the right to 200 acres.
I wish I knew more about Detmar. He arrived in 1658 and was in 1663 selling land. Why? Did he acquire other land? Did he originally acquire unsuitable land? What crop was he trying to raise? Did he actually work the land, or was that done by servants and slaves? Did he have another trade or way to support himself? What was his religion? We know he was living in 1678 but we don't know when after that he died. And most certainly, I'd love to know more about his origins. Did he find fellow Germans in the area, or Dutch, or English? What was his relationship with his neighbors? Could he speak English at all? Since we don't know the answers to these questions, this post is not a story of his life but just a beginning, hoping to point us toward a fuller understanding of our ancestor with the strange sounding name.
Two generations after Detmar arrived, the family, or at least some of it, changed its name to Stansbury, and that is the name our line is using today.
Here's the line of descent:
Detmar Sternberg-Catherine (renske)
Tobias Starnborough-Sarah Raven
Thomas Stansbury-Jean Dixon Hayes
Thomas Stansbury-Hannah Gorsuch
Rachel Stansubry-Alexis Lemmon
Sarah Lemmon-Abraham Hetrick
Isaac Hetrick-Elizabeth Black
Mary Alice Hetrick-Louis Stanard
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Detmar was the son of Dethmarus and Catherine Morske Sternberge, and was baptized in the Protestant church honoring St. Rainaldi in Dortmund, Prussia in 1628. He was probably born shortly before that. He married Catherine (Renske was her nickname but we don't know her given name) probably about 1650. Their first and perhaps only son was named Tobias. The three of them came to Maryland in 1658 according to Detmar's claim for headrights, and he had also transported a man by the name of John Dowlin. So he had 200 acres, or at least the right to 200 acres.
I wish I knew more about Detmar. He arrived in 1658 and was in 1663 selling land. Why? Did he acquire other land? Did he originally acquire unsuitable land? What crop was he trying to raise? Did he actually work the land, or was that done by servants and slaves? Did he have another trade or way to support himself? What was his religion? We know he was living in 1678 but we don't know when after that he died. And most certainly, I'd love to know more about his origins. Did he find fellow Germans in the area, or Dutch, or English? What was his relationship with his neighbors? Could he speak English at all? Since we don't know the answers to these questions, this post is not a story of his life but just a beginning, hoping to point us toward a fuller understanding of our ancestor with the strange sounding name.
Two generations after Detmar arrived, the family, or at least some of it, changed its name to Stansbury, and that is the name our line is using today.
Here's the line of descent:
Detmar Sternberg-Catherine (renske)
Tobias Starnborough-Sarah Raven
Thomas Stansbury-Jean Dixon Hayes
Thomas Stansbury-Hannah Gorsuch
Rachel Stansubry-Alexis Lemmon
Sarah Lemmon-Abraham Hetrick
Isaac Hetrick-Elizabeth Black
Mary Alice Hetrick-Louis Stanard
Etta Stanard-Loren Holbrook
Gladys Holbrook-Richard Allen
Their descendants
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)