|
|
Family tree▼ Facts and Events
Children
| | Birth | Death |
|---|
| 1. |
|
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
|
References
- ↑ Manning, William H. (William Henry). The Genealogical and Biographical History of the Manning Families of New England and Descendants: from the Settlement in America to the Present Time. (Salem, Mass.: Salem Press, 1902)
786.
"The marriage [Sarah Manning(?) and Edward Winship about 1705] has not been found on record by the present writer, nor has he found the authority for the statement that Sarah, the wife, was surnamed Manning before marriage."
- ↑ Barlow, Claude W. "Sarah Buck, Wife of Edward Winship 3rd of Cambridge", in The American Genealogist (TAG). (Donald Lines Jacobus, et.al.)
52:55.
Middlesex Deed 18:606: "We Edward Winship Junr. and Sarah Winship Wife of said Edward Winship of Cambridge" and "Samuel Wood of Charlestown and Hannah Wood Wife of the said Samuel Wood of Charlestown" sell to Jason Russell of Cambridge a small parcel (2+ acres) in Cambridge. Samuel Wood's wife is Hannah Buck. Samuel Buck and Rachel Leavens had son Samuel, daughters Hannah, Sarah and Rachel as shown by distribution of his estate in 1696/97. Jason Russell was guardian of Hannah and Sarah Buck and his accounting in 1708 was accepted by Samuel Wood and Edward Winship who were undoubtedly acting on behalf of their wives. "Thus it is proved that Edward Winship married about 1705 Sarah Buck" who was more appropriate age to have a child Isaac born in 1724 than the 55 year old Sarah Manning would have been.
- Note: Source:Hudson, Charles. History of the Town of Lexington, Middlesex County, Massachusetts, from Its Settlement to 1868 shows two children named Jonathan born into this family. The first was said to be born 28 May 1713, d. young. The second was b. 28 May 1719, married twice and d. 1784. This appears to be an error, and it appears that only the second Jonathan was real. The first birth is only 11 months after a child that survived to adulthood, much sooner than typical for that situation. Then it is odd that Hudson did not recognize that both births were shown on 28 May. The Lexington VRs do not show the first birth, or any death of the first child, and the suspicion is that the 1713 birth date is simply a misreading of the true 1719 record. This misreading apparently led to a fictitious child for which no evidence can be found.
|
|
