Family:John Child and Ruhamah Pierce (1)

Watchers
Facts and Events
Marriage[1][2][3] 15 Aug 1738 Waltham, Middlesex, Massachusetts, United States
Children
BirthDeath
References
  1. Waltham, Middlesex, Massachusetts, United States. Vital Records of Waltham, Massachusetts, to the Year 1850. (Boston, Massachusetts: New England Historic Genealogical Society, 1904)
    130.

    Child, John and Mrs. Ruhamah Pierce, Aug. 15, 1738. [Peirce, M.R.]

  2. Crane, Ellery B. Historic Homes and Institutions and Genealogical and Personal Memoirs of Worcester County, Massachusetts: With a History of Worcester Society of Antiquity. (New York: Lewis Publishing Co., 1907)
    2:114.

    Ruhamah, d/o Joseph Pierce, b. 12 Jan 1717, m. 15 Aug 1758 [sic] John Child.

    The two sources S2 and S3 both give the same day and month, but different year from VR Waltham. Given the birth dates of the husband and wife, a marriage in 1758 would be about age 40 for both, so would be very surprising unless it was a second marriage. Since there is no evidence of that, it seems likely the VR Waltham is correct in saying 1738. Additionally, VR Waltham indicates that it inspected both the town copy and the county copy (i.e., the one marked M.R.) of the records with no indication that they differ in the date.

  3. Hudson, Charles, and Lexington Historical Society (Massachusetts). History of the town of Lexington, Middlesex County, Massachusetts, from its first settlement to 1868. (Boston, Massachusetts, United States: Houghton Mifflin, 1913)
    532.

    Ruhamah Pierce, d/o Joseph Pierce and Mary Warren, m. 15 Aug 1758 [sic] John Child, b. 2 Dec 1713, s/o Daniel Child and Beriah Bemis.

    The two sources S2 and S3 both give the same day and month, but different year from VR Waltham. Given the birth dates of the husband and wife, a marriage in 1758 would be about age 40 for both, so would be very surprising unless it was a second marriage. Since there is no evidence of that, it seems likely the VR Waltham is correct in saying 1738. Additionally, VR Waltham indicates that it inspected both the town copy and the county copy (i.e., the one marked M.R.) of the records with no indication that they differ in the date.